Table of Contents

‘

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021

For the transition period from to

Commission file number 001-38223

RHYTHM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer

incorporation or organization) Identification No.)

222 Berkeley Street

12th Floor

Boston, MA02116

(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)

(857) 264-4280

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

N/A

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

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

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

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes☐ No ☒

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

Large accelerated filer ☒ Accelerated filer ☐

Non-accelerated filer ☐ Smaller reporting company ☐

Emerging growth company ☐

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

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

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $884.4 million, based on the closing price of the registrant’s Common Stock on June 30, 2021, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter.Solely for purposes of this disclosure, Common Stock held by executive officers, directors and certain stockholders of the registrant as of such date have been excluded because such holders may be deemed to be affiliates.

There were 50,329,713 shares of the registrant's Common Stock outstanding as of February 22, 2022.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The registrant intends to file a definitive proxy statement for the registrant's 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021. Portions of such definitive proxy statement are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

RHYTHM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

For the Year Ended December 31, 2021

Table of Contents

Page No.

PART I

Item 1. Business 5

Item 1A. Risk Factors 49

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 105

Item 2. Properties 105

Item 3. Legal Proceedings 105

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 105

PART II

Item 6. [Reserved] 107

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk 120

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 121

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 121

Item 9B. Other Information 122

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 123

Item 11. Executive Compensation 123

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services 124

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 125

SIGNATURES 129

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or this Annual Report, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and is subject to the “safe harbor” created by those sections. Any statements about our expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not historical facts and may be forward-looking. Some of the forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terms such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “could,” “estimates,” “expects,” “intends,” “may,” “might,” “likely,” “plans,” “potential,” “predicts,” “projects,” “seeks,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would,” or similar expressions and the negatives of those terms include forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the marketing and commercialization of IMCIVREE (setmelanotide), and the timing of commercialization, the success, cost and timing of our product development activities and clinical trials, our financial performance, including our expectations regarding our existing cash, operating losses, expenses, sources of future financing and sufficiency of cash, our ability to hire and retain necessary personnel, patient enrollments and the timing thereof, the timing of announcements regarding results of clinical trials and filing of regulatory applications, our ability to protect our intellectual property, our ability to negotiate our collaboration agreements, if needed, our marketing, commercial sales, and revenue generation, expectations surrounding our manufacturing arrangements, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business and operations and our future financial results, and the impact of accounting pronouncements. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements, and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Our actual results may differ significantly from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Important factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, those set forth in Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risk factors and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all risk factors and uncertainties. Except as may be required by law, we have no plans to update our forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Annual Report. We caution readers not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made.

Unless the content requires otherwise, references to “Rhythm Pharmaceuticals,” “Rhythm,” “the Company,” “we,” “our,” and “us,” in this Annual Report refer to Rhythm Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

TRADEMARKS, TRADENAMES AND SERVICE MARKS

This Annual Report may include trademarks, tradenames and service marks that are the property of other organizations. Solely for convenience, trademarks and tradenames referred to in this Annual Report may appear without the ® and TM symbols, but those references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or that the applicable owner will not assert its rights, to these trademarks and tradenames.

SUMMARY RISK FACTORS

Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including those described in Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report. You should carefully consider these risks and uncertainties when investing in our common stock. The principal risks and uncertainties affecting our business include the following:

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a global, commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on changing the paradigm for the treatment of rare genetic diseases of obesity, which are characterized by early-onset, severe obesity and hyperphagia, a pathological and insatiable hunger. While obesity affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide, we are advancing IMCIVREETM (setmelanotide) as a precision medicine strategy for a subset of individuals who have severe obesity due to genetic variants that impair the melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4R) pathway, a pathway in the brain that is responsible for regulating hunger, caloric intake and energy expenditure, which consequently affect body weight. IMCIVREE, an MC4R agonist for which we hold worldwide rights, is the first-ever therapy developed for patients with certain ultra-rare genetic diseases of obesity that is approved or authorized in the United States, European Union (EU) or Great Britain. We made IMCIVREE commercially available in the United States for patients 6 years and older with obesity due to proopiomelanocortin (POMC), proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 1 (PCSK1), or leptin receptor (LEPR) deficiency in early 2021, and we are working to achieve market access in several European countries in 2022. In addition to initial commercial efforts, we are preparing to bring IMCIVREE to additional populations in 2022 and beyond. We are advancing a broad clinical development program for setmelanotide in patients with additional rare genetic diseases of obesity in an effort to expand the approved indication to bring this potential therapy to approximately 100,000 to 200,000 patients in the United States and a similarly-sized rare patient population in Europe.

IMCIVREE was approved in November 2020 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for chronic weight management in adult and pediatric patients 6 years of age and older with obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency confirmed by genetic testing demonstrating variants in POMC, PCSK1, or LEPR genes that are interpreted as pathogenic, likely pathogenic, or of uncertain significance. The European Commission (EC) and Great Britain’s Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), in July and September 2021, respectively, granted marketing authorization to IMCIVREE for the treatment of obesity and the control of hunger associated with genetically confirmed loss-of-function biallelic POMC, including PCSK1, deficiency or biallelic LEPR deficiency in adults and children 6 years of age and above. These approvals were based on Phase 3 data demonstrating a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction of weight and hunger in patients 12 years old or older with severe obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency. In addition to the United States and Europe/UK, we and our partners are seeking approval for IMCIVREE to treat patients with these genetic obesities in Israel, China, Hong Kong and Macau.

Additionally, we are seeking regulatory approvals in the United States and Europe for setmelanotide to treat obesity and control hunger in patients with Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) or Alström syndrome. In November 2021, we announced the U.S. FDA has accepted for filing our supplemental New Drug Application (sNDA) for setmelanotide seeking to expand the approved label to include patients with BBS or Alström syndrome, granted us priority review for this sNDA and assigned a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) goal date of June 16, 2022. In October 2021, we announced that we submitted a Type II variation application to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for setmelanotide for the treatment of obesity and control of hunger in adult and pediatric patients 6 years of age and older with BBS or Alström syndrome. These regulatory submissions are based on positive results from a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial that

Table of Contents

met its primary and all key secondary endpoints and achieved clinically meaningful and statistically significant reductions in body weight and in hyperphagia associated with these syndromes. The submissions include a series of comprehensive individual patient narratives supporting the disease burden of BBS. Our belief that setmelanotide, if approved, has the potential to offer the first therapeutic option for the early-onset, severe obesity and unrelenting hunger that characterize these syndromes. Recently, we have decided to withdraw the Alström syndrome indication from the pending Type II variation application based on feedback from the EMA.

We also are advancing a broad clinical development program evaluating setmelanotide in several ongoing and planned clinical trials, and we are leveraging what we believe is the largest known DNA database focused on obesity - with approximately 45,000 sequencing samples as of December 31, 2021 - to improve the understanding, diagnosis and care of people living with severe obesity due to certain variants in genes associated with the MC4R pathway. Having achieved proof-of-concept in our ongoing exploratory Phase 2 Basket Study evaluating setmelanotide in patients with severe obesity driven by variants in several different MC4R pathway associated genes, we expect to initiate in the first half of 2022, the pivotal Phase 3 EMANATE clinical trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate setmelanotide in five independent sub-studies in patients with obesity due to a heterozygous variant of the POMC/PCSK1 genes or LEPR gene, certain rare variants of the SRC1 gene or the SH2B1 gene, or the N221D variant in the PCSK1 gene. We also have initiated the Phase 2 DAYBREAK clinical trial designed to evaluate setmelanotide in patients who carry a confirmed variant in one or more of 31 additional genes with strong or very strong relevance to the MC4R pathway. Our broad clinical program evaluating setmelanotide in rare diseases of obesity also includes the ongoing exploratory Phase 2 Basket study, an ongoing Phase 2 study evaluating setmelanotide in patients with hypothalamic obesity, a Phase 3 study in pediatric patients with MC4R pathway deficiencies between the ages of 2 and 6 years old, and potential registration-enabling study with our once-weekly formulation of setmelanotide.

We are taking a simple, three-step approach in our clinical development programs that we expect will translate to the real-world practice of medicine for MC4R pathway-related obesities. First, we will identify patients with early-onset severe obesity (BMI>40 kg/m2 in adults or BMI≥ 95th percentile for age and gender for patients 6 to 16 years of age) and hyperphagia. Second, with genetic testing, we will seek to confirm that these patients have a variant in one of 36 genes (or more) related to the MC4R pathway. If these individuals test positive for such a genetic variant, they would be eligible for access to IMCIVREE or enrollment in a clinical trial evaluating setmelanotide. In clinical trials across several different genetic deficiencies, we have seen patients respond to this precision treatment with rapid weight loss of 5 % or more in 12 to 16 weeks. Based on our experience treating more than 100 patients in our Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical studies, patients who achieve at least 5 % weight loss at approximately 12 to 16 weeks on setmelanotide therapy tend to achieve 10 % weight loss or more within a year, hence these patients demonstrate a robust clinically meaningful response to treatment.

Our sequencing-based epidemiology estimates show that each of these genetically-defined MC4R pathway deficiencies number in the rare or ultra-rare category, according to established definitions of rare disease patient populations. Our epidemiology estimates are approximately 5,000 for U.S. patients in initial indications, including obesity due to biallelic POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiencies, and BBS and Alström syndrome. Based on internal sequencing data, we believe the established epidemiology estimates for BBS ultimately may prove to underestimate the number of people with this syndrome. The epidemiology estimates for the indications being studied in our Phase 3 EMANATE trial suggest that between 100,000 to 200,000 U.S. patients with one of these genetically driven obesities have the potential to respond to setmelanotide. Despite the combined potential addressable patient population likely being larger than rare populations of each individual genetic disorder, these patients face similar challenges as other patients with rare diseases, namely lack of awareness, resources, tests, tools and especially therapeutic options.

We are working to expand access to IMCIVREE globally, beginning with obesities from POMC, PCSK1 and LEPR deficiencies, as we advance towards regulatory approvals in BBS and potentially Alström syndrome and expand our clinical development programs. Our disease awareness and patient finding efforts are aligned with a singular focus on building a community of caregivers and healthcare providers focused on transforming the treatment of these diseases. We have multiple teams in the field in the United States and Europe engaging with physicians who treat patients with severe obesity. We continue to bring health care providers together with our Genetic Obesity Learning Development (GOLD) Academy, a series of U.S. based non-CME programs we sponsor, as well as additional educational and awareness events directed towards patients and their families and health care providers. And our sequencing efforts, now primarily focused

Table of Contents

on our Uncovering Rare ObesityTM (URO) sponsored genetic testing program, fuel MC4R pathway research, disease education and awareness and patient finding.

With approximately 140 employees in the United States and Europe as of January 31, 2022, a rapidly expanding network of key opinion leaders, and an increasing number of treated patients, we are focused on changing the paradigm for the treatment of rare genetic diseases of obesity. Our focused disease awareness and patient finding efforts fuel the key elements of our strategy, including:

Table of Contents

Our Product Pipeline

The following chart depicts key information regarding the development of setmelanotide, including the indications we are pursuing within MC4R pathway deficiencies and the current state of development:

Market Overview

Early-onset, Severe Obesity, Hyperphagia, and the MC4R Pathway

All obesity is not the same, and rare genetic diseases of obesity are distinct from general obesity. The hallmark characteristics of rare genetic diseases of obesity are early-onset, severe obesity and hyperphagia, a pathological, overwhelming, obsessive, and relentless hunger that drives a severe preoccupation with food and extreme food-seeking behaviors. Lifestyle interventions are not therapeutic in patients with rare genetic diseases of obesity, because they fail to address the underlying genetic impairment of central energy regulation.

Accordingly, the discovery that the MC4R pathway regulates both energy intake (hunger) and energy expenditure to balance food intake and caloric expenditure has made it an important target for therapeutics. In addition to obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiencies, recent advances in genetic studies have identified several diseases characterized at least in part with early-onset, severe obesity and hyperphagia that are the result of genetic variants affecting the MC4R pathway, including BBS, Alström syndrome, certain variants of the POMC, PCSK1, LEPR, SRC1 and SH2B1 genes, as well as MC4R deficiency obesity and deficiencies in upwards of 31 additional genes with strong or very strong relevance to the MC4R pathway. With a deeper understanding of this critical signaling pathway, we are taking a different approach to drug development by focusing on specific genetic variants affecting the MC4R pathway. We believe that this approach has the potential to provide dramatic improvements in obesity and hyperphagia by restoring lost function in the MC4R pathway.

Obesity Caused by Rare Genetic Variants Affecting the MC4R Pathway

The MC4R pathway, which has been the focus of extensive scientific investigation for many years, regulates hunger, caloric intake, and energy expenditure, which consequently affect body weight. The critical role of the MC4R pathway in weight regulation is supported by the observation that single gene variants at many points in this pathway result in early-onset, severe obesity.

The MC4R pathway is illustrated in the figure below. Under normal conditions, POMC neurons are activated by adiposity and satiety signals, including those resulting from the hormone leptin acting through the LEPR. POMC neurons

Table of Contents

produce a protein, which is processed by the PCSK1 enzyme, into melanocyte stimulating hormone, or MSH, the natural ligand, or activator of the MC4R. When upstream genetic variants disrupt this pathway, it can lead to insufficient MC4R activation and downstream signaling; the result of which is hyperphagia and severe obesity.

The figure below also illustrates some of the genes that are upstream of the MC4R and the potential effect variants in those genes may have on the activation of the MC4R, which regulates food intake and energy expenditure.

Setmelanotide Development Targets: Upstream Deficiencies Affecting the MC4R Pathway

AgRP, agouti-related protein; LEPR, leptin receptor; MC4R, melanocortin-4 receptor; MSH, melanocyte-stimulating hormone; ACTH, adrenocorticotropic hormone; PCSK1, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-type 1; POMC, proopiomelanocortin; . Reference: Yazdi FT et al. PeerJ. 2015;3:e856.

We are focused on developing setmelanotide for genetic disorders that arise due to variants in this pathway that are upstream of the MC4R. With our expanding clinical development program, we are evaluating setmelanotide in Phase 2 and 3 trials for the treatment of obesity due to variants in one of 36 genes associated with the MC4R pathway. Setmelanotide has the potential to restore lost function in this pathway by activating the intact MC4R-expressing neuron downstream of the genetic impairment. In this way, we believe setmelanotide acts as restorative therapy, to restore lost signaling of the MC4R pathway.

Epidemiology Estimates of Rare Genetic Diseases of the MC4R Pathway

While obesity is epidemic in the United States and elsewhere, we are focused on rare genetic diseases of obesity, most often characterized by early-onset, severe obesity and hyperphagia. Of the tens of millions of individuals with obesity in the United States, the U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that there are approximately 5 million individuals whose severe obesity had early onset between the ages of 2 and 5 years old. The table below summarizes, using the estimations described below, the indications currently approved or under active clinical investigation.

Approved by the U.S. FDA and authorized by the EC and Great Britain’s MHRA1

Obesity due to biallelic POMC or PCSK1 deficiency ~100 – 500 U.S. patients

Obesity due to biallelic LEPR deficiency ~500 – 2,000 U.S. patients

Bardet-Biedl syndrome ~1,500 – 2,500 U.S. patients

Alström syndrome ~500 U.S. patients

Table of Contents

Setmelanotide currently being evaluated in Phase 2 or Phase 3 trials

Heterozygous POMC or PCSK1 variants ~45,000 U.S. patients

Heterozygous LEPR variants ~25,000 U.S. patients

SRC1 variants ~20,000 U.S. patients

SH2B1 variants ~23,000 U.S. patients

MC4R variants ~10,000 U.S. patients*

Hypothalamic obesity >4,500 U.S. patients**

1. Approved for use in patients six years of age and older.

These calculations rely on internal and proprietary sequencing data and current estimated responder rates to setmelanotide therapy, and they assume a U.S. population of 327 million, of which 1.7% have early-onset, severe obesity (Hales et al in JAMA – April 2018: Trends in Obesity and Severe Obesity Prevalence in US Youth and Adults by Sex and Age, 2007-2008 to 2015-2016); * Estimated prevalence of U.S. patients with rescuable variants of the MC4R; ** Internal Company estimate is based on reported incidence of hypothalamic obesity following craniophryngioma and long-term survival rates, Zacharia, et al., Neuro-Oncology 14(8):1070–1078, 2012. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos142; and Muller, et al., Neuro-Oncology 17(7), 1029–1038, 2015 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov044.

We believe that the patient populations in Europe are at least as large as those in the United States. While our sequencing data include patients from the United States and Europe, we do not have comparable epidemiological data from European countries and these estimates are therefore based solely on applying relative population percentages to the Rhythm-derived estimates described above.

Prevalence estimates for Bardet-Biedl syndrome vary markedly between populations, from 1 in 160,000 in northern European populations with higher prevalence rates in some additional regions throughout the world. Our estimate is that the number of patients with BBS in the United States is between 1,500 to 2,500 people and that it is a slightly higher number in Europe. We believe the BBS community in EU member states and Great Britain is particularly well established and more advanced than in the United States, as we believe there are approximately 1,500 patients diagnosed and being cared for at academic centers in Europe. Additionally, our genetic sequencing data support our belief that these prevalence estimates may be lower than the actual disease prevalence.

For patients with genetic variants of the MC4R pathway, the rarity and the genetic pathophysiology of our target indications means that there is no comprehensive patient registry or other method of establishing with precision the actual number of patients. As a result, we have had to rely on other available sources to derive clinical prevalence estimates for our target indications. We recently updated our prevalence estimates in 2021 based on sequencing data from approximately 45,000 individuals with obesity, and rates of response to setmelanotide in our exploratory Phase 2 Basket study. Because the published epidemiology studies for these genetic deficiencies are based on relatively small population samples, and are not amenable to robust statistical analyses, it is possible that these projections may significantly under- or overestimate the addressable population. While our projected estimates of the aggregate total addressable population continues to expand with the addition of new genes, the addressable population faces the challenges of a rare disease population. The disease must be suspected by the physician, confirmed by genetic testing and then setmelanotide responsiveness confirmed by a 12-16 week trial with the product candidate.

Limitations of Current Therapies

Although drugs approved for general obesity potentially can be used in patients with obesity and MC4R pathway variants, all currently available products have limited efficacy and treat symptoms without addressing the underlying biology of MC4R impairment. For example, drugs which delay gastric emptying may cause a patient to feel full and eat less, but are also often associated with nausea and vomiting as a consequence of the delayed emptying. In the case of individuals with MC4R pathway variants, these therapies also do not specifically address the impaired signaling in this central energy regulating pathway. Similarly, bariatric surgery which has been shown to be quite effective in the general population with obesity, may be unsuccessful in patients with MC4R variants for the same reason.

Table of Contents

IMCIVREETM (setmelanotide)

IMCIVREE was approved in November 2020 by the U.S. FDA for chronic weight management in adult and pediatric patients 6 years of age and older with obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency confirmed by genetic testing demonstrating variants in POMC, PCSK1, or LEPR genes that are interpreted as pathogenic, likely pathogenic, or of uncertain significance, and in July and September 2021, respectively, by the EC and Great Britain’s MHRA for the treatment of obesity and the control of hunger associated with genetically confirmed loss-of-function biallelic POMC, including PCSK1, deficiency or biallelic LEPR deficiency in adults and children 6 years of age and above. These approvals were based on Phase 3 data demonstrating a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reductions in weight and hunger in patients 12 years old or older with severe obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency. As an MC4 receptor agonist, IMCIVREE is designed to restore impaired MC4 receptor pathway activity arising due to genetic impairments upstream of the MC4 receptor.

IMCIVREE contains setmelanotide acetate, a melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R) agonist. Setmelanotide is an 8 amino acid cyclic peptide analog of endogenous melanocortin peptide α-MSH. The chemical name for setmelanotide acetate is acetyl-L-arginyl-L-cysteinyl-D-alanyl-L-histidinyl-D-phenylalanyl-L-arginyl-L-tryptophanyl-L-cysteinamide cyclic (2→8)-disulfide acetate. Its molecular formula is C49H68N18O9S2 (anhydrous, free-base), and molecular mass is 1117.3 Daltons (anhydrous, free-base).

The chemical structure of setmelanotide is:

IMCIVREE injection is a sterile, clear to slightly opalescent, colorless to slightly yellow solution. Each 1 mL of IMCIVREE contains 10 mg of setmelanotide provided as setmelanotide acetate, which is a salt with 2 to 4 molar equivalents of acetate, and the following inactive ingredients: 100 mg N-(carbonyl-methoxypolyethylene glycol 2000)-1,2-distearoyl- glycero-3- phosphoethanolamine sodium salt, 8 mg carboxymethylcellulose sodium (average MWt 90,500), 11 mg mannitol, 5 mg phenol, 10 mg benzyl alcohol, 1 mg edetate disodium dihydrate, and Water for Injection. The pH of IMCIVREE is 5 to 6.

Obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency are ultra-rare diseases caused by variants in POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR genes that impair the MC4 receptor pathway. People living with obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency struggle with hyperphagia, an extreme, insatiable hunger, beginning at a young age and resulting in early-onset, severe obesity.

Obesity due to POMC or PCSK1 deficiency is caused by the loss of both genetic copies of either the gene for POMC or the gene for PCSK1. This results either in loss of POMC neuropeptide synthesis, in the case of biallelic (compound heterozygous and homozygous) deficiency in the POMC gene, or in disruption of the required processing of the POMC neuropeptide product to MSH by the PCSK1 enzyme, in the case of biallelic deficiency in the PCSK1 gene. The result of both of these biallelic genetic variants is deficiency of MSH to bind and activate MC4R, ultimately leading to the lack of stimulation of downstream MC4R neurons and causing severe, early-onset obesity and hyperphagia. POMC or PSCK1 biallelic deficiency may also be associated with other hormonal deficiencies, such as hypoadrenalism, as well as other characteristics of MSH deficiency such as red hair and fair skin.

Table of Contents

POMC/PCSK1 deficiency is characterized by voracious infant feeding, rapid weight gain and severe obesity, often in early infancy, with patients demonstrating remarkable weight increases many standard deviations above the normal weight growth curves. These patients and their caregivers often attempt to stabilize body weight with the help of psychologists, nutritionists and pediatric endocrinologists, all without significant success, since none of these interventions addresses the underlying biology of the impact of the POMC/PSCK1 deficiency on the MC4R pathway.

Obesity due to LEPR deficiency is an ultra-rare genetic disease that causes hyperphagia and severe, early-onset obesity. Leptin’s role in obesity has been elucidated by characterization of people with severe obesity and biallelic mutations that impair the activity of leptin, including disruption of signaling at the LEPR, known as LEPR deficiency obesity. Under normal conditions, leptin is released from adipose (fat) tissue as a signal of the body’s energy reserves, and can activate POMC neurons and the downstream MC4R to signal for decreased energy intake and increased energy expenditure. However, like other deficiencies upstream in the MC4R pathway, lack of signaling at LEPR results in loss of function in the MC4R pathway and loss of signaling of downstream MC4R expressing neurons, resulting in hyperphagia and early-onset severe obesity.

Pivotal Phase 3 Clinical Trials Evaluating Setmelanotide in POMC and LEPR Deficiency Obesities

We assessed the safety and efficacy of IMCIVREE in two pivotal trials that were identically designed: one-year, open-label studies, each with an eight-week, double-blind withdrawal period. The studies enrolled patients with homozygous or presumed compound heterozygous pathogenic, likely pathogenic variants, or VUS, for either the POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR gene. In both studies, adult patients had a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m2. Weight in pediatric patients was ≥95th percentile using growth chart assessments.

Efficacy analyses were conducted in 21 patients who had completed at least one year of treatment at the time of a pre-specified data cutoff. Of the 21 patients included in the efficacy analysis in both pivotal studies, 62% were adults and 38% were aged 16 years or younger. In Study 1, 50% of patients were female, 70% were White, and the median baseline BMI was 40.0 kg/m2 (range: 26.6-53.3). In Study 2, 73% of patients were female, 91% were White, and the median baseline BMI was 46.6 kg/ m2 (range: 35.8-64.6).

In the POMC/PCSK1 study, 80% of patients with obesity due to POMC or PCSK1 deficiency met the primary endpoint, achieving a ≥10% weight loss after one year of treatment with IMCIVREE. In the LEPR study, 46% of patients with obesity due to LEPR deficiency met the primary endpoint by achieving a ≥10% weight loss after 1 year of treatment with IMCIVREE.

Development of Setmelanotide for Additional Indications

Bardet-Biedl and Alström syndromes

Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a life-threatening, ultra-rare orphan disease. BBS is a disease that causes hyperphagia and severe obesity beginning in early childhood, as well as vision loss, polydactyly, kidney abnormalities, and other signs and symptoms. For patients with BBS, hyperphagia and obesity can have significant health consequences. BBS is part of a class of disorders called ciliopathies, or disorders associated with the impairment of cilia function in cells. Cilia are hair-like cellular projections that play a fundamental role in the regulation of several biological processes, including satiety signaling. Cilia dysfunction in the hypothalamus, including in the MC4R pathway, is thought to contribute to hyperphagia and obesity in BBS. BBS is a genetically heterogeneous disease that is caused by as many as 21 separate Bardet-Biedl loci variants that result in a similar syndrome of clinical manifestations. Recent scientific studies identify deficiencies affecting the MC4R pathway as a potential cause of the hyperphagia and obesity associated with BBS, and demonstrate that an MC4R agonist can directly impact these symptoms. Currently there are no approved or effective therapies for BBS.

Alström syndrome is a life-threatening, ultra-rare orphan disease. It is a monogenic disorder that causes hyperphagia and obesity beginning in early childhood, as well as progressive vision loss, deafness, cardiomegaly, insulin resistance and other signs and symptoms. Variable features include short stature, cardiomyopathy, and progressive lung, liver, and kidney dysfunction. Symptoms of Alström syndrome first appear in infancy, and progressive development of

Table of Contents

multi-organ pathology leads to a reduced life expectancy, with survival rare beyond the age of 50. Alström syndrome shares many clinical features with BBS, including hyperphagia and obesity, and is also characterized by progressive vision loss, deafness, congestive heart failure, hyperinsulinemia and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Similarly, Alström syndrome is a ciliopathy caused by mutations in the ALMS1 gene, which has also been shown to be important for cilia function. Like BBS, recent scientific studies identify genetic deficiencies affecting the MC4R signaling pathway as a potential cause of the hyperphagia and obesity associated with Alström syndrome. While Alström syndrome is less well studied than BBS, the similar pathophysiology of cilia dysfunction and clinical presentation support our belief that deficiencies in the MC4R pathway are implicated in the hyperphagia and obesity observed in Alström syndrome. Therefore, we hypothesize that setmelanotide treatment can be applied to treat Alström syndrome.

In September 2021, we submitted an sNDA to the FDA for setmelanotide for the treatment of obesity and control of hunger in adult and pediatric patients 6 years of age and older with BBS or Alström syndrome, and in October 2021, we submitted a Type II variation application to the EMA for the same indications and patient populations. These submissions were based on based on data from our pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial of setmelanotide in patients with BBS or Alström syndrome. As we first reported in December 2020, the trial met its primary endpoint and all key secondary endpoints, with statistically significant and clinically meaningful reductions in weight and hunger at 52 weeks on therapy. All patients who met the primary endpoint, defined as at least 10 % weight loss, had BBS and none had Alström syndrome. However, data from this Phase 3 trial are supported by results from the Phase 2 trial, which suggested that treatment with setmelanotide may result in decreased weight and hunger in patients with Alström syndrome. In addition, data from a predefined exploratory endpoint showed that in patients with BBS or Alström syndrome who were younger than 18 years old and likely still growing in height, setmelanotide treatment was associated with clinically meaningful reductions in BMI Z scores. The BMI Z score, or BMI standard deviation score, represents the number of standard deviations from median BMI by child’s age and sex, and represents a unit of measure that accounts for height as well as weight in growing children and adolescents. Based on our discussion with the FDA and the EMA, we believe the decision or decisions to approve and/or authorize setmelanotide for BBS and Alström would be made independently, and recently we have decided to withdraw the Alström syndrome indication from the pending Type II variation application based on feedback from the EMA. In November 2021, we announced that the FDA accepted for filing our sNDA with Priority Review and assigned a PDUFA goal date of June 16, 2022 for our sNDA.

Based on the data included in our regulatory applications, we believe setmelanotide has the potential to address the early-onset, severe obesity and hyperphagia that characterize these diseases. In addition to the topline data reported from our Phase 3 trial of setmelanotide in patients with BBS or Alström syndrome, we have also presented several poster and oral presentations featuring the topline data from the pivotal cohort as well as additional updated data also including the supplemental cohort at medical meetings during 2021. Our pivotal, Phase 3 trial that combined both BBS and Alström syndrome was a multinational, open-label, single-arm study consisting of 52 weeks of treatment with setmelanotide. Participants were blinded and randomized for the first 14 weeks of the trial to receive either placebo or setmelanotide therapy. Those participants who began the trial on setmelanotide continued therapy for a total of 52 weeks, while those on placebo went on to receive 52 weeks of setmelanotide therapy after completion of the 14-week placebo period. All patients had obesity, defined as BMI equal to or greater than 30 kg/m2 for patients aged 16 years or older or weight greater than 97th percentile for age and sex on growth chart assessment for patients 6 to 15 years of age. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants (aged 12 years or older) who achieved at least 10 % reduction in body weight from baseline after 52 weeks of setmelanotide treatment. Key secondary endpoints further assessed changes in body weight and hunger, and daily maximal hunger score was based on participant responses to scoring their “most” hunger during the day using a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 is not hungry at all and 10 is the hungriest possible. Recognizing that adolescents normally gain height and weight, an analysis was performed to assess changes in BMI Z scores in participants with BBS who were younger than 18. This trial enrolled 38 participants, of which 32 were confirmed to have BBS and 6 were confirmed to have Alström syndrome. Five study participants who were under 12 years old and two participants who were equal to or more than 12 years old and who discontinued before receiving active therapy were not included in the primary analysis.

In this Phase 3 trial in participants with BBS or Alström syndrome, setmelanotide was associated with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in body weight and hunger, with outcomes driven by responses in individuals with

Table of Contents

BBS. Overall, this study met its primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints demonstrating that approximately 52 weeks of treatment with setmelanotide produced:

In the primary analysis, a total of 28 patients who had BBS were older than 12 years, 15 were adults and 13 were adolescents between the ages of 12 and 18. As presented at The Endocrine Society Annual Meeting in March 2021, data after approximately 52 weeks of treatment with setmelanotide demonstrated:

● Of the 15 adult patients with BBS:

o there was a -9.1% mean percentage change from baseline in BMI;

o 60%, or nine adults, achieved at least 5% weight reduction from baseline;

● Of the 14 patients who were younger than 18 years old:

o there was a -9.5% mean percentage change from baseline in BMI;

o there was a -0.75 point mean change from baseline in BMI Z score.

We also presented the 14-week, placebo-controlled data from this trial at the 59th Annual European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology (ESPE) Meeting in September 2021. Patients with BBS treated with setmelanotide achieved an average BMI reduction of −1.5 kg/m2 (or a decrease of 3.8%) at Week 14 compared with patients on placebo who had negligible change from baseline (P<0.05). Treatment with setmelanotide during that 14-week period also significantly reduced the Daily Hunger Questionnaire’s Most/Worst Hunger score compared to placebo in patients in the pivotal cohort aged 12 years or older, with directionally consistent results observed when the analysis was repeated using all patients (from the pivotal and supplemental cohorts).

In November 2021, we presented the first-ever data on the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and experience of patients with BBS at The Obesity Society’s ObesityWeek®. This research was conducted as a post-hoc analysis of data from our Phase 3 study, using the self-reported Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) or the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lite (IWQOL-Lite), both of which are 100-point scales, with zero being the worst and 100 being the best. Key findings include:

Table of Contents

● HRQOL improvements were sustained over the 52-week trial period.

On February 16, 2022, we announced positive interim data from our long-term extension study evaluating setmelanotide in patients with BBS. Of the patients enrolled in our long-term extension trial, 19 individuals with BBS had reached 24 months on therapy. As of a data cutoff date of October 29, 2021:

•The mean percent reduction in BMI from pivotal trial baseline was -14.3% (n=19);

•The mean percent reduction in body weight from pivotal trial baseline among patients 18 years of age or older was -14.9% (n=6);

•The mean reduction in BMI Z score from pivotal trial baseline among patients younger than 18 was -0.72 (n=12). For one patient who was 17 years old when enrolled and at baseline in the pivotal trial, BMI Z score could not be calculated as this patient was 20 years old at 24 months on therapy.

Overall, 34 patients with BBS transitioned from our phase 3 pivotal trial into our long-term extension study. We anticipate reporting updated data from this trial at a medical meeting in the spring of 2022. Consistent with prior clinical observations, setmelanotide was generally well-tolerated in the long-term extension study and no new safety signals were observed.

We studied patients with Alström syndrome and severe obesity in two clinical trials, our exploratory Phase 2 Basket study and our pivotal Phase 3 study in conjunction with BBS. As stated above, our Phase 3 study included three patients with Alström syndrome in the primary analysis and none of them met the primary endpoint of equal to or greater than 10 % weight loss. However, there were signals of potential efficacy in some patients, and based on those signals and data from the Phase 2 Basket study, we believe setmelanotide has the potential to address the unmet medical need in patients with Alström syndrome, hyperphagia and severe obesity.

A total of 12 patients with Alström syndrome entered these trials, with eight of them having been exposed to setmelanotide for at least 26 weeks, and overall patients had setmelanotide exposure up to 79 weeks. As the majority (67%) of patients were less than 18 years of age and still growing in height, we believe changes in BMI Z scores are a more appropriate measure of setmelanotide’s potential effects than change in body weight. Reductions in BMI Z scores were observed in 5 of the 6 patients (or 83%) under the age of 18 years who had at least 26 weeks of exposure to setmelanotide, with robust clinically meaningful reductions greater than 0.3 points observed in 3 of these patients. Clinically meaningful reductions in body weight (equal to or greater than 5%) were observed in 2 of the 8 (or 25%) patients with Alström syndrome with at least 26 weeks on setmelanotide, with one 12-year-old patient losing more than 20% of initial body weight at baseline. With respect to hunger, 4 of the 6 (or 66.7%) patients with evaluable data demonstrated clinically meaningful reductions of 1 to 2 points in hunger, as measured by the most/worst hunger question of the Daily Hunger Questionnaire. Five of the eight patients with Alström syndrome treated for at least 26 weeks decided to continue treatment with setmelanotide in our ongoing extension study.

In addition to positive results from our pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial, we included in our regulatory submissions a series of comprehensive individual patient narratives supporting our belief that setmelanotide, has the potential to address the hyperphagia and early-onset, severe obesity that characterize these syndromes.

Additional MC4R Pathway Genetic Variants

With significant advances in gene sequencing and analysis, we have deepened our understanding of the relationship between genetics and severe obesity. We also are advancing a broad clinical development program evaluating

Table of Contents

setmelanotide in several ongoing and planned clinical trials, and we are leveraging the largest known DNA database focused on obesity - with approximately 45,000 sequencing samples as of December 2021 - to improve the understanding, diagnosis and care of people living with severe obesity due to certain variants in genes associated with the MC4R pathway. There remains a significant unmet need with no effective therapeutic options for patients with these rare genetic diseases of obesity, and we believe setmelanotide has the potential to address the hyperphagia and severe obesity associated with these rare genetic diseases.

Having achieved proof-of-concept in our ongoing exploratory Phase 2 Basket Study evaluating setmelanotide in patients with severe obesity driven by variants in several different MC4R pathway associated genes, we expect to initiate in the first half of 2022, the pivotal Phase 3 EMANATE clinical trial to evaluate setmelanotide in five independent sub-studies in patients with variants in one of five specific genes within the MC4R pathway. In addition to EMANATE, we also initiated the Phase 2 DAYBREAK clinical trial to evaluate setmelanotide in patients who carry a confirmed variant in one or more of 31 genes with strong or very strong relevance to the MC4R pathway. Additionally, in our ongoing exploratory Phase 2 Basket Study, we are evaluating setmelanotide in patients with obesity arising due to heterozygote loss of function mutations in the MC4R gene itself. We also have a separate trial evaluating setmelanotide in patients with hypothalamic obesity, or HO, a severe obesity that arises after injury to the hypothalamus (such as from a tumor or the treatment of a tumor in this location). We anticipate reporting data from both of these Phase 2 studies in the first half of 2022.

Phase 3 EMANATE Trial

In the first half of 2022, we expect to initiate our pivotal Phase 3 EMANATE clinical trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, designed to evaluate setmelanotide in five independent sub-studies in patients with obesity due to: a heterozygous variant of the POMC/PCSK1 genes or LEPR gene, certain variants of the SRC1 gene or the SH2B1 gene, or PCSK1 N221D deletions within the MC4R pathway. The epidemiology estimates for the indications being studied in our Phase 3 EMANATE trial suggest that between 100,000 to 200,000 U.S. patients with one of these genetic deficiencies have the potential to respond to setmelanotide.

POMC, PCSK1 and LEPR are core genes of the MC4R pathway. Heterozygous variants in POMC, PCSK1 and LEPR have been associated with clinical obesity that may be due to a MC4R pathway dysfunction. Obesity due to rare variants in the SRC1 gene is an autosomal dominant disorder that is characterized by early-onset severe obesity and hyperphagia, as SRC1 variants found in individuals with severe obesity significantly impaired leptin-induced POMC expression (Yang et al 2019, Nat Comm. 10, Article 1718). Specifically, SRC1 is a transcriptional coactivator that has links to both the leptin receptor and to POMC. When the leptin receptor is activated, SRC1 is activated through a cascade of events that then drives the expression of POMC. Individuals who have heterozygous loss-of-function variants in their SRC1 genes can have insufficient leptin receptor activation of the MC4R pathway as a result of decreased POMC expression. This decreases the amount of available MSH to activate the MC4R, consequently resulting in hyperphagia and obesity in these individuals. Obesity due to variants in the SHWB1 gene is a rare genetic disease that is characterized by early-onset severe obesity, hyperphagia, hyperinsulinemia, and reduced final height. SH2B1 variants can arise through either DNA variants in the SH2B1 gene or through chromosomal deletions (chromosome 16) that encompass the SH2B1 gene. In both cases, dysfunction/loss of only one copy of the SH2B1 gene is sufficient to give rise to obesity and hyperphagia. The SH2B1 protein has been shown to have direct links to the MC4R-pathway. Specifically, SH2B1 is an adapter protein that amplifies the signal coming through the leptin receptor. In individuals who carry heterozygote loss of function mutations in SH2B1 or a chromosomal deletion that remove the SH2B1 from the chromosome, individuals may have insufficient leptin receptor activity activation of their MC4R pathway. This gives rise to a well-documented form of severe early-onset obesity and hyperphagia.

Proof of concept achieved in exploratory Phase 2 Basket Study

In January 2021, we announced proof-of-concept data from our exploratory Phase 2 Basket Study in multiple patient cohorts of patients with severe obesity due to a variant in one of the two alleles in the POMC, PCSK1, or LEPR genes (PPL HET obesity), as well as the SRC1 and SH2B1 genes. We provided subsequently furnished updated data in multiple presentations at medical meetings throughout 2021. The ongoing Phase 2 Basket Study is an open label study designed to evaluate setmelanotide in patients with obesity defined as Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2 for patients 16

Table of Contents

years of age or older or BMI≥ 95th percentile for age and gender for patients between 6 and 16 years old. Patients were stratified by cohort according to their genetic variant. The primary endpoint of the study is the percent of patients in each subgroup showing at least a 5% loss of body weight over three months (“clinical responders”).

PPL HET Obesity (POMC, LEPR, PCSK1) highlights included:

In our analyses, we are applying variant classification guidelines from the American College of Medical Genetics, or ACMG (as described in Richards, et al., 2015), to patient cohort stratification. Specific variants of the POMC, LEPR, PCSK1, SRC1 or SH2B1 gene may be classified based on published data as being pathogenic, likely pathogenic, likely benign or benign, or classified as a variant of unknown significance or VOUS. As genetics of obesity remains an emerging field, the vast majority of variants in genes associated with the MC4R pathway are classified as VOUS. Our hypothesis was that patients with genetic variants that indicate a higher degree of pathogenicity would be more likely to have impaired pathway signaling and therefore more likely to respond to setmelanotide. In addition, we decided to study a cohort of patients with an N221D variant of the PCSK1 gene. This is a common variant which has been associated with obesity in scientific and medical literature.

In September 2021, we presented updated interim data from the SRC1 and SH2B1 cohorts at the at the 59th Annual European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology (ESPE) Meeting. The data presented were based on an interim analysis of patients who completed 12 weeks of therapy. These presentations included analyses that showed setmelanotide achieved clinically meaningful weight loss or BMI Z reduction in 30% (9 of 30) of study participants with obesity due to variants of the SRC1 gene and clinically meaningful weight loss or BMI Z reduction in 43% (15 of 35) of study participants with obesity due to variants of the SH2B1 gene, including 16p11.2 chromosomal deletions.

Specifically in the SRC1 cohort, a total of 30 patients with obesity and deficiency in the SRC1 gene were enrolled in the full analysis set of this study. These patients had a mean BMI of 45.4 kg/m2 or BMI Z of 3.0 at baseline. Highlights of these data, as of a cut-off date of March 16, 2021, include:

Table of Contents

In addition, these interim data showed a clear separation between patients who responded to setmelanotide treatment at three months and those who did not:

In the SH2B1 cohort, a total of 35 patients with obesity and 16p11.2 deletions that include the SH2B1 gene or deficiency in the SH2B1 gene were enrolled in the full analysis set of this study. These patients had a mean BMI of 47.2 kg/m2 or BMI Z of 3.6 at baseline. Highlights of these interim data, as of a cut-off date of March 16, 2021, include:

Across all enrolled patients, the mean overall weight loss from baseline to three months among patients 18 years and older (n= 22) was -3.1% (a standard deviation of 3.9%), and the mean overall BMI Z score reduction from baseline to three months among patients younger than 18 years (n= 13) was -0.15 (a standard deviation of 0.13). In addition, the interim data showed a clear separation between patients who responded to setmelanotide treatment at three months and those who did not:

Consistent with prior clinical experience, setmelanotide was generally well tolerated in each of these rare genetic diseases of obesity as of the cutoff date. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events, or TEAEs, included mild injection site reactions, hyperpigmentation, and nausea and vomiting, which occurred early in the treatment course. There were no SAEs related to treatment with setmelanotide.

MC4 Receptor Deficiency Obesity

In the first half of 2022, we anticipate reporting interim data from ongoing exploratory Phase 2 Basket Study from a cohort of patients with MC4R deficiency obesity arising due to heterozygote loss of function mutations in the MC4 receptor gene itself. This is one of the most well-known and prevalent forms of monogenic early-onset severe obesity.

Table of Contents

Based on a comprehensive ongoing biochemical screening study, we believe setmelanotide may have the potential to address MC4R loss of function in a defined subset of this broader population, specifically individuals who carry MC4R loss of function variants that we believe can be rescued by setmelanotide (e.g. may not responsive to the endogenous ligand MSH, but would otherwise respond normally to setmelanotide).

Hypothalamic Obesity

Hypothalamic obesity, or HO, is a severe obesity that arises from mechanical hypothalamic injury. Lesions of the hypothalamus can derive from various types of tumors (e.g., craniopharyngiomas, gliomas, pituitary adenomas, hamartomas) or may be caused by surgeries and/or radiotherapies for the treatment of these same tumor types. These hypothalamic lesions, whether caused by the tumor itself and/or the treatment of the tumor, can disrupt the MC4R pathway. Moreover, patients with HO display high degree of hyperleptinemia and hyperinsulinemia. Alpha-melanocortin stimulating hormone (MSH) can be detectable in blood, and its levels can change depending on different energy states; however, in patients with craniopharyngioma or post-surgical treatment for it, α-MSH levels are significantly reduced. Reduced serum α-MSH levels may suggest melanocortin pathway deficiency, which might explain obesity in these patients.

As of February 1, 2022, we have completed enrollment in our Phase 2, multi-center, open-label, proof-of-concept study designed to assess the effect of setmelanotide over 16 weeks on weight-related assessments in patients aged 6 to 28 years who are affected by HO. We enrolled more than 15 subjects across 3-5 clinical sites in the United States. The primary endpoint is the percentage of subjects aged >12 years with ≥5 % body weight loss from baseline to week 16, compared to a historic control of <5 % in this subject population. All enrolled patients will have obesity, defined as a BMI ≥35 kg/m2 for subjects ≥16 years of age or BMI ≥99th percentile for age and gender for subjects 6 to <16 years of age based on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria.

We anticipate announcing results from a preliminary data analysis from this trial in the first half of 2022.

Weekly Formulation of Setmelanotide

In collaboration with Camurus AB, or Camurus, we have developed a once-weekly, long-acting formulation of setmelanotide using FluidCrystal® technology. When injected subcutaneously, aqueous body fluid may be absorbed by the excipient lipid phase, which may then form a gel-like depot consisting of liquid crystals formed in situ leading to slow diffusion of setmelanotide from the depot. We believe that this formulation may be more convenient and less burdensome for patients and their families.

In October 2021, we presented full data from our trial that evaluated the weekly formulation of setmelanotide in patients with obesity at the Obesity Medicine Association’s (OMA) Overcoming Obesity 2021 Conference. The data showed that otherwise healthy people with obesity treated with the weekly formulation of setmelanotide (QW) achieved comparable weight loss to those treated with the daily formulation, and that both weekly and daily formulations of setmelanotide (QD) were observed to be generally well tolerated. A total of 82 individuals aged 18 to 55 years with body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m2 were included in the data analysis.Based on the data from the study, we concluded the safety profile of QW setmelanotide was similar to that of the QD formulation; in healthy volunteers, peak and trough QW setmelanotide concentrations were generally consistent with the concentrations of the QD formulation; and weight and hunger change at Week 12 was comparable between QW and QD setmelanotide. Notably, the weight and hunger score changes in otherwise healthy individuals with obesity receiving both formulations were lower than those reported separately in patients with rare genetic diseases of obesity associated with an impaired MC4R pathway who received setmelanotide. Additionally, pharmacokinetic, or PK, analyses showed similar trough drug concentrations for the daily and weekly formulations over the duration of therapy. The weekly formulation of setmelanotide demonstrated a consistent 24-hour PK range and was detected steadily over one week, with a trough concentration consistent with the trough concentration of the daily formulation.

Weekly setmelanotide administration was generally well tolerated, with no serious TEAEs, and the safety results were similar to the daily administration and consistent with prior clinical experience. The most commonly reported TEAEs, rates of which were generally similar between individuals treated with the weekly and daily formulations, included

Table of Contents

injection site reaction, hyperpigmentation, nausea, headache and vomiting. Of the 249 reported injection site reactions, 247 (≥99%) were classified as mild.

In December 2021, we initiated a Phase 3 trial to evaluate the weekly formulation of setmelanotide in patients with rare genetic diseases of obesity. The weekly switch trial is a randomized, double-blind switch trial in patients with obesity due to biallelic or heterozygous POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency or a clinical diagnosis of BBS with genetic confirmation, who were previously enrolled in our long-term, open-label extension trial. We expect to enroll 30 patients, randomized 1:1 to receive once-weekly setmelanotide and once-daily placebo, or once-daily setmelanotide and once-weekly placebo for 13 weeks. Following the 13-week randomized treatment period, patients will crossover to an open-label, 13-week study in which all patients will receive once-weekly setmelanotide. The primary efficacy endpoint is a responder analysis, based on the proportion of patients with no weight gain defined as a change of 5 % or less from baseline to week 13.

In addition, we plan to initiate a second trial to evaluate the weekly formulation of setmelanotide in the second half of 2022. This de novo trial will be a randomized, double-blind Phase 3 clinical trial in patients with BBS who live outside the United States. We expect to enroll 40 patients, randomized 1:1 to receive 30 mg of setmelanotide or placebo once weekly for 18 weeks. Following the 18-week treatment period, patients will continue on treatment, or crossover from placebo to active therapy, for an additional 14 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint is the mean change from baseline in body weight after approximately 18 weeks of once weekly dosing.

Safety and Tolerability Results

Historically, clinical data with other MC4R therapies suggested that MC4R-mediated side effects may include changes in blood pressure and heart rate, increased erections in males, changes in libido and sexual function in females, and nausea and vomiting. As a result, primarily due to concerns about blood pressure and heart rate changes, we are not aware of any other MC4R agonists are currently in the clinic for the treatment of obesity and/or hyperphagia. It is noteworthy that the pattern of effects differed among each of the other MC4R therapies, underscoring the complex physiology of MC4R. With setmelanotide, there has been little, if any, evidence of blood pressure or heart rate changes, preliminarily supporting an important differentiation of setmelanotide from previous MC4R therapies. Monitoring for blood pressure and heart rate changes, as well as other potential adverse events, or AEs, is included in all setmelanotide clinical trials.

Because of these first generation MC4R therapy failures, the setmelanotide program employed an intensive preclinical screening program to assess clinical candidates for blood pressure and heart rate effects, along with efficacy. The cornerstone of this preclinical screening program was a significant investment in obese primate studies which validated setmelanotide as a promising compound for clinical development. More recently, new research supporting a unique mechanism of action of setmelanotide, compared to earlier MC4R agonists and the endogenous ligand MSH, was published in May 2018 in Nature Medicine.

Setmelanotide was generally well tolerated in our Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials to date. Overall, except as outlined below, the number and patterns of AEs were generally low, and the intensity of the AEs was generally mild, and infrequently led to clinical trial discontinuation.

In the majority of our trials, we observed a small increase in frequency of penile erections in male patients, as well as signs of sexual arousal in a small number of female patients. These symptoms were infrequent, generally mild, not painful, and short-lived. Most often these symptoms were reported in the first week of treatment. There was a small incidence of nausea and vomiting, as well as injection site reactions, both of which usually were reported as mild, early in treatment, and short-lived. A small number of patients had dose reductions and/or discontinued treatment due to nausea and vomiting.

We also noted darkening of skin and skin lesions, such as moles and freckles, in approximately half of the patients who received setmelanotide. This was likely caused by activation of the closely related MC1 receptor, the receptor that mediates skin darkening in response to sun exposure. This was observed generally after one to two weeks of treatment,

Table of Contents

most often plateaued by two to four weeks of treatment, and like sun-related tanning, generally returned to baseline after cessation of exposure.

Overall, the most common AEs reported among setmelanotide treated patients have been skin hyperpigmentation, injection site reactions, nausea, headache, vomiting, decreased appetite, and diarrhea.

Life-Cycle Management and Preclinical Development

We continue to advance the development of our once-weekly formulation of setmelanotide for all indications in which setmelanotide is approved or in development. In addition, we have initiated development of an auto-injector device designed to make administration of our once-weekly product candidate easier and more convenient for our patients.

IMCIVREE is approved in the United States and authorized in the EU and Great Britain for patients 6 years of age and older. Rare genetic diseases of obesity often present early in life, and we have identified children with genetic obesity under 6 years of age who we believe may potentially benefit from treatment with setmelanotide. In the first quarter of 2022, we announced initiation of the Phase 3 trial evaluating daily setmelanotide in pediatric patients who are between the ages of 2 and 6 years old. The trial is a multi-center, one-year, open-label Phase 3 trial in pediatric patients with obesity due to biallelic POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency or a clinical diagnosis of BBS with genetic confirmation. The primary efficacy endpoint is a responder analysis, based on the proportion of patients who experience a decrease from baseline over one year in BMI Z of ≥0.2. In addition, we have initiated discussions with the EMA to modify our EMA-approved Pediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) to be consistent with our plans for the treatment of these younger patients. We expect to meet all our PIP requirements by 2024.

We have initiated a program to identify next generation MC4R agonists based on the setmelanotide chemical space that we believe will have the potential to avoid cardiovascular AEs and MC1R activation, the latter of which results in hyperpigmentation. This program is expected to result in a clinical development candidate that will be an MC4R agonist matching setmelanotide’s cardiovascular safety but without the potential to cause hyperpigmentation. We expect to identify a lead compound from this program for preclinical development in 2022.

Genetic Sequencing and Patient Finding

We continue to expand our sequencing efforts in individuals living with early-onset, severe obesity to support research, patient finding and community building efforts in order to better understand rare genetic diseases of obesity. Our obesity DNA database contains sequencing samples from approximately 45,000 individuals, and we are using these data to support research, patient finding and community building while forging a better understanding of rare genetic diseases of obesity. Our sequencing data has come from four distinct sources in recent years: the Genetic Obesity ID | Genotyping Study, a global network of collaborations with obesity researchers with individual sample collections, institutional biobanks and Uncovering Rare Obesity or URO. By bringing additional awareness to these rare genetic diseases of obesity, our sequencing efforts have the potential to help foster patient communities and drive medical action in these populations.

Uncovering Rare Obesity

Moving forward, we expect that Uncovering Rare Obesity, or URO, our free genetic testing program designed to help determine if individuals have an underlying genetic cause of their severe obesity, will become the primary driver of how we collect sequencing samples and identify patients. As severe obesity is epidemic in the United States, we are focused on identifying people with early-onset obesity that may be caused by certain rare genetic variants. As part of these efforts, we have launched Uncovering Rare Obesity in order to increase access to genetic testing. As of December 31, 2021, 2,758 United States health care providers have requested 28,171 Uncovering Rare Obesity kits, and 13,029 sequencing tests have been ordered and patient samples collected.

This program complements several initiatives designed to advance the understanding of genetic causes of severe obesity, and Uncovering Rare Obesity broadens these efforts and brings access to genetic testing into the community setting. Currently available physician-ordered genetic testing panels are often cost prohibitive, while many consumer genetic tests are incomplete when it comes to genetic disorders of obesity. This makes it difficult to confirm an underlying

Table of Contents

genetic cause of severe obesity. We believe the program marks an important step in the understanding of these disorders that might help patients and their families find new diagnosis and treatment strategies in the years ahead.

Our partner Prevention Genetics, a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-College of American Pathologists of CLIA/CAP-certified independent laboratory, conducts the genetic testing for Uncovering Rare Obesity. This program covers the cost of the test and excludes office visit, copay, sample collection, and any other related costs to a participant. In addition, as part of the program, licensed genetic counselors from PWN Health, a leading provider of professional guidance for diagnostic and genetic testing, are available to advise participating individuals.

Commercial Efforts for IMCIVREE

We are focused on making IMCIVREE available globally. In the United States, we have executed on our strategy of making IMCIVREE commercially available to patients with obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiency, and we are building out the infrastructure and teams in preparation for a commercial launch for patients with BBS and potentially Alstrom syndrome, if our sNDA is approved by FDA. We expect IMCIVREE will be commercially available in the key European markets, UK and Israel in 2022. Although the total number of patients potentially addressable by setmelanotide may not be so rare, individually populations with each of these MC4R pathway-related genetic variants are rare and affected patients face many of the same challenges as any classically rare patient population. There is little or no awareness about these rare genetic diseases of obesity, and the patients suffering from them are lost in the health care system, with limited educational resources and no effective treatments for their condition. All our efforts and services described above are designed to address the challenges of rare diseases and lay the groundwork for potential future launches, with a focus on scalability.

We are working with the broader community of physicians, patients and families to improve the path to an accurate diagnosis as we support disease education through our medical and commercial team efforts. Additionally, we have patient support programs in place to provide support to patients, including genetic counseling, reimbursement support inclusive of co-pay and patient assistance programs, and IMCIVREE injection training.

The ongoing efforts outlined to support the POMC, PCSK1 and LEPR launch lay the foundation for future commercialization efforts, including potential for BBS and Alström if setmelanotide is ultimately approved in these indications. All disease education efforts supporting awareness of rare genetic diseases of obesity and testing will also uncover BBS and Alström patients. In addition, compared to POMC, PCSK1 and LEPR, BBS and Alström syndrome are syndromic diseases where patients suffer from multiple symptoms beyond early-onset obesity and hyperphagia. This allows for a tailored approach to disease education efforts to differentiate individuals with BBS and Alström syndrome from the broader population with obesity.

Following marketing authorization by both the European Commission and Great Britain’s MHRA for biallelic POMC, PCSK1 and LEPR deficiency, we are focused on achieving market access and reimbursement for IMCIVREE with country level authorities. As of March 1, 2022:

Table of Contents

We have established initial partnerships in Asia and the Middle East, and we are actively exploring opportunities to provide setmelanotide to patients in South America.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. We have competitors in a number of jurisdictions, many of which have substantially greater name recognition, commercial infrastructures and financial, technical and personnel resources than we have. Established competitors may invest heavily to quickly discover and develop compounds that could make setmelanotide obsolete or uneconomical. Any new product that competes with an approved product may need to demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety to be commercially successful. Other competitive factors, including generic competition, could force us to lower prices or could result in reduced sales. In addition, new products developed by others could emerge as competitors to setmelanotide. If we are not able to compete effectively against our current and future competitors, our business will not grow, and our financial condition and operations will suffer.

Currently, IMCIVREE is the only approved treatment for weight management in patients with obesity due to POMC, PCSK1 or LEPR deficiencies, and there are no approved treatments for regulating hunger and hyperphagia related behaviors of patients early-onset, severe obesity and hyperphagia that are the result of genetic variants affecting the MC4R pathway, including BBS, Alström syndrome, certain variants of the POMC, PCSK1, LEPR, SRC1 and SH2B1 genes, as well as MC4R deficiency obesity. Bariatric surgery is not an appropriate treatment option for these genetic diseases of obesity because the severe obesity and hyperphagia associated with these diseases are considered to be risk factors for bariatric surgery. Also, existing therapies indicated for general obesity, including glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, such as Wegovy®, and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, such as tirzepatide which is being investigated as a treatment for obesity, do not specifically restore function impaired by genetic deficiencies in the MC4R pathway, which we believe is the root cause of hyperphagia and obesity in patients with MC4R genetic variants.

Licensing Agreements

Ipsen Pharma S.A.S.

Pursuant to a license agreement with Ipsen Pharma S.A.S., or Ipsen, we have an exclusive, sublicensable, worldwide license to certain patents and other intellectual property rights to research, develop, and commercialize compounds that were discovered or researched by Ipsen in the course of conducting its MC4R program or that otherwise were covered by the licensed patents. Rights under the license included the right to research, develop and commercialize setmelanotide. Pursuant to the license, we have a non-exclusive, sublicensable, worldwide license to certain patents and other intellectual property rights that were licensed by Ipsen from a third party or that Ipsen may develop in the future to research, develop, and commercialize any of the compounds exclusively licensed by Ipsen pursuant to the license.

Under the terms of the Ipsen license agreement, Ipsen is eligible to receive payments of up to $40.0 million upon the achievement of certain development and commercial milestones in connection with the development, regulatory approval and commercialization of applicable licensed products, and royalties on future sales of the licensed products. Substantially all of the aggregate payments under the Ipsen license agreement are for milestones that may be achieved no earlier than first commercial sale of the applicable licensed product, and as of December 31, 2021, we have paid $4.0 million in clinical and regulatory milestones and $5.0 million in commercial milestones. Royalties in the mid-single digits on future sales of the applicable licensed products will be due under the Ipsen license agreement on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis until the later of the date when sales of a licensed product in a particular country are no longer covered by patent rights licensed pursuant to the Ipsen license agreement and the tenth anniversary of the date of the first commercial sale of the applicable licensed product in the applicable country. The term of the Ipsen license agreement continues until the expiration of the applicable royalty term on a country-by-country and product-by- product basis. Upon expiration of the term of the agreement, the licensed rights granted to us under the agreement, to the extent they remain in effect at the time of expiration, will thereafter become irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid-up licenses that survive the expiration of the term. We have a right to terminate the license agreement at any time during the term for any reason on 180 days’ written notice to Ipsen. Ipsen has a right to terminate the agreement prior to expiration

Table of Contents

of its term for our material breach of the agreement, our failure to initiate or complete development of a licensed product or our bringing an action seeking to have an Ipsen license patent right declared invalid. Upon any early termination of the license agreement not due to Ipsen’s material breach, all licensed rights granted under the license agreement will terminate.

Camurus

In January 2016, we entered into a license agreement for the use of Camurus’ drug delivery technology, FluidCrystal, to formulate setmelanotide with Camurus. Under the terms of the agreement, Camurus granted us a worldwide license to the FluidCrystal technology to formulate setmelanotide and to develop, manufacture, and commercialize this new formulation for once-weekly dosing, administered as a SC injection. The license granted to us is specific to the FluidCrystal technology incorporating setmelanotide. Under the terms of the license agreement, we are responsible for manufacturing, development, and commercialization of the setmelanotide FluidCrystal formulation worldwide. Camurus received a non-refundable and non-creditable upfront payment of $0.5 million in January 2016, and is eligible to receive progressive payments of approximately $65.0 million, of which the majority are sales milestones. As of December 31, 2021, we have made $1.3 million of milestone payments to Camrus. In addition, Camurus is eligible to receive tiered, mid to mid-high, single-digit royalties on future sales of the product.

The term of the agreement continues until the expiration of the applicable royalty term on a country-by-country and product-by-product basis. Upon expiration of the term of the agreement, the licensed rights granted to us under the agreement, to the extent they remain in effect at the time of expiration, will thereafter become irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid-up licenses that survive the expiration of the term. We have a right to terminate the license agreement at any time during the term for any reason upon 90 days’ written notice to Camurus. Camurus has a right to terminate the agreement prior to expiration of its term for our material breach of the agreement, if we voluntarily or involuntarily file for bankruptcy, or for our bringing an action seeking to have a Camurus license patent right declared invalid. Upon any early termination of the license agreement not due to Camurus’ material breach, all licensed rights granted under the license agreement will terminate.

Takeda

In March 2018, we acquired exclusive, worldwide rights from Takeda to develop and commercialize RM-853. RM-853 is a potent, orally available GOAT inhibitor currently in preclinical development for Prader-Willi Syndrome, or PWS. PWS is a rare genetic disorder that results in hyperphagia and early-onset, life-threatening obesity, for which there are no approved therapeutic options. We will assume sole responsibility for the global product development and commercialization of RM-853. Takeda received an upfront fee of $4.4 million which we settled in April 2018 with shares of our common stock, and is eligible to receive milestone payments of approximately $140.0 million, most of which are payable upon regulatory approval or are sales milestones. In addition, Takeda is eligible to receive back-end development milestones, and single-digit royalties on future RM-853 sales.

Among other obligations under our agreement with Takeda, Takeda has a right of first negotiation under certain circumstances to sublicense the assets we acquired from Takeda in the territory of Japan. This right of first negotiation remains in effect until the earlier of five years from the date of the agreement, consummation of a change in control, or sublicense to a third party. This may delay or limit our ability to enter into certain transactions with respect to this product candidate.

The term of the agreement continues until the expiration of the applicable royalty term on a country-by-country and product-by-product basis. Upon expiration of the term of the agreement, the licensed rights granted to us under the agreement, to the extent they remain in effect at the time of expiration, will thereafter become irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid-up licenses that survive the expiration of the term. We have a right to terminate the license agreement at any time during the term for any reason upon 90 days’ written notice to Takeda. Takeda has a right to terminate the agreement prior to expiration of its term for our material breach of the agreement, if we voluntarily or involuntarily file for bankruptcy, or for our bringing an action seeking to have a Takeda license patent right declared invalid. Upon any early termination of the license agreement not due to Takeda’s material breach, all licensed rights granted under the license agreement will terminate.

Table of Contents

RareStone Group Ltd.

In December 2021, we entered into an Exclusive License Agreement with RareStone, or the RareStone License. Pursuant to the RareStone License, we granted to RareStone an exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-bearing license under certain patent rights and know-how to develop, manufacture, commercialize and otherwise exploit any pharmaceutical product that contains setmelanotide in the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of conditions and diseases in humans in China, including mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao. RareStone has a right of first negotiation in the event that Rhythm chooses to grant a license to develop or commercialize the licensed product in Taiwan.

According to the terms of the RareStone License, RareStone has agreed to seek local approvals to commercialize IMCIVREE for the treatment of obesity and hyperphagia due to biallelic proopiomelanocortin (POMC), proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 1 (PCSK1) or leptin receptor (LEPR) deficiency, as well as Bardet-Biedl and Alström syndromes. Additionally, RareStone agreed to fund efforts to identify and enroll patients from China in Rhythm’s global EMANATE trial, a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate setmelanotide in five independent sub-studies in patients with obesity due to a heterozygous variant of POMC/PCSK1 or LEPR; certain variants of the SRC1 gene, certain variants of the SH2B1 gene, or PCSK1 N221D deletions within the MC4R pathway. According to the terms of the RareStone License, RareStone made an upfront payment to Rhythm of $7.0 million and issued $5.0 million in equity to Rhythm. Rhythm will be eligible to receive development and commercialization milestones of up to $62.5 million, as well as tiered royalty payments on annual net sales of IMCIVREE.

Patents and Proprietary Rights

We have in-licensed a large patent portfolio from Ipsen for our melanocortin programs. The portfolio includes multiple patent families, and all of these in-licensed patent families are being prosecuted or maintained by Ipsen in consultation with us. We have also filed patent applications in six families which are exclusively owned and maintained by us that relate to the melanocortin program.

Our MC4R portfolio of licensed and exclusively owned patent families, which includes setmelanotide, consists of 13 patent families currently being prosecuted or maintained, which include applications and patents directed to compositions of matter, formulations and methods of treatment using setmelanotide. As of December 31, 2020, the portfolio for the MC4 program consists of 14 issued United States patents and 228 issued non-United States patents across 8 of the 13 families. There also 13 pending United States patent applications and 76 pending non-United States applications in 24 jurisdictions.

In the patent family directed to selected MC4R receptor agonists, including the composition of matter for setmelanotide, we have 3 issued United States patents and 108 issued non-United States patents, including Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, Russia and Singapore. The standard 20-year term for patents in this family would expire in 2026, but two of the United States patents are expected to expire in 2027 due to patent term adjustments. Patent term extensions for delays in marketing approval may also extend the terms of patents in this family, and we have filed for patent term extension in the United States that, if granted, would extend the composition of matter patent protection to 2032.

In addition to the patents and patent applications discussed above, we co-own one patent family with Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, which has been filed in 21 jurisdictions. We also co-own one patent family with the University of Strasbourg and the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research, which has been filed in 4 jurisdictions. Both of these patent families relate to the melanocortin program.

We have also in-licensed a patent family from Takeda directed to the composition of matter and methods of use of ghrelin O-acetyltransferase inhibitors, including RM-853. This patent family includes 1 issued United States patent, nine issued non-United States patents including China, Europe, and Japan, and one allowed application in Canada. The standard 20-year term for the patents in this family will expire in 2033, though patent term extensions for delays in marketing approval may also extend the terms of patents in this family.

Table of Contents

Intellectual Property Protection Strategy

We currently seek, and intend to continue seeking, patent protection whenever commercially reasonable for any patentable aspects of setmelanotide and related technology or any new products or product candidates we acquire in the future. Where our intellectual property is not protected by patents, we may seek to protect it through other means, including maintenance of trade secrets and careful protection of our proprietary information. Our license from Ipsen for the melanocortin program require Ipsen, subject to certain exceptions and upon consultation with us, to prosecute and maintain its patent rights as they relate to the licensed compounds and methods. If Ipsen decides to cease prosecution or maintenance of any of the licensed patent rights, we have the option to take over prosecution and maintenance of those patents and Ipsen will assign to us all of its rights in such patents. For those patent rights that we own exclusively, we control all prosecution and maintenance activities.

The patent positions of biopharmaceutical companies are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Consequently, we do not know whether the product candidate we in-license will be protectable or remain protected by enforceable patents. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction, and furthermore, we cannot determine whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient proprietary protection to protect us from competitors, or will be challenged, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. Because patent applications in the United States and certain other jurisdictions are maintained in secrecy for 18 months, and since publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain of the priority of inventions covered by pending patent applications. This potential issue is exacerbated by the fact that, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, the first to make the claimed invention may be entitled to the patent. On March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first to file” system in which the first inventor to file a patent application may be entitled to the patent. For applications filed prior to the institution of the “first to file” system, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or PTO, or a foreign patent office to determine priority of invention. Moreover, we may have to participate in other proceedings declared by the United States PTO or a foreign patent office, such as post-grant proceedings and oppositions, that challenge the validity of a granted patent. Such proceedings could result in substantial cost, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

Although we currently have issued patents directed to a number of different attributes of our products, and pending applications on others, there can be no assurance that any issued patents would be held valid by a court of competent jurisdiction. An adverse outcome could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, require disputed rights to be licensed from third parties or require us to cease using specific compounds or technology. To the extent prudent, we intend to bring litigation against third parties that we believe are infringing our patents.

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the United States PTO in granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over another patent with an earlier expiration date.

As mentioned above, in the United States, the patent term of a patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may also be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. Setmelanotide has received FDA approval and we have filed for patent term extension on that product. In the future, if and when our other pharmaceutical products receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering those products. We intend to seek patent term adjustments and extensions to any of our issued patents in any jurisdiction where these are available, however there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA in the United States, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such adjustments or extensions.

To protect our rights to any of our issued patents and proprietary information, we may need to litigate against infringing third parties, or avail ourselves of the courts or participate in hearings to determine the scope and validity of those patents or other proprietary rights. These types of proceedings are often costly and could be very time-consuming to

Table of Contents

us, and we cannot be certain that the deciding authorities will rule in our favor. An unfavorable decision could result in the invalidation or a limitation in the scope of our patents or forfeiture of the rights associated with our patents or pending patent applications. Any such decision could result in our key technologies not being protectable, allowing third parties to use our technology without being required to pay us licensing fees or may compel us to license needed technologies from third parties to avoid infringing third-party patent and proprietary rights. Such a decision could even result in the invalidation or a limitation in the scope of our patents or could cause us to lose our rights under existing issued patents or not to have rights granted under our pending patent applications.

In addition, we intend to seek orphan drug exclusivity in jurisdictions in which it is available. A prerequisite to orphan drug exclusivity in the United States and in the European Union is orphan drug designation. An orphan drug designation may be granted, subject to fulfillment of specific criteria, where a drug is developed specifically to treat a rare or uncommon medical treatment. If a product which has an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan exclusivity, meaning that the applicable regulatory authority may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in certain very limited circumstances, for a period of seven years in the United States and 10 years in the European Union. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent competitors from developing or marketing different drugs for an indication. We have received orphan drug designation in the United States for the use of setmelanotide for five indications and approval for two of those indications.

We also rely on trade secret protection for our confidential and proprietary information. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, no assurance can be given that others will not independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose such technology, or that we can meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information developed or made known to the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. In the case of employees, the agreements provide that all inventions conceived by the individual will be our exclusive property. There can be no assurance, however, that these agreements will provide meaningful protection or adequate remedies for our trade secrets in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of such information.

Manufacturing

We currently contract with various third parties for the manufacture of setmelanotide and intend to continue to do so in the future. We have entered into process development and manufacturing service agreements with our CMOs, Corden Pharma Brussels S.A, or Corden (formerly Peptisyntha SA prior to its acquisition by Corden), PolyPeptide Group, Braine L’Alleud, or Polypeptide, Neuland Laboratories, and Recipharm Monts S.A.S for certain process development and manufacturing services for regulatory starting materials and/or drug substance, or API, and drug product in connection with the manufacture of setmelanotide. We have also entered into commercial supply agreements with both Polypeptide and Recipharm. Under our agreements, we pay these third parties for services and/or manufacture of setmelanotide in accordance with the terms of mutually agreed upon work orders, which we may enter into from time to time. We may need to engage additional third-party suppliers to manufacture our clinical and commercial drug supplies in the future. In connection with our commercialization of setmelanotide or any future product candidate, we have engaged and could need to engage other third parties to assist in manufacturing and/or supply chain related aspects. While there are a limited number of companies that can produce raw materials and API in the quantities and with the quality and purity that we require for our product, based on our diligence to date, we believe our current network of manufacturing partners are able to fulfill these requirements, and are capable of continuing to expand capacity as needed. Additionally, we have, and will continue to evaluate further relationships with additional suppliers to increase overall capacity as well as further reduce risks associated with reliance on a limited number of suppliers for manufacturing. Under the current agreements, each party is subject to customary indemnification provisions.

Table of Contents

Our contract manufacturing agreements give us visibility into the expected future cost of producing setmelanotide at commercial scale. Based upon a range of prices of currently-marketed therapies indicated for orphan diseases, we believe that our cost of goods for setmelanotide will be highly competitive.

We currently have no plans to build our own clinical or commercial scale manufacturing capabilities. To meet our projected needs for clinical supplies to support our activities through regulatory approval and commercial manufacturing, the CMOs with whom we currently work may need to increase scale of production or we expect that we may need to secure additional capacity or seek alternate suppliers. We believe that our current suppliers and CMOs are able to scale production to meet our clinical and commercial demands. Because we rely on these CMOs, we have personnel with pharmaceutical development and manufacturing experience who are responsible for maintaining our CMO relationships.

Setmelanotide is distributed in the U.S. through our specialty pharmacy and in the EU/UK through third-party service providers that deliver the medication to patients. We plan to continue building out our network for commercial distribution in jurisdictions in which setmelanotide is approved.

Regulatory Matters

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing and export and import of drug products. A new drug must be approved by the FDA through NDA process or by comparable foreign regulatory authorities through similar applications before it may be legally marketed in the United States and in foreign jurisdictions. We, along with any third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval of our products and product candidates. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with applicable federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

U.S. Drug Development Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and its implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. The process required by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

●completion of preclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies in accordance with FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice requirements and other applicable regulations;

●submission to the FDA of an Investigational New Drug Application (IND), which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;

●approval by an independent Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee at each clinical site before each trial may be initiated;

●performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with good clinical practices (GCPs), to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug for its intended use;

●preparation of and submission to the FDA of an NDA after completion of all pivotal trials;

●a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA to file the application for review

Table of Contents

●satisfactory completion of an FDA advisory committee review, if applicable;

●satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the drug is produced to assess compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity, and of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with GCPs; and

●FDA review and approval of the NDA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States.

Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate in the United States, a sponsor must submit an IND to the FDA. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical studies. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product; chemistry, manufacturing, and controls information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational product. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30- day time period, raises safety concerns or questions about the proposed clinical trial. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. Furthermore, an independent IRB for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site and must monitor the study until completed. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. Depending on its charter, this group may determine whether a trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and clinical study results to public registries.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

Table of Contents

In some cases, the FDA may require, or sponsors may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product. These so-called Phase 4 studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval, and may be used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug. In addition, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

While the IND is active, progress reports summarizing the results of the clinical trials and nonclinical studies performed since the last progress report, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and investigators for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the same or similar drugs, findings from animal or in vitro testing suggesting a significant risk to humans, and any clinically important increased incidence of a serious suspected adverse reaction compared to that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure.

In addition, during the development of a new drug, sponsors are given opportunities to meet with the FDA at certain points. These points may be prior to submission of an IND, at the end of Phase 2, and before an NDA is submitted. Meetings at other times may be requested. These meetings can provide an opportunity for the sponsor to share information about the data gathered to date, for the FDA to provide advice, and for the sponsor and the FDA to reach agreement on the next phase of development. Sponsors typically use the meetings at the end of the Phase 2 trial to discuss Phase 2 clinical results and present plans for the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials that they believe will support approval of the new drug.

U.S. Review and Approval Process

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, preclinical and other non-clinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the drug, proposed labeling and other relevant information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of the product, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by independent investigators. The submission of an NDA is subject to the payment of substantial user fees; a waiver of such fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication.

The FDA conducts a preliminary review of all NDAs within the first 60 days after submission, before accepting them for filing, to determine whether they are sufficiently complete to permit substantive review The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application also is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once filed, the FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is cGMP-compliant to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) guidelines that are currently in effect, the FDA has a goal of ten months from the filing date to complete a standard review of an NDA for a drug that is a new molecular entity. This review

Table of Contents

typically takes twelve months from the date the NDA is submitted to FDA because the FDA has approximately two months to make a “filing” decision after it the application is submitted.

The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCPs. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

After the FDA evaluates an NDA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter (CRL). An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A CRL will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the NDA, except that where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the CRL without first conducting required inspections and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the CRL, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the NDA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of an NDA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the NDA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a medicine and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use, and could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. The FDA may also require one or more Phase 4 post- market studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies.

In addition, the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) requires a sponsor to conduct pediatric clinical trials for most drugs, for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration. Under PREA, original NDAs and supplements must contain a pediatric assessment unless the sponsor has received a deferral or waiver. The required assessment must evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The sponsor or FDA may request a deferral of pediatric clinical trials for some or all of the pediatric subpopulations. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the drug is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric clinical trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric clinical trials begin. The FDA must send a non-compliance letter to any sponsor that fails to submit the required assessment, keep a deferral current or fails to submit a request for approval of a pediatric formulation.

Table of Contents

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA offers a number of expedited development and review programs for qualifying product candidates. For example, the Fast Track program is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a fast track product has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once an NDA is submitted, the product candidate may be eligible for priority review. A Fast Track product may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.

A product candidate intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may also be eligible for Breakthrough Therapy designation to expedite its development and review. A product candidate can receive Breakthrough Therapy designation if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the Fast Track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance beginning as early as Phase 1 and an organizational commitment to expedite the development and review of the product candidate, including involvement of senior managers.

Any marketing application for a drug submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product candidate with a Fast Track designation and/or Breakthrough Therapy designation, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite the FDA review and approval process, such as priority review and accelerated approval. A product candidate is eligible for priority review if it is designed to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness compared to available alternatives for such disease or condition. For new-molecular-entity NDAs, priority review designation means the FDA’s goal is to take action on the marketing application within six months of the 60-day filing date.

Additionally, product candidates studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may receive accelerated approval upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of accelerated approval, the FDA will generally require the sponsor to perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical studies to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. Products receiving accelerated approval may be subject to expedited withdrawal procedures if the sponsor fails to conduct the required post-marketing studies or if such studies fail to verify the predicted clinical benefit. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, priority review, and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval, but may expedite the development or approval process. Even if a product candidate qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug in the United States will be recovered from sales in

Table of Contents

the United States for that drug. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA, to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the NDA application user fee.

A designated orphan drug many not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or, as noted above, if a second applicant demonstrates that its product is clinically superior to the approved product with orphan exclusivity or the manufacturer of the approved product is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Post-approval Requirements

Drug products manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual program fees for any marketed products. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

● fines, warning letters, or untitled letters;

● clinical holds on clinical studies;

Table of Contents

●mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and the issuance of corrective information;

●the issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases and other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; or

●injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of drug products. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe, in their independent professional medical judgment, legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products. However, companies may share truthful and not misleading information that is otherwise consistent with a product’s FDA-approved labelling.

Marketing Exclusivity

Market exclusivity provisions authorized under the FDCA can delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve or even accept for review an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA), or an NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2) (505(b)(2) NDA), submitted by another company for another drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovative drug or for another indication, where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder.

The FDCA alternatively provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for drugs containing the active agent for the original indication or condition of use. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to any preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

Pediatric exclusivity is another type of marketing exclusivity available in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity provides for an additional six months of marketing exclusivity attached to another period of exclusivity if a sponsor conducts clinical trials in children in response to a written request from the FDA. The issuance of a written request does not require the sponsor to undertake the described clinical trials. In addition, orphan drug exclusivity, as described above, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances.

Table of Contents

FDA Approval and Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

If safe and effective use of a therapeutic product depends on an in vitro diagnostic medical device, then the FDA generally will require approval or clearance of that diagnostic, known as an in vitro companion diagnostic device, at the same time that the FDA approves the therapeutic product. In August 2014, the FDA issued final guidance clarifying the requirements that will apply to approval of therapeutic products and in vitro companion diagnostic devices. According to the guidance, for novel drugs, an in vitro companion diagnostic device and its corresponding therapeutic should be approved or cleared contemporaneously by the FDA for the use indicated in the therapeutic product’s labeling.

If the FDA determines that an in vitro companion diagnostic device is essential to the safe and effective use of a novel therapeutic product or indication, the FDA generally will not approve the therapeutic product or new therapeutic product indication if the in vitro companion diagnostic device is not approved or cleared for that indication. Approval or clearance of the in vitro companion diagnostic device will ensure that the device has been adequately evaluated and has adequate performance characteristics in the intended population.

Under the FDCA, in vitro diagnostics, including in vitro companion diagnostic devices, are generally regulated as medical devices. In the United States, the FDCA and its implementing regulations, and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, medical device design and development, preclinical and clinical testing, premarket clearance or approval, registration and listing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, advertising and promotion, sales and distribution, export and import, and post-market surveillance. Unless an exemption applies, diagnostic tests require marketing clearance or approval from the FDA prior to commercial distribution. The two primary types of FDA marketing authorization applicable to a medical device are premarket notification, also called 510(k) clearance, and premarket approval, or PMA approval. The FDA has stated that it generally requires in vitro companion diagnostic devices intended to select the patients who will respond to a drug to obtain a PMA for that diagnostic simultaneously with approval of the drug.

The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and preclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. It involves a rigorous premarket review during which the applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness and information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. In addition, PMAs for certain devices must generally include the results from extensive preclinical and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the device for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. In particular, for a diagnostic, a PMA application typically requires data regarding analytical and clinical validation studies. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which imposes elaborate testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements.

PMA approval is not guaranteed, and the FDA may ultimately respond to a PMA submission with a not approvable determination based on deficiencies in the application and require additional clinical trial or other data that may be expensive and time-consuming to generate and that can substantially delay approval. If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA application is favorable, the FDA typically issues an approvable letter requiring the applicant’s agreement to specific conditions, such as changes in labeling, or specific additional information, such as submission of final labeling, in order to secure final approval of the PMA. If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. A not approvable letter will outline the deficiencies in the application and, where practical, will identify what is necessary to make the PMA approvable. The FDA may also determine that additional clinical trials are necessary, in which case the PMA approval may be delayed for several months or years while the trials are conducted and then the data submitted in an amendment to the PMA. If the FDA concludes that the applicable criteria have been met, the FDA will issue a PMA for the approved indications, which can be more limited than those originally sought by the applicant. The PMA can include post-approval conditions that the FDA believes necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution. Once granted, PMA approval may be withdrawn by the FDA if compliance with post approval requirements, conditions of approval or other regulatory standards are not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing.

Table of Contents

After a device is placed on the market, it remains subject to significant regulatory requirements. Medical devices may be marketed only for the uses and indications for which they are cleared or approved. Device manufacturers must also establish registration and device listings with the FDA. A medical device manufacturer’s manufacturing processes and those of its suppliers are required to comply with the applicable portions of the QSR, which cover the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, processes, controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging and shipping of medical devices. Domestic facility records and manufacturing processes are subject to periodic unscheduled inspections by the FDA. The FDA also may inspect foreign facilities that export products to the United States.

Regulation of Combination Products in the United States

Certain product are comprised of components, such as drug components and device components, that would normally be subject to different regulatory frameworks by the FDA and frequently regulated by different centers at the FDA. These products are known as combination products. Under the FDCA, the FDA is charged with assigning a center with primary jurisdiction, or a lead center, for review of a combination product. The determination of which center will be the lead center is based on the “primary mode of action” of the combination product. Thus, if the primary mode of action of a drug-device combination product is attributable to the drug product, the FDA center responsible for premarket review of the drug product would have primary jurisdiction for the combination product. The FDA has also established the Office of Combination Products to address issues surrounding combination products and provide more certainty to the regulatory review process. That office serves as a focal point for combination product issues for agency reviewers and industry. It is also responsible for developing guidance and regulations to clarify the regulation of combination products, and for assignment of the FDA center that has primary jurisdiction for review of combination products where the jurisdiction is unclear or in dispute. A combination product with a primary mode of action attributable to the drug component generally would be reviewed and approved pursuant to the drug approval processes set forth in the FDCA. In reviewing the NDA for such a product, however, FDA reviewers would consult with their counterparts in the device center to ensure that the device component of the combination product met applicable requirements regarding safety, effectiveness, durability and performance. In addition, under FDA regulations, combination products are subject to cGMP requirements applicable to both drugs and devices, including the QSR applicable to medical devices.

Foreign Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of setmelanotide to the extent we choose to sell any setmelanotide outside of the United States. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain approval of a product by equivalent competent authorities in foreign jurisdictions before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country. As in the United States, post-approval regulatory requirements, such as those regarding product manufacture, marketing, pharmacovigilance, promotion, advertising or distribution would apply to any product that is approved outside the United States.

Regulation and Procedures Governing Marketing Authorization of Medicinal Products in the European Union

Non-clinical studies and clinical trials

Similarly to the United States, the various phases of non-clinical and clinical research in the EU are subject to significant regulatory controls.

Non-clinical studies are performed to demonstrate the health or environmental safety of new biological substances. Non-clinical studies must be conducted in compliance with the principles of good laboratory practice (GLP) as set forth in EU Directive 2004/10/EC. In particular, non-clinical studies, both in vitro and in vivo, must be planned, performed, monitored, recorded, reported and archived in accordance with the GLP principles, which define a set of rules and criteria for a quality system for the organizational process and the conditions for non-clinical studies. These GLP standards reflect the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development requirements.

Table of Contents

Clinical trials of medicinal products in the EU must be conducted in accordance with EU and national regulations and the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) guidelines on good clinical practices (GCP) as well as the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the sponsor of the clinical trial is not established within the EU, it must appoint an EU entity to act as its legal representative. The sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU member states, the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’ compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.

The regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU has been subject to recent changes. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. Unlike directives, the CTR is directly applicable in all EU member states without the need for member states to further implement it into national law. The CTR notably harmonizes the assessment and supervision processes for clinical trials throughout the EU via a Clinical Trials Information System, which contains a centralized EU portal and database.

While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application (CTA) to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and IRB respectively, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The CTA must include, among other things, a copy of the trial protocol and an investigational medicinal product dossier containing information about the manufacture and quality of the medicinal product under investigation. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed.

The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. For clinical trials whose CTA was made under the Clinical Trials Directive before January 31, 2022, the Clinical Trials Directive will continue to apply on a transitional basis for three years. Additionally, sponsors may still choose to submit a CTA under either the Clinical Trials Directive or the CTR until January 31, 2023 and, if authorized, those will be governed by the Clinical Trials Directive until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR.

Marketing Authorizations

In the EU, medicinal product candidates can only be commercialized after obtaining a marketing authorization, or MA. To obtain regulatory approval of a product candidate in the EU, we must submit a marketing authorization application, or MAA. The process for doing this depends, among other things, on the nature of the medicinal product.

There are two types of MAs:

Table of Contents

A MA has an initial validity for five years in principle. The MA may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk-benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the EU member state. To this end, the MA holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the file in respect of quality, safety and efficacy, including all variations introduced since the MA was granted, at least six months before the MA ceases to be valid. The European Commission or the competent authorities of the EU member states may decide, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one further five year period of MA. Once subsequently definitively renewed, the MA shall be valid for an unlimited period. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the medicinal product on the EU market or on the market of the authorizing EU member state(s) within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called “sunset clause”).

Under the centralized procedure, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA by the CHMP is 210 days, excluding clock stops, when additional information or written or oral explanation is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions of the CHMP. In exceptional cases, the CHMP might perform an accelerated review of a MAA in no more than 150 days (not including clock stops). Innovative products that target an unmet medical need and are expected to be of major public health interest may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the PRIME scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. In March 2016, the EMA launched an initiative, the Priority Medicines (PRIME) scheme, a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicines that target unmet medical needs. It is based on increased interaction and early dialogue with companies developing promising medicines, to optimize their product development plans and speed up their evaluation to help them reach patients earlier. Product developers that benefit from PRIME designation can expect to be eligible for accelerated assessment but this is not guaranteed. Many benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted. Importantly, a dedicated contact and rapporteur from the CHMP is appointed early in the PRIME scheme facilitating increased understanding of the product at EMA’s committee level. An initial meeting initiates these relationships and includes a team of multidisciplinary experts at the EMA to provide guidance on the overall development and regulatory strategies.

RYTM US Equity

RYTM · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1. Business

RYTM US Equity☆

RYTM · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1. Business

RYTM US Equity