PTCT US Equity☆

Item 1A. Risk Factors

The following risk factors and other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K should be carefully considered. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we presently deem less significant may also impair our business operations. Please see page 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of some of the forward-looking statements that are qualified by these risk factors. If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

64

Table of Contents

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

If we are unable to continue to execute our commercial strategy for our products, fail to obtain renewal of, or satisfy the conditions of our marketing authorization for our products, or if we experience significant delays in accomplishing such goals, our business will be materially harmed.

We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources to bring our products to market through research and development, collaborations and acquisitions. Our ability to continue to generate product revenues will depend heavily on the successful commercialization of our products.

If we do not successfully maintain our marketing authorizations for our products and obtain new marketing authorizations for our product candidates and new uses of our approved products, our ability to generate additional revenue will be jeopardized and, consequently, our business will be materially harmed. The success of our products will depend on a number of additional factors, including the following:

● the timing, scope and outcome of commercial launches;

● successful identification of eligible patients;

● effectively competing with other therapies;

● global trade policies;

● a continued acceptable safety profile of the drug;

65

Table of Contents

​

If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to continue to commercialize our products, either of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Delays or failures in obtaining regulatory approval would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates in the applicable territory and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired. Moreover, should we need to conduct additional development work, other than those we have planned, we expect to incur significant costs, which may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

There is significant risk that we will be unable to obtain approval for our product candidates on a timely basis or at all, and we may be required to perform additional clinical trials, non-clinical studies or CMC assessments or analyses at significant cost. Product development is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. This is especially true for rare and/or complicated diseases. A failure of one or more clinical or preclinical trials, or manufacturing development can occur at any stage. Preclinical and clinical studies may also reveal unfavorable product candidate characteristics, including safety concerns, or may not demonstrate product candidate efficacy. In some instances, there can be significant variability in results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing authorization of their products.

The approval process is also subject to the substantial discretion of regulatory authorities and the approval procedures vary among countries, can involve additional testing, and the time for approval may materially differ and be subject to administrative delays that we cannot control. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one regulatory authority outside the United States does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions or by the FDA. However, the failure to obtain approval in one jurisdiction may compromise our ability to obtain approval elsewhere.

In response to changes in the regulatory environment or requests from regulators, we may elect, or be obliged, to postpone a regulatory submission to include additional analyses, which could cause delays in getting our products to market and substantially increase our costs. Securing marketing authorization also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection or conduct of remote regulatory assessments of manufacturing facilities by, the regulatory authorities. Changes to manufacturers, product candidate formulation, manufacturing processes and other product candidate attributes, such as the method of delivery, during product candidate development may also require additional studies to demonstrate the comparability of the product candidate using prior processes, formulation, or manufacturers, or with the prior attributes, to the product candidate using new the processes, formulation, or manufacturers, or with the new attributes.

For example, we have been seeking FDA approval for Translarna for nmDMD with the FDA since 2010 and the FDA has repeatedly disagreed with our interpretation of our results. In October 2017, the Office of Drug Evaluation I of the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter for the NDA, stating that it was unable to approve the application in its current form. In response, we filed a formal dispute resolution request with the Office of New Drugs of the FDA. In February 2018, the Office of New Drugs of the FDA denied our appeal of the Complete Response Letter. In its response, the Office of New Drugs recommended a possible path forward for the ataluren NDA submission based on the accelerated approval pathway. This would involve a re-submission of an NDA containing the current data on effectiveness of ataluren with new data to be generated on dystrophin production in nmDMD patients’ muscles. We followed the FDA’s recommendation and collected, using newer technologies via procedures and methods that we designed, such dystrophin data in a new study, Study 045, and announced the results of Study 045 in February 2021. Study 045 did not meet its pre-specified primary endpoint. In June 2022, we announced top-line results from the placebo-controlled trial of Study 041. Following this announcement, we submitted a meeting request to the FDA to gain clarity on the regulatory pathway for a potential re-

66

Table of Contents

submission of an NDA for Translarna. The FDA provided initial written feedback that Study 041 does not provide substantial evidence of effectiveness to support NDA re-submission. We recently had an informal meeting with the FDA, during which we discussed the potential path to an NDA re-submission for Translarna. Based on the meeting discussion, we plan to request an additional Type C meeting with the FDA in the near future to review the totality of data collected to date, including dystrophin and other mechanistic data as well as additional analyses that could support the benefit of Translarna.

With respect to Upstaza, in a late 2019 interaction with the FDA, the FDA requested additional information concerning the use of the commercial delivery system for Upstaza in young patients. In response to the FDA’s request, we provided additional information concerning the use of the commercial cannula for Upstaza in young patients. In October 2022, we held a type C meeting with the FDA to discuss the details of a potential submission package for Upstaza. At such meeting, the FDA asked for additional bioanalytical data in support of comparability between the drug product used in the clinical studies and the commercial drug product. We have completed these analyses and provided the results to the FDA for review. We expect to submit a BLA to the FDA in the first half of 2023.

There is no guarantee that we will be able to achieve our milestones at all or within our anticipated timeframes, or that regulators may have additional questions to which we will need to respond. There is also substantial risk that the results of our future or current studies will not ultimately support the approval of a product candidate. Any delays in obtaining regulatory approval, or if we never obtain regulatory approval, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may use certain specialized pathways to develop our product candidates or to seek approval. We may not qualify for these pathways or such pathways may not ultimately speed the time to approval or result in product candidate approval.

In the United States, we may pursue the accelerated approval pathway for certain of our product candidates, such as Translarna. However, the FDA may find that our product candidates do not qualify for accelerated approval. Moreover, even if we do ultimately receive accelerated approval, we would need to meet certain post approval requirements, such as completing a post-approval study confirming our product candidates’ clinical benefit that may require substantial time, effort, and funds. Under a newly enacted law, the FDA must specify the conditions for the required post approval studies, including enrollment targets, the study protocol, milestones, and target completion dates, by the time of approval and the FDA may require that the post-approval studies be commenced before the date of approval. If this study does not confirm the product’s clinical benefit or if the study is not conducted in accordance with the FDA’s requirements, it would be subject to the risk of expedited FDA withdrawal. Additional regulatory requirements also include the pre-submission of promotional materials to the FDA and potential restrictions, such as distribution restrictions, to assure the product’s safe use. In recent years, the accelerated approval pathway has come under significant FDA and public scrutiny. Accordingly, depending on the results of our studies, the FDA may be more conservative in granting accelerated approval or, if granted, may be more apt to withdrawal approval if clinical benefit is not confirmed. Due to these and other uncertainties, we are unable to estimate the timing or potential for product candidates for which we may use the accelerated approval pathway or the cost or effort required to receive FDA approval. Further, even if we receive accelerated approval, there is no guarantee that we would be able to maintain such approval.

For our gene therapy product candidates, we may pursue an exceptional circumstances marketing authorization from the EMA. If a product candidate is eligible for marketing authorization under exceptional circumstances, the authorization would be subject to a requirement for the applicant to implement specific procedures, in particular related to notification of the competent authorities of any safety issue. Such exceptional circumstance marketing authorizations are annually reassessed and after five years, the authorization may be renewed under exceptional circumstances for an unlimited period, or the EMA may decide, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one additional five-year renewal. If any product we have is approved under the exceptional circumstances process, there is no guarantee that we will be able to maintain such approval. Moreover, our product candidates may not be eligible for exceptional circumstances marketing authorization.

67

Table of Contents

If we or our collaborators experience any of a number of possible unforeseen events in connection with clinical trials related to our products or our product candidates, maintenance of our existing marketing authorization for our products and any additional potential marketing authorization or commercialization of our products or our product candidates could be delayed or prevented.

We or our collaborators may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing authorization or commercialize our products or our product candidates, including:

68

Table of Contents

​

These risks may be increased for product candidates intended for the treatment of diseases for which there is little clinical experience, where we are using new endpoints or methodologies, or where the product candidates are new or novel. For example, there are no marketed therapies approved to treat the underlying cause of nmDMD and there is limited clinical trial experience with respect to drugs to treat nmDMD and other diseases that we are studying or have studied. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials for these diseases, particularly for drugs to address the underlying nonsense mutations causing these diseases in some subsets of patients, is subject to increased risk. Furthermore, the regulatory requirements regarding gene therapies are continually evolving and regulatory authorities have only approved a limited number of gene therapies. Moreover, because gene therapy products are a relatively new development, less is known about such products and product candidates and, accordingly there is an increased risk that such products may not perform as expected. Regulatory review agencies and the requirements and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional or larger studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions.

We may also experience increased risks to the extent that product candidates require a specialized delivery device or method. For example, Upstaza is administered directly to the putamen in the brain using stereotactic surgery, a brain surgery requiring significant skill and training. There is little experience with such surgeries being used to deliver drugs and for such surgeries being performed on children. We may need to train sufficient brain surgeons to perform the procedure properly, which may expose us to additional regulatory risks as our interactions with such healthcare providers must comply with all applicable laws and regulations. As a result, we will need to invest significant resources to ensure all personnel and contractors are adequately trained on these requirements and to monitor their conduct. Delivery of Upstaza to the putamen also requires certain medical devices, which may result in our product candidate being deemed to be a combination product by the FDA, requiring compliance with the FDA’s device regulations and collaboration with medical device manufacturers.

Our product development costs will increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing authorizations, and we may not have sufficient funding to complete the testing and approval process for any of our product candidates. We may be required to obtain additional funds to complete clinical trials and prepare for possible commercialization of our products and product candidates. We do not know whether any preclinical tests or clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant preclinical or clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our products or our product candidates and allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do or impair our ability to successfully commercialize our products or our product candidates, and so may harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Subgroup, retrospective, post-hoc, and certain statistical analyses may not be reliable and typically will not form the basis for regulatory approval.

In the event that a study’s primary endpoint is not met, companies may undertake certain analyses to further understand the data and potential reasons for the study results, including retrospective, post-hoc, and subgroup analyses. Because these analyses are not pre-planned and studies may not be adequately designed for these analyses, they may not be reliable and typically will not form the basis for regulatory approval. For example, after determining that we did not achieve the primary efficacy endpoint with the pre-specified level of statistical significance in our completed ACT DMD and Phase 2b clinical trials of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, we performed subgroup, retrospective, and meta-analyses. We submitted these analyses to the FDA as part of our NDA, taking the position that the totality of clinical data from these trials support the clinical benefit of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD. The FDA, however, did not agree that these analyses supported approval.

Some of our favorable statistical data from these trials also are based on nominal p-values. Nominal p-values are subject to certain limitations, and which, because of these limitations, regulatory authorities typically give less weight to nominal p-values, compared to regular p-values. For example, the p-values in ACT DMD for change from baseline at week 48 in the 6-minute walk test, or 6MWT (which we also refer to as 6-minute walk distance, or 6MWD) and each secondary end

69

Table of Contents

point timed function test were nominal p-values. The FDA found that certain post-hoc adjustments, our retrospective analyses and our reliance on nominal p-values for some of our statistical data did not support approval.

An unfavorable view of our data and analyses by regulatory authorities has and could continue to negatively impact our ability to obtain or maintain marketing authorizations, which would have a material adverse effect on our revenue and would materially harm our business, financial results and results of operations.

If we experience delays or difficulties in the enrollment of patients in our clinical trials, our receipt of necessary regulatory approvals could be delayed or prevented.

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates, including clinical trials due to the inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients. Patient enrollment is affected a number of factors including:

● the availability of approved treatments;

● severity of the disease under investigation;

● eligibility criteria for the study in question;

● perceived benefits and risks of the product candidate under study;

● efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;

● patient referral practices of physicians;

● competition from other clinical trials;

● the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment; and

● proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients.

For example, we previously experienced delays in enrolling our registration-directed Phase 2/3 trial of vatiquinone in children with mitochondrial disease associated seizures as some patients were unable or hesitant to travel to clinical trial sites due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We anticipate results from the Phase 2/3 trial to be available in the second quarter of 2023.

Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates. Our inability to enroll, timely or at all, a sufficient number of patients in our clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether.

If serious adverse side effects are identified during the development of any product candidate or for any product for which we have or may obtain marketing approval, we may need to abandon or limit our development and/or marketing of that product or product candidate.

If our products or our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects or have characteristics that are unexpected, regulatory authorities, institutional review boards, institutional biosafety committees, or independent ethics committees may place our studies on clinical hold, withdraw or suspend study approvals, or require that we modify our protocols. We may also need to abandon their development or limit development to certain uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a benefit-risk perspective. Adverse events or side effects may also result in study recruitment challenges, marketing authorization denial, limitations on the indicated use of a product, the inclusion of warnings, contraindications, or precautions on the label of any approved products, or significant conditions imposed on any approval, including the requirement of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, or REMS, costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety of the product. Adverse effects may also prevent the adoption of a product, if it is approved. Many compounds that initially showed promise in clinical or earlier stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound. Furthermore, we may be sued and held liable for harm caused by our products to patients as a result of the identification of undesirable side effects, which may cause reputational harm.

70

Table of Contents

For example, although we did not observe a pattern of liver enzyme elevations in our Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials of Translarna, we did observe modest elevations of liver enzymes in some subjects in one of our Phase 1 clinical trials. These elevated enzyme levels did not require cessation of Translarna administration, and enzyme levels typically normalized after completion of the treatment phase. We did not observe any increases in bilirubin, which can be associated with serious harm to the liver, in the Phase 1 clinical trial.

In addition, in Study 009, our first Phase 3 clinical trial of Translarna for the treatment of nmCF, five adverse events in the Translarna arm of the trial that involved the renal system led to discontinuation. As compared to the placebo group, the Translarna treatment arm also had a higher incidence of adverse events of creatinine elevations, which can be an indication of impaired kidney function. In the Translarna treatment arm, more severe clinically meaningful creatinine elevations were reported in conjunction with cystic fibrosis pulmonary exacerbations. These creatinine elevations were associated with concomitant treatment with antibiotics associated with impaired kidney functions, such as aminoglycosides or vancomycin. This led to the subsequent prohibition of concomitant use of Translarna and these antibiotics, which was successful in addressing this issue in the clinical trial.

The risk of finding adverse side effects may be particularly heightened in the case of gene therapies. For instance, new gene copies may produce too much or too little of the desired protein or RNA, or the production of the desired protein or RNA may change over time. Because the treatment is irreversible, there may be challenges in managing side effects. Adverse effects would not be able to be reversed or relieved by stopping dosing and might require us to develop additional clinical safety procedures. Furthermore, new gene copies may disrupt other normal biological molecules and processes. Adverse side effects may also be experienced by patients as a result of the process for administering the therapy or related procedures.

There have been several significant adverse side effects in gene therapy treatments in the past, including reported cases of leukemia, immune- and complement-mediated responses, and death seen in other trials using other vectors. While new recombinant vectors have been developed to potentially reduce these side effects, gene therapy is still a relatively new approach to disease treatment and additional adverse side effects could develop. For instance, possible adverse side effects that could occur include an immunologic or complement-mediated reactions early after administration which, could substantially limit the effectiveness of the treatment. Depending on the vector, additional manufacturing, clinical, and preclinical testing may be required, as well as additional analyses, assessments, and potential long-term patient and clinical study subject monitoring and sample testing and associated regulatory reporting. Serious adverse events in our clinical trials, or other clinical trials involving gene therapy products or our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity, could further adversely impact our product candidates in the form of increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays, stricter labeling requirements, and a decrease in demand.

If, following approval, we or others identify previously unknown side effects, if such side-effects are severe, or if known side effects are more frequent or severe than in the past then our marketing authorizations may be restricted or withdrawn, changes may be required to the product’s label, sales may be adversely impacted, we may be required to undertake additional studies or trials, and government investigations or litigation, including product liability claims, may be brought against us. Additionally, if the safety warnings in our product labels are not followed, adverse medical situations in patients may arise, resulting in negative publicity and potential lawsuits. Any of these occurrences would limit or prevent us from commercializing our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial results and operations.

Certain of our products and product candidates, such as our gene therapies and other biologic product candidates, may be difficult to produce, presenting manufacturing challenges that may delay product development and regulatory approval.

Manufacturers of pharmaceutical products must comply with strictly enforced manufacturing and quality requirements, including cGMP requirements, state and federal regulations, as well as ex-U.S. requirements when applicable. These may be particularly difficult to meet for complex products such as biologic and gene therapy products. Any failure to meet the applicable manufacturing and quality requirements could lead to a delay or interruption in development programs, delays in receiving regulatory approval, and consequences should we receive marketing approval.

71

Table of Contents

The manufacture of biologic and gene therapy products is technically complex, requires extreme precision to meet specification requirements and necessitates substantial expertise and capital investment. Production difficulties caused by unforeseen events, even if seemingly minimal, may delay the availability of material for clinical studies and commercial product. For example, given the nature of biologics manufacturing, there is a risk of contamination. Any contamination could materially adversely affect our ability to produce our gene therapy product candidates on schedule and could, therefore, harm our results of operations and cause reputational damage.

In addition, gene therapy products have only in limited cases been manufactured at scales sufficient for pivotal trials and commercialization. Few pharmaceutical contract manufacturers specialize in gene therapy products and those that do are still developing appropriate processes, controls and facilities for large-scale production. While we believe that there are alternative sources of supply that can satisfy our clinical and commercial requirements, we cannot be certain that we will be able to identify and establish relationships with such sources, if necessary, in a timely manner or at all, and what the terms and costs of such new arrangements would be, or that such alternative suppliers would be able to supply our potential commercial needs. To the extent that we decide to manufacture our own clinical and commercial supply as an alternative source of supply, there is no guarantee that we will be able to cost effectively produce sufficient quantities of our program material. Any switch from our current manufacturer would result in a significant delay, would require regulatory authority approval, and cause material additional costs.

Furthermore, some of the raw materials and other components required in our manufacturing process are derived from diverse biologic sources that may be difficult to procure and may be subject to contamination or recall. Any material shortage, supply chain disruption, contamination recall or restriction on the use of biologically derived substances in the manufacture of our product candidates could adversely impact or disrupt the production and commercialization of products.

In 2021, we began cGMP manufacturing of clinical material at the Hopewell Facility for certain of our gene therapy product candidates other than Upstaza. We still rely on third-party manufacturers to complete product testing for all of our gene therapy product candidates that we manufacture at the Hopewell Facility as well as to provide sufficient quantities of certain program materials that we have not yet transitioned to the Hopewell Facility. To the extent we rely on contract manufacturers, we have personnel with manufacturing and quality experience to oversee our contract manufacturers.

With respect to the Hopewell Facility, we have limited experience conducting our own manufacturing and could encounter problems and delays. The Hopewell Facility requires substantial investment and significant expertise, and our management devotes substantial time to its operation. There is substantial competition for skilled personnel within gene therapy manufacturing and we may not be able to attract and retain these personnel on acceptable terms. Moreover, operating a manufacturing facility may cost more than we currently anticipate. If we experience any problems or delays with the Hopewell Facility, we may need to rely on contract manufacturers for the manufacturing of program materials that we intended to produce ourselves, which may not be available or on acceptable terms.

Additionally, we have limited experience producing plasmid DNA and AAV vectors for third party customers, and we have yet to manufacture cGMP gene therapy product materials for our own clinical trials or commercialization. If we are unable to manufacture these product materials to the required specifications for the third parties we contract with, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected and we may become subject to regulatory or contractual actions, may need to expend significant time and costs to remedy issues, and we may forgo sales, incur liabilities or lose customers, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Finally, we and our third party manufacturers may experience any number of unforeseen issues, unforeseen delays, including equipment failure, labor shortages, natural disasters, power failures, transportation difficulties, quality control or other issues, including those resulting from compliance with regulatory requirements, as further described in these risks, that could prevent us from realizing the intended benefits of our manufacturing strategy.

​

72

Table of Contents

The marketing authorization granted by the European Commission for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD is limited to ambulatory patients aged two years and older located in the EEA, which significantly limits an already small treatable patient population, which reduces our commercial opportunity and is also subject to annual reassessment of the benefit-risk balance by the EMA as well as the specific obligation to conduct Study 041, and may be varied, suspended or withdrawn by the European Commission if we fail to satisfy those requirements.

The marketing label for Translarna approved by the European Commission is limited to ambulatory nmDMD patients aged two years and older who have been identified through genetic testing as having a nonsense mutation in the dystrophin gene. Prevalence estimates for rare diseases are uncertain due to the uncertainties associated with the methodologies used to derive estimates, such as epidemiology assumptions. It can take many years of experience in rare disease market places before prevalence becomes well characterized. Our estimates of both the number of people who have DMD caused by a nonsense mutation, as well as the subset of people with nmDMD who are ambulatory and at least two years old, are based on our beliefs and estimates derived from a variety of sources and may prove to be either incorrect or subject to additional refinement or characterization on a country specific basis over the coming years. If the market opportunities for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD are smaller than we believe they are, our business and anticipated revenues will be negatively impacted. If we decide to seek to expand the approved product label of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in the future, the timing of, and our ability to generate, the necessary data or results required to obtain expanded regulatory approval is currently uncertain. Given the small number of patients who have nmDMD, and the smaller number of patients who meet the criteria for treatment under our current marketing authorization, our commercial opportunity is limited. It is critical to the commercial success of Translarna for nmDMD that we successfully identify and treat these patients.

In order to continue to generate revenue from Translarna, we must maintain our current marketing authorizations in a number of countries and we also may need to receive or maintain marketing authorizations in other territories. The marketing authorization in the EEA is conditional and subject to annual review and renewal by the European Commission following reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization, which we refer to as the annual EMA reassessment. In June 2022, the European Commission renewed our marketing authorization, making it effective, unless extended, through August 5, 2023. This marketing authorization is further subject to a specific obligation to conduct and submit the results of Study 041. In June 2022, we announced top-line results from the placebo-controlled trial of Study 041. In September 2022, we submitted a Type II variation to the EMA to support conversion of the conditional marketing authorization for Translarna to a standard marketing authorization, which included a report on the placebo-controlled trial of Study 041 and data from the open-label extension. We expect an opinion from the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in the first half of 2023.

If the EMA determines in any annual renewal cycle that the balance of benefits and risks of using Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD has changed materially or that we have not or are unable to comply with any conditions that have been or may be placed on the marketing authorization, the European Commission could, at the EMA’s recommendation, vary, suspend, withdraw or refuse to renew the marketing authorization for Translarna or require the imposition of other conditions or restrictions. As such, there is ongoing risk to our ability to maintain our marketing authorization in the EEA. If we are unable to renew our marketing authorization in the EEA during any annual renewal cycle, or if our product label is materially restricted, we would lose all, or a significant portion of, our ability to generate revenue from sales of Translarna, whether pursuant to a commercial or an EAP program, and in all territories, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Any of our products or any other product candidate that receives marketing authorization, if any, may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Even if we are successful in obtaining and maintaining marketing authorizations, our products may not gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. Third-party payors may require prior authorizations or failure on another type of treatment before covering a particular drug, particularly with respect to higher-priced drugs. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for a product or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover a product could reduce physician usage of the product. If these products do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenues or any profits from operations.

73

Table of Contents

The degree of market acceptance of our products or product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

● the prevalence and severity of any side effects, as well as perceived safety;

● the convenience and ease of administration compared to alternative treatments;

● the strength of marketing and distribution support;

● any restrictions on concomitant use of other medications.

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement for a product from third-party payers is a time-consuming and costly process. Failure to obtain adequate reimbursement may significantly impact the adoption and sale of products. Market acceptance and obtaining reimbursement coverage may be particularly challenging in the case of gene therapies, where the cost of a single administration may be substantial and adequate coverage and reimbursement will be essential for patients to afford the treatment. Payors may require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data, which we may not be able to provide. Moreover, ethical, social and legal concerns about certain treatments, such as gene therapy, could result in additional regulations restricting or prohibiting sale of our products.

In the United States, third-party payers, including government payers such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered and reimbursed. Expensive specialty drugs in particular are often subject to restriction. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payers and government payers develop their coverage and reimbursement policies. We cannot be assured that Medicare or Medicaid will cover our product candidates that may be approved or provide reimbursement without restriction and at adequate levels to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Our rebate payments may increase or our 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. Moreover, reimbursement agencies in the EU may be more conservative than CMS. It is difficult to predict what third-party payers will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our products for which we obtain marketing approval. Additionally, within Europe, each country has its own reimbursement regime employing various health technology assessment approaches to assess the cost-effectiveness of the product (in the United Kingdom a HTA assessment is conducted by NICE) which may significantly affect the effective access to the market.

Our ability to negotiate, secure and maintain third-party coverage and reimbursement may also be affected by political, economic and regulatory developments. Governments continue to impose cost containment measures, and third-party payors are increasingly challenging prices charged for medicines and examining their cost effectiveness, in addition to their safety and efficacy. These and other similar developments could significantly limit the degree of market acceptance of our products or any of our other product candidates that receive marketing authorization.

74

Table of Contents

If we are unable to establish or maintain sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market, sell and distribute our products or product candidates, we may not be successful in our continuing efforts to commercialize our products or any other product candidate if and when they are approved.

Our ongoing commercial strategy for our products and any other product candidate that may receive marketing authorization involves the development of a commercial infrastructure that spans multiple jurisdictions and is heavily dependent upon our ability to continue to build an infrastructure that is capable of implementing our global commercial strategy. The establishment and development of our commercial infrastructure will continue to be expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to develop our commercial organizations in all intended territories, including in the United States, in a timely manner or at all. Doing so will require a high degree of coordination and compliance with laws and regulations in numerous territories, including restrictions on advertising practices, enforcement of intellectual property rights, restrictions on pricing or discounts, transparency laws and regulations, and unexpected changes in regulatory requirements and tariffs. If we are unable to effectively coordinate such activities or comply with such laws and regulations, our ability to commercialize our products or any other product candidates that may receive marketing authorization will be adversely affected. If we are unable to establish and maintain adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to generate product revenue consistent with our expectations and may not become profitable.

There are risks involved with establishing our own sales and marketing capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training an internal commercial team is expensive and time consuming and could delay commercialization efforts. If a commercial launch for any product or product candidate for which we recruit a commercial team and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition such personnel.

The arrangements that we have entered into, or may enter into, with third parties to perform sales and marketing services will generate lower product revenues or profitability of product revenues to us than if we were to market and sell any products that we develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively.

If we do not establish sales and marketing capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our products or product candidates. Factors that may materially affect our efforts to commercialize our products include:

75

Table of Contents

Any of these factors, individually or as a group, if not resolved in a favorable manner may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Similar risks apply in those territories where any of our products are available on a reimbursed basis under an EAP program.

A substantial portion of our commercial sales currently occurs in territories outside of the United States which subjects us to additional business risks that could adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

We commercialize Translarna, Upstaza, Tegsedi and Waylivra outside of the United States. We have operations in multiple European countries, Latin America and other territories. We expect that we will continue to expand our international operations in the future, including in emerging growth markets, pending successful completion of the applicable regulatory processes. International operations inherently subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including:

● difficulty in staffing and managing international operations;

● various effects and responsive measures relating to COVID-19 outbreaks;

● changes in international medical reimbursement policies and programs;

● unexpected changes in healthcare policies of ex-U.S. jurisdictions;

● differing labor regulations and business practices; and

For example, the Brazilian Ministry of Health is continuing to experience significant administrative delays processing centralized group purchase orders. Almost all of our product revenue for Translarna in Brazil is attributable to such purchase orders. These centralized group purchase order delays have caused, and may continue to cause, fluctuations in our ability to generate revenue in Brazil.

In addition, some countries in which a product candidate is not approved allow patients access to the product candidate through other legal mechanisms, including court intervention or EAP programs, if the product is approved in another jurisdiction. The price that is ultimately approved by governmental authorities in any country pursuant to commercial pricing and reimbursement processes may be significantly lower than the price we are able to charge for sales under such legal mechanisms and we may become obligated to repay such excess amount.

Some of the countries in which our products are available for sale are in emerging markets. Some countries within emerging markets, including those in Latin America, may be especially vulnerable to periods of global or regional financial instability or may have very limited resources to spend on. We also may be required to increase our reliance on third-party agents within less developed markets. In addition, many emerging market countries have currencies that fluctuate substantially and if such currencies devalue and we cannot offset the devaluations, our financial performance within such countries could be adversely affected.

76

Table of Contents

Furthermore, in some countries, including Brazil and Russia, orders for named patient sales may be for multiple months of therapy, which can lead to an unevenness in orders which could result in significant fluctuations in quarterly net product sales. Other factors may also contribute to fluctuations in quarterly net product sales including a product’s availability in any particular territory, government actions, economic pressures, political unrest and other factors. Net product sales are impacted by factors such as the timing of decisions by regulatory authorities and our ability to successfully negotiate favorable pricing and reimbursement processes on a timely basis in the countries in which we have or may obtain regulatory approval, including the United States, EEA and other territories.

Any of these factors may, individually or as a group, have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. As we continue to expand our existing international operations, we may encounter new risks.

Laws and regulations governing export restrictions and economic sanctions may preclude us from developing and selling certain products, generating revenue from such products, and manufacturing certain materials outside of the United States.

Many countries, including the United States, restrict the export or import of products to or from certain countries through, for example, bans, sanction programs, and boycotts. Such restrictions may preclude us from supplying products or generating revenue in certain countries or may require an export license prior to the export of the controlled item. Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products and technical data relating to those products. Furthermore, if we, or third parties acting on our behalf, do not comply with these restrictions, we may be subject to substantial civil and criminal penalties and suspension or debarment from government contracting.

Our activities outside of the United States, require that we dedicate resources to comply with these laws. Many of our customers and suppliers are ex-U.S. entities or have significant ex-U.S. operations. Although these restrictions have not affected our operations in the past, there is a risk that they could do so in the future as additional geographic regions and entities may become subject to such restrictions. The imposition of new or additional economic and trade sanctions against our major customers or suppliers or financial counterparties or intermediaries could result in our inability to sell to, and generate revenue from such customers or purchase materials from such suppliers. For example, we make sales of Translarna through a distributor to the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation to access Russian nmDMD patients. Our ability to generate and realize revenue in Russia may be materially and adversely impacted as many countries, including the United States, have imposed and may continue to consider imposing additional enhanced export controls on certain products and sanctions on certain industry sectors and parties in Russia in connection with the Russia-Ukraine conflict. We also contract with government-owned hospitals and third-party manufacturers located in China, which has recently been involved in political conflict with the United States. This conflict has increased the likelihood of restrictions that could materially and adversely affect our clinical trial sites located in China, our ability to obtain certain supplies, our ability to manufacture certain product candidates and our ability to potentially commercialize products in China. If our activities are affected because of these or other such restrictions, sanctions, or controls, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. As a result of restrictive export laws, our customers may also seek to obtain a greater supply of similar or substitute products from our competitors that are not subject to these restrictions, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We face competition with respect to our current products and product candidates and any products we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, and biotechnology companies worldwide. Other gene therapy companies may in the future decide to utilize existing technologies to address unmet needs that could potentially compete with our product candidates.

There is currently no marketed therapy, other than Translarna in the EEA, which has received approval for the treatment of the underlying cause of nmDMD. Sarepta recently received approval in the United States for two treatments (Exondys

77

Table of Contents

51 (eteplirsen) and Vyondys 53 (golodirsen)) addressing the underlying cause of disease for different mutations in the DMD gene. Additionally, the FDA granted accelerated approval to Viltepso (viltolarsen) from NS Pharma for the treatment of DMD in patients with exon 53 skipping and Sarepta (Casimersen (SRP 4045) for the treatment of DMD in patients with exon 45 skipping. Viltepso (viltolarsen) from NS Pharma is also approved in Japan. Other biopharmaceutical companies are developing treatments for the underlying cause of disease for different mutations in the DMD gene, Daiichi Sankyo (DS-5141), Nippon Shinyaku (Viltolarsen (NS-065/NCNP-01) and NS-089/NCNP-02), and Astellas (AT-702). Other pharmaceutical companies are developing micro dystrophin gene therapies for patients with DMD regardless of genotype, including Pfizer (PF-06939926), Solid Biosciences (SGT-001) and Sarepta (SRP-9001), whose gene therapy has been submitted for accelerated approval to the FDA.

Although the FDA has not approved a corticosteroid specifically for DMD in the United States other than Emflaza, we face competition in the U.S. DMD market from prednisone/prednisolone, which, while not approved for DMD in the United States, is generically available and has been prescribed off label for DMD patients. ReveraGen BioPharma and Santhera are developing a glucocorticoid antagonist (vamorolone) for DMD patients. An NDA for vamorolone has been submitted to and accepted by the FDA, and the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, date for a decision by the FDA is October 26, 2023.

Currently, no other treatment options are available for the underlying cause of AADC deficiency. Additionally, we are not aware of any late-stage development product candidates for AADC deficiency.

There are several pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies engaged in the development or commercialization of products against targets that are also targets of Tegsedi and Waylivra. For example, Waylivra for FCS faces competition from drugs like Myalept (metreleptin). Myalept, produced by Novelion Therapeutics, Inc., is currently approved for use in generalized lipodystrophy patients. Additionally, Ionis is developing AKCEA-APOCIII-LRx for the treatment of FCS. Currently, no other treatment options are available for the underlying cause of FPL. Additionally, we are not aware of any late-stage development product candidates for FPL. Tegsedi also faces competition from drugs like Onpattro (patisiran), which was launched by Alnylam in the United States in 2018 and received approval in Brazil for the treatment of hATTR amyloidosis in 2020 as well as AMVUTTRA (vutrisiran) which Alnylam received approval for in the United States and Brazil in 2022 for the treatment of the polyneuropathy of hATTR amyloidosis in adults. Vyndaqel (tafamidis meglumine) and Vyndamax (tafamidis) are commercialized in the United States, EU and some other countries in Latin America by Pfizer. Other companies are also pursing product candidates for the treatment of ATTR Amyloidosis with polyneuropathy including BridgeBio Pharma (AG-10), Proclara Biosciences (NPT-189), Prothena (PRK-004) and SOM Biotech (tolcapone).

Further, Tegsedi and Waylivra are delivered by injection, which may render them less attractive to patients than non-injectable products offered by our current or future competitors. If Tegsedi or Waylivra cannot compete effectively with these and other products with common or similar indications, we may not be able to generate substantial revenue from our product sales.

Evrysdi, an orally bioavailable treatment, faces competition from treatments that are not orally bioavailable, including Spinraza (nusinersen), a drug developed by Ionis and marketed by Biogen, which has received FDA approval to treat SMA and Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec), a gene therapy drug developed by AveXis, Inc., (acquired by Novartis in 2018), which is approved in the United States and Japan for the treatment of SMA in patients under 2 years of age and in Europe for babies and young children who weigh up to 21 kilograms. Other companies are also pursuing product candidates for the treatment of SMA, including Kowa (sodium valproate), Catalyst Pharmaceuticals (amifampridine), Scholar Rock (SRK 015), Roche Pharmaceuticals (RO7204239) and Cytokinetics (reldesemtiv)..

For additional discussion regarding the competition we face with respect to our current product candidates, see “Item 1. Business-Competition.”

Our competitors may develop products that are more effective, safer, more convenient or less costly than any that we are marketing or developing or that would render our products or product candidates obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors may also obtain marketing authorization for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for our

78

Table of Contents

products and product candidates, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

We believe that many competitors are attempting to develop therapeutics for the target indications of our products and product candidates, including academic institutions, government agencies, public and private research organizations, large pharmaceutical companies and smaller more focused companies.

Many of our competitors may have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to or necessary for our programs.

Our products or product candidates may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which would harm our business.

We may not obtain adequate coverage or reimbursement for our products, or we may be required to sell our products at an unsatisfactory price. In addition, obtaining pricing, coverage and reimbursement approvals can be a time consuming and expensive process. Our business would be materially adversely affected if we do not receive these approvals on a timely basis.

The regulations and practices that govern marketing authorizations, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries, including almost all of the member states of the EEA, require approval of the sale (list) price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some ex-U.S. markets, including the European market, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing authorization for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations, in some countries at national as well as regional levels, that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more products or other product candidates, even following marketing authorization.

Our ability to successfully commercialize our products or product candidates that may receive marketing authorization will depend in large part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, managed healthcare organizations and other third-party payors and organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and managed healthcare organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement conditions and rates. A primary trend in the EU and U.S. healthcare industries and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities, including the United States government and state legislatures, and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Prices at which our products are reimbursed can be subject to challenge, reduction or denial by the government and other payers. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with discounts off the products’ sale (list) prices and are challenging the prices manufacturers charge for medical products. We cannot be sure that coverage will be available for any product or product candidate that we may commercialize and, if coverage is available, the level of reimbursement is also uncertain.

Reimbursement levels may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product or product candidate for which we obtain marketing authorization. Obtaining reimbursement for our products has been and is expected to continue to be, particularly difficult due to price considerations typically associated with drugs that are developed to treat conditions that affect a small

79

Table of Contents

population of patients. In addition, third-party payors are likely to impose strict requirements for reimbursement of a higher priced drug, such as prior authorization and the requirement to try other therapies first, or high co-payments which can result in patient rejection. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for a product or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover a product could reduce physician usage of the product. If reimbursement is not available or is available only on a limited basis, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product or product candidate for which we have obtained or may obtain marketing authorization.

There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the drug’s approved indications as determined by the applicable regulatory authority. Moreover, eligibility for reimbursement does not imply that any drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent, and programs intended to provide patient assistance until coverage is established can be very costly. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs, and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Further, coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws, enforcement policies or administrative determinations with respect to the importation of drugs into the United States from other countries where they may be sold at lower prices.

In the United States, third-party payors include federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and Veterans Health Administration programs; managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Several of the U.S. federal healthcare programs establish ceiling prices or require that drug manufacturers extend discounts or pay rebates to certain programs in order for their products to be covered and reimbursed. For example, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers of covered outpatient drugs to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the federal government as a condition for coverage of the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drug(s) by state Medicaid programs. The amount of the rebate for each product is based on a statutory formula and may be subject to an additional discount if certain pricing increases more than inflation. State Medicaid programs and Medicaid managed care plans can seek additional “supplemental” rebates from manufacturers in connection with states’ establishment of preferred drug lists. A further requirement for Medicaid coverage is that manufacturers of single source and innovator multiple source drugs enter into a Master agreement and Federal Supply Schedule, or FSS, agreement with the Secretary for Veterans Affairs and charge no more than statutory ceiling prices to the Department of Veteran Affairs, the Department of Defense and certain other federal agencies.

Similarly, in order for a covered outpatient drug to receive federal reimbursement under the Medicare Part B and Medicaid programs, the manufacturer must extend discounts on the covered outpatient drug to entities that are enrolled and participating in the 340B drug pricing program, which is a federal program that requires manufacturers to provide discounts to certain statutorily-defined safety-net providers. The 340B discount for each product is calculated based on certain Medicaid Drug Rebate Program metrics that manufacturers are required to report to CMS.

Emflaza is also eligible for reimbursement under the Medicare Part D program. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities, which will provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Part D prescription drug formularies are required to include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan likely will be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain, and payment of Medicare Coverage Gap discounts may further reduce realization on Part D drugs. Further, CMS is proposing to relax Part D coverage requirements to give plans more leverage in negotiating their formularies.

With respect to drugs eligible for reimbursement under Medicare Part B, on November 27, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing a Most Favored Nations payment model under which reimbursement for certain Medicare Part B drugs and biologicals will be based on a price that reflects the lowest per capita Gross Domestic Product-adjusted (GDP-adjusted) price of any non-U.S. member country of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

80

Table of Contents

(OECD) with a GDP per capita that is at least sixty percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. This rule now has been rescinded but other measures, including the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, have been enacted to address the costs of pharmaceuticals. Such rules and any additional healthcare reform measures could further constrain our business or limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in additional pricing pressures.

In addition, U.S. private health insurers often rely upon Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. Any such coverage or payment limitations may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors. Payment by private payors is also subject to payor-determined coverage and reimbursement policies that vary considerably and are subject to change without notice. We expect that coverage and reimbursement of Emflaza in the United States will vary from commercial payor to commercial payor. Many commercial payors, such as managed care plans, manage access to prescription drugs partly to control costs to their plans, and may use drug formularies and medical policies to limit their exposure. Exclusion from policies can directly reduce product usage in the payor’s patient population and may negatively impact utilization in other payor plans, as well.

There has been recent negative publicity and increasing legislative and public scrutiny around pharmaceutical drug pricing in the U.S., in particular with respect to orphan drugs and specifically with respect to Emflaza. Moreover, U.S. government authorities and third-party payors are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate drug prices and reimbursement, often with particular focus on orphan drugs. These dynamics may give rise to heightened attention and potential negative reactions to pricing decisions for Emflaza and products for which we may receive regulatory approval in the future, possibly limiting our ability to generate revenue and attain profitability.

Moreover, in 2017, the U.S. Congress modified and amended certain provisions of the 2010 U.S. healthcare reform legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, known collectively as the Affordable Care Act), which could have an impact on coverage and reimbursement for healthcare items and services covered by the federal and state healthcare programs as well as plans in the private health insurance market. The so-called “individual mandate” was repealed as part of tax reform legislation adopted in December 2017. Legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act continue to arise and there may be future efforts to modify, repeal, or otherwise invalidate all, or certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. The Biden administration is expected to continue to take measures to further facilitate the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. We cannot assure that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as amended in the future, will not adversely affect our business and financial results and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative or administrative changes relating to healthcare reform will affect our business.

Additionally, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. Failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to reach required deficit reduction goals triggered the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This legislation resulted in aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and will remain in effect through 2031. However, pursuant to the CARES Act and subsequent legislation, these Medicare sequester reductions were suspended through the end of March 2022 and from April 2022 through June 2022, a 1% cut was in effect, with the full 2% cut remaining thereafter. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidates is prescribed or used.

In the EU, reference pricing systems and other measures may lead to cost containment and reduced prices with respect to Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency and other product candidates that might receive marketing authorization in the future. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable payment rates from both government-funded and private payors for our product or any of our product candidates that may receive marketing authorization, or a reduction in coverage for payment rates for our product or any such product candidates, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, in the EU, an authorized trader, such as a wholesaler, can purchase a medicine in one EU member state and obtain a license to import the product into another EU member state. This process is called “parallel distribution”. As a result, a purchaser in one EU

81

Table of Contents

member state may seek to import Translarna from another EU member state where Translarna is sold at a lower price. This could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth.

Similarly, sales of Emflaza in the United States could also be reduced if deflazacort is imported into the United States from lower-priced markets, whether legally or illegally. For example, in the United States, prices for pharmaceuticals are generally higher than in the bordering nations of Mexico and Canada. In October 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, and the FDA published a final rule allowing states and other entities to develop a Section 804 Importation Program, or SIP, to import certain prescription drugs from Canada into the United States. The final rule is currently the subject of ongoing litigation, but at least six states (Vermont, Colorado, Florida, Maine, New Mexico, and New Hampshire) have passed laws allowing for the importation of drugs from Canada with the intent of developing SIPs for review and approval by the FDA. Further, on November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The implementation of the rules has been delayed by the Biden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. The rule also creates a safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufactures, the implementation of which has been delayed until January 1, 2026 by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and based on our current commercial, research and development plans, we expect to continue to incur significant operating expenses for the foreseeable future. We may never generate profits from operations or maintain profitability.

Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. As of December 31, 2022, we had an accumulated deficit of $2,657.0 million. We have historically financed our operations primarily through the issuance and sale of our common stock in public offerings, our “at the market offerings” of our common stock, our initial public offering, proceeds from the Royalty Purchase Agreement, net proceeds from our borrowings under the Credit Agreement, or the Blackstone Credit Agreement, dated as of October 27, 2022, among us, as the Borrower, the subsidiaries of the Borrower from time to time party thereto, as Guarantors, the Lenders from time to time party thereto and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Administrative Agent, the private placements of our preferred stock and common stock, collaborations, bank and institutional lender debt, other convertible debt, grant funding and clinical trial support from governmental and philanthropic organizations and patient advocacy groups in the disease areas addressed by our product candidates. We have relied on revenue generated from net sales of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in territories outside of the United States since 2014, Emflaza for the treatment of DMD in the United States since 2017, and Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency in the EEA since May 2022. We have also relied on revenue associated with milestone and royalty payments from Roche pursuant to the SMA License Agreement under our SMA program. We also began to recognize revenue generated from net sales of Tegsedi for the treatment of stage 1 or stage 2 polyneuropathy in adult patients with hATTR amyloidosis in 2019 and Waylivra for the treatment of FCS in 2020 in Latin America and the Caribbean. Based on our current commercial, research and development plans, we expect to continue to incur significant operating expenses for the foreseeable future, which we anticipate will be partially offset by revenues generated from the sale of our products and our collaboration and royalty revenues. We expect to continue to generate operating losses through 2023 and, while we anticipate that operating losses generated in future periods should decline versus prior periods, we may never generate profits from operations or maintain profitability. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from period to period.

From time to time, we have engaged in strategic transactions to expand and diversify our product pipeline, including through the acquisition of assets or businesses. In connection with these acquisitions, we have entered into agreements through which we have ongoing obligations, including obligations to make contingent payments upon the achievement of certain development, regulatory and net sales milestones or upon a percentage of net sales of certain products. See “Item 1. Business-Our Ongoing Acquisition-Related Obligations” for further information regarding our acquisitions and our ongoing obligations. We may engage in additional strategic transactions to expand and diversify our product pipeline, including through the acquisition of assets, businesses, or rights to products, product candidates or technologies or through strategic alliances or collaborations and we may incur expenses, including with respect to transaction costs, subsequent

82

Table of Contents

development costs or any upfront, milestone or other payments or other financial obligations associated with any such transaction.

Our current ability to generate revenue from sales of Translarna is dependent upon our ability to maintain our marketing authorizations in the EEA for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in ambulatory patients aged two years and older, in Russia for the treatment of nmDMD in patients aged two years and older and in Brazil for the treatment of nmDMD in ambulatory patients two years and older and for continued treatment of patients that become non-ambulatory. The marketing authorization in the EEA is subject to annual review and renewal by the European Commission following reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization and is further subject to a specific obligation to conduct and report the results of Study 041, a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, 18-month, placebo-controlled trial, followed by an 18-month open-label extension, according to an agreed protocol, in order to confirm the efficacy and safety of Translarna. Enrolling, conducting and reporting a clinical trial is a time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we expect that we will incur material costs related to the implementation and conduct of Study 041. We may experience unknown complications with Study 041 and may not achieve the pre-specified endpoint with statistical significance, which would have a material adverse effect on our ability to maintain our marketing authorization in the EEA.

If, in any annual renewal cycle, the EMA determines that the balance of benefits and risks of using Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD has changed materially or that we have not or are unable to comply with the specific obligation to complete Study 041 or any other requirement that has been or may be placed on the marketing authorization, the European Commission could, at the EMA’s recommendation, vary, suspend, withdraw or refuse to renew the marketing authorization for Translarna or impose other specific obligations or restrictions, which would have a materially adverse effect on our business. We expect to incur significant costs in connection with our efforts to maintain our marketing authorization in the EEA. If our marketing authorization in the EEA is not renewed, or our product label is materially restricted, we would lose all, or a significant portion of, our ability to generate revenue from sales of Translarna, whether pursuant to a commercial or a reimbursed early access program, or EAP program, and throughout all territories.We also expect that our efforts to advance Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in the United States will be time-consuming and may be expensive.

We anticipate that our expenses will continue to increase in connection with our commercialization efforts in the United States, the EEA, Latin America and other territories, including the expansion of our infrastructure and corresponding sales and marketing, legal and regulatory, distribution and manufacturing and administrative and employee-based expenses. In addition to the foregoing, we expect to continue to incur significant costs in connection with ongoing, planned and potential future clinical trials and studies in our splicing, gene therapy, Bio-e, metabolic and oncology programs as well as studies in our products for maintaining authorizations, including Study 041, label extensions and additional indications. We have begun seeking and intend to continue to seek marketing authorization for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in territories outside of the EEA, Brazil and Russia. We are also preparing a BLA for Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency in the United States and we anticipate submitting a BLA to the FDA in the first half of 2023. These efforts may significantly impact the timing and extent of our commercialization expenses.

In addition, the clinical and regulatory developments noted in this risk factor may exacerbate the risks related to our commercialization efforts set forth under the heading “Risks Related to the Development and Commercialization of our Products and our Product Candidates,” which could increase the costs associated with our commercial activities or have a negative impact on our revenues.

We may seek to continue to expand and diversify our product pipeline through opportunistically in-licensing or acquiring the rights to products, product candidates or technologies and we may incur expenses, including with respect to transaction costs, subsequent development costs or any upfront, milestone or other payments or other financial obligations associated with any such transaction, which would increase our future capital requirements.

With respect to our outstanding 1.50% convertible senior notes due September 15, 2026, or the 2026 Convertible Notes, cash interest payments are payable on a semi-annual basis in arrears, which will require total funding of $4.3 million annually. With respect to borrowings under the Blackstone Credit Agreement, cash interest payments are payable on the applicable interest payment dates for each loan thereunder. In addition, we will be required under conditions specified in the Blackstone Credit Agreement to fund a reserve account up to certain amounts specified therein. The funds in the reserve

83

Table of Contents

account are available to prepay the Loans at any time at our option, and are, if funded, subject to release upon certain further conditions. Upon any such release, such funds are freely available for use by us subject to the generally applicable terms and conditions of the Blackstone Credit Agreement. Furthermore, the Blackstone Credit Agreement covenant requiring us to have consolidated liquidity of at least $100.0 million as of the last day of each fiscal quarter will be increased to $200.0 million if we consummate acquisitions meeting certain consideration thresholds described in the Blackstone Credit Agreement.

In February 2023, we completed enrollment of our Phase 3 placebo-controlled clinical trial for sepiapterin for PKU. In connection with this event and in accordance with the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of May 5, 2020, or the Censa Merger Agreement, by and among us, Hydro Merger Sub, Inc., our wholly owned, indirect subsidiary, and, solely in its capacity as the representative, agent and attorney-in-fact of the securityholders of Censa Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Censa, Shareholder Representative Services LLC, we are obligated to pay a $30.0 million development milestone to the former Censa securityholders, which we have the option to pay in cash or shares of our common stock. We also expect to make additional payments to the former Censa securityholders of $50.0 million in the aggregate upon the potential achievement in 2023 of certain development and regulatory milestones relating to sepiapterin. Furthermore, we expect to pay the former equityholders of Agilis an additional $20.0 million upon the acceptance for filing by the FDA of a BLA for Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency, which we expect to occur in the first half of 2023.

In addition, our expenses will increase if and as we:

● seek to discover and develop additional product candidates;

● maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio; and

Our expenses may also increase as a result of economic conditions, such as potentially high inflation rates within the jurisdictions that we operate or unfavorable fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.

Our ability to generate profits from operations and become and remain profitable depends on our ability to successfully develop and commercialize drugs that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including:

● commercializing and marketing all of our products and products candidates;

84

Table of Contents

● maintaining orphan exclusivity in the United States for Emflaza;

● expanding the territories in which we are approved to market our products;

We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant enough to generate profits from operations. Even if we do generate profits from operations, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to generate profits from operations and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product offerings or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause our stockholders to lose all or part of their investment in our company.

We may need additional funding. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

As noted in the prior risk factor, we expect to incur significant expenses related to our clinical, regulatory, commercial, legal, research and development, and other business efforts. We believe that our cash flows from product sales, together with existing cash and cash equivalents, will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect.

Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

● our ability to commercialize and market our products and product candidates;

● the timing and outcome of Study 041;

85

Table of Contents

● our ability to maintain orphan exclusivity in the United States for Emflaza;

● our ability to satisfy our obligations under the Blackstone Credit Agreement;

● the timing and scope of growth in our employee base;

Conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials is a time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales for certain product candidates or indications. In addition, our products and product candidates, if approved, may not achieve sustained commercial success. Likewise, if we fail to maintain our marketing authorization or lose non-patent market exclusivity for our products and product candidates, we will be unable to commercialize and generate revenue from the sales of those products.

Accordingly, we may need to continue to rely on additional financing in connection with our continuing operations and to achieve our business objectives. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or based on strategic considerations, even if we believe that we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or our commercialization efforts.

Our indebtedness under the Blackstone Credit Agreement could adversely affect our financial condition or restrict future operations.

On October 27, 2022, or the Closing Date, we entered into the Blackstone Credit Agreement for fundings of up to $950.0 million consisting of a committed loan facility of $450.0 million and further contemplating the potential for up to $500.0

86

Table of Contents

million of additional financing, to the extent that we request such additional financing and subject to the lenders’ agreement to provide such additional financing and to mutual agreement on terms.

The Blackstone Credit Agreement provides for a senior secured term loan facility funded on the Closing Date in the aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million, or the Initial Loans, and a committed delayed draw term loan facility of up to $150.0 million, or the Delayed Draw Loans and, together with the Initial Loans, the Loans, to be funded at our request within 18 months of the Closing Date subject to specified conditions. In addition, the Blackstone Credit Agreement contemplates the potential for further financings by Blackstone, by providing for incremental discretionary uncommitted further financings of up to $500.0 million.

The Loans mature on the date that is seven years from the Closing Date. Borrowings under the Blackstone Credit Agreement bear interest at a variable rate equal to, at our option, either an adjusted Term SOFR rate plus seven and a quarter percent (7.25%) or the Base Rate plus six and a quarter percent (6.25%), subject to a floor of one percent (1%) and two percent (2%) with respect to Term SOFR rate and Base Rate (each as defined in the Blackstone Credit Agreement), respectively.

All obligations under the Blackstone Credit Agreement are secured by security interests in certain of our assets, including (1) intellectual property and other assets related to Translarna, Emflaza, Upstaza, sepiapterin and, until certain release conditions are met, vatiquinone, in each case, together with any other forms, formulations, or methods of delivery of any such products, and regardless of trade or brand name, (2) future acquired intellectual property (but not internally developed intellectual property unrelated to other intellectual property collateral) and other related assets, and (3) the equity interests held by us in certain of our subsidiaries. The Blackstone Credit Agreement contains certain negative covenants with which we must remain in compliance. The Blackstone Credit Agreement also requires that we maintain consolidated liquidity of at least $100.0 million as of the last day of each fiscal quarter, which shall be increased to $200.0 million upon our consummating acquisitions meeting certain consideration thresholds described therein. In addition, we will be required under conditions specified in the Blackstone Credit Agreement to fund a reserve account up to certain amounts specified therein. The funds in the reserve account are available to prepay the Loans at any time at our option, and are, if funded, subject to release upon certain further conditions. Upon any such release, such funds are freely available for use by us subject to the generally applicable terms and conditions of the Blackstone Credit Agreement. The Blackstone Credit Agreement contains certain customary representations and warranties, affirmative covenants and provisions relating to events of default.

In the event of an acceleration of amounts due under the Blackstone Credit Agreement as a result of an event of default, we may not have sufficient funds or may be unable to arrange for additional financing to repay the Loans or to make any accelerated payments, and the lenders could seek to enforce security interests in the collateral securing the Loans, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, our indebtedness under the Blackstone Credit Agreement could have significant adverse consequences, including, among other things:

87

Table of Contents

Any of these factors could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We intend to satisfy our current and future debt obligations with our existing cash, cash equivalents and available for sale securities, potential future product revenue and funds from external sources. However, our inability to satisfy such obligations for any reason would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may engage in strategic transactions to acquire assets, businesses, or rights to products, product candidates or technologies or form collaborations or make investments in other companies or technologies that could harm our operating results, dilute our stockholders’ ownership, increase our debt, or cause us to incur significant expense.

As part of our business strategy, we may engage in additional strategic transactions to expand and diversify our product pipeline, including through the acquisition of assets, businesses, or rights to products, product candidates or technologies or through strategic alliances or collaborations, similar to our acquisitions of Emflaza, Agilis, Censa and BioElectron’s assets and the Tegsedi-Waylivra Agreement. We may not identify suitable strategic transactions, or complete such transactions in a timely manner, on a cost-effective basis, or at all. Moreover, we may devote resources to potential opportunities that are never completed, or we may incorrectly judge the value or worth of such opportunities. Even if we successfully execute a strategic transaction, we may not be able to realize the anticipated benefits of such transaction, may incur additional debt or assume unknown or contingent liabilities in connection therewith, and may experience losses related to our investments in such transactions. Integration of an acquired company or assets into our existing business may not be successful and may disrupt ongoing operations, require the hiring of additional personnel and the implementation of additional internal systems and infrastructure, and require management resources that would otherwise focus on developing our existing business. Even if we are able to achieve the long-term benefits of a strategic transaction, our expenses and short-term costs may increase materially and adversely affect our liquidity. Any of the foregoing could have a detrimental effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, future strategic transactions may entail numerous operational, financial and legal risks, including:

● higher than expected acquisition and integration costs;

● difficulty in integrating operations and personnel of any acquired business;

If we are unable to successfully manage any strategic transaction in which we may engage, our ability to develop new products and continue to expand and diversify our product pipeline may be limited.

88

Table of Contents

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

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate enough product revenues to cover our expenses, we expect to supplement our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances, grants and clinical trial support from governmental and philanthropic organizations and patient advocacy groups in the disease areas addressed by our product candidates; marketing, distribution, licensing or other arrangements.

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, our shareholders’ ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our common stockholders. Our senior secured term loan facility with Blackstone as well as any additional debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, entering into agreements involving licenses to our intellectual property, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates; or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Our ability to use our net operating losses and certain other tax attributes to offset potential taxable income and related income taxes that would otherwise be due is subject to limitation under the provisions of Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code as a result of ownership changes of the Company and could be subject to further annual limitations under such provisions. In addition, we may not generate sufficient future taxable income to use our net operating losses and certain other tax attributes.

If a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” within the meaning of Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Sections 382 and 383, the corporation’s ability to utilize any net operating losses, or NOLs, and certain tax credits and other tax attributes generated before such an ownership change, is limited. We believe that we have in the past experienced ownership changes within the meaning of Sections 382 and 383 that have resulted in limitations under Sections 382 and 383 (and similar state provisions) on the use of our NOLs and other tax attributes.

Sections 382 and 383 are extremely complex provisions with respect to which there are many uncertainties, and we have not requested a ruling from the United States Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, to confirm our analysis of the ownership change limitations related to the NOLs and other tax attributes generated by us. Therefore, we have not established whether the IRS would agree with our analysis regarding the application of Sections 382 and 383. We continue to fully evaluate the impact of a limitation on the use of our NOLs and other tax attributes under Sections 382 and 383.

Moreover, our ability to use these NOLs to offset potential future taxable income and related income taxes that would otherwise be due is dependent upon our generation of future taxable income. We generated taxable income that is subject to income tax in 2022, but continue to maintain NOLs from previous years that will be carried forward.

Changes in our effective income tax rates and future changes to U.S. and non-U.S. tax laws could adversely affect our results of operations.

We are subject to income taxes in the Unites States and various ex-U.S. jurisdictions. Taxes will be incurred as income is earned in these different jurisdictions. Various factors may have favorable or unfavorable effects on our effective income tax rate. These factors include, but are not limited to, interpretations of existing tax laws, changes in tax laws and rates, the accounting for stock options and other share-based compensation, changes in accounting standards, future levels of research and development spending, changes in the mix and level of pre-tax earnings by taxing jurisdiction, the outcome of examinations by the IRS and other jurisdictions, the accuracy of our estimates for unrecognized tax benefits, the realization of deferred tax assets, or by changes to our ownership or capital structure. The impact on our income tax

89

Table of Contents

provision resulting from the above-mentioned factors and others may be significant and could adversely affect our results of operations.

Changes in tax laws or regulations, including further regulatory developments arising from U.S. tax reform legislation as well as multi-jurisdictional changes enacted in response to the action items provided by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), may increase tax uncertainty and the amount of tax we pay.

On December 22, 2017, the United States government enacted the 2017 Tax Act, which significantly reformed the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. The Tax Act, among other things, contained significant changes to corporate taxation. As part of Congress’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, economic relief was enacted in 2020 and 2021. Such legislation contains numerous tax provisions. In addition, the IRA was signed into law in August 2022. The IRA introduced new tax provisions, including a 1% excise tax imposed on certain stock repurchases by publicly traded corporations. The 1% excise tax generally applies to any acquisition by the publicly traded corporation (or certain of its affiliates) of stock of the publicly traded corporation in exchange for money or other property (other than stock of the corporation itself), subject to a de minimis exception. Thus, the excise tax could apply to certain transactions that are not traditional stock repurchases.

Regulatory guidance under the 2017 Tax Act, the IRA, and such additional legislation is and continues to be forthcoming, and such guidance could ultimately increase or lessen the impact of these laws on our business and financial condition. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will confirm the IRA, the Tax Act, and additional tax legislation.

Regulatory guidance under the 2017 Tax Act, which was enacted on December 22, 2017, the FFCR Act, the CARES Act, the CAA, and the ARPA is and continues to be forthcoming, and such guidance could ultimately increase or lessen the impact of these laws on our business and financial condition. It is also possible that Congress will enact additional legislation in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic, and as a result of the changes in the U.S. presidential administration and control of the U.S. Senate, additional tax legislation may also be enacted.

Although we monitor actual and potential changes to the tax laws in the United States and other jurisdictions, it is very difficult to assess to what extent these changes may impact the way in which we conduct our business or our effective tax rate due to the unpredictability and interdependency of these changes. Changes in tax laws and related regulations and practices could have a material adverse effect on our business operations, cash flows, effective tax rate, financial position and results of operations.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of our Products and our Product Candidates

Our marketing authorization in the EEA for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD is a “conditional marketing authorization” that requires annual review and renewal by the European Commission following reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization, and, as such, there is ongoing risk that we may be unable to maintain such authorization. If we are unable to obtain renewal of such marketing authorization in any future renewal cycle, we could lose all, or a significant portion of, our ability to generate revenue from sales of Translarna, whether pursuant to a commercial or an EAP program, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial performance and results of operations.

Our marketing authorization in the EEA for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD is a “conditional marketing authorization” that requires annual review and renewal by the European Commission following reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization and is further conditioned upon the conduct of Study 041.We received initial marketing authorization for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in ambulatory patients aged five years and older from the European Commission in August 2014 as a “conditional marketing authorization.” In July 2018, the European Commission approved a label-extension request to our marketing authorization for Translarna in the EEA to include patients from two to up to five years of age. In July 2020, the European Commission approved the removal of the statement “efficacy has not been demonstrated in non-ambulatory patients” from the indication statement for Translarna. The marketing authorization is subject to annual review and renewal by the European Commission following reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization In June 2022, we announced top-line results from the placebo-controlled trial of Study 041. Within the placebo-controlled trial, Translarna showed a statistically significant treatment

90

Table of Contents

benefit across the entire intent to treat population as assessed by the 6-minute walk test, assessing ambulation and endurance, and in lower-limb muscle function as assessed by the North Star Ambulatory Assessment, a functional scale designed for boys affected by DMD. Additionally, Translarna showed a statistically significant treatment benefit across the intent to treat population within the 10-meter run/walk and 4-stair stair climb, each assessing ambulation and burst activity, while also showing a positive trend in the 4-stair stair descend although not statistically significant. Within the primary analysis group, Translarna demonstrated a positive trend across all endpoints, however, statistical significance was not achieved. Translarna was also well tolerated. In September 2022, we submitted a Type II variation to the EMA to support conversion of the conditional marketing authorization for Translarna to a standard marketing authorization, which included a report on the placebo-controlled trial of Study 041 and data from the open-label extension. We expect an opinion from the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in the first half of 2023. Given that statistical significance was not achieved in the placebo-controlled portion of Study 041 within the primary analysis group, the EMA may deny our request for conversion and our annual reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization may be negatively impacted as well.

We may also still experience unknown complications with open-label extension period Study 041, which would have a materially adverse effect on our ability to maintain our marketing authorization in the EEA. We are further required to implement measures, including pharmacovigilance plans, which are detailed in the risk management plan.

If we fail to satisfy our obligations under the marketing authorization, or if it is determined in any annual renewal cycle that the balance of benefits and risks of using Translarna has changed materially, the European Commission could, at the EMA’s recommendation, vary, suspend, withdraw or refuse to renew the marketing authorization for Translarna. The EMA may also impose other new conditions to our marketing authorization (in addition to Study 041), and may make other recommendations, including new label restrictions. In the event that we do secure annual renewal of the marketing authorization for any given annual renewal cycle, the EMA could nevertheless later determine that we have not complied, or are unable to comply, with any conditions that have been or may be placed on the marketing authorization, including those related to Study 041, which could result in the withdrawal of our marketing authorization or other outcome that would have a materially adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If our marketing authorization in the EEA is not renewed, or our product label is materially restricted, we would lose all, or a significant portion of, our ability to generate revenue from sales of Translarna, whether pursuant to a commercial or an EAP program and throughout all territories, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may not be able to obtain orphan drug exclusivity for our products or product candidates in either the United States or the EU.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the EU and the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. We have obtained orphan drug designations from the EMA and from the FDA for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, Upstaza for the treatment of AADC, Evrysdi for the treatment of SMA, PTC-AS for the treatment of Angelman syndrome, sepiapterin for the treatment of patients with hyperphenylalaninemia, including hyperphenylalaninemia caused by PKU, vatiquinone for the treatment of Friedreich ataxia, utreloxastat for the treatment of ALS and unesbulin for the treatment of LMS. The FDA has also granted an orphan drug designation to Emflaza for the treatment of DMD, vatiquinone for the treatment of seizures in patients with mitochondrial disease, unesbulin for the treatment of DIPG and PTC-FA for the treatment of Friedreich ataxia. We may also seek orphan drug exclusivity for other product candidates, if we believe that the product candidate may qualify. We, however, may not be able to obtain orphan drug designation in the future for any of our other product candidates. Obtaining orphan drug exclusivity, both in the EU and in the United States, may be important to a product candidate’s future success.

In the EU, if an orphan designated product subsequently receives the first marketing authorization for the indication for which it has received such a designation, the product is entitled to 10 years of market exclusivity, which, subject to certain exceptions, precludes the EMA from accepting another marketing application for a similar medicinal product, even if the new marketing application relies on independently generated data submitted as part of a full marketing authorization application dossier. The EU exclusivity period can be reduced to six years, at the end of the fifth year, if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation, including if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is

91

Table of Contents

no longer justified. In addition, a competing similar medicinal product may in limited circumstances be authorized prior to the expiration of the market exclusivity period, including if it is shown to be safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the orphan product. In this context, a “similar medicinal product” is a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in a currently authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. Product candidates can also lose orphan designation, and the related benefits, prior to obtaining a marketing authorization if it is demonstrated that the orphan designation criteria are no longer met.

In the United States, under FDA’s current policy, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing authorization for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to seven years of market exclusivity which precludes the FDA from approving another marketing application for the “same drug” for the same orphan designated approved indication for that time period. When determining whether a drug is the “same drug” as an orphan designated product, the FDA looks to the products’ molecular features and use. The specific sameness criteria, however, varies based on whether the product is composed of small or large molecules and if the product is a gene therapy. Moreover, for gene therapies, the sameness criteria is currently evolving. For example, the FDA recently issued a final guidance document specific to sameness determinations. Depending on product characteristics, sameness may be determined by the FDA on a case by case basis, making it difficult to predict when FDA may approve a product and whether periods of exclusivity will effectively block competitors seeking to market products that are the same or similar to ours for the same intended use. Moreover, following the Catalyst Pharms., Inc. v. Becerra and FDA’s subsequent statement that it intends to continue to apply its regulations tying the scope of orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which a drug is approved, as further described in this filing, the exact scope of orphan drug exclusivity may be an evolving space. Accordingly, whether any of our products or product candidates will be deemed to be the same as another product or product candidate is uncertain and the scope of any potential or received orphan drug exclusivity period may be subject to revision.

Obtaining orphan drug designation does not guarantee that we will be able to receive ultimate marketing approval. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a product candidate nor gives the product candidate any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. Moreover, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to multiple products that are considered to be the “same drug” for the same indication. If a competitor obtains an orphan drug designation for and approval of a product with orphan drug exclusivity for the same indication as one of our product candidates before we do and if the competitor’s product is the same drug, in the United States or a similar medicinal product, in the EU, as ours, we could be excluded from the market for a period of time.

We also may not be able to maintain any orphan drug designations or exclusivities. For instance, orphan drug designations may be revoked if the FDA finds that the request for designation contained an untrue statement of material fact or omitted material information, or if the FDA finds that the product candidate was not eligible for designation at the time of the submission of the request. Even if we are able to receive and maintain orphan drug designations, we may ultimately not receive any period of regulatory exclusivity if our product candidates are approved. For instance, we may not receive orphan product regulatory exclusivity if the indication for which we receive FDA approval is broader than the orphan drug designation. Orphan exclusivity may also be lost for the same reasons that designation may be lost. Orphan exclusivity may further be lost if we are unable to assure a sufficient quantity of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Further, even if we do receive orphan drug exclusivity upon approval of a product candidate, this exclusivity is not absolute. For example, if a competitive product that is the same drug or a similar medicinal product as one of our approved products with orphan exclusivity is shown to be “clinically superior” to our product candidate as determined by the FDA or EMA, respectively, any orphan drug exclusivity we have obtained will not block the approval of such competitive product. Orphan exclusivity also would not block FDA from approving a drug that is the same as our product candidates for different indications or products that are different from ours for the same indication. Moreover, marketing exclusivity would not prevent a provider from prescribing or using another drug off-label and third-party payors may reimburse for products off-label even if not indicated for the orphan condition.

For certain of our products, periods of orphan drug exclusivity are important. For instance, for Emflaza, we rely on non-patent market exclusivity periods under the Orphan Drug Act to commercialize Emflaza in the United States. Emflaza’s seven-year period of orphan drug exclusivity related to the treatment of DMD in patients five years and older expires in

92

Table of Contents

February 2024 while its orphan drug exclusivity related to the treatment of DMD in patients two years of age to less than five expires in June 2026. If we are not able to maintain orphan drug exclusivity for Emflaza or if another company is able to overcome this exclusivity, we may be materially harmed.

The respective orphan designation and exclusivity frameworks in the United States and in the EU are subject to change, and any such changes may affect our ability to obtain, or the impact of obtaining, EU or United States orphan designations in the future.

All pharmaceutical products for which marketing authorization has been granted are subject to extensive and rigorous governmental regulation and could be subject to restrictions or withdrawal from the market. We may also be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with our products, when and if any of them are approved, as well as our product candidates during development.

We, our products and product candidates, our operations, our facilities, our suppliers and our contract manufacturers, distributors, contract research organizations, clinical trial sites and contract testing laboratories are subject to extensive regulation by governmental authorities in the EEA, the United States, and other territories, with regulations differing from country to country.

We are not permitted to market our product candidates in the EEA, the United States, or other territories until we have received requisite regulatory approvals. In order to receive and maintain such approvals, and to be compliant with regulatory authority requirements, we and our third-party service providers must comply on a continuous basis with a broad array of regulations and requirements. Depending on the stage of product development and whether a product is approved these requirements may relate to establishment registration and product listing, the payment of user fees, manufacturing processes, risk management measures, quality and pharmacovigilance systems (including reporting of manufacturing deviations and adverse events), pre- and post-approval clinical and pre-clinical data, labeling, packaging, advertising, marketing and promotional activities (including product sampling), record keeping, distribution, storage, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Any regulatory approval of any of our products or product candidates, once obtained, may be withdrawn. For example, our marketing authorization for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in the EEA is subject to annual review and renewal by the European Commission following reassessment by the EMA of the benefit-risk balance of the authorization, as well as the specific obligation to conduct and report the results of Study 041.

After approving a drug, the FDA may withdraw product approval if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if safety problems occur after the product reaches the market. Requirements for additional clinical trials and studies to confirm safety and effectiveness may be imposed as a condition of marketing approval. In addition, the FDA requires surveillance programs to monitor approved products that have been commercialized, as well as REMS, and the agency has the power to require changes in labeling or to prevent further marketing and distribution of a product. For example, we were obligated to perform certain FDA post-marketing requirements in connection with our marketing authorization for Emflaza in the United States, including pre-clinical and clinical safety studies. Additionally, our marketing authorizations for Translarna, Tegsedi and Waylivra in Brazil and our marketing authorization for Translarna in Russia are subject to renewal every five years. There is no guarantee that we will be able to complete our post-marketing obligations in accordance with the established timetables. Failure to complete the required studies in accordance with the established timetables or failure to provide the requisite periodic reports on the status of post-marketing studies in the absence of good cause could result in an enforcement action. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money, and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing and distribution.

Regulatory authorities conduct ongoing reviews and inspections or remote regulatory assessments of marketed products, as well as sponsors and manufacturing facilities. Regulatory authorities also conduct inspections of manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites before approving a product, which can delay approval. If compliance issues are found, it could also result in refusal to approve marketing applications, disruption of production or distribution of a product or product candidate, disruption, cancellation, or suspension of a study, or require substantial resources to correct.

Even if marketing authorization of a product candidate is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed, the product may have labeling that includes significant restrictions, warnings, including black box warnings, and contraindications, the regulatory authorities may not approve label claims

93

Table of Contents

necessary for successful product marketing, or the approval may be subject to significant conditions of approval, including the requirement of a REMS. A regulatory authority also may impose requirements for costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product. In addition, the competent authorities of each EU member state and the FDA closely regulate the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs to ensure drugs are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling and regulatory requirements. Such regulatory authorities can and do impose stringent restrictions on our communications regarding off-label use and if we do not comply with the laws governing promotion of approved drugs, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label promotion. For example, violations of the FDCA relating to the promotion of prescription drugs may lead to civil and criminal penalties, investigations alleging violations of federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws.

In addition, later discovery of previously unknown adverse events or other problems with our products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, both before and after product approval, may yield various results which could negatively affect our business, including:

● restrictions on such products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes;

● changes to or restrictions on the labeling or marketing of a product;

● modifications to promotional pieces;

● issuance of corrective information;

● clinical holds or termination of clinical trials;

● changes in the way a product is administered;

● liability for harm caused to patients or subjects;

● restrictions on product distribution or use;

● requirements to implement a REMS;

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

● warning, cyber or untitled letters;

● withdrawal of the products from the market or marketing suspensions;

● recall of products;

● fines, restitution or disgorgement of profits or revenues;

● suspension or withdrawal of marketing authorizations;

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

● product seizure or detention;

● injunctions;

● the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; or

Non-compliance with regulatory requirements regarding safety monitoring or pharmacovigilance, and with requirements related to the development of products for the pediatric population, can also result in significant financial penalties. Similarly, failure to comply with regulatory requirements regarding the protection of personal information can also lead to significant penalties and sanctions.

Not only will we be responsible for our own conduct, but we will also be responsible for the conduct of our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners, manufacturers, investigators, and contract research organizations. To the extent that any of these third parties engage in intentional, reckless, negligent, or unintentional failures to comply applicable legal and regulatory requirements, we may be subject to regulatory enforcement action, legal actions and liability, and serious harm to our reputation. Moreover, it is possible for a whistleblower to pursue a False

94

Table of Contents

Claims Act case against us as a result of such third party conduct, even if the government considers the claim unmeritorious and declines to intervene, which could require us to incur costs defending against such a claim.

Any of the above events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, or could substantially increase the costs and expenses of developing and commercializing such product, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenues from its sale. Any of these events could further have other material and adverse effects on our operations and business and could adversely impact our stock price and could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may face competition from biosimilar, generic, and similar products approved through abbreviated pathways, as well as products approved pursuant to full applications.

Our approved products may face competition from products approved via abbreviated pathways as well as products approved pursuant to full applications. For example, our biologic products may face competition from biosimilar or interchangeable products. Sponsors seeking approval of biosimilar or interchangeable products to ours would reference our product in their applications. The applicable laws, however, establish certain protections for reference biologic products. For example, there is a complex and involved framework for sponsors to bring patent infringement actions and actions for declaratory judgment. Accordingly, we may need to pursue costly and time-consuming patent infringement actions, which may include certain statutorily specified regulatory steps before an infringement action may be brought. We may also need to spend time and money defending an action for declaratory judgement that is brought by the biosimilar product sponsor.

Another protection established for biologic products is a period of 12 years of exclusivity for reference products that begins on the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. During this time, the FDA may not make the licensure of a biosimilar product effective. Biosimilar applications can, however, be submitted for FDA review beginning four years after the date of the reference product’s first licensure. This exclusivity period, however, is subject to certain limitations. For example, certain changes and supplements to an approved BLA, and certain subsequent applications filed by the same sponsor, manufacturer, licensor, predecessor in interest, or other related entity do not qualify for the 12-year exclusivity period. Moreover, there have been legislative efforts to decrease this period of exclusivity to a shorter timeframe. Future proposed budgets, international trade agreements and other arrangements or proposals may affect periods of exclusivity. Further, even if our biologic product candidates qualify for biologic exclusivity, there is a risk that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for biosimilar competition sooner than anticipated. Additionally, this period of regulatory exclusivity does not apply to companies pursuing regulatory approval via their own traditional BLA, rather than via the abbreviated pathway. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet fully clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. It is also possible that payers will give reimbursement preference to biosimilars, even over reference biologics, absent a determination of interchangeability. Similarly, in the EU, another company could gain approval for a competing product based on an MAA with a completely independent data package that includes pharmaceutical tests, preclinical tests and clinical trials.

For small molecule drug products, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, seeking approval of a generic copy of one of our approved products. A manufacturer could also submit an NDA under section 505(b)(2), referencing the FDA’s finding of safety and efficacy for one of our drug products, while also conducting its own studies to support any product changes. Any ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA products referencing our approved products would be required to submit patent certifications to the FDA. Unless the applicant does not seek approval until any of our Orange Book listed patents expire or, to the extent possible, carve out any of our Orange Book listed method of use patents, such an applicant would be required to submit what is known as a “Paragraph IV certification,” challenging the validity or enforceability of, or claiming non-infringement of, the listed patent or patents. This would provide us with an opportunity to sue to enforce our patents, which would stay any FDA approval for 30 months from the patent or application owner’s receipt of the notice of the paragraph IV certification, the expiration of the patent, when the infringement case concerning each such patent is favorably decided in the applicant’s favor or settled, or such shorter or longer period as may be ordered by a court. While this would delay the approval of the generic or 505(b)(2) product, such actions would require significant time and cost.

95

Table of Contents

Our small molecule drug products may also be eligible for certain periods of regulatory exclusivity (e.g., five years for new chemical entities, three years for changes to an approved drug requiring a new clinical study, and seven years for orphan drugs), which preclude FDA approval (or in some circumstances, FDA filing and review of) an ANDA or 505(b) (2) NDA relying on the FDA’s finding of safety and effectiveness for the innovative drug. These exclusivities, however, are also subject to certain limitations. For instance, they would not block FDA acceptance and approval of full NDA applications.

Even with the various protections in place, we may not be successful in securing or maintaining proprietary patent protection for our products and product candidates necessary to prevail should we need to bring any challenges under the above FDA regulatory structures. We may also not receive any anticipated periods of regulatory exclusivity. Competition that our products may face from biosimilar, interchangeable, generic, or 505(b)(2) NDA products could materially and adversely impact our future revenue, profitability, and cash flows and substantially limit our ability to obtain a return on the investments we have made in those product candidates. In the United States, this risk has increased in recent years as the FDA and the U.S. government have taken steps to encourage increased drug and biologic competition in the market, in an effort to bring down the cost of pharmaceutical products.

Commercialization of Translarna and Upstaza has been in, and is expected to continue to take place in, countries that tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenues. Failure to obtain and maintain acceptable pricing and reimbursement terms for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD or Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency in the EEA and other countries where Translarna is available would delay or prevent us from marketing our product in such regions, which would adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

In some countries, particularly the member states of the EEA, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to strict governmental control. Each country in the EEA has its own pricing and reimbursement regulations and may have other regulations related to the marketing and sale of pharmaceutical products in the country. We generally will not be able to commence commercial sales of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD or Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency pursuant to the marketing authorization granted by the European Commission in any particular member state of the EEA until we conclude the applicable pricing and reimbursement negotiations and comply with any licensing, employment or related regulatory requirements in that country. In some countries we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials or other studies of our product, including trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product to other available therapies in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. We may not be able to conclude pricing and reimbursement negotiations or comply with additional regulatory requirements in the countries in which we seek to commercialize Translarna or Upstaza on a timely basis, or at all.

The pricing and reimbursement process varies from country to country and can take a substantial amount of time from initiation to completion. Pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. We cannot predict the timing of Translarna’s or Upstaza’s commercial launch in countries where we are awaiting pricing and reimbursement guidelines. While we have submitted pricing and reimbursement dossiers with respect to Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD and Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency in many EEA countries, we have only received both pricing and reimbursement approval on terms that are acceptable to us in a limited number of countries.

The price that is approved by governmental authorities in any country pursuant to commercial pricing and reimbursement processes may be significantly lower than the price we are able to charge for sales under our reimbursed EAP programs and various forms of national “market access agreements” may need to be entered into to achieve reimbursement. In some instances, reimbursement may be subject to challenge, reduction or denial by the government and other payors.

For example, in France, EAP and commercial sales of a product can begin while pricing and reimbursement rates are under discussion with the applicable government health programs. In the event that the negotiated price of the product is lower than the amount reimbursed for sales made prior to the conclusion of price negotiations, we may become obligated to repay such excess amount to the applicable government health program. We will make such retroactive reimbursement, if any, following the conclusion of price negotiations with the applicable government health authority.

Further, based on unsustainable economics imposed by the arbitration board in Germany upon the conclusion of an arbitration process in 2016 with us and the German Federal Association of the Statutory Health Insurances, we delisted

96

Table of Contents

Translarna from the German pharmacy ordering system, effective April 1, 2016. While some patients and healthcare professionals in Germany have been able to access Translarna through a reimbursed importation pathway possible under German law, there can be no assurance that other patients or healthcare professionals in Germany will be successful doing so or, if initially successful, that any or all will continue to be successful. We were required to reimburse payors in Germany the difference between the commercial price of Translarna and the price established by the arbitration board in Germany for sales made in Germany after December 2015, other than sales made pursuant to the reimbursed importation pathway.

Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing and reimbursement negotiations and there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels, including as part of cost containment measures. In addition, adverse clinical and regulatory developments may exacerbate these risks.

Reference pricing used by various EU member states and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states, can further reduce prices and revenues. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries.

If we fail to successfully secure and maintain pricing and reimbursement coverage for Translarna or Upstaza or are significantly delayed in doing so or if burdensome conditions are imposed by private payers, government authorities or other third-party payors on such reimbursement, planned launches in the affected countries will be delayed and our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Our relationships with customers, healthcare providers and professionals, patients, patient organizations, and third-party payors are or will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, transparency and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare professionals and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products or product candidates. Our arrangements with customers, healthcare professionals and third-party payors may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse, transparency and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing authorization. Failure to maintain a comprehensive and effective compliance program, and to integrate the operations of any acquired businesses into a combined comprehensive and effective compliance program on a timely basis, could result in business practices and operations that expose us to a range of regulatory actions that could adversely affect our ability to commercialize our products and could harm or prevent sales of the affected products, or could substantially increase the costs and expenses of commercializing and marketing our products.

There are numerous restrictions and reporting requirements under applicable U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, and equivalent laws and regulations in the EU and other countries in which we operate, as well as self-regulatory codes. Efforts to ensure that we and our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws, regulations, transparency requirements and self-regulatory codes have and will continue to involve substantial costs. We cannot guarantee that we, our employees, our consultants, our third-party contractors, or the healthcare professionals or entities with whom we expect to do business, are or will be in compliance with all federal, state and ex-U.S. regulations and codes. It is possible that governmental authorities could conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, reputational harm, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Exclusion, suspension and debarment from government funded healthcare, procurement and non-procurement programs would adversely affect, perhaps materially, our ability to commercialize, sell or distribute any drug. Even if we were not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant time and resources and generate negative publicity, which could also have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

97

Table of Contents

Legislative and regulatory changes affecting the pharmaceutical industry or the healthcare system more broadly may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain or maintain marketing authorization of and commercialize our products and product candidates and affect the coverage and reimbursement we may obtain.

Our industry is highly regulated and changes in law may adversely impact our business, operations, or financial results. In the United States and some ex-U.S. jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing authorization of our products or product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any products or product candidates for which we have obtained, or may obtain, marketing authorization.

Certain provisions of enacted or proposed legislative changes may negatively impact coverage and reimbursement of healthcare items and services. For example, in the United States, the Medicare Modernization Act requires manufacturers to calculate and report a drug’s Average Sales Price used to reimburse providers for physician-administered drugs under Medicare Part B and changed the way Medicare covers and pays for pharmaceutical products. Cost reduction initiatives and other provisions of this legislation could decrease the coverage and reimbursement that we receive for any approved products. While the Medicare Modernization Act applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own policies. Therefore, any restrictions to coverage or reductions in reimbursement that result from the Medicare Modernization Act may result in a similar coverage restriction or reimbursement reduction from private payors. In addition, private payors may implement coverage restrictions or payment reductions independently from federal programs such as Medicare.

Similarly, in the United States, the Affordable Care Act contains provisions that may reduce the profitability of drug products. However, legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act may contribute to the uncertainty of the ongoing implementation and impact of the Affordable Care Act and also underscore the potential for additional reform going forward. The Biden administration is expected to continue to take measures to further facilitate the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. We cannot assure that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as amended in the future, will not adversely affect our business and financial results.

Promulgated and proposed regulatory changes could also affect coverage or reimbursement of our products and in 2016, CMS issued a final rule regarding the Medicaid drug rebate program, which among other things, revises the manner in which the “average manufacturer price” is to be calculated by manufacturers participating in the program and implements certain amendments to the Medicaid rebate statute created under the ACA. More recently, Congress amended the Medicaid statute, effective October 1, 2019, to exclude prices paid by secondary manufacturers for an authorized generic drug (but not a product approved under the BLA process) from the NDA holder’s AMP for the brand, thereby increasing the rebate amount and the 340B price for the brand. This was implemented by CMS in a final rule issued December 31, 2020. The rule also expanded the definition of products identified as “line extensions” and, in certain circumstances, required inclusion of patient copay assistance in Medicaid best price (effective January 1, 2023), thereby potentially increasing Medicaid rebates paid by manufacturers for such drugs. 340B program guidance regulations on civil monetary penalties for statutory violations, which had been finalized in early 2017 but deferred, recently also went into effect.

In 2020, the Trump administration issued several executive orders intended to lower the costs of prescription products and certain provisions in these orders have been incorporated into regulations. These regulations include an interim final rule implementing a most favored nation model for prices that would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered pharmaceuticals to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. That rule, however, has been subject to a nationwide preliminary injunction and, on December 29, 2021, CMS issued a final rule to rescind it. With issuance of this rule, CMS stated that it will explore all options to incorporate value into payments for Medicare Part B pharmaceuticals and improve beneficiaries' access to evidence-based care.

More recently, on August 16, 2022, the IRA was signed into law by President Biden. The new legislation has implications for Medicare Part D, which is a program available to individuals who are entitled to Medicare Part A or enrolled in Medicare Part B to give them the option of paying a monthly premium for outpatient prescription drug coverage. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program

98

Table of Contents

with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years.