10-K
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023
OR
For the transition period from ___________ to ___________
Commission File Number: 001-39536
Taysha Gene Therapies, Inc.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (214) 612-0000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class TradingSymbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered
Common stock, par value $0.00001 per share TSHA The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
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, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☐
Non-accelerated filer ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒
Emerging growth company ☒
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐
If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ̈
Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to § 240.10D-1(b). ̈
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒
As of June 30, 2023, the aggregate market value of the common stock of the registrant held by non-affiliates was: $30.4 million.
As of March 19, 2024, the registrant had 187,018,275 shares of common stock, $0.00001 par value per share, outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated herein by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Proxy Statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the year ended December 31, 2023.
Table of Contents
Page
PART I
Item 1. Business 1
Item 1A. Risk Factors 32
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 84
Item 1C. Cybersecurity 84
Item 2. Properties 85
Item 3. Legal Proceedings 85
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 85
PART II
Item 6. Reserved 86
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 100
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data F-1
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 101
Item 9B. Other Information 101
Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdiction that Prevent Inspections 101
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 102
Item 11. Executive Compensation 102
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 102
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 103
i
SPECIAL CAUTIONARY NOTICE 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, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. The forward-looking statements are contained principally in Part I, Item 1. “Business,” Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors,” and Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” but are also contained elsewhere in this Annual Report. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the words “may,” “might,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “objective,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “project,” “potential,” “continue” and “ongoing,” or the negative of these terms, or other comparable terminology intended to identify statements about the future. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Annual Report, we caution you that these statements are based on a combination of facts and factors currently known by us and our expectations of the future, about which we cannot be certain. Forward-looking statements include statements about:
•
the timing, progress and results of our preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, including statements regarding the timing of initiation and completion of studies or trials and related preparatory work, the period during which the results of the trials will become available and our research and development programs;
•
the timing of our planned Investigational New Drug and Clinical Trial Agreement submissions, initiation of clinical trials and timing of expected clinical results for TSHA-102 for Rett and any other current and future product candidates that we advance;
•
the timing of any submission of filings for regulatory approval of, and our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for, our current and future product candidates;
•
our ability to identify patients with the diseases treated by our product candidates, and to enroll patients in trials;
•
our expectations regarding the size of the patient populations, market acceptance and opportunity for and clinical utility of our product candidates, if approved for commercial use;
•
our manufacturing capabilities and strategy, including the scalability and commercial viability of our manufacturing methods and processes;
•
our expectations regarding the scope of any approved indication for, TSHA-102 or any other current or future product candidate that we advance;
•
our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates;
•
our ability to leverage our platform, including our next-generation technologies, to identify and develop future product candidates;
•
our estimates of our expenses, ongoing losses, future revenue, capital requirements and our need for or ability to obtain additional funding before we can expect to generate any revenue from product sales;
•
our ability to establish or maintain collaborations or strategic relationships;
•
our ability to identify, recruit and retain key personnel;
•
our reliance upon intellectual property licensed from third parties and our ability to obtain such licenses on commercially reasonable terms or at all;
•
our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property position for our product candidates, and the scope of such protection;
•
our ability to comply with the terms of our term loan agreement;
•
our financial performance;
•
our competitive position and the development of and projections relating to our competitors or our industry;
•
our estimates regarding future revenue, expenses and needs for additional financing; and
•
our expectations regarding the time during which we will be an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act.
You should refer to “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Annual Report for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report represent our views as of the date of this Annual Report. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments may cause our views to change. However, while we may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. You should, therefore, not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing our views as of any date subsequent to the date of this Annual Report.
You should read this report and the documents that we reference in this report, completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.
All brand names or trademarks appearing in this Annual Report are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, the trademarks and trade names in this Annual Report are referred to without the symbols ® and TM, but such references should not be construed as any indication that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their rights thereto.
Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this report to “Taysha,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Taysha Gene Therapies, Inc. together with its consolidated subsidiaries.
PART I
Item 1. Business.
Overview
We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on advancing AAV-based gene therapies for the treatment of severe monogenic diseases of the central nervous system, or CNS. Our lead clinical program TSHA-102 is in development for the treatment of Rett syndrome, a rare neurodevelopmental disorder with no approved disease-modifying therapies that address the genetic root cause of the disease. With a singular focus on developing transformative medicines, we aim to address severe unmet medical needs and dramatically improve the lives of patients and their caregivers. Our management team has proven experience in gene therapy development and commercialization. We leverage this experience, our manufacturing process and a clinically and commercially proven AAV9 capsid in an effort to rapidly translate treatments from bench to bedside. In March 2022, we announced strategic pipeline prioritization initiatives focused on giant axonal neuropathy, or GAN, and Rett syndrome, and we have subsequently further paused substantially all other research and development activities to increase operational efficiency. Further, in September 2023, we announced that subsequent to the receipt of Type C meeting feedback from the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, regarding a registrational path for TSHA-120, we were discontinuing the development of our TSHA-120 program in evaluation for the treatment of GAN. We initiated the transfer of the FDA Investigational New Drug, or IND, application and investigational clinical trial material for TSHA-120 in GAN to clinical trial collaborator National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), creating an opportunity for continued clinical evaluation of TSHA-120 in GAN. Additionally, we initiated discussions with the originating advocacy organization regarding TSHA-120 in an effort to transfer rights back to the advocacy organization to move the program forward.
We are evaluating TSHA-102 in the REVEAL Phase 1/2 adolescent and adult clinical trial, which is a first-in-human, open-label, randomized, dose escalation and dose-expansion, multicenter study evaluating the safety and preliminary efficacy of TSHA-102 in female patients aged 12-years and older with Rett syndrome. The trial is taking place in Canada and the United States. We dosed the first two adult patients with Rett syndrome in 2023. There have been no treatment-emergent serious adverse events as of the 35-week assessment post-treatment for the first Rett adult patient treated. In addition, there have been no treatment-emergent serious adverse events as of the 19-week assessment post-treatment for the second Rett adult patient treated. In February 2024, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, or IDMC, approved the Company’s request to proceed to dose escalation, enabling earlier advancement to cohort 2 evaluating the high dose of TSHA-102 (1x1015 total vg). Dosing in cohort 1 evaluating the low dose of TSHA-102 (5.7x1014 total vg) in the adolescent and adult trial is now considered complete. In February 2024, we announced the expansion of the ongoing REVEAL Phase 1/2 adolescent and adult trial in Canada into the United States following submission of the adolescent and adult trial protocol to the FDA. We expect to begin dosing the first patient in cohort 2 in the second quarter of 2024, and to report safety and efficacy data from cohort 2 in the second half of 2024.
We are also evaluating TSHA-102 in the REVEAL Phase 1/2 pediatric trial, which is a first-in-human, open-label, randomized, dose-escalation and dose-expansion study evaluating the safety and preliminary efficacy of TSHA-102 in pediatric females with Rett syndrome. The trial is taking place in the United States. We submitted a clinical trial application, or CTA, to the United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, for pediatric patients with Rett syndrome and submitted an IND application for pediatric patients with Rett syndrome to the FDA for TSHA-102 early in the third quarter of 2023. In August 2023, we received clearance from the FDA on our IND for TSHA-102 in pediatric patients with Rett syndrome and dosed the first Rett syndrome pediatric patient in December 2023. In February 2024, the IDMC provided clearance to dose the second pediatric patient. We expect to begin dosing the second patient in cohort 1 in the first quarter of 2024, and to report initial safety and efficacy data from cohort 1 in mid-2024. We expect to report initial safety and efficacy data from cohort 2 in the second half of 2024.
We have received orphan drug designation and rare pediatric disease designation from the FDA and orphan drug designation from the European Commission for TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome. We also received Fast Track Designation from the FDA for TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome. We also received CTA clearance from the MHRA in early 2024. In February 2024, we received Innovative Licensing and Access Pathway, or ILAP, designation for TSHA-102 from the U.K. MHRA. The ILAP aims to facilitate patient access to novel treatments by accelerating time to market through opportunities for enhanced engagements with U.K. regulatory authorities and other stakeholders.
1
Our Pipeline
We are focused on discovering, developing and commercializing gene therapies for the treatment of monogenic diseases of the central nervous system (CNS), in both rare and large patient populations. Our primary focus is advancing our lead clinical program in Rett syndrome, while our pipeline of CNS programs offers the potential for additional development opportunities in the future. The stage of development of our Rett syndrome program, including the progress in our ongoing clinical trials, is represented in the below table:
As of the date of this report, we have deprioritized the company sponsored evaluation of certain clinical-stage programs, including TSHA-120 for GAN, TSHA-105 for SLC13A5, TSHA-118 for CLN1 and TSHA-121 for CLN7, and are seeking external strategic options to potentially enable further development of these programs.
TSHA-102 for Rett Syndrome
TSHA-102 is a self-complementary intrathecally delivered AAV9 gene transfer therapy in clinical evaluation for Rett syndrome, a rare progressive neurodevelopmental disorder caused by mutations in the X-linked MECP2 gene encoding methyl CpG-binding protein 2 (MeCP2), which is essential for regulating neuronal and synaptic function in the brain. The disorder is characterized by loss of communication and hand function, slowing and/or regression of development, motor and respiratory impairment, seizures, intellectual disabilities and shortened life expectancy. Rett syndrome progression is divided into four key stages, beginning with early onset stagnation at 6 to 18 months of age followed by rapid regression, plateau and late motor deterioration. Rett syndrome primarily occurs in females and is one of the most common genetic causes of severe intellectual disability.
Designed as a one-time treatment, TSHA-102 aims to address the genetic root cause of the disease by delivering a functional form of MECP2 to cells in the CNS. The vector is delivered directly to the cerebrospinal fluid via intrathecal administration, which facilitates optimal biodistribution and cell transduction within key regions of the CNS. Because of the risks associated with both under- and over-expression of MeCP2, we have combined high-throughput microRNA (miRNA), profiling and genome mining to create miRNA-Responsive Auto-Regulatory Element (miRARE), our novel miRNA target panel. The miRARE element includes binding sites for endogenous miRNA, which are responsive to MeCP2 levels to prevent overexpression. By utilizing the miRARE technology, TSHA-102 is designed to mediate levels of MeCP2 in the CNS on a cell-by-cell basis without risk of overexpression. By increasing MECP2 levels in MECP2 deficient cells and maintaining healthy levels of MECP2 output of healthy cells, TSHA-102 has demonstrated the ability to produce and maintain safe transgene expression levels in the CNS. (Sinnet, SE, et al. Engineered microRNA-based regulatory element permits safe high-dose miniMECP2 gene therapy in Rett mice. Brain. 2021 awab182.)
Currently, there are no approved disease-modifying therapies that treat the genetic root cause of Rett syndrome, and there is a significant unmet medical need. According to the Rett Syndrome Research Trust, Rett syndrome affects more than 350,000 patients worldwide. The estimated addressable patient population with typical Rett syndrome caused by a pathogenic/likely pathogenic MECP2 mutation is between 15,000 and 20,000 patients in the United States, European Union and United Kingdom.
2
Phase 1/2 REVEAL Clinical Trials
We currently have two Phase 1/2 clinical trials ongoing for TSHA-102: an adolescent/adult study in the United States and Canada and a pediatric study in the United States. In addition, approval has been granted to open a pediatric study in the U.K. The trials are described below:
IT – Intrathecal; MTD – Maximum Tolerated Dose; MAD – Maximum Administered Dose.
We dosed the first adult patient with Rett syndrome in May 2023. The second adult patient was dosed in September 2023. We dosed the first pediatric patient with Rett syndrome in the Phase 1/2 REVEAL Pediatric trial TSHA-102-CL-102 in December 2023. In early 2024, we announced the U.K. MHRA authorized the CTA for TSHA-102 in pediatric patients with Rett syndrome, enabling expansion of our ongoing pediatric trial into the U.K. In February 2024, we announced the expansion of the ongoing REVEAL Phase 1/2 adolescent and adult trial in Canada into the United States. following submission of the adolescent and adult trial protocol to the FDA. TSHA-102 showed a well-tolerated safety profile with no treatment-emergent serious adverse events as of the week 35 post-treatment assessment for the first adult patient and as of the week 19 post-treatment assessment for the second adult patient.
In cohort 1 of both studies, the first two adult patients and first pediatric patient were dosed with 5.7x1014 total vg. The remaining patients in pediatric cohort 1 will receive this same dose. Following review of available clinical data from the first two dosed adult patients and first dosed pediatric patient showing that TSHA-102 was generally well-tolerated, and in light of the potential for improved benefit at the higher dose (1.0x1015 total vg), in February 2024 the IDMC approved the Company’s request to proceed to dose escalation in the adolescent and adult trial, enabling earlier advancement to cohort 2 evaluating the high dose of TSHA-102. Dosing in cohort 1, the low dose cohort, of the adolescent and adult trial is now considered complete. The IDMC also approved the dosing of the second patient in cohort 1 in the pediatric trial.
The maximum tolerated dose or maximum administered dose established in Part A will be administered during dose expansion in Part B. Data from Part A will be assessed by regulatory agencies and the IDMC to determine key elements of Part B of the study, including efficacy endpoints, study duration and the MTD or MAD.
TSHA-102 REVEAL Adolescent / Adult Clinical Trial TSHA-102-CL-101 Safety and Efficacy Summary
Efficacy endpoints include patient assessments performed by clinicians using the Clinical Global Impressions Scale – Improvement, or CGI-I, the Clinical Global Impressions Scale – Severity, or CGI-S, Rett Syndrome Hand Function Scale, or RSHFS, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales Third Edition, and Revised Motor Behavior Assessment, or R-MBA. Additional efficacy
3
endpoints also include patient assessments by caregivers using Parental Global Impressions Improvement, or PGI-I, the Rett Syndrome Behavior Questionnaire, or RSBQ, Seizure Diaries and other clinical assessment scales.
The first adult patient has the most advanced stage of Rett syndrome, Stage IV, with a genetic change consisting of a large deletion within the MECP2 gene that is known to cause Rett syndrome. This patient's phenotypic manifestation is severe, having lost all abilities to: walk, stand, and sit without support around age eight (non-ambulatory, wheelchair bound, limited movements of her lower extremities), use her hands around age six (unable to grasp and hold objects of any size) and speak around age two (non-verbal, minimal vocalizations). Per the Principal Investigator, or PI, the first adult patient’s baseline reported seizure frequency was approximately two to four seizures per year. After TSHA-102 administration, the first adult patient has showed a well-tolerated safety profile with no treatment-emergent serious adverse events as of the 35-week safety assessment post-treatment. Per the protocol, prophylactic immunosuppressant therapy began seven days prior to TSHA-102 administration. The first adult patient’s steroid taper was initiated on week 17 and was completed by week 33. At week 25, the patient demonstrated sustained and new improvements across key efficacy assessments at decreased steroid levels compared to earlier post-treatment assessments and the patient was subsequently at physiologic levels within a few days post the week 25 assessment.
As of 35 weeks post-treatment, following completion of the steroid taper, the PI noted that the first adult patient’s improvements observed across multiple clinical domains had been sustained with new improvements as well. These include sustained improvements in motor function, with the gained ability to kick legs against gravity and sit unassisted for the first time in over one decade, including after the steroids have been fully tapered from the patient at week 35 post-treatment, as supported by video evidence. Further sustained improvements from the first adult patient were also observed in motor function, including improved hand function as the patient’s hands were more open, and the improved ability to grasp and hold objects. The PI also observed new improvements in the patient’s socialization/communication skills at week 35 post-treatment, as the patient was more alert and interactive during the day, made more vocalizations, and showed the enhanced ability to use her eye-driven communication device, which caregivers reported she had not expressed interest in before treatment. Specifically, at week 35 post-treatment, the patient was able to use the eye-driven device much more efficiently, with the gained ability to activate functions on the screen of the device. Difficulty in communication, including loss of speech, is one of the most prominent symptoms of Rett syndrome and a key area of concern for caregivers as it interferes with patients’ ability to communicate their needs and express their interests. Further, the first adult patient showed sustained improvements in autonomic function at week 35 post-treatment, including sustained normalized sleep/night-time behaviors for the first time in twenty years, improved breathing patterns with fewer breath holding spells and infrequent hyperventilation compared to before treatment, and improved circulation with hands and feet at a more normal temperature and color. Finally, the PI observed that the patient’s seizures had been overall well controlled through week 35 following treatment at lower levels of anti-seizure medication, relative to baseline, and the patient no longer experienced unprovoked seizures. These observations are supported by data from the Seizure diaries. The PI’s clinical observations are supported by clinical and video evidence as well as caregiver-reported seizure diaries.
The second adult patient has the most advanced stage of Rett syndrome, Stage IV, with a missense mutation in the MECP2 gene, which has been reported in over 25 publications to cause Rett syndrome. This patient's phenotypic manifestation is milder than the first adult patient, with partial loss of ambulation (able to walk/stand without support, wide based, slow, unsteady gait) and hand function (with significant stereotypies that emerged by age three, inability to transfer objects between hands). She has been nonverbal since the age of two years old. Per the PI, the second adult patient’s baseline reported seizure frequency was approximately two to four seizures per week. After TSHA-102 administration, the patient has showed a well-tolerated safety profile with no treatment-emergent serious adverse events as of the 19-week safety assessment post-treatment. Tapering of the steroids was initiated on week 17 and is expected to be complete by week 25.
As of 19-weeks post-treatment, the PI noted that the second adult patient’s improvements observed across multiple clinical domains had been maintained with new improvements at decreased steroid levels relative to earlier post-treatment assessments. These include sustained improvement in motor function, with the patient’s hands more open and relaxed, and improved hand stereotypies, with less forceful hand wringing. These observations from the PI are supported by video evidence. The second adult patient also showed sustained improvements in social/communication skills as she was more interested, engaged and alert, including showing increased response to spoken words and eye contact, as supported by improved social skills on the clinician administered R-MBA scale. The second adult patient also showed sustained improvements in autonomic function, including improved breathing patterns with fewer breath holding spells and infrequent hyperventilation compared to before treatment, and improved circulation, with hands and feet at a more normal temperature and color. Finally, the second adult patient showed pronounced improvements in seizure frequency at week 19 post-treatment, with a significant reduction in seizures at lower levels of anti-seizure medication, relative to baseline. The PI noted that the patient’s epilepsy had been much better controlled following treatment at a lower dose of anti-seizure medication, and has been seizure-free for 17 weeks as of the week 19 post-treatment time point, despite a pre-treatment seizure frequency of approximately two to four seizures per week. The PI’s clinical observations are supported by clinical and video evidence as well as caregiver-reported seizure diaries.
4
TSHA-102-CL-101 Trial Adult Patient 1 Efficacy Data
The first adult patient showed clinically significant improvement in CGI-S from score of six (severely ill) at baseline to score of five (markedly ill) in this measure four weeks post-TSHA-102 administration and this improvement was sustained through week 25. Similarly, the patient demonstrated sustained improvement in CGI-I and PGI-I as of week 25 assessment post-TSHA-102 administration with scores of two (much improved and much better for CGI-I and PGI-I, respectively).
The first adult patient dosed with TSHA-102 demonstrated a sustained clinical improvement in RSBQ Total Score at week 25 post-TSHA-102 administration as depicted in the chart below.
Compared to baseline, a 30-point improvement was observed in RSBQ total score at week 25 post TSHA-102 administration. RSBQ changes at week 25 were driven by improvements in hand behaviors, breathing problems, general mood, repetitive face movements, night-time behaviors, fear/anxiety, and body rocking/expressionless face.
As shown in the diagram below, the first adult patient started to show notable overall improvements in R-MBA total scores at the week-12 visit. However, the total R-MBA score increased closer to baseline at the week 25 visit where improvements were demonstrated in motor dysfunction and respiratory behaviors.
5
The first adult patient has demonstrated stable seizure events relative to baseline through week 35 post-treatment, based on caregiver-reported medical history, and seizures are confined to periods where phenytoin level declines to <50 μmol/L (previously <100 μmol/L). The first adult patient has been on phenytoin as antiepileptic therapy, which she has continued following treatment with TSHA-102. Prior to treatment and per medical history, the patient required phenytoin levels of >100 μmol/L to control her seizures. The first adult patient had seizures prior to TSHA-102 administration on Day –8 and Day –7, and post-administration she had seizures on Days 45-49 and Day 82 associated with lower than target phenytoin levels. Specifically, the seizures on Days 45-49 corresponded with a phenytoin level of 45.9 μmol/L, and the seizure on Day 82 corresponded with a phenytoin level was 35.9 umol/L.
Loss of hand function is a hallmark characteristic of Rett syndrome and a key area of concern for caregivers. It impacts a patient’s ability to communicate and impedes daily activities, which ultimately limits independence. The RSHFS is a scale designed to evaluate hand function in patients with Rett syndrome. Hand function is evaluated by an experienced independent physical therapist with expertise in evaluating hand function in patients with Rett syndrome. Sessions are videotaped in which the patient’s caregiver offers the patient both large (e.g. a toy, cup, or spoon) and small (e.g. a grape or small piece of sandwich) objects so that she may demonstrate her ability to grasp, pick up, and hold the objects. The independent physical therapist then codes the demonstrated hand function in each video at one of four levels of hand function, ranging from no active grasping of any objects to independent grasping, for the best level for large objects assessment.
The first adult patient showed an improvement in RSHFS at 25 weeks post-TSHA-102 administration as depicted in the tables below. As of week 25 following treatment, the first adult patient is using her non-dominant hand for some basic grasping whereas before treatment, she was not able to grasp at all. As of the week 25 assessment, her dominant hand function improved from baseline with the demonstrated ability to grasp of two different objects (spoon and toy) rather than just one object (spoon). These clinical observations reported by the independent physical therapist are supported by video evidence.
TSHA-102-CL-101 Trial Adult Patient 2 Efficacy Endpoints
While the two adult patients dosed to date in our REVEAL trial both have the most advanced stage of Rett syndrome, Stage, IV, they possess different genetic backgrounds and mutation types, which manifest in different phenotypes and clinical severity.
While there was no change at 12 weeks post TSHA-102 administration in the second adult patient’s CGI-S score of four (moderately ill) at baseline, her CGI-I and PGI-I scores show sustained improvement (score of three, minimally better and a little better, respectively) at week 12.
6
The second adult patient showed a sustained clinical improvement in RSBQ Total Score 12 weeks post-TSHA-102 administration as depicted in the chart below.
Improvements were documented in several subdomains. Specifically, compared to baseline, improvements were noted in breathing, body rocking, facial expressions, general mood, and repetitive face movements.
The second adult patient showed continued improvement in the R-MBA Total Score at 12 weeks post-TSHA-102 administration as depicted in the graph below.
A 17-point improvement at week 12 was demonstrated in the R-MBA Total Score. Most notable improvements were documented in the following subscales: social skills, respiratory behaviors, seizures, truncal rocking and stereotypic hand movements and/or mouthing, and aberrant behaviors.
Seizure diary demonstrated reduced seizure events relative to baseline through 19-weeks post-treatment for the second adult patient at lower levels of anti-seizure medication, based on caregiver-reported medical history. Pre-treatment, the second adult patient had approximately two to four seizures per week, and there has been a significant reduction in seizures post-treatment with TSHA-102. Post-treatment, the second adult patient had a single seizure event on day 13 as of week 19 post-treatment. The seizure was an
7
unknown type, with motor manifestations and lasted less than one minute duration. The patient has been seizure-free for 17 weeks as of the week 19 post-treatment time point.
Hand function in the dominant hand for the second adult patient is challenging to interpret due to inconsistency in the video recording. At the week 8 post-treatment assessment, the second adult patient’s dominant hand received a hand function score of four, an independent grasp (pick up and hold) and was able to grasp three objects. Hand function in the second adult patient remained unchanged in the non-dominant hand on the RSHFS 12 weeks post-TSHA-102 treatment. These clinical observations reported by the independent physical therapist are supported by video evidence.
Deprioritized Programs
We have previously deprioritized the evaluation of our clinical product candidates TSHA-120 for GAN, TSHA-105 for SLC13A5, TSHA-118 for CLN1 and TSHA-121 for CLN7. Although we are not currently evaluating the potential of TSHA-105, TSHA-118 and TSHA-121, we may again evaluate any of these in the future as a product candidate as a component of our pipeline expansion plans, or pursue partnerships to advance these programs.
TSHA-120 for Giant Axonal Neuropathy (GAN)
GAN is an ultra-rare autosomal recessive, progressive neurodegenerative disease of the central, peripheral and autonomic nervous systems caused by deficiency or complete loss-of-function of gigaxonin and the accumulation of intermediate filaments. Epidemiology studies indicate there are between 1,000 and 1,500 treatable GAN patients in the United States, European Union and United Kingdom.
There is an early (classical) and late-onset (non-classical) phenotype associated with the disease, with shared pathophysiology due to accumulation of intermediate filaments. Symptoms and features of children with classical GAN usually develop before the age of five years with distal muscle weakness and sensory loss due to axonal sensory motor neuropathy, manifesting as bilateral foot drop and difficulties with fine motor coordination. An abnormal, wide based, unsteady gait due to CNS and cerebellar involvement is also a common initial clinical manifestation. Children with the classical phenotype typically have dull, tightly curled, coarse hair (“kinky” hair), “giant” axons pathognomonic on a nerve biopsy due to accumulation of intermediate filaments, and progressive spinal cord atrophy and white matter abnormalities, initially around the cerebellar dentate nucleus, on MRI images. Symptoms progress and, as the children grow older, they develop progressive proximal muscle weakness, resulting in difficulties raising their arms and standing from the floor or a chair, scoliosis, distal contractures, progressive gait and limb ataxia, leading to loss of ambulation by the second decade. Progressive optic nerve atrophy, seen early in the disease, results in increasing deterioration of visual acuity in later stages and has been more recently described. Indeed, decreased visual acuity was seen at baseline in approximately half of GAN patients aged 3-21 years, enrolled in a natural history study [Brain. 2021 Nov 29;144(10):3239-3250]. Due to increased respiratory muscle weakness and restrictive respiratory failure as a result of severe scoliosis, assisted ventilation is required in adolescents. GAN patients often die during their late teens or early twenties, typically due to respiratory failure.
The late-onset, or non-classical, phenotype is often categorized as Charcot-Marie-Tooth Type 2, or CMT2, as it presents as a typical early onset axonal sensory motor neuropathy without the typical kinky hair and CNS involvement of the classical phenotype
8
and has a relatively slow progression. This phenotype might represent up to 6% of all CMT2 diagnosis. In the late-onset population, patients have poor quality of life and significantly compromised activities of daily living. The disease is life limiting but not as severely as classic GAN. In classic GAN, symptomatic treatments attempt to maximize physical development and minimize the rate of deterioration. Currently, there are no approved disease-modifying therapies available, only palliative treatments.
In March 2021, we acquired the exclusive worldwide rights to a clinical-stage, intrathecally dosed AAV9 gene therapy program, now known as TSHA-120, for the treatment of GAN, pursuant to a license agreement with Hannah’s Hope Fund for Giant Axonal Neuropathy, Inc., or HHF. Under the terms of the agreement, HHF received an upfront payment of $5.5 million and will be eligible to receive clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones totaling up to $19.3 million, as well as a low, single-digit royalty on net sales upon commercialization of TSHA-120. We received orphan drug designation and rare pediatric disease designation from the FDA for TSHA-120 for the treatment of GAN. In April 2022, we received orphan drug designation from the European Commission for TSHA-120 for the treatment of GAN.
In September 2023, subsequent to the receipt of Type C meeting feedback from the FDA regarding a registrational path for TSHA-120, we announced that we discontinued the development of our TSHA-120 program in the evaluation for the treatment of GAN. In January 2024, we initiated the transfer of the FDA IND application and investigational clinical trial material for TSHA-120 in GAN to clinical trial collaborator National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), creating an opportunity for continued clinical evaluation of TSHA-120 in GAN. Additionally, we have entered discussions with the originating advocacy organization regarding TSHA-120 in an effort to transfer rights back to the advocacy organization to move the program forward.
TSHA-118 for CLN1 Disease
CLN1 disease (one of the forms of Batten disease), a lysosomal storage disorder, is a progressive, fatal neurodegenerative disease with early childhood onset that has an estimated incidence of approximately 1 in 138,000 live births worldwide. The estimated prevalence of CLN1 disease is 1,000 patients in the United States and European Union. CLN1 disease is caused by loss-of-function mutations in the CLN1 gene that encodes the enzyme palmitoyl-protein thioesterase-1, a small glycoprotein involved in the degradation of certain lipid-modified proteins. Loss of function mutations in the CLN1 gene causes accumulation of these lipid-modified proteins in cells, eventually leading to aggregation, neuronal cellular dysfunction and ultimately neuronal cell death.
In the infantile-onset form of CLN1 disease, clinical symptoms appear between six to 24 months and include rapid deterioration of speech and motor function, refractory epilepsy, ataxia and visual failure. Infantile-onset CLN1 patients are typically poorly responsive by five years of age and remain noncommunicative until their death, which usually occurs by seven years of age. Late-infantile-onset CLN1 disease begins between two to four years of age with initial visual and cognitive decline followed by the development of ataxia and myoclonus, or quick, involuntary muscle jerks. Juvenile-onset CLN1 disease patients present between the ages of five to ten years old, with vision loss as a first symptom followed by cognitive decline, seizures and motor decline. Approximately 60% of the children diagnosed with CLN1 disease in the United States present with early-onset infantile forms, with the remaining 40% experiencing later-onset childhood forms.
All currently available therapeutic approaches for patients with CLN1 disease are targeted towards the treatment of symptoms, and no disease-modifying therapies have been approved. Gene therapy has shown promise in correcting forms of neuronal ceroid lipofuscinoses diseases that involve mutations in soluble enzymes, in part, due to cross-correction of neighboring non-transduced cells.
We believe that the introduction of a functional CLN1 gene using an AAV9 vector delivered intrathecally to the CNS offers the potential of a disease-modifying therapeutic approach for this disease. TSHA-118 is a self-complementary AAV9 viral vector that expresses human codon-optimized CLN1 complementary deoxyribonucleic acid under control of the chicken ß-actin hybrid promoter. We acquired exclusive worldwide rights to certain intellectual property rights and know-how relating to the research, development and
9
manufacture of TSHA-118 (formerly ABO-202) in August 2020 pursuant to a license agreement with Abeona Therapeutics Inc., or Abeona.
TSHA-118 has been granted orphan drug designation, rare pediatric disease designation and fast track designation from the FDA and orphan drug designation from the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of CLN1 disease.
There is currently an open IND for the CLN1 program. We submitted a CTA filing for TSHA-118 which was approved by Health Canada in 2021. Clinical trial material has been manufactured and released and is now ready for use in a clinical trial setting. We provided investigational clinical trial material for TSHA-118 in CLN1 to support an individual-patient investigator-initiated IND request from RUSH University Medical Center for the treatment of a patient with CLN1 disease.
TSHA-105 for SLC13A5 Deficiency
TSHA-105 is a gene replacement therapy in development for the treatment of SLC13A5 deficiency, a rare autosomal recessive epileptic encephalopathy characterized by the onset of seizures within the first few days of life. SLC13A5 deficiency is caused by bi-allelic loss-of function mutations in the SLC13A5 gene, which codes for a sodium dependent citrate transporter, or NaCT, that is largely expressed in the brain and liver. To date, all tested mutations result in no or a greatly reduced amount of the citrate in the cells. Diminished NaCT function leads to loss of neuronal uptake of citrate and other metabolites such as succinate that are critical to brain energy metabolism and function. Affected children have impairments in gross motor function and speech production with relative preservation of fine motor skills and receptive speech. Currently, there are no approved therapies for SLC13A5 deficiency, and treatment is largely to address symptoms. The estimated prevalence of SLC13A5 deficiency is 1,900 patients in the United States and European Union.
TSHA-105 is constructed from a codon-optimized human SLC13A5 gene packaged in a self-complementary AAV9 capsid.
We have received orphan drug designation and rare pediatric disease designation from the FDA and orphan drug designation from the European Commission for TSHA-105 for the treatment of epilepsy caused by SLC13A5 deficiency. Clinical trial material has been manufactured and released and is now ready for use in a clinical trial setting.
Other Programs
Taysha has a pipeline of early-stage gene therapy programs targeting CNS diseases that we may progress in the future or advance through potential partnerships.
TSHA-113 for Tauopathies
We are developing TSHA-113 for the treatment of tauopathies. Tauopathies comprise a large subset of neurodegenerative diseases involving the aggregation of microtubule associated protein tau, or MAPT, protein into neurofibrillary or gliofibrillary tangles in the human brain. These include MAPT-associated frontotemporal dementia, or FTD, progressive supranuclear palsy, or PSP, corticobasal degeneration, or CD, and Alzheimer’s disease. There are an estimated 11,000 patients in United States and Europe affected by MAPT mediated FTD and 2,000 to 2,500 are affected with MAPT-mediated PSP. and CD, and Alzheimer’s disease affects an estimated 6.2 million Americans and 7.8 million Europeans.
Intrathecal delivery of an antisense oligonucleotide, or ASO, targeting Tau mRNA by Biogen/Ionis in a Phase 1 study demonstrated durable, robust, time and dose dependent lowering of tau protein and phospho-tau in cerebrospinal fluid of Alzheimer’s disease patients. Buoyed by these results, in August 2022, Biogen started a Phase 2 trial in people with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease. This ASO target validation paved the way for other approaches targeting intercellular tau mRNA (reduce tau protein production), for treating Tauopathies.
Unlike an ASO treatment, which would require repeat lifelong administration, we are developing a one-time treatment for Tauopathies. TSHA-113 is an AAV9 capsid that packages a tau-specific miRNA and is delivered in the cerebrospinal fluid for the treatment of tauopathies. This miRNA targets all six isoforms of tau mRNA.
We tested the efficacy of TSHA-113 in PS19 mice, a validated mouse model for tauopathies. These mice express human MAPT, and they exhibit significant tau pathology, neurodegeneration, loss of body weight and progressive hind-limb paralysis around nine to 12 months of age. We tested efficacy of our treatment by delivering TSHA-113 to PS19 mice at three months, six months and nine months of age via intracisterna magna injection. We found that the tau mRNA and protein levels were significantly reduced by TSHA-113 treatment. Consistently, the tau seeding assay showed reduced levels of pathological tau in brains from PS19 mice treated with TSHA-113. In addition, TSHA-113 treatment was able to rescue the survival rate, loss in body weight, and the hind limb clasping phenotype in the PS19 mice when treated at three months, six months and nine months of age. Taken together, these results
10
demonstrate that a one-time, vectorized delivery of a tau-specific miRNA is a promising approach for treatment for tauopathies. Ongoing and future work is focused on optimal dose determination for IND-enabling studies.
TSHA-106 for Angelman syndrome
We are developing TSHA-106 for the treatment of Angelman syndrome, a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by a maternal deficiency of the UBE3A gene. Angelman syndrome is characterized by profound developmental delay, ataxia and gait disturbance, sleep disorder, seizures, heightened anxiety, aggression and severe speech impairments. Angelman syndrome affects approximately one per 12,000 to 20,000 patients worldwide.
Angelman syndrome is an imprinting disorder in which the maternal gene is deficient and the paternal copy of UBE3A is intact but silenced by a long non-coding RNA, UBE3A antisense transcript, or UBE3A-ATS. Delivery of an ASO targeting UBE3A-ATS showed promising results in ameliorating Angelman syndrome symptoms in a transgenic mouse model.
We have in-licensed a novel gene replacement therapy from University of North Carolina. This novel construct is designed to express two isoforms of UBE3A mRNA from the same codon optimized transgene cassette and could potentially be a one-time treatment for the disease. The unique design feature allows short and long hUBE3A isoforms expression at a near-endogenous 3:1 (short/long) ratio, a feature that could help to support optimal therapeutic outcomes. Additionally, this construct uses human Synapsin 1 promoter, to limit UBE3A expression primarily in neurons, the primary therapeutic target for treating Angelman syndrome.
In a published study, this dual isoform expressing cassette was packaged into PHP.B capsids and administered by intracerebroventricular injections in neonatal mice models. This treatment significantly improved motor learning and innate behaviors in Angelman syndrome mice (PMID: 34676830). It rendered Angelman syndrome mice resilient to epileptogenesis and associated hippocampal neuropathologies induced by seizure kindling. These results demonstrated the feasibility, tolerability, and therapeutic potential for dual-isoform hUBE3A gene transfer in the treatment of AS in mice.
To advance these findings into translatable interventions, our collaborators packaged the dual isoform expressing cassette into AAV9 capsids and undertook animal proof of concept studies. Overall, these results are highly consistent with the published data describing neonatal ICV delivery of a similar dose of the PHP.B/hUBE3Aopt vector (PMID: 34676830) and support continued development. Ongoing and future work is focused on optimal dose and route of administration determination for IND enabling studies.
There are an estimated 55,000 patients with Angelman syndrome in the United States and Europe.
TSHA-114 for Fragile X Syndrome
We are developing TSHA-114 for the treatment of Fragile X syndrome, the most common single gene cause of autism and cognitive impairment, affecting about one in 6,000 individuals worldwide. Fragile X syndrome is diagnosed around three years of age and characterized by anxiety, aggression, hyperactivity, attention deficits and sleep and communication disruption.
Fragile X syndrome is caused by a pathological expansion of a CGG triplet repeat in the 5’ untranslated region of the FMR1 gene. Expansion of the triplet above the normal 5–55 repeats to 200 or more causes hypermethylation of the gene promoter, and shutdown of transcription and translation of the encoded protein, fragile X mental retardation protein, or FMRP. The expanded repeat also induces formation of RNA: DNA heteroduplexes that induces epigenetic gene silencing. Although most patients with Fragile X syndrome do not express FMRP, some individuals with the full mutation produce low amounts of the protein (less than 10% of normal levels). FMRP expression in unaffected persons varies greatly from person to person. Current pharmacotherapeutic treatments for Fragile X syndrome are solely directed towards symptom relief.
We conducted proof of concept studies in animal models of Fragile X (Fmr1 KO) with TSHA-114. No significant adverse effects were observed in behavioral, serological or pathohistological markers up to 12 months after intrathecal administration of TSHA-114 in wild-type mice. TSHA-114 treated FMRKO showed widespread FMRP expression was observed throughout brain post administration. TSHA-114 treated FMRKO mice showed robust suppression of audiogenic seizures and normalization of fear conditioning behavior. In addition, assessment of circadian locomotor activity revealed restoration of hyperactivity and sleep. Assessment of transgene expression and behavioral responses in individual mice demonstrated correlations between the level of FMRP expression and potential drug efficacy.
11
The results from the study support continued development. Ongoing and future work is focused on optimal dose and route of administration determination for IND enabling studies.
There are an estimated 75,000 patients with Fragile X syndrome in the United States and Europe.
License Agreements
Research, Collaboration and License Agreement with The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
In November 2019, we entered into a research, collaboration and license agreement, or the UT Southwestern Agreement, with The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System on behalf of UT Southwestern, as amended in April 2020.
In connection with the UT Southwestern Agreement, we obtained an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under certain patent rights of UT Southwestern and a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under certain know-how of UT Southwestern, in each case to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale and import licensed products for use in certain specified indications. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize at least one licensed product. Additionally, we obtained a right of first refusal to negotiate for an exclusive license under certain additional patent rights and know-how of UT Southwestern.
In connection with the UT Southwestern Agreement, we issued to UT Southwestern 2,179,000 shares of our common stock. We do not have any future milestone or royalty obligations to UT Southwestern under the UT Southwestern Agreement, other than costs related to the maintenance of patents.
The UT Southwestern Agreement expires on a country-by-country and licensed product-by-licensed product basis upon the expiration of the last valid claim of a licensed patent in such country for such licensed product. After the initial research term, we may terminate the agreement, on an indication-by-indication and licensed product-by-licensed product basis, at any time upon specified written notice to UT Southwestern. Either party may terminate the agreement upon an uncured material breach of the agreement or insolvency of the other party.
License Agreement with Abeona (CLN1 Disease)
In August 2020, we entered into a license agreement, or the Abeona CLN1 Agreement, with Abeona Therapeutics Inc., or Abeona. In connection with the Abeona CLN1 Agreement, we obtained an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license, with the right to grant sublicenses under certain patents, know-how and materials originally developed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Abeona to research, develop, manufacture, have manufactured, use, and commercialize licensed products for gene therapy for the prevention, treatment, or diagnosis of CLN1 Disease (one of the forms of Batten disease) in humans.
Subject to certain obligations of Abeona, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop at least one product and commercialize at least one product in the United States.
In connection with the license grant, we paid Abeona a one-time upfront license fee of $3.0 million during fiscal year 2020. We are obligated to pay Abeona up to $26.0 million in regulatory-related milestones and up to $30.0 million in sales-related milestones per licensed product and high single-digit royalties on net sales of licensed products. Royalties are payable on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis until the latest of the expiration or revocation or complete rejection of the last licensed patent covering such licensed product in the country where the licensed product is sold, the loss of market exclusivity in such country where the product is sold, or, if no licensed product exists in such country and no market exclusivity exists in such country, ten years from first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country. In addition, concurrent with the Abeona CLN1 Agreement, we entered into a purchase and reimbursement agreement with Abeona, pursuant to which we purchased specified inventory from Abeona and reimbursed Abeona for certain research and development costs previously incurred for total consideration of $4.0 million paid in fiscal year 2020.
In December 2021 a regulatory milestone was triggered in connection with the Abeona CLN1 Agreement, and therefore we recorded $3.0 million within research and development expenses in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2021. The milestone fee was paid in January 2022 and has been classified as an investing outflow in the consolidated statements of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2022. No additional milestone payments were made or triggered during the year ended December 31, 2023.
12
The Abeona CLN1 Agreement expires on a country-by-country and licensed product-by-licensed product basis upon the expiration of the royalty term of a licensed product in such country. Either party may terminate the agreement upon an uncured material breach of the agreement or insolvency of the other party. We may terminate the agreement for convenience upon specified prior written notice to Abeona.
License Agreement with Abeona (Rett Syndrome)
In October 2020, we entered into a license agreement, or the Abeona Rett Agreement, with Abeona pursuant to which we obtained an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license, with the right to grant sublicenses under certain patents, know-how and materials originally developed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Edinburgh and Abeona to research, develop, manufacture, have manufactured, use, and commercialize licensed products for gene therapy and the use of related transgenes for Rett syndrome.
Subject to certain obligations of Abeona, we are required to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop at least one licensed product and commercialize at least one licensed product in the United States.
In connection with the Abeona Rett Agreement, we paid Abeona a one-time upfront license fee of $3.0 million during fiscal year 2020. We are obligated to pay Abeona up to $26.5 million in regulatory-related milestones and up to $30.0 million in sales-related milestones per licensed product and high single-digit royalties on net sales of licensed products. Royalties are payable on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis until the latest of the expiration or revocation or complete rejection of the last licensed patent covering such licensed product in the country where the licensed product is sold, the loss of market exclusivity in such country where the product is sold, or, if no licensed product exists in such country and no market exclusivity exists in such country, ten years from first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country.
In March 2022, our CTA filing for TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett Syndrome was approved by Health Canada and therefore triggered a regulatory milestone payment in connection with the Rett Agreement. We recorded $1.0 million within research and development expenses in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2022. This milestone fee was paid in July 2022 and has been classified as an investing outflow in the consolidated statements of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2022. In May 2023, we dosed the first patient with TSHA-102 in the Phase 1/2 REVEAL trial evaluating the safety and preliminary efficacy of TSHA-102 in adult patients with Rett syndrome and therefore triggered a milestone payment in connection with this agreement. We recorded $3.5 million within research and development expenses in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2023. This milestone fee was paid in August 2023 and has been classified as an investing cash outflow in the consolidated statements of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2023. No additional milestone payments were made or triggered in connection with this agreement during the year ended December 31, 2023.
The Abeona Rett Agreement expires on a country-by-country and licensed product-by-licensed product basis upon the expiration of the royalty term of a licensed product in such country. Either party may terminate the agreement upon an uncured material breach of the agreement or insolvency of the other party. We may terminate the agreement for convenience.
Option Agreement with Astellas
On October 21, 2022, or the Effective Date, we entered into an Option Agreement, or the Option Agreement with Audentes Therapeutics, Inc. (d/b/a Astellas Gene Therapy), or Astellas.
TSHA-120 Giant Axonal Neuropathy
Under the Option Agreement, we granted to Astellas an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive, worldwide, royalty and milestone-bearing right and license (A) to research, develop, make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, have sold, import, export and otherwise exploit, or, collectively, Exploit or the Exploitation, the product known, as of the Effective Date, as TSHA-120, or the 120 GAN Product, and any backup products with respect thereto for use in the treatment of GAN or any other gene therapy product for use in the treatment of GAN that is controlled by us or any of our affiliates or with respect to which we or any of our affiliates controls intellectual property rights covering the Exploitation thereof, or a GAN Product, and (B) under any intellectual property rights controlled by us or any of our affiliates with respect to such Exploitation, or the GAN Option. Following the receipt of Type C meeting feedback from the FDA regarding a registrational path for TSHA-120 in September 2023, Astellas elected not to exercise the GAN Option.
TSHA-102 Rett Syndrome
Under the Option Agreement, we also granted to Astellas an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive, worldwide, royalty and milestone- bearing right and license (A) to Exploit any Rett Product (as defined below), and (B) under any intellectual property rights
13
controlled by us or any of our affiliates with respect to such Exploitation, or the Rett Option, and together with the GAN Option, each, an Option. Subject to certain extensions, the Rett Option is exercisable from the Effective Date through a specified period of time following Astellas’ receipt of (1) certain clinical data from the female pediatric trial and (2) certain specified data with respect to TSHA-102, or the Rett Option Period related to (i) the product known, as of the Effective Date, as TSHA-102 and any backup products with respect thereto for use in the treatment of Rett syndrome, and (ii) any other gene therapy product for use in the treatment of Rett syndrome that is controlled by us or any of our affiliates or with respect to which we or any of our affiliates controls intellectual property rights covering the Exploitation thereof, or a Rett Product.
The parties have agreed that, if Astellas exercises an Option, the parties will, for a specified period, negotiate a license agreement in good faith on the terms and conditions outlined in the Option Agreement, including payments by Astellas of a to-be-determined upfront payment, certain to-be-determined milestone payments, and certain to-be-determined royalties on net sales of GAN Products and/or Rett Products, as applicable.
Intellectual Property
We actively seek to protect our proprietary technology, inventions, and other intellectual property that is commercially important to the development of our business by a variety of means, for example seeking, maintaining, and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. We also may rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology platform, on continuing technological innovation and on in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen and maintain the strength of our position in the field of gene therapy that may be important for the development of our business. We also intend to seek patent protection or rely upon trade secret rights to protect other technologies that may be used to discover and validate targets, and that may be used to manufacture and develop novel gene therapy products. We are a party to license agreements that give us rights to use specific technologies in our gene therapy products and in manufacturing our products. Additional regulatory protection may also be afforded through data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions where available.
As of February 27, 2024, we in-license five U.S. patents, six foreign patents, six pending Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT, applications, 68 pending foreign patent applications and 16 pending United States utility patent applications. Our policy is to file patent applications to protect technology, inventions and improvements to inventions that may be commercially important to the development of our business. Patent applications and patents directed to specific product candidates are summarized below:
TSHA-102
We in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System five pending patent applications worldwide directed to a minigene encoding MECP2 packaged into an AAV vector, and methods of using that vector to treat Rett syndrome. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2040, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees. We also in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System one issued U.S. patent with claims to an AAV vector comprising a MecP2 transgene and a regulatory region, as well as methods of using the same to treat Rett Syndrome. The issued U.S. Patent will expire on October 27, 2041, assuming all maintenance fees are timely paid.
We also in-license from the University of Edinburgh and the University of Glasgow 13 pending patent applications worldwide directed to MECP2 expression cassettes for gene therapy. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2038, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees. We also in-license from the University of Edinburgh and the University of Glasgow one Japanese patent and one Australian patent, each with claims to a MECP2 expression cassette and vector comprising the same, as well as their use for treating Rett Syndrome. These patents will expire in 2038 assuming all maintenance fees are timely paid.
We also in-license from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 11 pending patent applications worldwide directed to feedback-enabled synthetic genes that inhibit MECP2 expression and use of these synthetic genes for treating Rett Syndrome. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2039, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-120
We in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System 10 pending patent applications worldwide directed to gigaxonin-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to treat Giant Axonal Neuropathy. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2041, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees. We also in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System one issued U.S. patent with claims to a method of treatment with an rAAV vector comprising a transgene encoding gigaxonin administered to the vagus nerve,
14
including methods of treating giant axonal neuropathy. The issued U.S. Patent will expire on November 19, 2041, assuming all maintenance fees are timely paid.
TSHA-118
We in-license certain patent rights directed to a palmitoyl-protein thioesterase 1-encoding transgene packaged into an AAV vector, and methods of using that vector to treat CLN1 disease (one of the forms of Batten disease). Specifically, pursuant to our license agreement with Abeona Therapeutics, Inc. we have in-licensed seven pending patent applications worldwide assigned to Abeona Therapeutics, Inc. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2040, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
In addition, pursuant to the Abeona CLN1 agreement, we have sublicensed five pending patent applications worldwide assigned to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Any patents based on these patent applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2037, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees. We have also licensed one U.S. patent, one Korean patent, one Israeli patent, one Indian patent and one Australian patent with claims to a CLN1 expression cassettes and vector comprising the same, which will expire in 2038 assuming all maintenance fees are timely paid.
TSHA-105
We in-license from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill four pending patent applications worldwide directed to SLC13A5-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to treat SLC13A5 deficiency. Any patents claiming priority to this PCT application, if issued, are expected to expire in 2041, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
We also in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System six pending patent applications worldwide directed to SLC13A5-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to treat SLC13A5 deficiency. Any patents claiming priority to this PCT application, if issued, are expected to expire in 2042, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-121
We in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System one U.S. pending PCT application directed to CLN7-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to treat disorders associated with aberrant CLN7 expression. Any patents claiming priority to this PCT application, if issued, are expected to expire in 2042, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-106
We in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System two pending patent applications worldwide directed to RNA interference (RNAi) constructs targeting UBE3A and methods of using these constructs for the treatment of Angelman Syndrome. Any patents claiming priority to this PCT application, if issued, are expected to expire in 2042, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
We also in-license from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 10 pending patent applications worldwide directed to UBE3A-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to Angelman Syndrome. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2040, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-113
We in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System five pending patent applications worldwide directed to RNA interference (RNAi) constructs targeting MAPT and methods of using these constructs for the treatment of Tauopathies. Any patents claiming priority to this PCT application, if issued, are expected to expire in 2042, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
15
Fragile X Syndrome
We in-license from The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System one pending PCT application directed to FMR1-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to treat disorders associated with aberrant FMR1 expression (such as Fragile X Syndrome). Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2043, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-103
We in-license from The Board Of Regents Of The University Of Texas System two pending patent applications worldwide directed to SLC6A1-encoding transgene packaged in an AAV vector and methods of using that vector to treat disorders associated with aberrant SLC6A1 expression. Any patents based on these applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2040, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-116
We in-license from The Board Of Regents Of The University Of Texas System one pending PCT application directed to RNA interference (RNAi) constructs targeting EHMT2 and methods of using these constructs for the treatment of Prader-Willi Syndrome. Any patents claiming priority to this PCT application, if issued, are expected to expire in 2042, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment, regulatory extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all annuity and/or maintenance fees.
TSHA-101
We in-license from Queen’s University at Kingston and Kingston Health Sciences Centre two United States patent with claims directed to a bicistronic HEXBP2A-HEXA transgene packaged into an AAV vector which will expire in 2039, assuming all maintenance fees are timely paid. This application has no foreign counterparts.
We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and confidential information to develop and maintain our proprietary position and protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection. We seek to protect employees, consultants, scientific advisors, contractors and others who may have access to proprietary information, under which they are bound to assign to us inventions made during the term of their employment or term of service. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems.
Government Regulation
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and other regulatory authorities at federal, state and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring and post-approval reporting of biologics such as those we are developing.
Biological products are subject to regulation under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, and other federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations. We, along with 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 or licensure of our product candidates.
U.S. Biologics Regulation
The process required by the FDA before biological product candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:
•
completion of extensive preclinical laboratory tests and animal studies performed in accordance with applicable regulations, including the good laboratory practice, or GLP, regulations;
•
submission to the FDA of an IND application, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin;
•
approval by an independent institutional review board, or IRB, or ethics committee at each clinical site before the trial is commenced;
16
•
performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety, purity and potency of the proposed biological product candidate for its intended purpose;
•
preparation of and submission to the FDA of a BLA after completion of all pivotal clinical trials;
•
a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of a BLA to file the application for review;
•
satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the proposed product is produced to assess compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice requirements, or cGMPs, and to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the biological product’s continued safety, purity and potency, and of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with the FDA’s good clinical practices, or GCPs;
•
satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable; and
•
FDA review and approval, or licensure, of a BLA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States.
Preclinical and Clinical Development
Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate, we 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 or protocols for preclinical studies and clinical trials. 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 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.
In addition to the submission of an IND to the FDA before initiation of a clinical trial in the United States, certain human clinical trials involving recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules are subject to oversight at the local level as set forth in the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, Guidelines. Specifically, under the NIH Guidelines, supervision of human gene transfer trials includes evaluation and assessment by an Institutional Biosafety Committee, or IBC, a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them.
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. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. 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. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing preclinical studies and clinical trials and clinical study results to public registries.
For purposes of BLA approval of a product candidate, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:
•
Phase 1. For gene therapies, the investigational product is initially introduced into patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism and distribution of the
17
investigational product in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness.
•
Phase 2. The investigational product is administered to a limited patient population to evaluate the preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks.
•
Phase 3. The investigational product is administered to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval.
When these phases overlap or are combined, the trials may be referred to as Phase 1/2 or Phase 2/3.
In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies 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 made a condition to approval of the BLA. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the characteristics of the product candidate, and must 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, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency. Additionally, 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.
During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical study investigators. The FDA or the sponsor or its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical study at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research patients or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical study at its institution if the clinical study is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the biological product candidate has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trial results to public registries. Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including biologics, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information, which is publicly available at www.clinicaltrials.gov.
BLA Submission and Review
Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical studies and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. The submission of a BLA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to the FDA, unless a waiver or exemption applies. The FDA has sixty days from the applicant’s submission of a BLA to either issue a refusal to file letter or accept the BLA for filing, indicating that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review.
Once a BLA has been accepted for filing, the FDA’s goal is to review standard applications within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent for its intended use, and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure and preserve the product’s identity, safety, strength, quality, potency and purity. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving a BLA, 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 requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a BLA, 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 a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be manufactured, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response letter. An approval letter
18
authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response letter will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the BLA, except that where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the Complete Response letter without first conducting required inspections, testing submitted product lots and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the Complete Response letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the BLA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification, which may include the potential requirement for additional clinical studies. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a BLA 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 BLA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or 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 product 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. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may 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.
Expedited Development and Review Programs
The FDA offers a number of expedited development and review programs for qualifying product candidates. The fast track program is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new products are eligible for fast track designation if they 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 frequent interactions with the review team during product development and, once a BLA is submitted, the product 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 BLA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the BLA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the BLA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the BLA.
A product 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 can receive breakthrough therapy designation if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product, 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, including involvement of senior managers.
A regenerative medicine advanced therapy, or RMAT, is defined as cell therapies, therapeutic tissue engineering products, human cell and tissue products, and combination products using any such therapies or products. Gene therapies, including genetically modified cells that lead to a durable modification of cells or tissues may meet the definition of a Regenerative Medicine Therapy. The RMAT program is intended to facilitate efficient development and expedite review of RMATs, which are intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition. A new drug application or a BLA for an RMAT may be eligible for priority review or accelerated approval through (1) surrogate or intermediate endpoints reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit or (2) reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites. Benefits of such designation also include early interactions with FDA to discuss any potential surrogate or intermediate endpoint to be used to support accelerated approval. A Regenerative Medicine Therapy that is granted accelerated approval and is subject to post-approval requirements may fulfill such requirements through the submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real-world evidence, such as electronic health records; the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to its approval.
Any marketing application for a biologic submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product 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 is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition. For original BLAs,
19
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, products 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. 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, RMAT 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 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
Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or 200,000 or more than individuals in the United States for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug or biologic for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug or biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA. 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. The orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review or approval process.
If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusive approval (or exclusivity), which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA, to market the same biologic 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 holder of the orphan drug exclusivity cannot 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 or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic 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 BLA application fee.
A designated orphan drug may 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, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.
Rare Pediatric Disease Designation and Priority Review Vouchers
Under the FDCA, as amended, the FDA incentivizes the development of drugs and biologics that meet the definition of a “rare pediatric disease,” defined to mean a serious or life-threatening disease in which the serious of life-threatening manifestations primarily affect individuals aged from birth to 18 years and the disease affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or affects 200,000 or more in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making in the United States a drug for such disease or condition will be received from sales in the United States of such drug. The sponsor of a product candidate for a rare pediatric disease may be eligible for a voucher that can be used to obtain a priority review for a subsequent human drug or biologic application after the date of approval of the rare pediatric disease drug product, referred to as a priority review voucher, or PRV. A sponsor may request rare pediatric disease designation from the FDA prior to the submission of its NDA or BLA. A rare pediatric disease designation does not guarantee that a sponsor will receive a PRV upon approval of its NDA or BLA. Moreover, a sponsor who chooses not to submit a rare pediatric disease designation request may nonetheless receive a PRV upon approval of their marketing application if they request such a voucher in their original marketing application and meet all of the eligibility criteria. If a PRV is received, it may be sold or transferred an unlimited number of times. Congress has extended the PRV program until September 30, 2024, with the potential for PRVs to be granted until September 30, 2026.
20
Post-Approval Requirements
Any products manufactured or distributed by us 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 user fee requirements, under which the FDA assesses an annual program fee for each product identified in an approved BLA. Biologic 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 cGMPs, 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 cGMPs and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs 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:
•
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;
•
fines, warning or untitled letters or holds on post-approval clinical studies;
•
refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of existing product approvals;
•
product seizure or detention, or refusal of the FDA to permit the import or export of products;
•
consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs;
•
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 biologics. 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. However, companies may share truthful and not misleading information that is otherwise consistent with a product’s FDA approved labeling. 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 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. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied
21
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.
Biosimilars and Reference Product Exclusivity
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the ACA, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product. To date, a number of biosimilars have been licensed under the BPCIA, and numerous biosimilars have been approved in Europe. The FDA has issued several guidance documents outlining an approach to review and approval of biosimilars.
Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. Complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the processes by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA.
Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing that applicant’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed “interchangeable” by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law.
The BPCIA is complex and continues to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. In addition, government proposals have sought to reduce the 12-year reference product exclusivity period. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. As a result, the ultimate impact, implementation, and impact of the BPCIA is subject to significant uncertainty.
Foreign Regulation
In order to market any product outside of the United States, we would need to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety, and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of our products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we would need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in foreign countries and jurisdictions. Although many of the issues discussed above with respect to the United States apply similarly in the context of the European Union, the approval process varies between countries and jurisdictions and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries and jurisdictions might differ from and be longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction may negatively impact the regulatory process in others.
EU Regulation of medicinal products
Clinical Trials in the EU
Similarly to the United States, the various phases of non-clinical and clinical research in the European Union, or EU are subject to significant regulatory controls. In the EU, clinical trials are governed by the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, or CTR, which entered into application on January 31, 2022 repealing and replacing the former Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20, or CTD.
The CTR is intended to harmonize and streamline clinical trial authorizations, simplify adverse-event reporting procedures, improve the supervision of clinical trials and increase transparency. Specifically, the Regulation, which is directly applicable in all EU
22
Member States, introduces a streamlined application procedure through a single-entry point, the "EU portal", the Clinical Trials Information System, or CTIS; a single set of documents to be prepared and submitted for the application; as well as simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors. A harmonized procedure for the assessment of applications for clinical trials has been introduced and is divided into two parts. Part I assessment is led by the competent authorities of a reference Member State selected by the trial sponsor and relates to clinical trial aspects that are considered to be scientifically harmonized across EU Member States. This assessment is then submitted to the competent authorities of all concerned Member States in which the trial is to be conducted for their review. Part II is assessed separately by the competent authorities and Ethics Committees in each concerned EU Member State. Individual EU Member States retain the power to authorize the conduct of clinical trials on their territory.
The extent to which on-going clinical trials will be governed by the CTR will depend on the duration of the individual clinical trial. For clinical trials in relation to which an application for approval was made on the basis of the CTD before January 31, 2023, the CTD will continue to apply on a transitional basis until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. The CTR will apply to clinical trials from an earlier date if the related clinical trial application was made on the basis of the CTR or if the clinical trial has already transitioned to the CTR framework before January 31, 2025.
In all cases, clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. Medicines used in clinical trials, including ATMPs, must be manufactured in accordance with the guidelines on cGMP and in a GMP licensed facility, which can be subject to GMP inspections.
EU Review and approval process
In the EU, medicinal products can only be commercialized after a related marketing authorization, or MA, has been granted. To obtain an MA for a product in the EU, an applicant must submit a Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, either under a centralized procedure administered by the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, or one of the procedures administered by the competent authorities of EU Member States (decentralized procedure, national procedure or mutual recognition procedure). An MA may be granted only to an applicant established in the EU.
The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single MA by the European Commission that is valid throughout the EEA (which is comprised of the 27 EU Member States plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, the centralized procedure is compulsory for specific products, including for (i) medicinal products derived from biotechnological processes, (ii) products designated as orphan medicinal products, (iii) advanced therapy medicinal products, or ATMPs, and (iv) products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases. For products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of other diseases and products that are highly innovative or for which a centralized process is in the interest of patients, authorization through the centralized procedure is optional on related approval.
Under the centralized procedure, the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP, conducts the initial assessment of a product. The CHMP is also responsible for several post-authorization and maintenance activities, such as the assessment of modifications or extensions to an existing MA. The maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA under the centralized procedure 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. Accelerated assessment may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product targeting an unmet medical need is expected to be of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts a request for accelerated assessment, the time limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days (excluding clock stops). The CHMP can, however, revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.
Unlike the centralized authorization procedure, the decentralized MA procedure requires a separate application to, and leads to separate approval by, the competent authorities of each EU Member State in which the product is to be marketed. This application is identical to the application that would be submitted to the EMA for authorization through the centralized procedure. The reference EU Member State prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. The resulting assessment report is submitted to the concerned EU Member States who, within 90 days of receipt, must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a concerned EU Member State cannot approve the assessment report and related materials due to concerns relating to a potential serious risk to public health, disputed elements may be referred to the Heads of Medicines Agencies’ Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures – Human, or CMDh, for review. The subsequent decision of the European Commission is binding on all EU Member States.
The mutual recognition procedure allows companies that have a medicinal product already authorized in one EU Member State to apply for this authorization to be recognized by the competent authorities in other EU Member States. Like the decentralized procedure, the mutual recognition procedure is based on the acceptance by the competent authorities of the EU Member States of the
23
MA of a medicinal product by the competent authorities of other EU Member States. The holder of a national MA may submit an application to the competent authority of an EU Member State requesting that this authority recognize the MA delivered by the competent authority of another EU Member State.
An MA has, in principle, an initial validity of five years. 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 in which the original MA was granted. To support the application, the MA holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the Common Technical Document providing up-to-date data concerning the quality, safety and efficacy of the product, including all variations introduced since the MA was granted, at least nine 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 renewal period for the 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 (for a centralized MA) or on the market of the authorizing EU Member State within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause).
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 Priority Medicines, or PRIME, scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicinal products that target unmet medical needs. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the EU or, if there is, the new medicinal product will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods of therapy or improving existing ones. 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 potentially accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted.
In the EU, a “conditional” MA may be granted in cases where all the required safety and efficacy data are not yet available. The European Commission may grant a conditional MA for a medicinal product if it is demonstrated that all of the following criteria are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the medicinal product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorization; (iii) the medicinal product fulfils an unmet medical need; and (iv) the benefit of the immediate availability to patients of the medicinal product is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. The conditional MA is subject to conditions to be fulfilled for generating the missing data or ensuring increased safety measures. It is valid for one year and must be renewed annually until all related conditions have been fulfilled. Once any pending studies are provided, the conditional MA can be converted into a traditional MA. However, if the conditions are not fulfilled within the timeframe set by the EMA and approved by the European Commission, the MA will cease to be renewed.
An MA may also be granted “under exceptional circumstances” where the applicant can show that it is unable to provide comprehensive data on efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use even after the product has been authorized and subject to specific procedures being introduced. These circumstances may arise in particular when the intended indications are very rare and, in the state of scientific knowledge at that time, it is not possible to provide comprehensive information, or when generating data may be contrary to generally accepted ethical principles. Like a conditional MA, an MA granted in exceptional circumstances is reserved to medicinal products intended to be authorized for treatment of rare diseases or unmet medical needs for which the applicant does not hold a complete data set that is required for the grant of a standard MA. However, unlike the conditional MA, an applicant for authorization in exceptional circumstances is not subsequently required to provide the missing data. Although the MA “under exceptional circumstances” is granted definitively, the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product is reviewed annually, and the MA will be withdrawn if the risk-benefit ratio is no longer favorable.
Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products in the EU
Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products, or ATMPs, include gene therapy products as well as somatic cell therapy products and tissue engineered products. The grant of marketing authorization in the EU for products containing viable human tissues or cells such as gene therapy medicinal products is governed by Regulation (EC) No. 1394/2007 on ATMPs, read in combination with Directive (EC) No. 2001/83 of the European Parliament and of the Council, commonly known as the Community code on medicinal products. Regulation (EC) No. 1394/2007 establishes specific rules concerning the authorization, supervision and pharmacovigilance of gene therapy medicinal products, somatic cell therapy medicinal products and tissue engineered products. Manufacturers of advanced therapy medicinal products must demonstrate the quality, safety and efficacy of their products to the EMA which is required to provide an opinion regarding the application for marketing authorization. The European Commission grants or refuses marketing authorization in light of the opinion delivered by the EMA.
24
Cell-based products must also comply with Directive (EC) No. 2004/23 of the European Parliament and of the Council of March 31, 2004 on setting standards of quality and safety for the donation, procurement, testing, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells, or the Tissues and Cells Directive, as well as its technical implementing directives. This Directive describes the conditions and quality requirements which must be applied when sourcing the cells intended for manufacturing of the cell-based medicinal product. The EU Member States have transposed the Tissues and Cells Directive into their national laws. However, various interpretations of the Tissue and Cells Directive have occurred and are reflected in individual EU Member States national implementing legislation which have led to diverging approaches.
Pediatric Development
In the EU, Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 provides that all MAAs for new medicinal products have to include the results of trials conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee, or PDCO. The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the medicinal product for which MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures provided in the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data are not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Once the MA is obtained in all EU Member States and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for a six-month extension to the Supplementary Protection Certificate, or SPC, if any is in effect at the time of authorization or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of orphan market exclusivity.
Manufacturing Regulation in the EU
In addition to an MA, various other requirements apply to the manufacturing and placing on the EU market of medicinal products. The manufacturing of medicinal products in the EU requires a manufacturing authorization and import of medicinal products into the EU requires a manufacturing authorization allowing for import. The manufacturing authorization holder must comply with various requirements set out in the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidance, including EU cGMP standards. Similarly, the distribution of medicinal products within the EU is subject to compliance with the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidelines, including the requirement to hold appropriate authorizations for distribution granted by the competent authorities of EU Member States. Marketing authorization holders and/or manufacturing and import authorization, or MA holders and/or distribution authorization holders may be subject to civil, criminal or administrative sanctions, including suspension of manufacturing authorization, in case of non-compliance with the EU or EU Member States’ requirements applicable to the manufacturing of medicinal products.
Data and Market Exclusivity in the EU
The EU provides opportunities for data and market exclusivity related to MAs. Upon receiving an MA, innovative medicinal products are generally entitled to receive eight years of data exclusivity and 10 years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity, if granted, prevents regulatory authorities in the EU from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic application or biosimilar application for eight years from the date of authorization of the innovative product, after which a generic or biosimilar MAA can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced. The market exclusivity period prevents a successful generic or biosimilar applicant from commercializing its product in the EU until 10 years have elapsed from the initial MA of the reference product in the EU. The overall ten-year period may, occasionally, be extended for a further year to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EU’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical/biological entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity.
In the EU, there is a special regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet the definition of a generic medicinal product. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided in support of an application for MA. Guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product.
Orphan Designation in the EU
In the EU, Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000, as implemented by Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 provides that a medicinal product can be designated as an orphan medicinal product by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish that: (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions; (ii) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in developing
25
the medicinal product; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition.
Regulation (EC) No 847/2000 sets out further provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product. An application for the designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product must be submitted at any stage of development of the medicinal product but before filing of an MAA. An MA for an orphan medicinal product may only include indications designated as orphan. For non-orphan indications treated with the same active pharmaceutical ingredient, a separate marketing authorization has to be sought.
Orphan medicinal product designation entitles an applicant to incentives such fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, which means that the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications. Orphan medicinal product designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.
The period of market exclusivity may, however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product destination, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. A company may voluntarily remove a product from the register of orphan products.
Post-authorization Requirements
Where an MA is granted in relation to a medicinal product in the EU, the holder of the MA is required to comply with a range of regulatory requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. Similar to the United States, both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. The holder of an MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance who is responsible for oversight of that system. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports, or PSURs.
All new MAAs must include a risk management plan, or RMP, describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Such risk- minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies.
In the EU, the advertising and promotion of medicinal products are subject to both EU and EU Member States’ laws governing promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians and other healthcare professionals, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. General requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products, such as direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicinal products are established in EU law. However, the details are governed by regulations in individual EU Member States and can differ from one country to another. For example, applicable laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics, or SmPC, which may require approval by the competent national authorities in connection with an MA. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians concerning the safe and effective use of the product. Promotional activity that does not comply with the SmPC is considered off-label and is prohibited in the EU.
26
Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements
Pharmaceutical companies are subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which they conduct their business. Such laws include, without limitation: the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the civil False Claims Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, and similar foreign, federal and state fraud and abuse, transparency and privacy laws.
The U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, to induce, or in return for, either the referral of an individual, or the purchase or recommendation of an item or service for which payment may be made under any federal healthcare program. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value, including stock options. The U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and others on the other hand. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, but they are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration, such as consulting agreements, that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act.
Civil and criminal false claims laws, and civil monetary penalty laws, including the civil False Claims Act, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment to the federal government, including federal healthcare programs, that are false or fraudulent. For example, the civil False Claims Act prohibits any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government or knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. Several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product.
HIPAA created additional federal civil and criminal liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the payor (e.g., public or private) and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing, or covering up by any trick or device a material fact or making any materially false statements in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity can be found guilty of violating HIPAA without actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it. In addition, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, impose certain requirements on HIPAA covered entities, which include certain healthcare providers, healthcare clearing houses and health plans, and individuals and entities that provide services on their behalf that involve individually identifiable health information, known as business associates, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information, as well as their covered subcontractors. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions.
The U.S. federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to annually report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (currently defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other health care professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members.
We are also subject to additional similar U.S. state and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third party payors, including private insurers, or that apply regardless of payor, state and
27
foreign laws which require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the government, state, local and foreign laws which require pharmaceutical companies to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures, state and foreign laws which require the reporting of information related to drug pricing, state, local and foreign laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives, and state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information which, in some cases, differ from each other in significant ways, and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, imprisonment damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.
Coverage and Reimbursement
Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any pharmaceutical or biological product for which we obtain regulatory approval. Sales of any product, if approved, depend, in part, on the extent to which such product will be covered by third-party payors, such as federal, state, and foreign government healthcare programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations, and the level of reimbursement, if any, for such product by third-party payors. Decisions regarding whether to cover any of our product candidates, if approved, the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided are made on a plan-by-plan basis. Further, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, and coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor.
Nonetheless, product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost effective. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover any product candidates we may develop could reduce physician utilization of such product candidates once approved and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our product candidates to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.
For products administered under the supervision of a physician, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such drugs. Additionally, separate reimbursement for the product itself or the treatment or procedure in which the product is used may not be available, which may impact physician utilization.
In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of pharmaceutical or biological products, medical devices and medical services, in addition to questioning safety and efficacy. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit sales of any product that receives approval. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for any product or a decision by a third-party not to cover a product could reduce physician usage and patient demand for the product.
Outside the United States, ensuring adequate coverage and payment for any biological candidates we may develop will face challenges. Pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control in many countries. Pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can extend well beyond the receipt of regulatory marketing approval for a product and may require us to conduct a clinical study that compares the cost effectiveness of any product candidates we may develop to other available therapies. The conduct of such a clinical study could be expensive and result in delays in our commercialization efforts. In the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies (so called health technology assessments) in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. This HTA process is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medicinal products will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. European Union member states may approve a specific price for a product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the
28