cort-20241231

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 000-50679

CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS INCORPORATED

(Exact Name of Corporation as Specified in Its Charter)

101 Redwood Shores Parkway

Redwood City, CA94065

(Address of principal executive offices) (zip code)

(650) 327-3270

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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

Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered

Common Stock, $0.001 par value CORT The Nasdaq Stock Market

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

None

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

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

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

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

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

Large accelerated filer ☒ Accelerated filer ☐

Non-accelerated filer ☐ Smaller reporting company ☐

Emerging growth company ☐

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

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

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

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

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant as of June 30, 2024 was $2,691,187,787, based on the closing price of $32.49 for shares of the Registrant’s common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Stock Market on June 30, 2024. Shares of common stock beneficially owned by each executive officer, director and holder of more than 10% of our common stock have been excluded, in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This calculation does not reflect a determination that certain persons are affiliates of the Registrant for any other purpose.

On February 18, 2025 there were 105,503,432 shares of common stock outstanding at a par value of $0.001 per share.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant’s definitive proxy statement for its 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference in Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part III.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Form 10-K

For the year ended December 31, 2024

Page

PART I

ITEM 1. Business 1

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors 12

ITEM 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 27

ITEM 1C. Cybersecurity 27

ITEM 2. Properties 25

ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings 27

ITEM 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 29

PART II

ITEM 6. [Reserved] 31

ITEM 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 38

ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 38

ITEM 9A. Controls and Procedures 39

ITEM 9B. Other Information 40

ITEM 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions That Prevent Inspections 40

PART III

ITEM 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 41

ITEM 11. Executive Compensation 41

ITEM 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 41

PART IV

ITEM 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 42

Signatures and Power of Attorney 46

PART I

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Form 10-K”) contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). All statements contained in this Form 10-K, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. When used in this report, the words “believe,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “would,” “could,” “seek” and similar expressions are forward-looking statements based on management’s current expectations. The absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

•our ability to manufacture, market and sell Korlym® (mifepristone) 300 mg Tablets (“Korlym”) and an authorized generic version of Korlym (collectively, our “Products”);

•the impact of possible future competition on our Products or our product candidates;

•estimates regarding enrollment in and the completion dates of our clinical trials and the anticipated results of these trials;

•the progress and timing of our research and development programs and the regulatory activities associated with them;

•the timing of regulatory submissions seeking approval of product candidates and the commercialization of any product candidates that are approved;

•our estimates for future performance, including revenue, income and capital requirements;

•our ability to manufacture, market, commercialize and achieve market acceptance for our product candidates; and

•uncertainties associated with obtaining and enforcing patents.

Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual events or results may differ materially for many reasons. For a more detailed discussion of the risks and uncertainties that may affect the accuracy of our forward-looking statements, see the “Risk Factors,” “Overview” and “Liquidity and Capital Resources” sections of the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” sections of this Form 10-K. You should also carefully consider the other reports and documents we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

Forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K reflect our view only as of the date of this report. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update forward-looking statements.

Unless stated otherwise, all references in this document to “we,” “us,” “our,” “Corcept,” the “Company,” “our company” and similar words and phrases refer to Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

We are a commercial-stage company engaged in the discovery and development of medications to treat severe endocrinologic, oncologic, metabolic and neurologic disorders by modulating the effects of the hormone cortisol.

Cortisol plays a significant role in the body’s response to stress and is essential for survival. Cortisol influences metabolism and the immune system and contributes to emotional stability. Cortisol levels follow a diurnal rhythm that is essential to health, peaking upon awakening and decreasing during the day. Insufficient cortisol activity may lead to dehydration, hypotension, shock, fatigue and hypoglycemia. Excessive cortisol activity, known as hypercortisolism, may lead to hypertension, diabetes, impaired glucose tolerance, obesity, fatty liver disease, depressed mood, psychosis, wasting of the arms and legs, edema, fatigue, insomnia and other problems.

Cortisol reduces a patient’s immune response to oncogenesis, shields certain cancer cells from the apoptotic effects of chemotherapy and facilitates the growth of others. Pre-clinical and clinical data indicate that modulating cortisol activity may improve outcomes in patients with fatty liver disease and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (“MASH”), which are precursors of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Pre-clinical and clinical data also suggest that modulating cortisol activity may lead to treatments for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (“ALS”).

Since 2012, we have marketed Korlym in the United States for the treatment of patients suffering from hypercortisolism (also known as “Cushing’s syndrome”). In June 2024, we made available an authorized generic version of Korlym for the same indication. The challenge in treating a patient with hypercortisolism is modulating cortisol’s effects without either inappropriately suppressing them or disrupting cortisol’s normal diurnal rhythm. Simply reducing or destroying the ability of the body to make cortisol can cause serious harm. Cortisol activity can be modulated effectively by a drug that competes with cortisol’s binding to the glucocorticoid receptor (“GR”).

Because Korlym’s active ingredient, mifepristone, reduces the binding of excess cortisol to the GR, it can modulate the effects of abnormal levels and release patterns of cortisol without compromising cortisol’s healthy functions and rhythms. However, mifepristone also binds to the progesterone receptor (“PR”), thereby terminating pregnancy and causing other adverse effects, including endometrial thickening and vaginal bleeding, a debilitating condition suffered by a significant portion of women who take Korlym. On December 30, 2024, we submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) a New Drug Application (“NDA”) for a proprietary cortisol modulator we have developed, relacorilant, that, like Korlym, modulates the effects of cortisol by binding at the GR, but has no affinity for the PR and so does not cause PR-related side effects.

In addition to relacorilant, we have discovered more than 1,000 proprietary cortisol modulators that bind to the GR but have no affinity for the PR and therefore do not cause effects arising from antagonism of progesterone activity, such as termination of pregnancy, endometrial thickening and vaginal bleeding. The composition of these “selective” cortisol modulators and their methods of use in a wide range of indications are covered by U.S. and foreign patents.

Our lead compounds are being evaluated in clinical trials as potential treatments for a variety of serious disorders – hypercortisolism, advanced ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, ALS and MASH.

Hypercortisolism (Cushing’s Syndrome)

Background. Hypercortisolism is the result of a tumor that produces either cortisol or adrenal corticotropic hormone, a hormone that causes the adrenal glands to produce cortisol. Abnormally high levels of cortisol lead to overstimulation of the GR, which gives rise to a wide range of serious adverse effects. Most people with hypercortisolism have one or more of the following symptoms: hypertension, diabetes, impaired glucose tolerance, obesity, fatty liver disease, wasting of the arms and legs, edema, fatigue and insomnia. Irritability, anxiety, cognitive disturbances and depression are also common. Hypercortisolism can affect every organ system in the body and can be lethal if not treated. If the tumor can be found, the preferred treatment is surgery, which, if successful, can cure the disease. In approximately half of patients who receive surgery, the procedure is not successful. Depending on the type of tumor, surgery can also result in a range of complications and recurrence of the disease is common.

Our Products. We sell Korlym and a generic version of Korlym in the United States (our “Products”), using sales representatives to call on physicians caring for patients with hypercortisolism. We also have a field-based force of medical science liaisons. We use a specialty pharmacy and a specialty distributor to distribute our Products and provide logistical support to physicians and patients. Our policy is that no patient with hypercortisolism will be denied access to our Products for financial reasons. To help us achieve that goal, we have patient support programs and donate money to independent charitable foundations that help patients pay for all aspects of their hypercortisolism care, whether or not that care includes taking our Products.

Because most people who suffer from hypercortisolism are undiagnosed or inadequately treated, we have developed and continue to refine and expand programs to educate physicians and patients about screening for hypercortisolism and the role our Products can play in treating patients with the disorder. In 2024, we conducted the CATALYST study to determine the prevalence of hypercortisolism in patients with difficult-to-control diabetes (defined as HbA1c of 7.5 percent or higher) despite receiving optimum treatment. Of the 1,057 patients enrolled in the first phase of CATALYST, 23.8 percent were found to have hypercortisolism. These patients were offered the chance to enter CATALYST’s second phase, in which 136 eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either Korlym or placebo for 24 weeks. CATALYST’s primary endpoint was the difference in HbA1c in patients who received Korlym compared to patients who received placebo. Patients who received Korlym exhibited a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in hemoglobin A1c, with a decrease from baseline of 1.47 percent, compared to a decrease of 0.15 percent in patients who received placebo (p-value: < 0.0001). The safety profile of Korlym in CATALYST was consistent with the medication’s label: No new side effects or adverse events were identified.

The CATALYST data will help physicians better identify patients with hypercortisolism and determine their optimal treatment.

Relacorilant. We are developing our proprietary, selective cortisol modulator, relacorilant, as a treatment for patients with hypercortisolism. Relacorilant shares Korlym’s affinity for the GR but, unlike Korlym, has no affinity for the PR and so is

not the “abortion pill” and does not cause other effects associated with PR affinity, including endometrial thickening and vaginal bleeding. Because relacorilant does not meaningfully increase cortisol levels, it does not cause hypokalemia (low potassium), a potentially serious condition that is a leading cause of patients stopping treatment with Korlym. Forty-four percent of patients in Korlym’s pivotal trial experienced hypokalemia. Unlike all other medications used to treat hypercortisolism, relacorilant does not prolong the heart’s QT interval, a potentially deadly off-target effect.

In December 2024, we submitted an NDA to the FDA seeking approval to market relacorilant as a treatment for patients with endogenous hypercortisolism. The NDA is based on positive results from our pivotal trial “GRACE”, as well as confirmatory evidence from our Phase 3 “GRADIENT” trial, our Phase 3 long-term extension study and our Phase 2 study. In all of these trials, patients exhibited clinically meaningful improvements in a wide range of hypercortisolism signs and symptoms, including hypertension, glucose control, weight and body composition. Relacorilant was well-tolerated in all of the trials. Notably, patients did not experience some of the serious adverse events that can arise in patients taking Korlym or other currently approved treatments.

The GRACE trial had two parts. The first, open-label phase enrolled 152 patients with any etiology of hypercortisolism. Each patient received relacorilant for 22 weeks. Patients who exhibited pre-specified improvements in either hypertension, hyperglycemia or both symptoms proceeded to GRACE’s second, double-blind, randomized withdrawal phase, in which half of the patients continued to receive relacorilant and half received placebo for 12 weeks. GRACE’s primary endpoint was the number of patients in the relacorilant group who lost blood pressure control compared to the number who lost blood pressure control in the placebo group.

In the open-label phase, patients experienced clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in a wide-array of hypercortisolism signs and symptoms, including hypertension, hyperglycemia, weight, waist circumference, fat and lean body mass, cognition and Cushing’s Quality of Life score. Rapid and sustained improvements in systolic blood pressure (“SBP”) and diastolic blood pressure (“DBP”) were observed in all patients with hypertension, with an improvement in mean SBP of 7.9 mm Hg and mean DBP of 5.4 mm Hg at 22 weeks (p-values: <0.0001). During the open-label phase, 63 percent of patients with hypertension met the study’s response criteria. The improvements were even greater in the patients with hypertension who entered the randomized withdrawal phase, with reductions in SBP of 12.6 mm Hg and DBP of 8.3 mm Hg (p-values: <0.0001). To ensure accuracy, hypertension was measured by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (“ABPM”).

Glucose metabolism was measured by several diagnostic tests, including the oral glucose tolerance test (glucose area under the curve or AUCglucose), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and fasting glucose. In the open-label phase, clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in glucose metabolism were observed in patients with diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance (i.e., pre-diabetes), with reductions in AUCglucose of 3.3 h*mmol/L, HbA1c of 0.3 percent and fasting glucose of 12.4 mg/dL at 22 weeks (p-values: <0.0001, 0.03, 0.03, respectively). During the open-label phase, 50 percent of patients with hyperglycemia met the study’s response criteria. Patients with hyperglycemia who entered the randomized withdrawal phase exhibited more pronounced improvements, with reductions in AUCglucose of 6.2 h*mmol/L, HbA1c of 0.7 percent and fasting glucose of 25.2 mg/dL at 22 weeks (p-values: <0.0001, <0.0001, 0.006, respectively).

GRACE met its primary endpoint. Patients with hypertension who were switched to placebo in the randomized withdrawal phase were significantly more likely to lose blood pressure control than were patients who continued to receive relacorilant (odds ratio: 0.17; p-value: 0.02). Patients who continued to receive relacorilant also maintained their improvements in hyperglycemia, waist circumference, fat and lean tissue mass, while patients who received placebo experienced a significant worsening of hypercortisolism signs and symptoms.

Our Phase 3 GRADIENT study enrolled patients with hypercortisolism caused by adrenal adenomas or adrenal hyperplasia. These patients have a more gradual decline than patients with other etiologies of hypercortisolism, although their health outcomes are ultimately poor. GRADIENT enrolled 137 patients with hypercortisolism and either hypertension, hyperglycemia or both. Patients were randomized on a double-blind basis 1:1 to receive either relacorilant or placebo for 22 weeks. The trial’s primary endpoint was the improvement compared to placebo in systolic blood pressure with glycemic control, weight and body composition as secondary endpoints.

Patients in GRADIENT who received relacorilant exhibited clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in hypertension, hyperglycemia, weight and body composition compared to baseline, while patients who received placebo did not.

GRADIENT patients with hypertension who received relacorilant experienced a reduction in systolic blood pressure of 6.6 mm Hg (p-value 0.012) compared to baseline. The reduction in patients who received placebo was 2.1 mm Hg (p-value: ns) compared to baseline. The comparison between those who received relacorilant and placebo was not statistically significant. During the study, five patients who received placebo required rescue therapy with anti-hypertension medications, compared to

one patient who received relacorilant. To ensure accuracy, hypertension was measured by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

GRADIENT patients with hyperglycemia who received relacorilant experienced clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in glucose metabolism, including fasting glucose (placebo-adjusted reduction of 22.2 mg/dL; p-value 0.002), area under the curve of the oral glucose tolerance test (placebo-adjusted reduction of 2.6 h*mmol/L; p-value 0.046) and hemoglobin A1c (placebo-adjusted reduction of 0.3 percent; p-value 0.019), compared to those who received placebo.

Patients in GRADIENT who received relacorilant experienced clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in body weight (placebo-adjusted reduction of 3.9 kg; p-value: 0.0001) and visceral adipose fat mass and volume (p-values: 0.018 and 0.016, respectively), compared to patients who received placebo.

Relacorilant was well-tolerated in GRADIENT, with side effects consistent with its other clinical trials. The most common adverse events were mild-to-moderate nausea, edema, pain in the extremities and back, and fatigue – all symptoms associated with the “cortisol withdrawal” many patients experience when cortisol activity reverts to a more normal level, following surgery or the start of medical therapy for hypercortisolism. Importantly, there were no relacorilant-induced instances of hypokalemia, endometrial hypertrophy or drug-induced vaginal bleeding, adrenal insufficiency or QT prolongation.

Patients who completed our Phase 2 study or the GRACE or GRADIENT trials were eligible to enter our open-label, long-term extension study. Of the 116 patients who chose to do so, the duration of the treatment has been up to six years. In December 2024, we announced that patients who remained in the study for 24 months exhibited, at that time, further clinically meaningful and statistically significant reductions in systolic (10.0 mm Hg; p-value: 0.012) and diastolic blood pressure (7.3 mm Hg; p-value: 0.016), compared to their blood pressure at entry into the long-term extension study. These patients had also maintained response in other cardiometabolic measures, such as glycemic control and body weight. Consistent with its known safety profile, relacorilant was well-tolerated.

The FDA and the European Commission (“EC”) have designated relacorilant as an orphan drug for the treatment of hypercortisolism. In the United States, relacorilant’s orphan designation confers tax credits, reduced regulatory fees and, provided we obtain approval for the treatment of patients with hypercortisolism, seven years of exclusive marketing rights. Benefits of orphan drug designation by the EC are similar, but also include protocol assistance from the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure in the European Union (“EU”) and, if we obtain approval, ten years of exclusive marketing rights in the EU for the treatment of patients with hypercortisolism.

Oncology

There is substantial evidence that cortisol activity at the GR reduces the efficacy of certain anti-cancer therapies and that modulating cortisol’s activity may help anti-cancer treatments achieve their intended effect. In some cancers, cortisol retards cellular apoptosis – the tumor-killing effect many treatments are meant to stimulate. In other cancers, cortisol activity promotes tumor growth. Cortisol also suppresses the body’s immune response; activating – not suppressing – the immune system is beneficial in fighting certain cancers. Many types of solid tumors express the GR and are potential targets for cortisol modulation therapy, among them ovarian, adrenal and prostate cancer.

Relacorilant in Patients with Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer. We are conducting a pivotal Phase 3 trial (“ROSELLA”) of our proprietary, selective cortisol modulator, relacorilant combined with nab-paclitaxel as a treatment for patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Enrollment in ROSELLA is complete. Three hundred eighty-one women with recurrent, platinum-resistant ovarian cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive either 150 mg of relacorilant intermittently in addition to nab-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel monotherapy. ROSELLA has dual primary endpoints – progression free survival (“PFS”) and overall survival (“OS”). ROSELLA will have a statistically positive outcome if either endpoint is met. Patients enrolled in ROSELLA were required to have received prior bevacizumab therapy, which is the approved standard of care for patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Women with a history of tumors that do not respond to initial platinum-based treatments (i.e., women with “primary platinum-refractory” disease) and those who have received more than three prior lines of therapy were excluded.

ROSELLA seeks to replicate the positive results of our Phase 2 trial, a 178-patient, controlled, multi-center, trial of relacorilant combined with nab-paclitaxel in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Phase 2 study participants were randomized to one of three treatment arms: 60 women received 150 mg of relacorilant intermittently (the day before, the day of and the day after their weekly nab-paclitaxel infusion) and 58 women received a daily relacorilant dose of 100 mg per day in addition to nab-paclitaxel. Sixty women received nab-paclitaxel alone. The trial’s primary endpoint was PFS.

Patients in both of the relacorilant plus nab-paclitaxel treatment arms of the Phase 2 trial experienced longer PFS than did the patients who received nab-paclitaxel alone. Patients who received a higher dose of relacorilant intermittently exhibited a

statistically significant improvement in median PFS (5.6 months versus 3.8 months, hazard ratio: 0.66; p-value: 0.038). Patients who received a lower dose of relacorilant daily exhibited a median PFS that was 1.5 months longer than did the patients who received nab-paclitaxel alone (5.3 months versus 3.8 months, hazard ratio: 0.83; p-value: not significant). Patients who received relacorilant intermittently also had a longer median duration of response (“DoR”) (5.6 months versus 3.7 months, hazard ratio: 0.36; p-value: 0.006) compared to those who received nab-paclitaxel alone. Patients who received relacorilant intermittently also lived longer (median OS: 13.9 months versus 12.2 months, hazard ratio: 0.67; p-value: 0.066) compared to those who received nab-paclitaxel alone.

Notably, the addition of relacorilant to treatment with nab-paclitaxel did not create an additional adverse event burden for patients.Safety and tolerability of relacorilant and nab-paclitaxel combination treatment were comparable to the safety and tolerability of nab-paclitaxel monotherapy.

The final analysis from our Phase 2 trial was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (Colombo et al., 2023), the premiere journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO).

Relacorilant in Patients with Adrenal Cancer with Cortisol Excess. We have completed an open-label, Phase 1b trial of relacorilant plus the PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab in 14 patients with metastatic or unresectable adrenal cancer whose tumors produce cortisol. Patients with this form of adrenal cancer virtually never respond to immunotherapy and their disease progresses very rapidly. Our trial sought to test whether adding relacorilant to pembrolizumab therapy would reduce cortisol-activated immune suppression sufficiently to help the patient’s immune system reduce or eradicate the patient’s tumors while also reducing the symptoms of hypercortisolism caused by the tumors’ hypersecretion of cortisol.Although patients exhibited significant improvements in their symptoms of hypercortisolism, such as reductions in hypertension and hyperglycemia, their tumor progression did not slow. The combination of relacorilant with pembrolizumab was well-tolerated. We are evaluating next steps to better understand the role cortisol modulation may play in combination with immunotherapies directed to other tumor types and earlier stages of cancer.

Relacorilant in Patients with Prostate Cancer. Androgen deprivation is the standard treatment for prostate cancer because androgens stimulate prostate tumor growth. Prostate cancer tumors eventually escape androgen deprivation therapy; one of the prime reasons is that these tumors begin to be stimulated by cortisol’s activity. Combining a cortisol modulator with an androgen modulator may block this escape route. Our collaborators at the University of Chicago have initiated a randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2 trial of relacorilant plus enzalutamide in patients with prostate cancer, pre-prostatectomy. We are providing relacorilant and placebo for the study.Patents we have licensed from the University of Chicago cover the use of relacorilant combined with anticancer agents, including enzalutamide, to treat patients with this disease.

ALS

ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a devastating neuromuscular illness. Our selective cortisol modulator dazucorilant improved motor performance and reduced neuroinflammation and muscular atrophy in an animal model of ALS. Following these compelling results, we initiated a Phase 2 trial (“DAZALS”) of dazucorilant in patients with ALS. Two hundred forty-nine patients were randomized on a double-blind basis 1:1:1 to receive either 150 mg of dazucorilant, 300 mg of dazucorilant or placebo daily for 24 weeks. Upon completion of the trial, patients were eligible to enter an open-label, long-term extension study, in which they receive 300 mg of dazucorilant for up to 132 weeks. DAZALS did not meet its primary endpoint, which was the change from baseline in the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) in patients who received dazucorilant compared to those who received placebo. Patients who received dazucorilant also experienced substantially more gastrointestinal upset at the onset of treatment than did those who received placebo. During the 24-week study, no deaths (0/83) were observed in the 300 mg dazucorilant arm, compared to 5 deaths (5/82) in the placebo group (p-value: 0.02). The open-label, long-term extension study, which enrolled 118 patients, will continue. Pursuant to the study protocol, overall survival will be assessed again in March 2025. The FDA has granted dazucorilant Fast Track Designation and orphan drug status for the treatment of ALS in the United States.

Metabolic Diseases

Liver Disease. Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (“MASH”) is an advanced form of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease that afflicts millions of patients and is a leading cause of liver-related mortality. Our Phase 1b trial of the selective cortisol modulator miricorilant as a potential treatment for MASH identified a dosing regimen that reduced liver fat, improved liver health and key metabolic and lipid measures and was well-tolerated. Following these compelling results, we initiated a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 2b trial (“MONARCH”) of miricorilant in patients with MASH in October 2023. MONARCH has two patient cohorts. Cohort A has a planned enrollment of 120 patients with biopsy-confirmed MASH, randomized 2:1 to receive either 100 mg of miricorilant twice weekly or placebo for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint of Cohort A is reduction in liver fat, with MASH resolution and fibrosis improvement as key

secondary endpoints. Cohort B has a planned enrollment of 75 patients with presumed MASH, randomized 2:1 to receive either 100 mg of miricorilant twice weekly for 6 weeks and then 200 mg of miricorilant twice weekly for 18 weeks or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint of Cohort B is reduction in liver fat.

Development of Other Selective Cortisol Modulators

Our portfolio of proprietary selective cortisol modulators consists of four structurally distinct series. More than 1,000 of these compounds, including relacorilant, miricorilant and dazucorilant, potently bind to the GR but not the progesterone, estrogen or androgen receptors. We hold U.S. and foreign patents covering these compounds and their methods of use in a wide range of indications. We have applied, and will continue to apply, for patents covering the composition and method of use of our Products and product candidates. See “Business – Intellectual Property” for additional information.

We continue to create new selective cortisol modulators, the most promising of which we advance towards the clinic.

Studies by Independent Investigators

For many years we have advanced our understanding of cortisol modulation by supporting the work of independent academic investigators. These researchers have studied the potential utility of mifepristone and our proprietary selective cortisol modulators in a wide range of disorders, including central serous retinopathy, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, alcoholism, cocaine addiction, Alzheimer’s disease, ALS, hypercortisolism, metabolic syndrome, atherosclerosis, fatty liver disease, sarcoma, melanoma and solid tumors, including triple-negative breast, prostate, ovarian and non-small cell lung cancers.

Clinical Trial Agreements

We typically conduct our clinical trials with the assistance of clinical research organizations (“CROs”). Syneos Health is helping us conduct our ROSELLA trial. Medpace Research is helping us conduct our MONARCH trial. We may terminate our agreements with Syneos Health on 60 days’ written notice and with Medpace Research without cause at any time.

Research and Development Spending

We incurred $246.9 million, $184.4 million and $131.0 million of research and development expense in the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively, which accounted for 46 percent, 49 percent and 45 percent, respectively, of our total operating expenses in those years.

Manufacturing

We rely on contract manufacturers to produce our Products and product candidates.

We have agreements with manufacturers to supply mifepristone, the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) in our Products, and to produce and bottle tablets of our Products. We have purchased and hold significant quantities of API.

Competition

Our Products compete with established treatments, including surgery, radiation and other medications, including “off-label” uses of drugs such as ketoconazole, an anti-fungal medication, and metyrapone, which is approved for testing hypothalamic-pituitary function. Our Products also compete with Signifor® (pasireotide) Injection and Isturisa® (osilodrostat). Both of these drugs are approved by the FDA for the treatment of adult patients with Cushing’s disease who are not candidates for pituitary surgery or for whom surgery did not work, and both are sold by the Italian pharmaceutical company Recordati S.p.A (“Recordati”). Cushing’s disease is a subset of hypercortisolism. In the EU, osilodrostat is also approved as a treatment for hypercortisolism. Our Products also compete with Recorlev® (levoketoconazole), a chiral form of the commonly-prescribed cortisol synthesis inhibitor ketoconazole, that is sold by Xeris Biopharma Holdings, Inc. (“Xeris”), as a treatment for patients with hypercortisolism.

The orphan drug marketing exclusivity period for Korlym ended in February 2019, which means a competitor that receives FDA approval for a generic equivalent of Korlym may market its drug to patients with hypercortisolism, provided doing so would not infringe any of our patents. In January 2024, Teva launched a generic version of Korlym. We sued Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Teva”) in federal district court to prevent them from marketing generic versions of Korlym in violation of our patents. In response, Teva separately challenged the validity of one of our patents in a post grant review (“PGR”) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). In November 2020, the PTAB rejected Teva’s claims, affirming the validity of our patent in its entirety. Teva appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the PTAB’s decision. On December 29, 2023, the federal district in which we had sued Teva issued a ruling finding

that Teva’s proposed product would not infringe the two patents we had asserted against it. We have appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See “Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings” for additional information.

Intellectual Property

Overview. Patents and other proprietary rights are important to our business. We own U.S. composition of matter patents related to our next-generation cortisol modulators. Foreign counterparts of some of these patents have been issued in Europe, Japan, China, Canada, Australia and other countries. The expiration dates of these patents and their foreign counterparts range from 2025 to 2041.

We also own U.S. and foreign patents directed to the use of our selective cortisol modulators in the treatment of a variety of serious disorders, including hypercortisolism, various cancers, fatty liver disease, and other disorders.

We continue to file patent applications in the United States and abroad.There can be no guarantee that any of these applications will result in the issuance of patents, that any issued patent will include claims of the breadth we are seeking or that competitors or other third parties will not successfully challenge or circumvent our patents if they are issued.

We believe our patents are valid and that the production and use of our patented compounds and methods do not infringe the proprietary rights of others. Accordingly, we believe we are not obligated to pay royalties relating to the use of intellectual property to any third parties except the University of Chicago, from which we have licensed certain patents, as described below.

Hypercortisolism. The composition of matter patent covering Korlym’s active ingredient, mifepristone, has expired. We own U.S. method of use patents directed to the use of Korlym in the treatment of patients with hypercortisolism, with expiration dates ranging from 2028 to 2038. Furthermore, we own U.S. composition of matter and method of use patents using our proprietary selective cortisol modulators directed to the treatment of patients with hypercortisolism, with expiration dates ranging from 2033 to 2041. We have asserted two patents directed to patients with hypercortisolism in a lawsuit against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Teva”) in a lawsuit filed in Federal District Court. On December 29, 2023, the Court found that Teva’s proposed generic version of Korlym would not infringe either patent. We are appealing that decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. We do not know when our appeal will be resolved. See “Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings” for additional details.

Oncology. We own U.S. patents covering methods of treating cancer using our proprietary selective cortisol modulators with expiration dates ranging from 2033 to 2041. In addition, we have exclusively licensed from the University of Chicago U.S. patents for (a) the use of cortisol modulators in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer, and (b) the use of cortisol modulators to treat castration resistant prostate cancer (“CRPC”). We are required to pay the University of Chicago customary milestone fees and royalties on revenue from products commercialized under the issued patents or patents that may issue pursuant to the pending applications. Our license will end upon expiration of the licensed patents in 2031 and 2033 or upon notification by us to the University of Chicago. See “Business – License Agreements” for additional information.

We hold U.S. and international patents covering relacorilant’s composition of matter, as well as U.S. patents covering its use to treat patients with ovarian and pancreatic cancer.We also own or have exclusively licensed U.S. and European patents covering the use of GR modulators, including relacorilant, miricorilant, dazucorilant, and other of our proprietary compounds to treat a variety of disorders, including CRPC and other solid tumors. Relacorilant has been designated an orphan drug in both the United States and the EU for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

Other Indications. In addition to the United States and foreign patents we own or have licensed relating to hypercortisolism and various cancers, we also own U.S. and foreign patents for the use of cortisol modulators to treat ALS, fatty liver disease, delirium, catatonia, psychosis induced by interferon-alpha therapy, migraine headaches, gastroesophageal reflux disease, neurological damage in premature infants, for the improvement of therapeutic response to electroconvulsive therapy, and in the treatment of diseases using combined steroid and GR modulator therapy. The expiration dates of these patents and their foreign counterparts range from 2025 to 2039.

Government Regulation

Prescription pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive pre- and post-approval regulation governing the research, development, testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, storage, record keeping, and advertising and promotion of the products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. All of our product candidates require regulatory approval by government agencies prior to commercialization and are subject to continued regulatory oversight thereafter. Before a new drug may be marketed in the United States, the FDA generally requires completion of preclinical laboratory and animal testing, performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug’s

intended use and approval by the FDA. Complying with these and other federal and state statutes and regulations involves significant time and expense.

Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate in the United States, a sponsor must submit an investigational new drug application (“IND”) to the FDA. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical studies. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, and pharmacodynamics characteristics of the drug, chemistry, manufacturing, and controls information, and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational drug. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational drug to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with Good Clinical Practice regulations, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Typically, human clinical trials are conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap.

•Phase 1. The product candidate is administered to a small number of healthy subjects or patients with the target disease or condition to provide preliminary information as to its safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics and sometimes to provide preliminary information as to its activity and/or efficacy.

•Phase 2. The product candidate is administered to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate its preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages and to identify possible adverse events and safety risks.

•Phase 3. The product candidate is administered to a larger group of patients with the target disease or condition to further evaluate dosage, establish its risk/benefit ratio and to provide an adequate basis for product approval.

The FDA and the institutional review boards associated with clinical trial sites closely monitor the progress of clinical trials conducted in the United States and may reevaluate, alter, suspend or terminate a trial at any time for various reasons, including a belief that the subjects are being exposed to unacceptable risks. The FDA may also require that additional trials be conducted to address and evaluate any potential safety risks.

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, drug developers will submit the results of preclinical studies, clinical trials, formulation studies and data supporting manufacturing to the FDA in the form of an NDA requesting approval to market the drug for one or more indications. The submission of an NDA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to the FDA, unless a waiver or exemption applies. Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews an NDA submitted to determine if it is substantially complete before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once filed, the FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is sufficient to assure and preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity.Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the FDA has a goal of responding to NDAs within ten months of the filing date for standard review, and six months for priority review, which the FDA may undertake, in its sole discretion, if a sponsor shows that its drug candidate is designed to treat a serious condition, and if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness compared to marketed drugs. FDA approvals may not be granted on a timely basis or at all.

In addition, under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug in the United States will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug.If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA, to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the NDA application user fee.

The FDA also has the authority to grant Fast Track designation for drugs intended to fill an unmet need in the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition. When a drug receives Fast Track designation, among other things, the manufacturer is eligible for more frequent communication with the FDA regarding the drug’s NDA, and for the FDA to review parts of the application as they are submitted, rather than waiting until every section of the NDA is completed.

If the FDA approves the marketing of a new drug, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. The FDA may withdraw its approval at any time if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained. The holder of an approved NDA must submit periodic reports to the FDA, including reports of adverse patient experiences, which could cause the FDA to impose marketing restrictions through labeling changes or remove the drug from the market. The FDA may also require post-approval studies, referred to as “Phase 4 studies,” to monitor or further explore the effect of approved products, and may limit marketing of the drug based on the results of such studies.

In addition, most changes to an approved drug, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. The FDA imposes complex regulations regarding the promotion and sale of pharmaceuticals, including standards for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, and industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. In addition, facilities involved in the manufacture of drugs must comply with FDA-mandated current Good Manufacturing Practices regulations (“cGMP”) and are subject to periodic inspection by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. Failure to abide by these regulations can result in penalties including the issuance of a warning letter or untitled letter directing a company to correct deviations from FDA regulations, mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling, the issuance of corrective information, clinical holds, restrictions on manufacturing, product recalls, product detentions or seizures, refusal to approve pending applications or supplements and injunctions, in addition to state and federal civil and criminal penalties.

Marketing Approvals Outside the United States

If we choose to distribute our product candidates outside the United States, we will have to complete an approval process similar to the one imposed by the FDA. The approval procedure and the time required for approval vary from country to country and may involve additional preclinical and clinical trials. Foreign approvals may not be granted on a timely basis, or at all. Regulatory approval of pricing is required in most countries other than the United States, which pricing may be too low to generate an acceptable return.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of our Products will depend, in part, on the extent to which they will be covered by government health care programs and commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. Third-party payers are increasingly limiting coverage and reducing reimbursements for medical products and services, although this trend has not, to-date, had a material impact on the amount or timing of our revenues. In addition, the United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could limit our revenue. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for our Products or a decision by a third-party payer to not cover our Products could reduce our sales and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Examples of legislation in this area include the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) which was passed in 2010, and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”). The ACA substantially changed the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers. The ACA, among other things, expanded Medicaid program eligibility and access to commercial health insurance coverage, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs, and promoted a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program. The IRA was enacted on August 16, 2022. The IRA includes provisions requiring manufacturers to pay a rebate to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) if the price of a Medicare Part B or Part D drug increases faster than the rate of inflation. In addition, beginning in 2025, the IRA will also shift a significant portion of the Medicare beneficiary costs currently borne by the government and beneficiaries to manufacturers. The IRA permits CMS to negotiate prices for certain high-expenditure Medicare Part B or Part D drugs. We also expect there to be other healthcare reform measures that could impact coverage, reimbursement, and drug prices.

Other Healthcare Laws

In addition to the laws and regulations outlined in the “Government Regulations” section, we are subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states where we conduct business. These laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, and physicians’ sunshine (e.g. transparency) laws and regulations. Foreign governments have comparable regulations, and violating these laws and regulations in any jurisdiction could result in significant criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce either the referral of an individual, for an item or service or the purchasing or ordering of a good or service, for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In the past, the government has enforced the Anti-Kickback Statute to reach large settlements with healthcare companies based on sham consulting and other financial arrangements with physicians and other third parties. The Anti-Kickback Statute is subject to evolving interpretations, and in the absence of substantive guidance, it is possible for future initiatives or engagements with healthcare professionals to be challenged under this statute, which could adversely impact our operations. While this statute has a number of exceptions and regulatory safe harbors that safeguard certain common, industry practices from prosecution, these exceptions and safe harbors are narrowly defined, and parties must satisfy all elements of an available exception or safe harbor to avoid scrutiny. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of these statutes or specific intent to violate them to have committed a violation. For example, through legislative action, the government may assert that an Anti-Kickback Statute violation could implicate the federal civil False Claims Act. The majority of states also have anti-kickback laws, which establish similar prohibitions and in some cases may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers.

The civil False Claims Act prohibits knowingly presenting or causing the presentation of a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to federal programs (including Medicare and Medicaid). Actions under the False Claims Act may be brought directly by the government or as a qui tam action by a private individual (acting as a “whistleblower”) in the name of the government. In addition, as noted directly above, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act. Violations of the False Claims Act can result in significant monetary penalties including treble damages, and carry the potential for exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. The federal government has and continues to use the False Claims Act, and the accompanying threat of significant liability, in its investigation and prosecution of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in connection with the potential or actual false claims resulting from promotion of products for unapproved uses or other sales and marketing practices. The government has obtained multi-billion dollar settlements under the False Claims Act and individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. We expect that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating potential or actual violations of the False Claims Act.

The federal criminal statute on false statements makes it a crime to knowingly and willfully (in connection with the delivery of or payment for health care benefits, items, or services): (i) falsify, conceal, or cover up any material fact, (ii) make any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations, or (iii) make or use any materially false writing or document while knowing such writings or documents contain materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements.

The Civil Monetary Penalties Law provides the government the ability to impose civil monetary penalties against any party or entity who offers or transfers anything of value to a federal health care program beneficiary when a party or entity knows or should know that providing a transfer of value is likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular provider, practitioner, or supplier for the order or receipt of any item or service reimbursable by a federal health care program. Notably, while pharmaceutical and biotech companies are generally not considered “providers, practitioners, or suppliers,” offering anything of value to a beneficiary that is likely to influence the beneficiary to select a particular provider, practitioner, or supplier (e.g., a physician or pharmacy) could implicate the Civil Monetary Penalties Law.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of these statutes or specific intent to violate them to have committed a violation.

The federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act (generally referred to as the Open PaymentsTM Program) is a provision under the Patent Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). The Open Payments Program imposes reporting requirements on covered entities (e.g., drug manufacturers) for payments made or transfers of value provided by them to certain healthcare organizations (e.g., teaching hospitals) and physicians, which is broadly defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors, and certain non-physician practitioners (e.g., physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesiology assistants and certified nurse midwives). Covered entities are also required to report ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members (as it relates to the Covered entities). This information is then analyzed and made public, available via searchable databases. Failure to submit required information may result in significant civil monetary penalties for any payments, transfers of value, or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately and completely reported in an annual submission. Similarly, certain states also mandate the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to physicians. Some of these states also require the implementation of commercial compliance programs and impose restrictions on drug manufacturer marketing practices.

Federal and state agencies continue to spend time, energy and resources combating healthcare fraud and abuse. This regulatory environment, taken together with the evolving commercial compliance environment and the need to build, enhance and maintain robust and expandable systems and controls to comply with different compliance and/or reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions increase the possibility that a healthcare company may violate one or more of the requirements. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and imprisonment, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

In addition to the above “fraud and abuse” laws and regulations, we must also account for other applicable state and foreign laws and regulations that could impact our business activities. For example, some states require pharmaceutical companies to certify that they are in compliance with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and certain federal government compliance guidance, while other states (and some local governments) require the public registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Data Privacy and Security

Numerous state, federal and foreign laws and regulations govern the collection of, disclosure of, use of, access to, transfer of, and confidentiality and security of health-related and other personal information and could apply now or in the future to our operations or the operations of our partners. For example, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), and their implementing regulations, imposes requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of protected health information on HIPAA covered entities, which include certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses, and their business associates who conduct certain activities for or on their behalf involving protected health information on their behalf. Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA as the result of a breach of unsecured protected health information, a complaint about privacy practices or an audit by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative fines and penalties and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations if required to enter into a resolution agreement and corrective action plan with HHS to settle allegations of HIPAA non-compliance.Further, entities that knowingly receive individually identifiable health information from a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA may be subject to criminal penalties.

Even when HIPAA does not apply, according to the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”), failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure constitutes unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business, and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Individually identifiable health information is considered sensitive data that merits stronger safeguards. In 2024, the FTC finalized updates to the Health Breach Notification Rule that, among other things, clarified its applicability to health apps and other similar technologies and expanded the information the breach notification requirements for entities subject to the rule, which may add additional complexity to compliance obligations going forward.

In addition, certain state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. For example, the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act imposes restrictive requirements regulating the use and disclosure of health information and other personally identifiable information. Further, the California Consumer Privacy Act which took effect on January 1, 2020, and was later revised and expanded by the California Privacy Rights Act (collectively, “CCPA”), created individual privacy rights for California consumers and increased the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information as well as limitations on data uses, audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. It also created a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. Similar laws passed in Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Montana, Oregon, Texas, and Utah took effect in 2023 and 2024. Additionally, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Tennessee have adopted privacy laws, which take effect from January 1, 2025 through 2026. In addition, some of these laws (including the CPRA), along with other standalone health privacy laws, subject health-related information to additional safeguards and disclosures and some specifically regulate consumer health data. For example, Washington’s My Health My Data Act, effective as of March 31, 2024, imposes similar requirements specific to consumer health data. Similar laws have also passed in Connecticut and Nevada, which came into effect in 2023 and 2024. As a result,

additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition. Additional legislation proposed at the federal level and in other states, along with increased regulatory action, reflect a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States.

In Europe, the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) went into effect in May 2018 and imposes stringent data protection requirements for controllers and processors of personal data of persons within the EU. The GDPR applies to any company established in the EU or the European Economic Area (“EEA”) as well as to those outside the EU or the EEA if they collect and use personal data in connection with the offering of goods or services to individuals in the EU or the monitoring of their behavior. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater. In addition, the GDPR increases the scrutiny of transfers of personal data from clinical trial sites located in the EEA to the United States and other jurisdictions that the EC does not recognize as having “adequate” data protection laws. Transfers of personal information out of the European Union face a constantly shifting set of requirements, as courts in Europe have invalidated intergovernmental agreements. As a result, uncertainty exists with respect to GDPR compliance and the attendant obligations going forward as the regulatory environment is rapidly developing. In addition, from January 1, 2021, companies have had to comply with both the GDPR and the GDPR as incorporated into United Kingdom national law (“UK GDPR”), the latter regime having the ability to separately fine up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. The EC has adopted an adequacy decision in favor of the United Kingdom, enabling data transfers from EU member states to the United Kingdom without additional safeguards. However, the UK adequacy decision will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the EC re-assesses and renews/extends that decision. Outside Europe, significant data privacy regulatory regimes exist in major markets including Brazil, India, China, and elsewhere. The ever-shifting landscape of global data privacy regulation requires significant investment and attention to avoid significant noncompliance liabilities.

Employees

We are managed by experienced pharmaceutical executives and also enlist the expertise of independent advisors with extensive pharmaceutical experience. As of December 31, 2024, we had 500 employees. We consider our employee relations to be good. Our employees are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement.

We seek to hire, retain and motivate smart, ethical, hard-working employees, officers and directors. To achieve this goal, we offer a collegial work environment where creativity, collaboration and initiative are encouraged. We offer competitive salaries, performance bonuses and equity grants, as well as industry-leading health, retirement and other benefits. To align our employees’ goals with Corcept’s goals, we offer annual performance-based cash bonuses and stock-based compensation.

About Corcept

We were incorporated in the State of Delaware on May 13, 1998. Our registered trademarks include Corcept® and Korlym®. Other service marks, trademarks and trade names referred to in this document are the property of their respective owners.

Available Information

We are subject to the information requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and we therefore file periodic reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC relating to our business, consolidated financial statements and other matters. The SEC maintains an Internet site, www.sec.gov, that contains reports, proxy statements and other information regarding issuers such as Corcept.

For more information about Corcept, including free access to our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports, visit our website at www.corcept.com or the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. The information found on or accessible through our website is not incorporated into, and does not form a part of, this Form 10-K.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common stock involves significant risks. Before investing, carefully consider the risks described below and the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes. The risks and uncertainties described below are the ones we believe may materially affect us. There may be others of

which we are unaware that could materially harm our business or financial condition and cause the price of our stock to decline, in which case you could lose all or part of your investment.

Summary of Principal Risks

The following bullet points summarize the principal risks we face, each of which could adversely affect our business, operations and financial results. Below, we have arranged these risks by the part of our business they most directly affect.

Risks Related to our Commercial Activities

•Failure to generate sufficient revenue from the sale of our Products would harm our financial results and would likely cause our stock price to decline.

•The availability of generic versions of Korlym could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial position.

•Public perception of mifepristone or legislation limiting or barring its distribution or use for termination of early pregnancy may limit our ability to sell our Products.

•New laws, government regulations, or changes to existing laws and regulations could make it difficult or impossible for us to obtain acceptable prices or adequate insurance coverage and reimbursement for our Products, which would adversely affect our results of operations and financial position.

Risks Related to our Research and Development Activities

•Vendors perform many of the activities necessary to carry out our clinical trials, including drug product distribution, trial management and oversight and data collection and analysis. Failure of these vendors to perform their duties or meet expected timelines may prevent or delay approval of our product candidates.

•Our efforts to discover, develop and commercialize our product candidates may not succeed. Clinical drug development is lengthy, expensive and often unsuccessful. Results of early studies and trials are often not predictive of later trial results. Failure can occur at any time. Even if we deem that our product candidates’ clinical trial results demonstrate safety and efficacy, regulatory authorities may not agree. Failure to obtain or maintain regulatory approvals for our product candidates would prevent us from commercializing them.

Risks Related to our Intellectual Property

•We may not be able to secure, maintain or effectively assert patent protection for the composition, manufacture, or methods of use of our proprietary, selective cortisol modulators and for the use of our Products to treat hypercortisolism. Litigation is slow and expensive and its outcome is uncertain and subject to challenge on appeal.

Risks Related to our Stock

•The price of our common stock fluctuates widely and is likely to continue to do so. Opportunities for investors to sell shares may be limited.

•Our stock price may decline if our performance does not meet the guidance we have provided to the public, estimates published by research analysts or other investor expectations.

General Risk Factors

•We rely on information technology to conduct our business. A breakdown or breach of our information technology systems or our failure to protect confidential information concerning our business, patients or employees could interrupt the operation of our business and subject us to liability.

Risk Factors – Discussion

The following section discusses the principal risks listed above, as well as other risks we believe to be material.

Risks Related to our Commercial Activities

Failure to generate sufficient revenue from the sale of our Products would harm our financial results and would likely cause our stock price to decline.

Our ability to generate revenue and to fund our commercial operations and development programs is dependent on the sale of our Products to treat patients with hypercortisolism. Physicians will prescribe our Products if they determine that it is preferable to other treatments, even if those treatments are not approved for hypercortisolism. Most physicians are

inexperienced diagnosing or caring for patients with hypercortisolism and it can be hard to persuade them to identify appropriate patients and treat them with our Products.

Many factors could limit our product revenue, including:

•the preference of physicians or payors for competing treatments for hypercortisolism, including a lower-priced generic version of Korlym and off-label treatments; and

•lack of availability of government or private insurance, the shift of a significant number of patients to Medicaid, which reimburses Korlym at a significantly lower price, or the introduction of government price controls or other price-reducing regulations, such as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, that may significantly limit Medicare reimbursement rates.

Failure to generate sufficient product revenue could prevent us from fully funding our planned commercial and clinical activities and would likely cause our stock price to decline.

The availability of generic versions of Korlym could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial position.

In January 2024, Teva launched a generic version of Korlym. We have sued Teva in Federal District Court with respect to its generic version of Korlym. On December 29, 2023, the Court issued a ruling in that case finding that Teva’s generic product would not infringe the patents we have asserted against it. We have appealed this adverse decision to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, but there can be no assurance our appeal will be successful. If Teva’s commercial efforts are successful, they may materially harm our results of operations and financial condition, even if our appeal is successful and Teva is required to withdraw its product and pay us damages. We have made available our own generic version of Korlym.

We also have litigation settlements with Sun and Hikma that allow them to begin selling mifepristone, with customary restrictions, provided the FDA has approved their products and Teva’s generic product remains commercially available. The availability of generic versions of Korlym from Sun or Hikma could materially harm our results of operations and financial condition, even if our on-going appeal against Teva is successful and Teva, Sun and Hikma were required to withdraw their products and pay us damages. Please see “Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings” for additional details.

The availability of generic Korlym could cause our revenue to decline and materially harm our results of operations and financial position, by reducing the number of tablets we sell or lowering their price. It may also cause our revenue to be materially less than the public guidance we have provided, which would likely cause the price of our common stock to decline.

Legal action to enforce or defend intellectual property rights is complex, costly and involves significant commitments of management time. Other companies may seek FDA approval to market generic versions of Korlym, in which case we will vigorously protect our intellectual property. However, there can be no assurance our efforts will be successful.

Public perception of mifepristone or legislation limiting or barring its distribution or use for termination of early pregnancy may limit our ability to sell our Products.

The active ingredient in our Products, mifepristone, is approved by the FDA in another drug for the termination of early pregnancy. In 2022, the United States Supreme Court published its decision in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (“Dobbs”), which overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that had established a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy, subject to certain limitations. Dobbs has stimulated many states to enact laws restricting the legality of abortion and mifepristone, including during early pregnancy and under specific conditions of use. More laws banning or heavily restricting termination of pregnancy may be adopted and existing laws may be made more restrictive. On June 13, 2024, in a highly publicized case, the Supreme Court ruled against plaintiffs seeking to restrict access to mifepristone for terminating pregnancy, holding that they lacked standing (i.e., the right to sue), thus preserving current access to mifepristone. Because the Supreme Court’s decision was made solely on procedural grounds, the ruling does not necessarily foreclose other challenges to the continued availability of mifepristone. The timing and outcome of any subsequent cases, as well as additional legislative changes are uncertain. In addition, heightened public awareness of mifepristone as an abortifacient may draw the attention of hostile state government officials or political activists to our Products – as could additional public debate concerning current or proposed restrictions on the distribution of mifepristone. This may be the case even though (i) our Products are not approved for the termination of pregnancy, (ii) we do not promote it for that use and (iii) we have taken measures to minimize the chance that it will accidentally be prescribed to a pregnant woman.

New laws, government regulations, or changes to existing laws and regulations could make it difficult or impossible for us to obtain acceptable prices or adequate insurance coverage and reimbursement for our Products, which would adversely affect our results of operations and financial position.

The commercial success of our Products depends on the availability of acceptable pricing and adequate insurance coverage and reimbursement. Government payers, including Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Administration, as well as private insurers and health maintenance organizations, are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting reimbursement for medicines. In many foreign markets, drug prices and the profitability of prescription medications are subject to government control. In the United States, we expect that there will continue to be federal and state proposals for similar controls. Also, the trends toward managed health care in the United States and recent laws and legislation intended to increase the public visibility of drug prices and reduce the cost of government and private insurance programs could significantly influence the purchase of health care services and products and may result in lower prices for our Products. If government or private payers cease to provide adequate and timely coverage, pricing and reimbursement for our Products, physicians may not prescribe the medication and patients may not purchase it, even if it is prescribed, or the price we receive may be reduced, which would reduce our revenue.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. The IRA significantly changed the way Medicare pays for prescription drugs. The IRA requires the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to negotiate Medicare prices for selected drugs and biologicals, including both physician-administered products covered under Medicare’s Part B benefit and self-administered drugs such as our Products that are covered under the Part D benefit. Each year, the Secretary will select for price negotiation a specified number of negotiation-eligible drugs with the highest total Part B or D expenditures over the preceding 12-month period. To be eligible for price negotiation a drug must have been on the market for at least seven years without generic competition. Orphan drugs indicated for only one rare disease or condition and drugs with less than $200 million in annual Medicare expenditures are exempt from the negotiation program. For the first two years of the program, 2026 and 2027, only Part D drugs are eligible. The Secretary will publish the negotiated price, known as the “Maximum Fair Price” (“MFP”), for each of the selected products. Manufacturers of selected drugs would be required to offer the drug for Medicare recipients at the MFP. Manufacturers who fail to negotiate with the Secretary or offer their drug to Medicare recipients at the MFP can face significant civil money penalties or excise tax liability on sales of that drug. If our Products or any drug we commercialize becomes eligible for Medicare negotiation, the revenue we generate from sales of that drug may be significantly reduced.

The IRA also establishes an inflation rebate program that requires manufacturers to pay rebates to the Medicare program if any of the medications they provide Medicare recipients increase in price faster than the rate of inflation. The Part D inflation rebate provision went into effect on October 1, 2022. Although manufacturers are generally familiar with inflation rebates under the Medicaid program, where they have existed for decades, the IRA represents the first time that inflation rebates have been extended to the Medicare program. The inflation rebate provision applies to any medication sold to Medicare recipients, whether or not that medication is subject to Medicare price negotiation.

Beginning in 2025, the IRA also shifts a significant portion of the Medicare beneficiary costs from the government and beneficiaries to manufacturers. We anticipate that this provision will significantly limit the revenue we receive and may materially reduce our revenue and profits.

We make grants to independent charitable foundations that help financially needy patients with their premium, co-pay, and co-insurance obligations with respect to their hypercortisolism treatment, regardless of whether that treatment includes one of our Products. There has been enhanced scrutiny of company-sponsored patient assistance programs, including insurance premium and co-pay assistance programs and donations to third-party charities that provide such assistance. As a result of this scrutiny, these assistance programs and charities may decide to reduce or eliminate entirely the assistance they provide to patients, which could result in fewer patients receiving the financial support they need to cover the cost of their hypercortisolism care, including the cost of medication, which may include one of our Products.

We expect governmental oversight and scrutiny of pharmaceutical companies to increase and that there will be additional attempts to change the healthcare system in ways that could harm our ability to sell our Products and any other drugs we commercialize profitably, including new policies intended to curb healthcare costs, such as federal and state controls on reimbursement for drugs (including under Medicare and commercial health plans), new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates and penalties to government health care programs and policies that require drug companies to disclose and justify the prices they charge.

Other companies offer different medications to treat patients with hypercortisolism. The availability of competing treatments could limit our product revenue.

Since 2012, a medication owned by the Italian pharmaceutical company Recordati-S.p.A., the somatostatin analogue Signifor® (pasireotide) Injection, has been marketed in both the United States and the EU for adult patients with Cushing’s disease (a subset of hypercortisolism). On March 6, 2020, the FDA granted Recordati approval to market another cortisol synthesis inhibitor, Isturisa® (osilodrostat) tablets, to treat patients with Cushing’s disease. Osilodrostat is approved in the EU for the treatment of patients with hypercortisolism.

On December 30, 2021, Xeris received FDA approval to market the cortisol synthesis inhibitor Recorlev® (levoketoconazole) to treat patients with hypercortisolism in the United States. Levoketoconazole is an enantiomer of the generic anti-fungal medication, ketoconazole, that is prescribed off-label to treat patients with hypercortisolism.

Osilodrostat and levoketoconazole have been designated orphan drugs in both the EU and the United States.

Physician preference for any of these medications, or for the off-label use of generic medications such as ketoconazole, to treat patients with hypercortisolism could reduce our revenue materially and harm our results of operations, which would cause our stock price to decline.

We depend on vendors to manufacture the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) and capsules or tablets for our commercialized products as well as our product candidates. We also depend on vendors to package our products and dispense them to patients. If our vendors become unable or unwilling to perform these functions and we cannot transfer these activities to other vendors in a timely manner, our business will be harmed.

In the event any of our vendors fails to perform its contractual obligations to us or is materially impaired in its performance, we may experience disruptions and delays in our ability to deliver our commercialized products to patients or investigational drugs to patients in our clinical trials, which would adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial position.

Our single specialty pharmacy, Optime, dispenses our Products and performs related pharmacy and patient support services, including the collection of payments from insurers representing more than 99 percent of our revenue. If Optime does not adhere to its agreements with payers or does not continue to meet regulatory requirements concerning pharmacy operations, it may not be able to collect on our behalf some or all of the payments due to us. In addition, if Optime becomes unable or unwilling to perform its obligations under our agreement, we may not be able to dispense our Products in a timely manner to some or all of our patients. Effective April 1, 2024, we extended our agreement with Optime through March 31, 2027, with automatic renewal for successive three-year terms. The agreement is subject to customary termination provisions, including the right of Optime to terminate in the event of a material breach by us that we do not cure in a reasonable period of time after receiving written notice. In addition, we may terminate the agreement for convenience.

The facilities used by our vendors to manufacture and package the API and drug product for our Products and product candidates and distribute them to hospitals, clinics and patients, must be approved by government regulators in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere. We do not control the activities of these vendors, including whether they maintain adequate quality control and hire qualified personnel. We are dependent on them for compliance with the regulatory requirements known as current good manufacturing practices (“cGMPs”), which are subject to change at the regulators’ discretion. If our vendors cannot manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to maintain regulatory authorizations for their facilities and we could be prohibited from using the API or drug product they have provided. If the FDA, European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) or other regulatory authorities withdraw regulatory authorizations of these facilities, we may need to find alternative vendors or facilities, which would be time-consuming, complex and expensive and could significantly hamper our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and market our Products. Sanctions could be imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, refusal of regulators to approve our product candidates, delays, suspensions or withdrawals of approvals, seizures or recalls of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could harm our business. In addition, our reputation as a reliable sponsor of clinical studies would be harmed, which would make it more difficult for us to develop our drug candidates.

Natural disasters, such as earthquakes, fires, extreme weather events or widespread outbreaks of a deadly disease such as COVID-19, could disrupt our commercial and clinical activities or damage or destroy clinical trial sites, our office spaces, the residences of our employees or the facilities or residences of our vendors, contractors or consultants, which could significantly harm our operations.

A resurgence of COVID-19 or the widespread occurrence of another deadly illness could adversely affect our business, operations and financial results. The COVID-19 pandemic made it difficult to grow our commercial business and slowed the pace of some of our clinical trials.

We are also vulnerable to natural disasters, including earthquakes, fires, hurricanes, floods, blizzards and the extended periods of extreme heat, cold and precipitation made more frequent and severe by global warming. For example, our headquarters are in the San Francisco Bay Area, which experiences earthquakes, wildfires and flooding. Our specialty pharmacy, tablet manufacturers and warehouses are in areas subject to hurricanes and tornadoes. All our activities, as well as the activities of our vendors, consultants, clinical investigators, patients, physicians and regulators, are subject to the risks posed by global warming.

The loss of life, property damage and disruptions to electrical power distribution, communications, travel and shipping caused by natural disasters could make it difficult or impossible to conduct our commercial activities or complete our drug discovery activities or clinical trials. Patients may be unwilling or unable to travel to clinical trial sites, for example, or clinical materials or data may be lost.

Our insurance, if available at all, would likely be insufficient to cover losses resulting from disasters or other business interruptions.

If we are unable to maintain regulatory approval of our Products or if we fail to comply with other requirements, we will be unable to generate revenue and may be subject to penalties.

We are subject to oversight by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and elsewhere with respect to our research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, recordkeeping and sales and marketing activities. These requirements include submissions of safety information, annual updates on manufacturing activities and continued compliance with FDA regulations, including cGMPs, good laboratory practices and good clinical practices (“GCPs”), all of which are subject to change without notice and at the regulators’ sole discretion. Foreign regulatory authorities have comparable requirements and enforcement mechanisms, which are also subject to change. The FDA and other regulators enforce these regulations through inspections of us and the laboratories, manufacturers and clinical sites we use. Discovery of previously unknown problems with a product or product candidate, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency or deficiencies in manufacturing processes or management, as well as failure to comply with current or future FDA or other U.S. or foreign regulatory requirements, may subject us to substantial civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, holds on clinical trials, product seizure, refusal to permit the import or export of products, restrictions on product marketing, withdrawal of the product from the market, product recalls, total or partial suspension of production, refusal to approve pending new drug applications (“NDAs”) or supplemental NDAs, and suspension or revocation of product approvals.

We may be subject to civil or criminal penalties if our marketing of our Products violates FDA regulations or health care fraud and abuse laws.

We are subject to statutes and regulations governing the promotion and sale of medicine. Although physicians are permitted to prescribe drugs for any indication they choose, manufacturers may only promote products for their FDA-approved use. All other uses are referred to as “off-label”; manufacturers are prohibited from engaging in any “off-label” promotion. In the United States, we market our Products to treat hyperglycemia secondary to hypercortisolism in adult patients with endogenous hypercortisolism who have type 2 diabetes mellitus or glucose intolerance and for whom surgery has failed or is not an option. Among other activities, we provide promotional materials and training programs to physicians covering the use of our Products for this indication. The FDA may change its policies or enact new regulations at any time that may restrict our ability to promote our Products, which could adversely impact our business.

If the FDA or a law enforcement agency were to determine that we engaged in off-label promotion, we could be required to change our practices and be subject to regulatory enforcement actions, including issuance of a public “warning letter,” untitled letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties. Federal or state enforcement authorities may act if they believe that the alleged improper promotion led to the submission and payment of claims for an unapproved use, which could result in significant fines or penalties under other statutory authorities, such as laws prohibiting false claims for reimbursement. Even if it is determined that we are not in violation of these laws, we may receive negative publicity, incur significant expenses and be forced to devote management time to defending our position.

In addition to laws prohibiting off-label promotion, we are also subject to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. The United States healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

•the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made under federal health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. And, although we structure our applicable business arrangements in accordance with the safe harbors, it is difficult to determine exactly how the law will be applied in specific circumstances. Accordingly, it is possible that certain practices of ours may be challenged under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. From a liability perspective, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

•federal false claims laws, including, without limitation, the False Claims Act, which prohibit any person from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government, or knowingly making, or causing to be made, a false statement to get a false claim paid. The federal False Claims Act is unique in that it allows private individuals (whistleblowers) to bring actions on behalf of the federal government via qui tam actions. Importantly, under the False Claims Act the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act;

•the federal Civil Monetary Penalties law, which prohibits, among other things, offering or transferring remuneration to a federal healthcare beneficiary that a person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s decision to order or receive items or services reimbursable by the government from a particular provider or supplier;

•HIPAA, which created federal criminal laws that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any health care benefit program or making false statements relating to health care matters; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

•federal “sunshine” laws, including the federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act (or sometimes referred to as the Open PaymentsTM Program), that require transparency regarding financial arrangements with health care providers, such as the reporting and disclosure requirements imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) on drug manufacturers regarding any “transfer of value” made or distributed to physicians, certain non-physician practitioners, teaching hospitals, and ownership or investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;

•federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers;

•state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payer, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers; and

•state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information.

The risk of being found in violation of these laws and regulations is increased by the fact that many of them have not been definitively interpreted by regulatory authorities or the courts and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available under them, it is possible that some of our business activities, including our relationships with physicians and other healthcare providers (some of whom recommend, purchase and/or prescribe our Products) and the manner in which we promote our Products, could be subject to challenge and scrutiny. We are also exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors, distributors and contract research organizations (“CROs”) may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. Although we have policies and procedures prohibiting such activity, it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct and the precautions we take may not be effective in controlling unknown risks or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations.

In November 2021, we received a records subpoena from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey (the “NJ USAO”) seeking documents relating to the sale and promotion of Korlym, our relationships with and payments to health care professionals who can prescribe or recommend Korlym and prior authorizations and reimbursement for Korlym. The NJ USAO has informed us that it is investigating whether any criminal or civil violations by us occurred in connection with the matters referenced in the subpoena. It has also informed us that it does not currently consider us a defendant but rather an entity whose conduct is within the scope of the government’s investigation. We are cooperating with the investigation. Please see “Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings” for additional details.

If we are found in violation of any of the laws described above or any other government regulations, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from governmental health care programs, a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance, individual imprisonment, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our financial results and ability to operate.

Risks Related to our Research and Development Activities

Vendors perform many of the activities necessary to carry out our clinical trials, including drug product distribution, trial management and oversight and data collection and analysis. Failure of these vendors to perform their duties or meet expected timelines may prevent or delay approval of our product candidates.

Third-party clinical investigators and clinical sites enroll patients and CROs manage many of our trials and perform data collection and analysis. Although we control only certain aspects of these third parties’ activities, we are responsible for ensuring that every study adheres to its protocol and meets regulatory and scientific standards. If any of our vendors does not perform its duties or meet expected deadlines or fails to adhere to applicable GCPs, or if the quality or accuracy of the data it produces is compromised, affected clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may be unable to obtain approval for our product candidates. Outside parties may have staffing difficulties, may undergo changes in priorities or may become financially distressed, adversely affecting their willingness or ability to conduct our clinical trials. Problems with the timeliness or quality of the work of a CRO may lead us to seek to terminate the relationship and use an alternative service provider. However, making this change may be costly and may delay our trials, and it may be challenging to find a replacement organization that can conduct our trials in an acceptable manner and at an acceptable cost. Failure of our manufacturing vendors to perform their duties or comply with cGMPs may require us to recall drug product or repeat clinical trials, which would delay regulatory approval. If our agreements with any of these vendors terminate, we may not be able to enter into alternative arrangements in a timely manner or on reasonable terms.

Our efforts to discover, develop and commercialize our product candidates may not succeed. Clinical drug development is lengthy, expensive and often unsuccessful. Results of early studies and trials are often not predictive of later trial results. Failure can occur at any time. Even if we deem that our product candidates’ clinical trial results demonstrate safety and efficacy, regulatory authorities may not agree. Failure to obtain or maintain regulatory approvals for our product candidates would prevent us from commercializing them.

Clinical development is costly, time-consuming and unpredictable. Positive data from clinical trials are susceptible to varying interpretations, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. The results from early clinical trials are often not predictive of results in later clinical trials. Product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having produced positive results in preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Many companies have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or unanticipated or unexpectedly severe adverse events.

Our current clinical trials may prove inadequate to support marketing approvals. Even trials that generate positive results may have to be confirmed in much larger, more expensive and lengthier trials before we could seek regulatory approval.

Clinical trials may take longer to complete, cost more than expected and fail for many reasons, including:

•failure to show efficacy or acceptable safety;

•slow patient enrollment or delayed activation of clinical trial sites;

•delays obtaining regulatory permission to start a trial, changes to the size or design of a trial or changes in regulatory requirements for a trial already underway;

•inability to secure acceptable terms with vendors and an appropriate number of clinical trial sites;

•delays or inability to obtain institutional review board (“IRB”) approval at prospective trial sites;

•failure of patients or investigators to comply with the clinical trial protocol;

•unforeseen safety issues; and

•negative findings of inspections of clinical sites or manufacturing operations by us, the FDA or other authorities.

A trial may also be suspended or terminated by us, the trial’s data safety monitoring board, the IRBs governing the sites where the trial is being conducted or the FDA for many reasons, including failure to comply with regulatory requirements or clinical protocols, negative findings in an inspection of our clinical trial operations or trial sites by the FDA or other authorities, unforeseen safety issues, failure to demonstrate a benefit or changes in government regulations.

At any time prior to the regulatory approval of a product candidate, we may decide, or the FDA or other regulatory authorities may require us, to conduct more pre-clinical or clinical studies, provide additional analysis of existing data or change the size or design of a trial already underway. Such additional or changed requirements, which regulators may impose in their sole discretion, may delay or prevent the completion of development, submission of an NDA or the completion of regulatory review, which would increase our costs and adversely impact future revenue. Even if we conduct the clinical trials and supportive studies that we consider appropriate and the results are positive, we may not receive regulatory approval. Following regulatory approval, there is no assurance of commercial success.

We may be unable to obtain or maintain regulatory approvals for our Products or product candidates, which would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates.

We cannot sell a product without the approval of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority. Obtaining such approval is difficult, uncertain, lengthy and expensive. Failure can occur at any stage. In order to receive FDA approval for a new drug, we must demonstrate to the FDA’s satisfaction that the new drug is safe and effective for its intended use and that our manufacturing processes comply with cGMPs. Our inability or the inability of our vendors to comply with applicable FDA and other regulatory requirements can result in delays in or denials of new product approvals, warning letters, untitled letters, fines, consent decrees restricting or suspending manufacturing operations, injunctions, civil penalties, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of product sales and criminal prosecution. We may seek to commercialize our Products in international markets, which would require us to receive a marketing authorization and, in many cases, pricing approval, from the appropriate regulatory authorities. Approval procedures vary between countries and can require additional pre-clinical or clinical studies. Obtaining approval may take longer than it does in the United States. Although approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by others, failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others. Any of these or other regulatory actions could materially harm our business and financial condition.

If we receive regulatory approval for a product candidate, we will be subject to ongoing requirements and oversight by the FDA and other regulatory authorities, such as continued safety and other reporting requirements and possibly post-approval marketing restrictions and additional costly clinical trials. If we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be required to stop development of a product candidate or to stop selling a product that has already been approved. We may also be subject to product recalls or seizures. Future governmental action or changes in regulatory authority policy or personnel may also result in delays or rejection of pending or anticipated product approvals.

Our Products and product candidates may cause undesirable side effects that halt their clinical development, prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential or cause us significant liability.

Patients in clinical trials report changes in their health, including new illnesses, injuries and discomforts, to their study doctor. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not these conditions were caused by the drug candidate being studied or something else. As we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials, or as use of them becomes more widespread if we receive regulatory approval, patients may report serious adverse events that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials. Many times, serious side effects are only detected in large-scale, Phase 3 clinical trials or following commercial approval.

Adverse events reported in clinical trials can slow or stop patient recruitment, prevent enrolled patients from completing a trial and could give rise to liability claims. Regulatory authorities could respond to reported adverse events by interrupting or halting our clinical trials or limiting the scope of, delaying or denying marketing approval. If we elect, or are required by authorities, to delay, suspend or terminate a clinical trial or commercialization efforts, the commercial prospects of the affected product candidates or products may be harmed and our ability to generate product revenues from them may be delayed or eliminated.

If one of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects or adverse events, potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

•regulatory authorities may suspend, limit or withdraw approvals of such product;

•regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label, including “boxed” warnings, or issue safety alerts and other safety information about the product;

•we may be required to change the way the product is administered or conduct additional studies or clinical trials;

•we may be required to create a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, which could include a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients, a communication plan for healthcare providers and/or other elements to assure safe use;

•the product may become less competitive;

•we may be subject to fines, injunctions or the imposition of criminal penalties; and

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

Any of these events could seriously harm our business.

Risks Related to our Capital Needs and Financial Results

We may need additional capital to fund our operations or for strategic reasons. Such capital may not be available on acceptable terms or at all.

We are dependent on revenue from the sale of our Products and our cash reserves to fund our commercial operations and development programs. If our revenue declines significantly, we may need to curtail our operations or raise funds to support our plans. We may also choose to raise funds for strategic reasons. We cannot be certain funding will be available on acceptable terms or at all. Equity financing would cause dilution, debt financing may involve restrictive covenants. Neither type of financing may be available to us on attractive terms or at all. If we obtain funds through collaborations with other companies, we may have to relinquish rights to one or more of our product candidates. If our revenue declines and our cash reserves are depleted, and if adequate funds are not available from other sources, we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more of our development programs.

Risks Related to our Intellectual Property

We may not be able to secure, maintain or effectively assert patent protection for the composition, manufacture, or methods of use of our proprietary, selective cortisol modulators and for the use of our Products to treat hypercortisolism. Litigation is slow and expensive and its outcome is uncertain and subject to challenge on appeal.

Patents are uncertain, involve complex legal and factual questions and are frequently the subject of litigation. The patents issued or licensed to us may be challenged at any time. Competitors may take actions we believe infringe our intellectual property, causing us to take legal action to defend our rights. Intellectual property litigation is lengthy, expensive and requires significant management attention. Outcomes are uncertain. If we do not protect our intellectual property, competitors may erode our competitive advantage. Please see “Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings” for additional information.

Our patent applications may not result in issued patents and patents issued to us may be challenged, invalidated, held unenforceable or circumvented. Our patents may not prevent third parties from producing competing products. The foreign countries where we may someday operate may not protect our intellectual property to the extent the laws of the United States do. If we fail to obtain adequate patent protection in other countries, others may produce products in those countries based on our technology.

Risks Related to our Stock

The price of our common stock fluctuates widely and is likely to continue to do so. Opportunities for investors to sell shares may be limited.

We cannot assure investors that a liquid trading market for our common stock will exist at any particular time. As a result, holders of our common stock may not be able to sell shares quickly or at the current market price. During the 52-week period ended February 18, 2025, our average daily trading volume was approximately 970,395 shares and the intra-day sales prices per share of our common stock on The Nasdaq Stock Market ranged from $20.84 to $74.61. As of February 18, 2025, our officers, directors and principal stockholders beneficially owned approximately 21 percent of our common stock.

Our stock price can experience extreme price and volume fluctuations that are unrelated or disproportionate to our operating performance or prospects. Securities class action lawsuits are often instituted against companies following periods of stock market volatility. Such litigation is costly and diverts management’s attention from productive efforts.

Factors that may cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate rapidly and widely include:

•actual or anticipated variations in our operating results or changes to any public guidance we have provided;

•actual or anticipated timing and results of our clinical trials;

•actual or anticipated regulatory approvals of our product candidates;

•disputes or other developments relating to our intellectual property, including developments in generic-related litigation;

•changes in laws or regulations applicable to the pricing, availability of insurance reimbursement, or approved uses of our commercialized products, our product candidates or our competitors’ products;

•short-selling of our common stock, the publication of negative opinions about our business or other market manipulation activities that are intended to lower our stock price or increase its volatility;

•sales of a substantial number of shares of our stock in the public market, leading to reductions in its price;

•changes in estimates or recommendations by securities analysts or the failure of our performance to meet the published expectations of those analysts or public guidance we have provided;

•purchases of our common stock pursuant to our stock repurchase program (the “Stock Repurchase Program”) or changes to that program;

•general market and economic conditions;

•changes in the expected or actual timing of our competitors’ development programs and the approval of competing products;

•purchases or sales of our common stock by our officers, directors or stockholders;

•technological innovations by us, our collaborators or our competitors;

•conditions in the pharmaceutical industry, including the market valuations of companies similar to ours;

•additions or departures of key personnel;

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

•additional financing activities.

Our stock price may decline if our financial performance does not meet the guidance we have provided to the public, estimates published by research analysts or other investor expectations.

The guidance we provide as to our expected revenue is only an estimate of what we believe is realizable at the time we give such guidance. Our revenue depends on many factors, including, without limitation, the efficacy of our sales and marketing efforts, the price we receive from private and government payors, competition from alternate treatments for patients with hypercortisolism, including from generic versions of Korlym and changes in government regulations. Our guidance estimate considers all of these factors, but they are difficult to predict.As a result,our revenue may vary materially from our guidance. Research analysts publish estimates of our future revenue and earnings based on their own analysis. The revenue guidance we provide may be one factor they consider when determining their estimates. If our revenue is materially less than the guidance we or the research analysts who cover our stock provide investors, our stock price may decline.

We have in the past and may in the future be subject to short selling strategies that may drive down the market price of our common stock and increase its volatility.

Short sellers have, and likely will continue to, attempt to drive down the price of our common stock. Short selling is the practice of selling stock the seller does not own with the intention of buying it back later at a lower price, thereby profiting

from any decline in the price of the stock between the time it is sold and the time it is repurchased. To support their efforts, short sellers often publish, or arrange for others to publish, negative opinions regarding the relevant issuer and its business prospects. These publications are often made to appear as if they were objective journalism or unbiased “research reports” of the type distributed by credible Wall Street firms and independent research analysts. Short seller publications are not regulated by any governmental, self-regulatory organization or other authority in the United States and the opinions they express are often based on distortions, omissions or fabrications. Short attacks supported by such publications have, in the past, led to selling of our stock and at least temporary reductions in its price. Companies that are subject to unfavorable allegations, even if untrue, may have to expend a significant amount of resources to investigate such allegations and/or defend themselves, including shareholder suits against the company that may be prompted by such allegations. We have been, and may in the future be, the subject of shareholder suits prompted by allegations made by short sellers.

General Risk Factors

We need to increase the size of our organization and may experience difficulties in managing growth.

Our commercial and research and development efforts are constrained by our limited administrative, operational and management resources. To date, we have relied on a small management team. Growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to recruit and retain additional employees. Our financial performance and ability to compete will depend on our ability to manage growth effectively. To that end, we must:

•continue to add talented, experienced personnel to our endocrine, oncology and emerging markets businesses;

•manage our clinical trials, research and manufacturing activities effectively;

•hire more general management, clinical development, administrative and sales and marketing personnel; and

•continue to develop our administrative systems and controls.

Failure to accomplish any of these tasks could harm our business.

If we lose key personnel or are unable to attract more skilled personnel, we may be unable to pursue our product development and commercialization goals.

Our ability to operate successfully and manage growth depends upon hiring and retaining skilled managerial, scientific, sales, marketing and financial personnel. The job market for qualified personnel is intensely competitive and turnover rates have reached record highs within our industry and the geographical areas from which we recruit. We depend on the principal members of our management and scientific staff. Any officer or employee may terminate his or her relationship with us at any time and work for a competitor. We do not have employment insurance covering any of our personnel. The loss of key individuals could delay our research, development and commercialization efforts.

We are subject to regulations and other legal obligations relating to drug development and commercialization, the conduct of business as an issuer of publicly traded securities and individual privacy and data protection. Compliance with these obligations is complex and costly. Failure to comply could materially harm our business.

New laws and regulations, as well as changes to existing laws and regulations, including statutes and regulations concerning taxes and the development, approval, marketing and pricing of medications, the provisions of the ACA requiring the reporting of aggregate spending related to health care professionals, the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd Frank Act of 2010 and rules adopted by the SEC and by The Nasdaq Stock Market have and will likely continue to increase our cost of doing business and divert management’s attention from revenue-generating activities.

We and our partners are subject to federal, state and foreign laws and regulations concerning data privacy and security, including HIPAA and the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). These and other regulatory frameworks are evolving rapidly as new rules are enacted and existing ones updated and made more stringent.

In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy, laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to criminal penalties if we knowingly obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA. Requirements for compliance under HIPAA are also subject to change,

as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights issued a proposed rule that would amend certain security compliance requirements for covered entities and business associates.

Even when HIPAA does not apply, according to the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”), violating consumers’ privacy or failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure may constitute unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business, and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Individually identifiable health information is considered sensitive data that merits stronger safeguards. In 2024, the FTC also finalized its rulemaking on additional data privacy rules and requirements, which may add additional complexity to compliance obligations going forward.

In addition, certain state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. For example, the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act imposes restrictive requirements regulating the use and disclosure of health information and other personally identifiable information. Further, the California Consumer Privacy Act, which took effect on January 1, 2020, and was later revised and expanded by the California Privacy Rights Act, collectively the CCPA, created individual privacy rights for California consumers and increased the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information as well as limitation on data uses, audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. The CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. It also created a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. Similar laws passed in Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Montana, Oregon, Texas and Utah have taken effect in 2023 and 2024 and other states, including Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Tennessee, have passed similar laws that will take effect in or after 2025. In addition, along with the CPRA, some of these laws, along with other standalone health privacy laws, subject health-related information to additional safeguards and disclosures and some specifically regulate consumer health data, such as the Washington My Health My Data Privacy Law, which became effective in 2024, Nevada’s Consumer Health Data Privacy Law, which became effective in 2024, and Connecticut’s amendments to its privacy law to address health data, which became effective in 2023. As a result, additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition. Additional legislation proposed at the federal level and in other states, along with increased regulatory action, reflect a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States.

Outside the United States, many jurisdictions have or are in the process of enacting sweeping data privacy regulatory regimes. In Europe, the GDPR took effect in 2018, and is imposing stringent requirements for controllers and processors of personal data of individuals within the EEA, particularly with respect to clinical trials. The GDPR provides that EEA member states may make their own further laws and regulations limiting the processing of health data, which could limit our ability to use and share personal data or could cause our costs to increase and harm our business and financial condition. In addition, the GDPR increases the scrutiny that clinical trial sites located in the EEA should apply to transfers of personal data from such sites to countries that are considered to lack an adequate level of data protection, such as the United States. Legal developments have added complexity and compliance uncertainty regarding certain transfers of information from the EEA to the United States. Following EU court decisions, updated standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”) were adopted to account for these judicial decisions, imposing new requirements on data transfers. The revised SCCs must be used for relevant new data transfers from September 27, 2021, and existing SCC arrangements were required to be migrated by December 27, 2022. As supervisory authorities issue further guidance on personal data export mechanisms, and/or start taking enforcement action, we could suffer additional costs, complaints and/or regulatory investigations or fines, and/or if we are otherwise unable to transfer personal data between and among countries and regions in which we operate, it could affect the manner in which we provide our services, the geographical location or segregation of our relevant systems and operations, and could adversely affect our financial results. Further, on July 10, 2023, the European Commission adopted its adequacy decision on the E.U.-U.S. Data Privacy Framework or DPF. The decision, which took effect on the day of its adoption, concludes that the United States ensures an adequate level of protection for personal data transferred from the EEA to companies certified to the DPF. It is currently unclear how the future of DPF will evolve and what impact it will have on our international activities. The GDPR imposes substantial fines for breaches of data protection requirements, which can be up to four percent of global revenue for the preceding financial year or €20 million, whichever is greater, and it also confers a private right of action on data subjects for breaches of data protection requirements. Compliance with European data protection laws is a rigorous and time intensive process that may increase our

cost of doing business, and despite those efforts, there is a risk that we may be subject to fines and penalties, litigation and reputational harm in connection with our European activities. From January 1, 2021, we have had to comply with the GDPR and separately the UK GDPR, which, together with the amended United Kingdom Data Protection Act 2018, retains the GDPR in United Kingdom national law, each regime having the ability to fine up to the greater of €20 million/ £17.5 million or 4 percent of global turnover. It is unclear how United Kingdom data protection laws and regulations will develop in the medium to longer term and these changes may lead to additional costs and increase our overall risk exposure. Further, on June 28, 2021, the EC adopted an adequacy decision in favor of the United Kingdom, enabling data transfers from EU member states to the United Kingdom without additional safeguards. However, the United Kingdom adequacy decision will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the EC renews or extends that decision and remains under review by the Commission during this period.

Preparing for and complying with U.S. and foreign privacy and security laws and regulations is complex and costly as it is rigorous and time intensive and requires significant resources and a review of our technologies, systems and practices, as well as those of any third-party collaborators, service providers, CROs, contractors or consultants that process or transfer personal data collected in the EU. The GDPR and other changes in laws or regulations associated with the enhanced protection of certain types of sensitive data, such as healthcare data or other personal data from our clinical trials, and access to certain data such as the European Health Data Space Regulation, could require us to change our business practices and put in place additional compliance mechanisms, may interrupt or delay our development, regulatory and commercialization activities and increase our cost of doing business, and could lead to government enforcement actions, private litigation and significant fines and penalties against us and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. Similarly, failure to comply with federal and state laws regarding privacy and security of personal data could expose us to fines and penalties under such laws. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our reputation and our business.

We rely on information technology to conduct our business. A breakdown or breach of our information technology systems or our failure to protect confidential information concerning our business, patients or employees could interrupt the operation of our business and subject us to liability.

We store valuable confidential information relating to our business, patients and employees on our computer networks and on the networks of our vendors. In addition, we rely heavily on internet technology, including video conference, teleconference and file-sharing services, to conduct business. Despite our security measures, our networks and the networks of our vendors are at risk of break-ins, installation of malware or ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, data theft and other forms of malfeasance by persons seeking to commit fraud or theft, which could result in unauthorized access to, and/or misuse of, our clinical data or other confidential information, including confidential information relating to our patients or employees. We may continue to increase our cybersecurity risks, due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees that are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities.

We and our vendors have experienced data breaches, theft, “phishing” attacks and other unauthorized access to confidential data and information. There can be no assurance that our cybersecurity systems and processes will prevent unauthorized access in the future that causes serious harm to us, our patients or employees. We may also experience security breaches that remain undetected for an extended period.

Disruptions or security breaches that result in the disclosure of confidential or proprietary information could cause us to incur liability and delay or otherwise harm our research, development and commercialization efforts. We may be liable for losses suffered by patients or employees or other individuals whose confidential information is stolen as a result of a breach of the security of the systems that we or third parties and our vendors store this information on, and any such liability could be material. Even if we are not liable for such losses, any breach of these systems could expose us to material costs in notifying affected individuals, as well as regulatory fines or penalties. In addition, any breach of these systems could disrupt our normal business operations and expose us to reputational damage and harm our business, operating results and financial condition. Any insurance we maintain against the risk of this type of loss may not be sufficient to cover actual losses or may not apply to the circumstances relating to any particular loss.

Changes in federal, state and local tax laws may reduce our net earnings.

Our earnings are subject to federal, state and local taxes. We offset a portion of our earnings using net operating losses and our taxes using research and development tax credits, which reduces the amount of tax we pay. Some jurisdictions require that we pay taxes or fees calculated as a percentage of sales, payroll expense, or other indicia of our activities. Please see “Part IV, Item 15, Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements – Income Taxes.” Changes to existing tax laws could materially increase the amounts we pay, which would reduce our after tax net income.

Research analysts may not continue to provide or initiate coverage of our common stock or may issue negative reports.

The market for our common stock may be affected by the reports financial analysts publish about us. If any of the analysts covering us downgrades or discontinues coverage of our stock, the price of our common stock could decline rapidly and significantly. Paucity of research coverage may also adversely affect our stock price.

Any acquisition of Corcept shares through our stock repurchase program or, in certain cases, pursuant to the exercise of stock options, will reduce our cash reserves.

In January 2024, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $200 million of our common stock pursuant to the Stock Repurchase Program. In addition, we sometimes accept, in our sole discretion, shares equal in value to any tax and exercise price liability due from option holders at the time of exercise and remit the applicable tax amounts to the tax authorities. Neither our Stock Repurchase Program nor the acceptance of shares at the time of options exercise require us to acquire shares. Furthermore, the Stock Repurchase Program may be modified, suspended or discontinued at any time without notice. It is possible that other uses of our capital would have been more advantageous or that our future capital requirements increase unexpectedly. By reducing our cash balance, our repurchases of common stock could hamper our ability to execute our plans, meet financial obligations or access financing.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter and bylaws and under Delaware law may make an acquisition of us or a change in our management more expensive or difficult, even if an acquisition or a management change would be beneficial to our stockholders.

Provisions in our charter and bylaws may delay or prevent an acquisition of us or a change in our management. Some of these provisions allow us to issue preferred stock without any vote or further action by the stockholders, require advance notification of stockholder proposals and nominations of candidates for election as directors and prohibit stockholders from acting by written consent. In addition, a supermajority vote of stockholders is required to amend our bylaws. Our bylaws provide that special meetings of the stockholders may be called only by our Chairman, President or the Board of Directors and that the authorized number of directors may be changed only by resolution of the Board of Directors. These provisions may prevent or delay a change in our Board of Directors or our management, which our Board of Directors appoints. In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. Section 203 may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15 percent or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us. These provisions in our charter and bylaws and under Delaware law could reduce the price that investors would be willing to pay for shares of our common stock.

Our officers, directors and principal stockholders, acting as a group, could significantly influence corporate actions.

As of February 18, 2025, our officers and directors beneficially owned approximately 21 percent of our common stock. Acting together, these stockholders could significantly influence any matter requiring approval by our stockholders, including the election of directors and the approval of mergers or other business combinations. The interests of this group may not always coincide with our interests or the interests of other stockholders and may prevent or delay a change in control. This significant concentration of share ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock because many investors perceive disadvantages to owning stock in companies with controlling stockholders.

We face unprecedented political, legal, governmental, regulatory and economic uncertainty and risks that may adversely affect our business.

Steps taken by the presidential administration in the United States have caused great uncertainty regarding the continuity of government funding, policies and operations. The scope and direction of the administration’s policies and their implementation are unpredictable. New policies may be adopted or actions taken, without notice, that adversely affect our commercial efforts or make it more challenging or costly to develop our product candidates. Significant cuts or disruptions to government employment and spending may delay review of our NDA for relacorilant as a treatment for patients with hypercortisolism or constrain our ability to advance our other clinical development programs and the development programs of our academic collaborators. The imposition of tariffs such as the administration has threatened to impose on materials we or our vendors use to conduct experiments or to make our Products or product candidates would increase our cost of doing business. Additionally, the laws and regulations governing our operations, as well as the application of such laws and regulations, may change abruptly. Failure to comply with new laws or regulations, whether by us or by our vendors, as well as changes in the application of existing laws and regulations, could adversely affect our operations, cash flow and financial condition or otherwise harm our business.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

In the normal course of business, we collect and store personal information and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business information, intellectual property, information regarding patients and clinical trial participants, sensitive third-party information and employee information. To protect this information, we use managed detection and response services to monitor our network infrastructure and associated endpoints for possible cybersecurity threats. In addition, we use multi-factor authentication, perform penetration testing and engage third parties to assess the effectiveness of our cybersecurity practices.We conduct a thorough risk assessment by identifying critical assets, recognizing potential threats and vulnerabilities, and implement strategies to mitigate these risks and their possible impacts. We establish incidence response plans and provide cybersecurity training to our employees and monitor their activity to ensure adherence to our security protocols.

No risks from cybersecurity threats have occurred that have affected our business strategy, results of operations, or financial condition.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee of our Board of Directors oversees management of risks associated with corporate governance, including cybersecurity.This committee meets regularly with Corcept management and reports to the full Board of Directors.

See “Risk Factors – General Risk Factors” for additional information about the risks to our business associated with a breach or compromise to our information security systems.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

We lease 50,632 square feet of office space in Redwood City, California for our corporate facilities. Our current lease expires in June 2030.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Teva Patent Litigation

In February 2018, we received a Paragraph IV Notice Letter advising that Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Teva”) had submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) to the FDA seeking authorization to manufacture and sell a generic version of Korlym prior to the expiration of patents related to Korlym that are listed in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (the “Orange Book”). In March 2018, we filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (“D.N.J.”) against Teva for infringement of our patents. In August 2020, Teva received final approval from the FDA for its ANDA in accordance with the Hatch-Waxman Act.

In May 2019, Teva submitted to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) a petition for post-grant review (“PGR”) of U.S. Patent No. 10,195,214 (the “’214 patent”). In November 2020, the PTAB issued a decision upholding the validity of the ’214 patent in its entirety, which decision the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld. This matter is closed.

The patents currently at issue in the D.N.J matter are the ʼ214 patent and U.S. Patent No. 10,842,800 (the “’800 patent”).Trial was held from September 26, 2023 through September 28, 2023 before Judge Renee Marie Bumb. On December 29, 2023, Judge Bumb ruled that Teva’s proposed generic product would not infringe either the ’214 or ’800 patent.We have appealed that ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Teva launched its generic product in January 2024.

We will vigorously enforce our intellectual property rights relating to Korlym but cannot predict the outcome of these matters.

Antitrust Litigation

On June 13, 2024, Teva filed a complaint in the Northern District of California, captioned Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Corcept Therapeutics, Inc., et al. (N.D. Cal.), Case No. 3:24-cv-03567-BLF (the “Teva Antitrust Litigation”). This lawsuit names Corcept and Optime Care, Inc. (“Optime”), our single specialty pharmacy that dispenses Korlym and the authorized generic version of Korlym and performs related pharmacy and patient support services, as defendants. The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that Corcept has violated federal and state laws related to antitrust and unfair business practices.

On August 26, 2024, Corcept and Optime filed motions to dismiss the complaint. On September 13, 2024, Teva filed a First Amended Complaint, and on October 14, 2024, Corcept and Optime moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint.

CORT US Equity

CORT · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

CORT US Equity☆

CORT · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

CORT US Equity