Item 1A. Risk Factors.

An investment in shares of our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, before deciding whether to purchase, hold or sell shares of our common stock. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and those we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described when evaluating our business.

Risks Related to Commercialization of our Approved Medicines and Development of our Product Candidates

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

The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to commercialize our approved medicines profitably. Our successful commercialization of our approved medicines depends on a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

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

•the availability of adequate reimbursement and a commercially viable sales price of our approved medicines;

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

•a continued acceptable safety profile of our approved medicines;

•the effect of health care legislation and regulatory changes in the locations where our approved medicines are authorized;

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

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

•our ability to compete successfully with the marketing and sale of compounded and generic versions of our medicines; and

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

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

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

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

Growing and maintaining our own sales force to market Livmarli, Cholbam and Ctexli is expensive and time-consuming. Moreover, we may not be able to successfully or adequately develop this capability for our product candidates

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

•increasing and intense pressure from political, social, competitive and other sources to reduce drug unit costs, access drugs from other countries to achieve better pricing or limit changes in list price;

•changes in federal, state or foreign government regulations or private third-party payors’ reimbursement policies, including changes that may result from government administration changes;

•implementation of federal or state regulations;

•reimbursement decisions and price negotiations with foreign government payors;

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

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

A trend in the healthcare industry is cost containment. Third-party payors are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs by, among other methods, limiting or preventing (for example via prior authorization, prior therapy or step edit requirements) coverage for particular medications, requiring drug companies to provide them with varying levels of discounts from list prices and/or challenging the value of list prices charged for medical products. Similarly, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority for federal, national, and state governments around the world. For example, the Inflation Reduction Act (“IRA”) among other things, requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least seven (7) years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. In addition, the IRA imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our current and any future product candidates that we develop, which could have an adverse effect on our operating results and our overall financial condition. Coverage decisions may depend upon the size of a patient population, perceptions of clinical efficacy and economic standards that may disfavor new drug products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available.

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

Table of Contents

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

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. On January 12, 2025, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment, amending Directive 2011/24/EU (the “Regulation”), entered into application through a phased implementation. The Regulation initially applies to new active substances for oncology and advanced therapy medicinal products. It will be expanded to orphan medicinal products in January 2028 and to all centrally authorized medicinal products as of 2030. Select high-risk medical devices also came into scope in 2026. It is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicines. The Regulation establishes a framework for joint clinical assessments, increasing cooperation among EU Member States on clinical aspects of health technology evaluation. Individual EU Member States will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU Member States for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval, any anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for those product candidates in the EU could be negatively affected.

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

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

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

•patient demand;

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

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

•limitations, warnings or adverse drug reactions contained in the labeling or product inserts approved by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and patients’ and physicians’ assessment of these limitations and warnings;

•overcoming any biases physicians or patients may have toward particular therapies for the treatment of the indications our approved medicines are approved for (or, if applicable, deemed medically necessary for);

•patients and caregivers properly using our approved medicines as instructed;

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

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

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

•our ability to successfully internalize operation of our patient services hub from our third-party vendor;

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

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

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

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

•potential product liability claims;

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

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

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

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

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

In clinical trials of Livmarli in ALGS, the most commonly reported AEs were diarrhea, abdominal pain and vomiting, and were mostly mild to moderate in severity and transient in nature. Additionally, AEs reported in greater than 5% of patients included fat-soluble vitamin deficiency, nausea, liver transaminase increases, and bone fracture. The frequency of observed AEs has not increased over time. In the pivotal trial of Livmarli in PFIC, adverse reactions reported

Table of Contents

in greater than 5% of patients and greater than placebo included diarrhea, abdominal pain, increased transaminases, hematochezia or rectal hemorrhage, and bone fractures. Prescribing information for Livmarli includes warnings and precautions related to monitoring for and the risk of hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal adverse reactions, fat-soluble vitamin deficiency and risk of propylene glycol toxicity (pediatric patients less than 5 years of age). In clinical trials of volixibat, the most common AEs reported were mild to moderate GI events (diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting) observed in the volixibat groups. In the interim analysis of the PBC VANTAGE study, the incidence of diarrhea in patients on volixibat was 77% with all cases mild to moderate; one patient discontinued the study due to an AE of diarrhea. The most common adverse reactions for Cholbam (≥1%) are diarrhea, reflux esophagitis, malaise, jaundice, skin lesion, nausea, abdominal pain, intestinal polyp, urinary tract infection, and peripheral neuropathy. The most common (> 20%) AEs seen in patients on chenodiol in the RESTORE clinical trial included diarrhea, constipation and headache. The most common treatment emergent AEs seen in clinical trials of MRM-3379 include nausea and vomiting, all mild and moderate in severity.

In clinical studies of brelovitug, the most common treatment-related AEs were injection-related events that resolved within 1-2 days, and cases of flu-like illness that were mild-moderate in severity.

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

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

•regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label;

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

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

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

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

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

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

•sales may decrease significantly;

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

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

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

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

We participate in, or are subject to, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), and other federal and state government pricing programs in the U.S., and we may participate, or be asked to participate, in additional government pricing programs or supplemental rebates in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors in connection

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

•decreased demand for our approved medicines or product candidates;

•termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs;

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

•impairment of our business reputation and negative media attention;

•substantial costs of any related litigation or similar disputes;

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

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

•loss of revenue.

Large judgments have been awarded in class action and individual lawsuits based on drugs that had anticipated or unanticipated side effects. Although we have obtained product liability insurance coverage, our insurance coverage may

Table of Contents

not be sufficient to cover all of our product liability related expenses or losses and may not cover us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost, in sufficient amounts or upon adequate terms to protect us against losses due to product liability. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and could harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

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

The FDA, European Commission, Health Canada, competent authorities of individual EU Member States, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities strictly regulate the marketing and promotional claims that are made about drug and biologic products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses or indications that are not approved by the FDA, European Commission, Health Canada or comparable foreign regulatory authorities as reflected in the product’s approved labeling and comparative safety or efficacy claims cannot be made without direct comparative clinical data. For example, although Livmarli may appeal to individuals who have not been diagnosed with cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS or PFIC or suffer from other forms of cholestatic pruritus like those included in our Phase 3 EXPAND trial, we (and our collaborators, where applicable) are only able to promote Livmarli:

•in the U.S. for cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS in patients three months of age and older and for cholestatic pruritus in PFIC patients twelve months of age and older;

•in the EU for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus in patients with ALGS two months of age and older and for the treatment of PFIC in patients three months of age and older; and

•in Japan for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus in patients with ALGS and PFIC.

Additionally, Ctexli is only indicated for adults with CTX, not for individuals under the age of 18, even though it may be prescribed by healthcare providers for that population. If we are found to have promoted off-label uses of our approved medicines or product candidates, we may receive warning or untitled letters and become subject to significant criminal and civil liability, which would materially harm our business. Further, in the U.S., both federal and state governments have levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper off-label promotion and have enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion and to undertake corrective remedies.

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

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

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

Table of Contents

measures to minimize risks. In addition, if the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve a product candidate, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, post-marketing obligations, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for the approved product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. For example, we are subject to ongoing FDA and European Commission obligations and continued regulatory review with respect to, among other things, the manufacturing, processing, labeling, packaging, distribution, AE reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for Livmarli, which requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, as well as continued compliance with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) requirements and with the FDA’s and equivalent foreign good clinical practice (“GCP”).

In addition, Livmarli was the subject of a marketing authorization granted by the European Commission under exceptional circumstances in accordance with Article 14.8 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 relating to the authorization and supervision of medicines for human and veterinary use and establishing the EMA. This type of authorization is reviewed annually to reassess the risk-benefit balance of the medicine. The purpose of any specific procedures/obligations imposed as part of the marketing authorization granted in exceptional circumstances is to contribute to the provision of information on the safe and effective use of the product. Grant of a marketing authorization in exceptional circumstances is renewable for one-year periods and will normally not lead to the completion of a full dossier/approval.

We are subject to various FDA and EU post-marketing requirements across our approved medicines, including the conduct and submission of registry studies and the FDA’s and EU’s prohibition against marketing medicines in uses that are not approved. These and similar requirements could be imposed by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for any approved product.

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

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

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

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

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

•injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

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

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

We may pursue approval in the U.S., Canada or certain countries in Europe using accelerated, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval pathways, which typically require commitments to complete additional clinical trials. The additional clinical trials may not confirm the treatment effect, which may result in the loss of marketing authorization under accelerated approval, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval. For example, the 24-week endpoint for the AZURE-1 and AZURE-4 trials is meant to enable accelerated approval of brelovitug for the treatment of chronic HDV infection. We expect that if approved, confirmatory studies will be required for full approval. Such confirmatory studies may not show the same clinical benefit as the studies that lead to accelerated approval.

Table of Contents

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

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

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

Even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of our clinical trials, such regulatory authorities may change their requirements in the future. In addition, even if the clinical trials are successfully completed, the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not interpret the results as we do, and more clinical trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval.

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of a product candidate, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that a product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Our clinical trials have in the past and could in the future fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. For example, in December 2023, we announced that our Phase 2b EMBARK clinical trial evaluating Livmarli in patients with biliary atresia (“BA”) did not meet its primary or key secondary endpoints. For example, although brelovitug is being evaluated in the Phase 3 AZURE program for HDV, there can be no assurance that results will be positive or that we will be able to submit a BLA on the basis of these results. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. In the case of our product candidates, we are seeking to develop treatments for rare diseases for which there is limited clinical experience, and our planned clinical trials use novel end points and measurement methodologies, which add complexity to the conduct of and analysis of data from our clinical trials and may delay or prevent regulatory approval.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

•obtaining approval from one or more institutional review boards (“IRBs”) or positive ethics committee opinions;

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

Table of Contents

•changes to clinical trial protocol;

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

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

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

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

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

•lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial;

•subjects experiencing severe or unexpected drug-related AEs;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the U.S. or internationally, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from non-clinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the non-clinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as the case may be, may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or may object to elements of our clinical development program. If we were required to conduct such additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not agree with our interpretation of the results and we may not receive approval for our product candidates or additional indications, or marketing of our approved medicines may be subject to additional requirements.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

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

Even if we eventually complete clinical trials and receive approval of an NDA or equivalent EU or foreign marketing application for our product candidates, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and/or the implementation of a REMS in the U.S. or RMP in the EU, which may be required to ensure safe use of the drug after approval. The FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for a more limited indication or patient population than we originally requested, and the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of a product. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval would delay or prevent commercialization of that product candidate and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.

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

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

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

If generic manufacturers are successful in their use of litigation or regulatory means to obtain approval for generic versions of LIVMARLI, our revenue and results of operations would be adversely affected.

The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, known as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “Hatch-Waxman Act”), permits the FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications (“ANDAs”) for generic versions of branded drugs. We refer to this process as the ANDA process. The ANDA process permits competitor companies to obtain marketing approval for a drug with the same active ingredient as a branded drug, but does not generally require the conduct and submission of clinical efficacy studies for the generic product. In place of such clinical studies, an ANDA applicant usually needs only to submit data demonstrating that its product is bioequivalent to the branded product.

Pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act, companies were permitted to file ANDA applications for proposed generic versions of LIVMARLI on or after September 29, 2025. We own, license or have acquired several patents that cover

Table of Contents

LIVMARLI, and we have listed those patents in conjunction with that product in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (the “Orange Book”). The Hatch-Waxman Act requires an ANDA applicant seeking FDA approval of its proposed generic product prior to the expiration of our Orange Book-listed patents to certify to the FDA, for all patents listed in the Orange Book for LIVMARLI, that (a) the applicant is not seeking approval until after the expiration date of the patent, or (b) the applicant believes the patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of the drug for which the application has been submitted (a paragraph IV certification) and notify us of such certification (a paragraph IV notice). For a method-of-treatment patent listed in the Orange Book, the applicant may also choose to submit a section viii statement certifying that its proposed product label does not contain any language regarding the patented method-of-use instead of certifying to the patent. Upon receipt of a paragraph IV notice, the Hatch-Waxman Act allows us, with proper basis, to bring an action for patent infringement against the ANDA filer, asking that the proposed generic product not be approved until after our patents expire. If we commence a lawsuit within 45 days from receipt of the paragraph IV notice, the FDA cannot finally approve the generic’s ANDA until the earlier of 30 months (known as the “30-month stay”), the expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, or a decision in the litigation resolving it in favor of the ANDA applicant. The discovery, trial and appeals process in such a lawsuit is costly, time consuming, and may result in generic competition if the ANDA applicant prevails.

On December 19, 2025, we, along with Satiogen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Shire Human Genetic Therapies, Inc. as co-plaintiffs, filed four complaints against Sandoz Inc. (“Sandoz”); Annora Pharma Private Limited, Hetero Labs Limited, and Hetero USA Inc. (together, “Hetero”); Zenara Pharma Private Limited and Biophore India Pharmaceuticals Private Limited (together, “Biophore”); and Zydus Lifesciences Global FZE, Zydus Lifesciences Limited, and Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. (together, “Zydus”) (all collectively, “Defendants”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (the “LIVMARLI Patent Litigations”), alleging infringement of certain Orange Book listed patents covering LIVMARLI (the “LIVMARLI Patents”). The LIVMARLI Patent Litigations were initiated, in accordance with the procedures set out in the Hatch-Waxman Act, following the submission by Defendants of ANDAs directed to generic versions of LIVMARLI. Defendants’ ANDAs seek approval to market generic versions of LIVMARLI prior to the expiration of one or more of the LIVMARLI Patents and allege that one or more of the LIVMARLI Patents are invalid, unenforceable, and/or not infringed. We are seeking, among other relief, an order that the effective date of any FDA approval of Defendants’ ANDAs be no earlier than the expiration of the asserted patents, and such further and other relief as the court may deem appropriate. Based on our initiating the litigation, a 30-month stay is in place through March 29, 2029, preventing Defendants from marketing generic versions of LIVMARLI® during that time, subject to the exceptions noted above. On February 20, 2026, Sandoz asserted counterclaims against us and our co-plaintiffs seeking declaratory judgments of non-infringement and invalidity with respect to certain LIVMARLI Patents. Trial in the LIVMARLI Patent Litigations has not yet been scheduled. We cannot make any predictions about the final outcome of these matters or the timing thereof.

Any approved ANDA or related legal proceeding could have an adverse impact on our stock price. Litigation both by us to enforce our patents and by others to invalidate our patents has, and is likely to continue to, cost a substantial amount and require significant management attention. If the validity and/or enforceability of our patents covering LIVMARLI are not upheld in litigation, or if any ANDA filer we bring suit against is found to not infringe our asserted patents, the resulting generic competition following the expiration of regulatory exclusivity would have a material adverse effect on our revenue and results of operations.

We may also face generic competition for LIVMARLI in certain non-U.S. countries, and there is a process somewhat similar to the ANDA process under Article 10 of Directive 2001/83/EC in the EU. Our ability to successfully market and sell LIVMARLI in many countries in which we operate is based upon patent rights or certain regulatory forms of exclusivity, or both. The scope of our patent rights and regulatory exclusivity for LIVMARLI vary from country to country and are dependent on the availability of meaningful legal remedies in each country. If our patent rights and regulatory exclusivity for LIVMARLI are successfully challenged, expire, or otherwise terminate in a particular country, the resulting generic competition could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

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

Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate effectiveness in the targeted indication or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. While we have three medicines approved for commercial sale, we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred

Table of Contents

substantial net losses since our inception in May 2018. For the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, we reported a net loss of $23.4 million, $87.9 million and $163.4 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $667.5 million.

While we generated net income in the third quarter of 2025, we expect to continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future as we look to acquire products and product candidates, continue our clinical development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates and as we continue commercializing our approved medicines in the U.S., Canada and in certain countries in Europe. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. Our prior net losses and expected future net losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with drug development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, if at all, we will be able to achieve profitability.

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

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

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

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

Regulatory authorities in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. and the EU have requirements for approval for product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those jurisdictions, and the regulatory approval process outside the U.S. and EU generally includes all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA and European Commission approval. Consequently, approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by the European Commission, approval by the European Commission does not assure approval by the FDA, and approval of either or both of the FDA and European Commission does not assure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions. Further, marketing approvals in countries outside the U.S., including in the EU, do not ensure pricing approvals in those countries or in any other countries, and marketing approvals and pricing approvals do not ensure that reimbursement will be obtained. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and/or receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of any of our approved medicines or product candidates, if approved, will be harmed, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Table of Contents

Disruptions at the FDA, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities caused by layoffs, funding shortages or global health concerns could negatively impact our business.

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

Disruptions at the FDA, European Commission, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary regulatory authorities, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities to the extent they are not funded by existing available user fees. Repeated or prolonged government shutdowns or global health concerns could prevent the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities and could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, European Commission, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, the current U.S. administration has enacted substantial reductions in force at various U.S. government agencies that, if applied to the FDA in a material way, could significantly reduce the FDA’s capacity to perform its functions in a manner consistent with its past practices and could negatively impact our business.

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

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

There have also been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Affordable Care Act”) was enacted in the U.S., which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers.

There have been amendments and executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “OBBBA”) was signed into law, which narrowed access to Affordable Care Act marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired Affordable Care Act subsidies. Any of these measures could reduce the number of insured individuals in the U.S. and thereby reduce access to reimbursement for our commercial medicines.

Table of Contents

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

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct to consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact “The Great Healthcare Plan,”to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (“Loper Bright”), the U.S. Supreme Court greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures. It is unclear how any such additional health care reform measures will impact our business.

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

On December 11, 2025, the European Commission, the Parliament and the European Council reached a political agreement on a comprehensive overhaul of EU pharmaceutical legislation (the “Pharma Package”). The reform has been under negotiation since the European Commission submitted its proposal in April 2023. This package, comprised of a new directive and regulation to replace existing legislation, aims to modernize the EU framework. The political agreement is still subject to formal approval by the European Parliament and Council. If approved in the form proposed, the Pharma Package will, among other changes, reduce the baseline market protection period by one year, with limited opportunities for extensions, capped at a maximum of eleven years; reshape the incentives regime for orphan medicinal products, by introducing “breakthrough” orphan medicinal products (those addressing diseases with no available medicinal treatment) which will benefit from 11 years of market exclusivity; and expand the “Bolar” exemption to permit generic and biosimilar manufacturers to conduct preparatory activities for regulatory submissions, including pricing and reimbursement, and participate in procurement tenders while patent protection remains in force. A decrease in market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the EU, combined with the expanded Bolar exemption, could open them to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than under the current regime, potentially impacting reimbursement status and the commercial prospects of our product candidates.

Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

•changes in tariffs (including tariffs imposed by the U.S. and retaliatory tariffs, if any, imposed by U.S. trading partners), trade barriers, price and exchange controls and other regulatory requirements;

•economic weakness, including inflation, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets, including as a result of high interest rates and ongoing military conflicts, as well as any related political or economic responses and counter-responses or otherwise by various global actors;

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

•foreign taxes, including withholding of payroll taxes;

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

•difficulties staffing and managing foreign operations;

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

•potential liability under the FCPA or comparable foreign regulations;

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

competitors for our product candidates that we are unaware of at this point. Additionally, while our product candidates and approved medicines are generally protected for a defined period per jurisdiction by various patents, the loss of patent or regulatory exclusivity for our pharmaceutical products may open such products to competition from generic substitutes that are typically priced significantly lower than the original products. The introduction of generic versions of a pharmaceutical product frequently leads to a swift and substantial decline in the sales of the original product. Our continued innovation efforts cannot fully mitigate the impact of competition from generics.

We are aware of two other companies pursuing clinical development and commercialization of therapies that reduce sBA levels via the IBAT pathway. GSK and Ipsen have IBATs in clinical development for cholestatic liver diseases.

We are aware Ipsen has received approval for odevixibat (Bylvay) for the treatment of pruritus in patients with PFIC and cholestatic pruritus in patients with ALGS in the U.S., and for the treatment of PFIC in the EU and for odevixibat (Kayfanda) for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus in ALGS. In the EU, Bylvay and Kayfanda are authorized under exceptional circumstances. Ipsen has opened enrollment in their ALGS open-label extension study to infants 11 months or younger and is also conducting a study of odevixibat in biliary atresia and plans to pursue other cholestatic liver diseases. GSK announced in November 2024 that the Phase 3 GLISTEN trial with linerixibat in PBC met its primary pruritus endpoint and that GSK has submitted marketing applications to the U.S., EU and other health authorities with potential approvals expected in 2026.

Other off-label medications are also used in ALGS, PFIC, PSC and PBC for cholestatic pruritus such as Ursodeoxycholic acid (“UDCA”), cholestyramine and other bile salt resins, rifampin, naltrexone and other agents, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Further, we may compete with companies that are developing gene therapy for the treatment of PFIC. Additionally, surgical interventions, such as partial external biliary diversion and nasobiliary drainage, and extracorporeal liver support, such as Molecular Adsorbent Recirculation System, are also employed in an attempt to lower bile acid levels, manage pruritus and improve measures of liver function.

In adult settings of cholestasis, similar to pediatric settings, cholestyramine, UDCA, rifampin and naltrexone are commonly used agents. We are aware that Alfasigma S.p.’s (formerly Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) Ocaliva, Gilead Science’s Livdelzi, and Ipsen’s Iqirvo are approved as a second-line treatment for PBC in patients with inadequate response to ursodeoxycholic acid. We are aware of several agents in clinical development for the treatment of PBC including Alfasigma’s Ocaliva and bezafibrate, Zydus Therapeutics Inc.’s saroglitazar magnesium, Calliditas Therapeutics AB’s setanaxib, COUR Pharmaceuticals’ CNP-104, Umecrine Cognition’s golexanolone, Kowa Company Ltd’s K-808, HighTide Therapeutics Inc.’s HTD-1801, Hepagene Therapeutics Inc.’s HPG-1860, Tharimmune Inc.’s TH-104, Cascade Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s CS-0159, and GSK’s linerixibat, another IBATi.

We are not aware of FDA or European Commission approved therapeutics for the treatment of PSC. We are aware of several agents in clinical development for the treatment of PSC, including Dr. Falk Pharma's Norucholic acid, HighTide Therapeutics Inc.’s HTD-1801, Alfasigma’s Ocaliva, or obeticholic acid, Ipsen’s elafibranor and ritivixibat, NGM Biopharmaceuticals Inc.’s NGM282, Chemomab Therapeutics Ltd.’s CM-101, Cascade Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s CS-0159, LISCure Biosciences Inc.’s LB-P8, Halo Biosciences Inc.’s HB-1614, ProQR Therapeutics N.V.’s AX-0810, Rectify Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s RTY-694 and Pliant Therapeutics’ bexotegrast.

There are other approved chenodeoxycholic acid products available outside of the U.S. Both Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH and Leadiant Biosciences, Inc. have FDA Orphan Drug Designations granted for the treatment of CTX (granted in 2004 and 2007, respectively), and we believe that Leadiant Biosciences, based on publicly available information, may be conducting a clinical study in CTX. There are currently no FDA-approved treatments in the U.S. that compete with Cholbam. There are other approved cholic acid products available outside of the U.S. and Laboratories CTRS has received approval from the EMA for a version of cholic acid.

There are currently no approved products available in the U.S. for the treatment of chronic HDV infection. Bulevirtide, which is commercialized by Gilead Sciences, is approved for commercial sale in the EU and Gilead is seeking approval from the FDA to commercialize bulevirtide in the U.S. In addition, we are aware that Vir Biotechnology is developing tobevibart in combination with elebsiran for the treatment of chronic HDV. We are aware of several other agents in clinical development for the treatment of chronic HDV including Gilead Science’s GS-4321, Shanghai HEP Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.’s Hepalatide, Suzhou Ribo Life Science Co., Ltd.'s RBD1016, Assembly Biosciences’s ABI-6250, Huahui Health Ltd.’s Libevitug and HH-1270, Replicor Inc.’s REP 2139-Mg and REP 2139-Ca, and EIT Pharma’s Jitixib® (Lonafarnib).

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an ANDA seeking approval of a generic copy of an approved innovator product or an NDA under Section 505(b)(2) that relies on the FDA’s prior findings of safety and effectiveness in approving the innovator product. A Section 505(b)(2) NDA may be for a new or improved version of

Table of Contents

the original innovator product. Certain of our approved medicines, including Ctexli and Cholbam, are or may be subject to immediate competition from compounded and generic entrants, as the ANDA and NDA for these drug products have no remaining or current patent or non-patent exclusivity although Ctexli does have orphan designation for the CTX indication. Further, as described in more detail in this Part I, Item 1A and Note 15 in the notes to our consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report, we have initiated litigation against certain parties alleging infringement of certain “Orange Book” listed patents covering LIVMARLI in accordance with the procedures set out in the Hatch-Waxman Act following the submission by such parties of ANDAs directed to generic versions of LIVMARLI. We cannot make any predictions about the final outcome of these matters or the timing thereof.

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

We are not aware of FDA or European Commission approved therapeutics for the treatment of FXS. We are aware of one other company, Shionogi & Co., LTD., pursuing clinical development of a PDE4D inhibitor (zatomilast/BPN14770) in FXS. We are aware of several other companies pursuing clinical development of therapies for FXS including Harmony Biosciences Inc.’s ZYN002, Allos Pharma Inc.’s Arbaclofen, Healx Ltd.’s Gabaxodol, Spinogenix Inc.’s SPG601, Connecta Therapeutics S.L.’s CTH120, and Kaerus Therapeutics Inc.’s KER-0193.

Even though we have obtained orphan drug designation for several of our product candidates, we may not be able to obtain or maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug status, including market exclusivity.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the U.S. and the EU, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or a patient population of greater than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the U.S. In the EU, the European Commission, on the basis of the opinion of the EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (“COMP”), grants orphan drug designation for medicines to be developed for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of diseases that are life-threatening or chronically debilitating, for which either no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment exists, or if such method exists, the medicine is of significant benefit to those affected by such condition. To benefit from such designation, either the prevalence of such condition must not be more than five in 10,000 people across the EU or, if more prevalent, it must be unlikely that the marketing of the medicine would generate sufficient returns to justify the investment needed for its development. In September 2013, the FDA granted orphan drug status to Livmarli for the treatment of patients with PFIC and ALGS in the U.S. We also received orphan drug designation for Livmarli for PFIC and ALGS in the EU. In 2025, the FDA and COMP granted orphan drug designation for volixibat for PBC and PSC. The FDA granted orphan drug designation for chenodiol for the treatment of CTX in 2010. COMP granted orphan drug designation for brelovitug for hepatitis D virus infection in 2024. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug may be entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or the European Commission from approving another marketing application for the same drug (or, in the case of the European Commission, a similar drug) for the same indication for that time period. The applicable period is seven years in the U.S. and ten years in the EU, which may be extended by six months and two years, respectively, in the case of product candidates that have complied with the respective regulatory authority’s agreed upon pediatric investigation plan (“PIP”). There is, however, a legislative proposal pending in the EU that may modify the length of orphan market exclusivity, change the way in which market exclusivity is awarded to drugs with more than one approved orphan indication. The exclusivity period in the EU can be reduced to six years if at the end of the fifth year a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or European Commission determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. In addition, even after a drug is granted orphan exclusivity and approved, the FDA can subsequently approve another drug for the same condition before the expiration of the seven-year exclusivity period including the same active ingredient, if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In the EU, the European Commission may approve another drug for the same indication despite its orphan exclusivity on the basis that it is not a similar medicinal product or if it is considered safer, more effective, or otherwise clinically superior. Conversely, the European Commission may deny marketing approval for a product candidate if it determines such product candidate is structurally similar to an approved product for the same indication. In addition, if an orphan designated product

Table of Contents

receives marketing approval for an indication broader than or different from what is designated, such product may not be entitled to orphan exclusivity. Even though the FDA has granted orphan drug designation to Livmarli for the treatment of PFIC and ALGS, and for volixibat for the treatment of PBC, our current orphan drug designations may not provide exclusivity for approval for Livmarli or volixibat for modified or different indications.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Although a substantial amount of our efforts are focused on the clinical development, potential regulatory approval and commercialization of our approved medicines and product candidates, a key element of our long-term strategy is to in-license, acquire, develop, market and commercialize a portfolio of products to treat patients with rare diseases. Because we do not have the necessary internal research and development capabilities, unless we build such capabilities internally, we will be dependent upon pharmaceutical companies, academic scientists and other researchers to sell or license products or technology to us. The success of this strategy depends partly upon our ability to identify and select promising biopharmaceutical product candidates and products, negotiate licensing or acquisition agreements with their current owners and finance these arrangements. The process of proposing, negotiating and implementing a license or acquisition of a product candidate or approved product is lengthy and complex. Other companies, including some with substantially greater financial, marketing, sales and other resources, may compete with us for the license or acquisition of product candidates and approved medicines. We have limited resources to identify and execute the acquisition or in-licensing of third-party products, businesses and technologies and integrate them into our current infrastructure. Moreover, we may devote resources to potential acquisitions or licensing opportunities that are never completed, or we may fail to realize the anticipated benefits of such efforts. We may not be able to acquire the rights to additional approved medicines or product candidates on terms that we find acceptable, or at all. Further, any product candidate that we acquire may require additional development efforts prior to commercial sale, including preclinical or clinical testing and approval by the FDA, the European Commission and other similar regulatory authorities. For example, we are conducting the Phase 3 AZURE program for brelovitug to treat chronic HDV infection before we can seek approval by the competent regulatory authorities. All product candidates are prone to risks of failure during biopharmaceutical product development, including the possibility that a product candidate will not be shown to be sufficiently safe and effective for approval by regulatory authorities. In addition, any approved medicines that we acquire may not have the market potential we believe, be manufactured or sold profitably, or achieve market acceptance.

Table of Contents

We may fail to realize all of the anticipated benefits of our commercial and product candidate acquisitions or those benefits may take longer to realize than expected.

We believe that there are significant benefits that may be realized from the Bluejay Acquisition or any other product or product candidate acquisition. For example, the full benefits of the Bluejay Acquisition including the anticipated financial contribution of newly acquired assets or businesses, may not be realized as expected, may be diminished due to competition or may not be achieved within the anticipated time frame, or at all. Failure to achieve the anticipated benefits of either the Bluejay Acquisition or any other product or product candidate acquisition, could adversely affect our results of operations or cash flows, divert needed resources away from our current approved medicines and product candidates, decrease or delay any accretive effect of an acquisition and negatively impact the price of our common stock.

We may not be able to integrate our acquired products and product candidates successfully. We have transferred and entered into new contracts for a number of vendors that support the manufacture and distribution of the acquired assets. We acquired all of Bluejay in the Bluejay Acquisition, including many of its employees, contracts and the operations of Bluejay. If we do not successfully integrate those employees, continue the operations and maintain the existing contractual relationships, we may fail to successfully develop brelovitug. If we fail to successfully integrate our acquired commercial products and product candidates, our results of operations could be adversely affected. The integration processes will continue to require significant time and resources, require significant attention from management and may disrupt the ordinary functioning of our business, and we may not be able to manage the processes successfully, which could harm our business.

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

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

We conduct many of our operations at our facility in Foster City, California. This region serves as the headquarters to many other biopharmaceutical companies and many academic and research institutions. Competition for skilled personnel in our market is intense and may limit our ability to hire and retain highly qualified personnel on acceptable terms or at all.

To induce valuable employees to remain at our company, in addition to salary and cash incentives, we have provided stock awards that vest over time. The value to employees of stock awards that vest over time may be significantly affected by movements in our stock price that are beyond our control and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies. In addition, in response to competition, high inflation rates and labor shortages, we may need to adjust employee cash compensation, which would affect our operating costs and our margins, or equity compensation, which would affect our outstanding share count and cause dilution to existing stockholders. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us on short notice. Although we have offer letters with our key employees, these offer letters provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. We do not maintain “key man” insurance policies on the lives of these individuals or the lives of any of our other employees. Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled junior, mid-level, and senior managers as well as junior, mid-level, and senior scientific and medical personnel.

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

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

As of December 31, 2025, we had 369 full-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we expect to need additional development, managerial, operational, financial, sales, marketing and other personnel. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

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

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

Table of Contents

•managing our internal development efforts effectively, including the clinical and regulatory review process for our approved medicines and our product candidates, while complying with our contractual obligations to contractors and other third parties; and

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

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

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

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

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

We are exposed to the risk that employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants and vendors may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: (1) the laws of the FDA, EU, individual EU Member States or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, EMA, the competent authorities of individual EU Member States or comparable foreign regulatory authorities; (2) manufacturing standards; (3) healthcare fraud and abuse laws in the U.S. and similar foreign fraudulent misconduct laws; or (4) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of our financial information or data. These laws may impact, among other things, our current activities with principal investigators and research subjects, as well as proposed and future sales, marketing and education programs. In particular, the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services, as well as certain business arrangements in the healthcare industry, are subject to extensive laws designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, structuring and commission(s), certain customer incentive programs and other business arrangements generally.

Table of Contents

Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment for clinical trials. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the U.S. or other foreign jurisdictions, our potential exposure under such laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with such laws are also likely to increase. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, imprisonment, possible exclusion from participation in the U.S. in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs and in equivalent foreign programs, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations.

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

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

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

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

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

•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), and their respective implementing regulations, which impose requirements on certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, known as covered entities and their

Table of Contents

respective business associates that perform services for them as well as their covered subcontractors that involve the use, or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;

•federal civil and criminal anti-trust or anti-monopoly laws that restrict or limit corporate actions and practices in order to regulate the conduct and organization of businesses in order to promote competition may apply to exclusive contractual relationships between manufacturers, distributors, and specialty pharmacies which dispense the manufactured products; and

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contracts, and other obligations that govern the processing of personal data by us and on our behalf. In the U.S., federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). For example, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (“CAN-SPAM”) and Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) imposes specific requirements on communications with customers. In particular, the TCPA imposes various consumer consent requirements and other restrictions relating to marketing to individuals using technology such as telephones, mobile devices, and text messages. TCPA violations can result in significant financial penalties, including penalties or criminal fines imposed by the Federal Communications Commission or fines of up to $1,500 per violation imposed through private litigation or by state authorities.

Numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, at the state level, the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended, (“CCPA”), applies to personal data of California consumers, business representatives and employees, and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for fines for violations and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Although the CCPA and other comprehensive state privacy laws exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these laws may increase compliance costs and potential liability for us and the third parties with whom we work. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future.

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

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

We are subject to the GDPR because of our data processing activities that involve the personal data of individuals residing in the EEA and UK, such as in connection with our clinical trials in Europe, and early access program in multiple EU countries, and because of certain processing of personal data carried out in the context of the activities of our relevant European subsidiaries. In addition, we maintain an office in Switzerland, which subjects us to privacy and data protection laws and regulations similar to the GDPR under the Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection, or the FADP. The

Table of Contents

FADP applies to the collection and processing of personal data, including health-related information, by companies located in Switzerland, or in certain circumstances, by companies located outside of Switzerland.

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

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

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

Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a rule entitled the Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons, which places additional restriction on certain data transactions involving countries of concern (e.g., China, Russia, Iran) and covered persons (i.e., individuals or entities who are designated as such by the U.S. Attorney General or considered “foreign persons” and are majority owned by, organized under the laws of, a primary resident in, or a contract or, a covered person or country of concern, as applicable) that may impact certain business activities such as vendor engagements, sale or sharing of data, employment of certain individuals, and investor agreements. Violations of the rule could lead to significant civil and criminal fines and penalties. The rule applies regardless of whether data is anonymized, key-coded, pseudonymized, de-identified or encrypted, which presents particular challenges for companies like ours and may our ability to transfer data in connection with certain transactions or agreements.

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

Table of Contents

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

MIRM US Equity

MIRM · 10-K · period ended 2025-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

MIRM US Equity☆

MIRM · 10-K · period ended 2025-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

MIRM US Equity