Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2020

COMMISSION FILE NUMBER: 001-36279

CARA THERAPEUTICS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

4 Stamford Plaza107 Elm Street, 9th FloorStamford, Connecticut 06902

(Address of registrant’s principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (203) 406-3700

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

Title of each class Trading Symbol Name of each exchange on which registered

Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share CARA The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the 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 ☐

Smaller Reporting Company ☐

Non-accelerated filer ☐ Emerging growth company ☐

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

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

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

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s Common Stock (the only common equity of the registrant) held by non-affiliates, based on the closing sales price of the stock on the Nasdaq Global Market for the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $726,180,228. For purposes of this calculation, shares of common stock held by directors and officers and their affiliated entities at June 30, 2020 were excluded. Exclusion of shares held by any person should not be construed to indicate that the person possesses the power, direct or indirect, to direct or cause the direction of the management or policies of the registrant, or that the person is controlled by or under common control with the registrant.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share, as of February 22, 2021 was 49,876,763.

Documents Incorporated By Reference

Portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement for its 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than 120 days after December 31, 2020, are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

CARA THERAPEUTICS, INC.

2020 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

PART I

Item 1. Business. 4

Item 1A. Risk Factors. 33

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments. 76

Item 2. Properties. 76

Item 3. Legal Proceedings. 76

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures. 76

PART II

Item 6. Selected Financial Data. 79

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk. 99

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. 100

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures. 152

Item 9B. Other Information. 153

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance. 153

Item 11. Executive Compensation. 153

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services. 153

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 154

Table of Contents

PART I

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Cara Therapeutics, Inc.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. The forward-looking statements are contained principally in the sections of this Annual Report on Form 10-K titled “Risk Factors,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Business,” but are also contained elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “objective,” “ongoing,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “potential,” “should,” “will,” or “would,” and 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 on Form 10-K, 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.

The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K include, among other things, statements about:

● the rate and degree of market acceptance of any approved products;

Table of Contents

● our ability to establish additional collaborations for our product candidates;

● the continued service of our key scientific or management personnel;

● our ability to establish commercialization and marketing capabilities;

● regulatory developments in the United States and foreign countries;

● our ability to obtain funding for our operations;

● the success of competing drugs that are or may become available;

You should refer to Part I Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K 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 on Form 10-K 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. 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 read this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents that we reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and have filed as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K 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.

Table of Contents

Risk Factors Summary

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk because our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, as fully described below. The principal factors and uncertainties that make investing in our common stock risky include, among others:

Industry and Market Data

We obtained the industry and market data in this Annual Report on Form 10-K from our own research as well as from industry and general publications, surveys and studies conducted by third parties. Industry and general publications, studies and surveys generally state that the information contained therein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. These third parties may, in the future, alter the manner in which they conduct surveys and studies regarding the markets in which we operate our business. As a result, you should carefully consider the inherent risks and

Table of Contents

uncertainties associated with the industry and market data contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including those discussed in Part I Item 1A. “Risk Factors.”

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing new chemical entities designed to alleviate pruritus by selectively targeting peripheral kappa opioid receptors, or KORs. We are developing a novel and proprietary class of product candidates, led by KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin), a first-in-class KOR agonist that targets KORs located in the peripheral nervous system and on immune cells.

In our KALMTM-1 and KALM-2 Phase 3 trials and two Phase 2 trials, KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection (intravenous formulation) has demonstrated statistically significant reductions in itch intensity and concomitant improvement in pruritus-related quality of life measures in hemodialysis patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. We have partnered with VFMCRP, a joint venture between Vifor Pharma Group and Fresenius Medical Care, and Vifor to commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in dialysis patients with CKD-aP in the U.S. under profit share agreements. We have partnered with VFMCRP to commercialize KORSUVA worldwide, excluding Japan (Maruishi/sub-licensee Kissei), and South Korea (CKDP).

CR845/difelikefalin has also demonstrated statistically significant pain reduction in clinical trials in patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain in the post-operative setting, without inducing many of the undesirable side effects typically associated with currently available opioid pain therapeutics. We retain rights to all KORSUVA/CR845 formulations and indications worldwide, excluding KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in dialysis patients with CKD-aP under our agreements with VFMCRP and Vifor for U.S. and certain ex-U.S. territories in Japan (Maruishi/sub-licensee Kissei) and South Korea (CKDP).

The FDA has conditionally accepted KORSUVA as the trade name for CR845/difelikefalin injection. In December 2020, we submitted a New Drug Application, or NDA, to the FDA for KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of moderate-to-severe pruritus in hemodialysis patients, and in February 2021, the NDA was accepted by the FDA. KORSUVA’s safety and efficacy have not been fully evaluated by any regulatory authority.

We were incorporated and commenced operations in 2004, and our primary activities to date have been organizing and staffing our company, developing our product candidates, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials of CR845/difelikefalin-based product candidates and raising capital. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through sales of our equity and debt securities and payments from license agreements. We have no products currently available for sale, and substantially all of our revenue to date has been revenue from license agreements, although we have received nominal amounts of revenue under research grants and the sale of clinical compound.

Recent Developments

COVID-19 Update

The extent of the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on our business, operations and clinical development and regulatory timelines and plans remains uncertain, and will depend on certain developments, including the duration and spread of the outbreak and its impact on our clinical trial enrollment, trial sites, partners, CROs, third-party manufacturers, and other third parties with whom we do business, as well as its impact on regulatory authorities and our key scientific and management personnel. The timing of our submission of our NDA to the FDA for KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection was not affected, as we submitted the NDA in December 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic, however, has affected, and may in the future affect, the initiation of certain trial sites and patient enrollment for our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for moderate-to-severe pruritus in patients with AD, NP, and for the treatment of pruritus in patients with hepatic impairment due to primary biliary cholangitis, or PBC. While we currently do not expect any significant delays in our clinical development or commercial timelines, the ultimate impact of the evolving COVID-19 pandemic remains difficult to predict.

Table of Contents

To the extent possible, we are conducting business as usual, with necessary or advisable modifications to employee travel and employee work locations. We are continuing to actively monitor the rapidly evolving situation related to COVID-19 and may take further actions that alter our operations, including those that may be required by federal, state or local authorities, or that we determine are in the best interests of our employees, partners and other third-parties with whom we do business. The extent to which the ongoing and evolving COVID-19 pandemic may affect our business, operations and clinical development and regulatory timelines and plans, including the resulting impact on our expenditures and capital needs, remains uncertain.

Vifor License and Stock Purchase Agreements

In October 2020, we entered into a license agreement with Vifor pursuant to which we granted Vifor an exclusive license solely in the United States to use, distribute, offer for sale, promote, sell and otherwise commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for all therapeutic uses relating to the inhibition, prevention or treatment of itch associated with pruritus in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients in the United States. We retain all rights with respect to the clinical development of, and activities to gain regulatory approvals of, KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the United States. As consideration, we received an upfront payment of $100.0 million and an additional payment of $50.0 million for the purchase of an aggregate of 2,939,552 shares of our common stock. (see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Collaboration and License Agreements – Vifor (International) Ltd.).

Thomas Reilly Appointed as Chief Financial Officer

Effective October 1, 2020, we appointed Thomas Reilly to serve as our Chief Financial Officer. In this capacity, Mr. Reilly will serve as our principal financial and accounting officer. There are no arrangements or understandings between Mr. Reilly and any other persons pursuant to which he was elected as an officer, and there is no family relationship between Mr. Reilly and any of our directors or other executive officers.

The Market Opportunity – Pruritus

Pruritus, or itch, is defined as an unpleasant sensation that provokes the desire to scratch. Certain systemic diseases have been known to cause pruritus that ranges in intensity from a mild annoyance to an intractable, disabling condition. Itch originates in the epidermis and dermal–epidermal junction and is transmitted by itch-selective sensory neuron C fibers, or pruriceptors. Some of these fibers are sensitive to histamine while others are not, and there is evidence for histamine-insensitive C fibers that are activated by numerous itch-inducing substances or pruritogens, many of which initiate signals through interaction with specific G-protein-coupled receptors. In addition, there is increasing evidence for the differential involvement of these systems in various forms of itch which may involve disease-specific pruritogens. As an example, chronic pruritus associated with kidney failure is thought to involve complex interactions among peripheral cells (T cells, mast cells, neutrophils, eosinophils, and keratinocytes) and histamine-insensitive nerve fibers, involving increased release of cytokines, proteases, and neuropeptides, interacting with multiple receptors that lead to exacerbation of itch. These different peripheral cell types express kappa opioid receptors, which can regulate the release of these pruritogenic substances, while the kappa opioid receptors on C fibers are thought to regulate their response to these pruritogens. Because kappa opioid receptors are expressed in peripheral tissues, there is a potential to modulate itch signals peripherally without impacting the central kappa opioid receptors. The itch-sensitive sensory nerve fibers transmit signals to the cell bodies in the dorsal root ganglia (that also have kappa opioid receptors), which send fibers to enter the spinal cord. Itch signals then ascend via the spinothalamic tract to multiple brain areas for sensory processing and interactions with cognitive and other systems.

Additionally, the activation of kappa receptors via an agonist is thought to reduce itching by functionally counteracting increased mu opioid receptor activity which is suggested to be associated with some chronic forms of pruritus. Activation of the mu opioid receptor in the brain and in the peripheral nerve endings results in itching while non-selective mu opioid antagonists can inhibit itching. Kappa opioid receptor stimulation inhibits the effects of mu receptor activation both centrally and peripherally.

Table of Contents

Pruritus may be classified into different categories on the basis of the underlying causative disease: renal or CKD-aP (previously known as uremic pruritus), cholestatic pruritus, dermatological pruritus, neurological pruritus, hematologic pruritus, endocrine pruritus, pruritus related to malignancy and idiopathic generalized pruritus. According to a study we conducted with IMS Health (now IQVIA) utilizing medical claims data from 2013, approximately 21 million patients were diagnosed with diseases known to trigger chronic pruritus and received a prescription for an anti-pruritic agent such as corticosteroids, antihistamines, select antidepressants, counterirritants, bile acid sequestrants, rifampin, narcotic antagonists and partial agonists, topical immunomodulators or gabapentin.

Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Pruritus (CKD-aP)

According to the National Kidney Foundation, or NKF, it is estimated that 37 million people (15% of the adult population) have chronic kidney disease, or CKD, in the United States alone, yet many of these patients remain undiagnosed. According to a study conducted by IQVIA, in 2017, approximately 7.3 million patients were diagnosed with CKD in the United States and roughly 33% or approximately 2.4 million patients received a prescription for an anti-pruritic. A separate epidemiological study published in 2019 in the Clinical Journal of American Society of Nephrology shows that approximately 25% of stage III to V (moderate-to-severe) CKD patients suffer from moderate-to-severe pruritus or itching.

CKD-aP (also known as uremic pruritus) can occur in patients with CKD as well as End Stage Renal Disease, or ESRD, and is commonly seen in patients receiving hemodialysis. According to Fresenius Medical Care, a world leading provider of products and medical care for dialysis patients, there were approximately 3.2 million patients globally undergoing dialysis in 2017. According to the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study published in December 2017 in the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrologists, it is estimated that nearly 70% of these patients suffer from some form of CKD-aP with approximately 40% of these patients experiencing moderate to severe pruritus.

Currently, there are no approved products in the United States or Europe to treat CKD-aP. Patients are generally managed with a multitude of products including corticosteroids, gabapentin, antihistamines, antidepressants and others with varying degrees of success. There is one product, nalfurafine (Remitch®) marketed by Toray Industries, approved to treat CKD-aP in Japan only. It is not approved either in the United States or Europe for CKD-aP.

Pruritus Associated with Atopic Dermatitis (AD)

AD is a chronic, pruritic inflammatory dermatosis that affects up to 25% of children and 2% to 5% of adults. Chronic pruritus is one of the defining features of AD. The itch is so common in AD that AD is often described as the itch that rashes. The point prevalence of chronic pruritus ranges between 87% to 100% in AD. Both quality of life and psychosocial well-being are known to negatively correlate with itch severity. The associated psychosocial morbidity of this distressing symptom includes sleep disruption, depression, agitation, anxiety, altered eating habits, reduced self-esteem and difficulty concentrating.

The cause of AD is multifactorial, including genetic predisposition, impaired skin barrier, environmental triggers and immune dysregulation. The sensation of itch in AD is similarly complex. Chronic itch in AD is mediated by a complex interplay between keratinocytes, cutaneous nerve fibers, pruritogenic molecules and the peripheral and central nervous system. An imbalance in the epidermal opioid system has also been described as potentially playing a role in the modulation of pruritus in AD.

Table of Contents

Chronic Liver Disease-Associated Pruritus (CLD-aP)

Millions of Americans suffer from chronic liver disease, or CLD, of various etiologies ranging from hepatitis to cirrhosis to primary biliary cholangitis, or PBC. Pruritus is a common and irritating symptom in patients who suffer from CLD, especially those with chronic cholestatic disease. Severe pruritus can have debilitating effects and can lead to a significant reduction in a patient’s quality of life. According to a study conducted by IQVIA, nearly 7.0 million patients were diagnosed with CLD in 2013 in the United States and approximately 37% percent or 2.5 million patients received a prescription for an anti-pruritic.

There are no approved therapies for CLD-aP in the United States. Current antipruritic therapies, primarily antihistamines and corticosteroids as well as other therapies tried off-label, are largely ineffective in treating the disease and/or can produce significant side effects.

Notalgia Paresthetica (NP)

NP is a common, although under-recognized chronic, sensory neuropathy affecting the upper back. It is estimated that chronic pruritus affects up to 13% of the United States population, and about 8% of these patients suffer from neuropathic itch, including NP. One of the hallmark features of NP is chronic pruritus, which can be significantly burdensome and undermines the affected subject’s quality of life and overall well-being. The exact etiology of NP still has not been fully elucidated; however, it is widely accepted that NP is a sensory neuropathy caused by alteration and damage to thoracic spinal nerves.

The management of NP is challenging and is often resistant to multiple therapies. There is currently no well-defined treatment for NP and conventional treatments for pruritus, such as antihistamines and topical steroids, are largely ineffective.

Other Causes of Pruritus

There are many other systemic diseases that can trigger pruritus in patients. They include endocrinologic disease (e.g. hyperthyroidism), malignancy (e.g. Hodgkin lymphoma), hematologic disease (e.g. polycythemia vera), psoriasis, hives/urticarial, and lice/scabies. Data from a Cara-sponsored IMS Health (now IQVIA) study, utilizing medical claims data from 2013, indicate that over 20 million prescriptions for anti-pruritic therapeutics are filled annually in the United States.

The Market Opportunity – Post-Operative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) Management

PONV in a hospital or other medical setting in the United States is most often treated with 5-HT3 antagonists (e.g. ondansetron), NK-1 receptor antagonists (e.g. aprepitant) steroids (dexamethasone), dopamine receptor antagonists (haloperidol, metoclopramide) as well as Anticholinergics (scopolamine patch) either alone in low risk patients or in combination in patients with a higher risk of PONV. According to an article published in Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology, PONV is one of the most important factors in determining length of stay after surgery, resulting in estimated annual costs in the United States in the range of $1 billion. Per IQVIA, in 2017, there were over 700 million units of PONV drugs sold in the United States.

The market for the prevention and treatment of PONV is highly fragmented. Anesthesiologists utilize a number of different agents alone or in combination (particularly in patients with a high risk for PONV) with different mechanism of actions to try to manage PONV. If approved, I.V. CR845/difelikefalin would likely be competing within the overall PONV market, although we expect that it would primarily be utilized as an add-on therapy in patients with a higher risk of PONV. Although most of the PONV products are generically available, there is still a significant segment of high-risk patients where their PONV is not adequately managed, which can increase the hospital length of stay and add significant cost to managing a post-operative patient.

Table of Contents

Our Strategy

Our strategy is to develop and commercialize a novel and first-in-class portfolio of peripherally-acting kappa opioid receptor agonists, with KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection and Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) as our lead candidates. We have designed and are developing product candidates which have clearly defined clinical development programs and target significant commercial market opportunities. The key elements of our strategy are as follows:

Advance KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of moderate-to-severe CKD-aP in patients undergoing hemodialysis. In January 2018, based on positive data from our earlier Phase 2 studies, we initiated the first pivotal Phase 3 trial (KALM-1) of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in hemodialysis patients suffering from moderate to severe CKD-aP. In May 2019, we announced positive top-line results from this trial. The study met the primary and all secondary efficacy endpoints. In August 2018, we initiated a global Phase 3 study (KALM-2) with KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in hemodialysis patients with CKD-aP in multiple countries worldwide, including the United States. In April 2020, we announced positive top line results from the trial. The study met the primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints. In June 2017, the FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy Designation to KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of CKD-aP in hemodialysis patients, for which there are currently no approved therapies in the United States. The Breakthrough Therapy Designation was in part supported by positive data from our previous Phase 2 efficacy studies. In December 2020, we submitted a NDA to the FDA for KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of moderate-to-severe pruritus in hemodialysis patients, and in February 2021, the NDA was accepted by the FDA.

Partner through license and collaboration agreements to commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of CKD-aP in hemodialysis patients, if approved. If KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection is approved by the FDA for the treatment of CKD-aP in hemodialysis patients, we have entered into license and collaboration agreements to commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection. We do not intend to build an internal sales force to market to nephrologists and dialysis centers and we also do not intend to build an internal supportive commercialization organization. In May 2018, we licensed worldwide rights, excluding the United States, Japan, and South Korea, to commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment CKD-aP in dialysis patients to VFMCRP. Under the agreement, VFMCRP has the exclusive rights to commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of CKD-aP in dialysis patients in all countries outside the United States, except for Japan and South Korea. In October 2020, we entered into a license agreement with Vifor pursuant to which we granted Vifor an exclusive license solely in the United States to use, distribute, offer for sale, promote, sell and otherwise commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for all therapeutic uses relating to the inhibition, prevention or treatment of itch associated with pruritus in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients in the United States. In addition, we already have development and commercialization agreements with Maruishi and CKDP for development of CR845/difelikefalin for the Japanese and South Korean markets, respectively.

Expand the use of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) in other pruritic indications by establishing proof-of-concept in clinical conditions such as non-dialysis stage III-V CKD-aP, CLD-aP, AD, and NP. Based on potent anti-pruritic effect we observed with KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in CKD-aP in hemodialysis patients as well as the data we and others have generated in preclinical models of itch, we have initiated clinical programs with Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the treatment of pruritus in patients with stage III to V (moderate-to-severe) CKD, in patients with CLD-aP, AD, and NP. In July 2018, we initiated a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2 study with Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) in stage III to V (moderate-to-severe) CKD patients with CKD-aP. In December 2019, we announced top-line data from this trial indicating that patients treated with the 1.0 mg tablet strength of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) achieved the primary endpoint of statistically significant reduction in weekly mean of the daily worst itching NRS scores vs. placebo after the 12-week treatment period (-4.4 KORSUVA vs. -3.3 placebo, p=0.018). In mid-2019, we also initiated Phase 2 trials of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the treatment of pruritus in patients with hepatic impairment due to PBC and in patients with AD. We aim to report top-line data from both of these trials in 2021. In January 2021, we initiated a Phase 2 study with Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the treatment of pruritus in patients suffering from NP.

Table of Contents

Establish partnerships for further development and commercialization of I.V. CR845/difelikefalin for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain and/or PONV in acute care settings in the United States. In June 2018, we reported positive top-line data from the adaptive Phase 2/3 post-operative pain trial of I.V. CR845/difelikefalin in patients undergoing abdominal surgeries. At the higher dose of 1.0 mcg/kg dose, I.V. CR845/difelikefalin demonstrated statistically significant reductions in pain intensity compared to placebo at all pre-specified post-operative assessment periods. Additionally, I.V. CR845 treatment resulted in statistically significant reductions in the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting over the 24-hour period post-surgery for both the lower and higher doses of 0.5 and 1.0 mcg/kg, respectively. We are currently assessing the best path forward for I.V. CR845/difelikefalin in the post-operative acute care setting and have received FDA input regarding PONV as a potential indication. We expect to seek partnerships for further development of I.V. CR845/difelikefalin in the acute care setting.

Our Product Candidates

Our product candidate, CR845/difelikefalin, is a new chemical entity, which is designed to selectively stimulate kappa, rather than mu, and delta opioid receptors. CR845/difelikefalin has been designed with specific chemical characteristics to restrict its entry into the CNS and further limit its mechanism of action to KORs in the peripheral nervous system and on immune cells. Activation of kappa receptors in the CNS is known to result in some undesirable effects, including dysphoria. Since CR845/difelikefalin modulates kappa receptor signals peripherally without any significant activation of opioid receptors in the CNS, it is generally not expected to produce the CNS-related side effects of mu opioid agonists (such as addiction and respiratory depression) or centrally-active kappa opioid agonists (such as dysphoria and hallucinations). CR845/difelikefalin has been administered to more than 3,000 human subjects in Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials as an I.V. infusion, bolus intravenous injection or oral capsule or tablet, and thus far has been observed to be generally well tolerated in multiple clinical trials.

Based on the non-clinical and clinical studies we have completed to date, we believe that CR845/difelikefalin, if approved, would be attractive to both patients and physicians as a treatment for moderate-to-severe pruritus associated with systematic conditions as CKD and CLD, dermatological conditions such as AD, and neurological conditions such as NP, as well as moderate-to-severe pain due to the following attributes:

● novel, peripherally-acting, KOR agonist mechanism of action;

● evidence of efficacy in completed clinical trials of pruritus and pain;

● potential for reduction of post-operative nausea and vomiting, or PONV;

● lower potential for addiction or abuse liability;

Table of Contents

Our current product candidate pipeline is summarized in the table below:

Program Product Candidate Primary Indication Status Commercialization Rights

KORSUVA (CR845/Difelikefalin) Injection for Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Pruritus (CKD-aP)

CKD-aP is an intractable systemic itch condition with high prevalence for which there are no approved therapeutics in the United States or Europe. Based on the results from our efficacy and safety trials highlighted below, we submitted an NDA to the FDA for KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in December 2020, including a request for Priority Review under the Breakthrough Therapy Designation granted by the FDA in June 2017, which, if granted, could result in a six-month review process. In February 2021, the NDA was accepted by the FDA. We expect our partner, VFMCRP, to submit a Marketing Authorisation Application, or MAA, to the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, in the first quarter of 2021.

In April 2020, we announced positive top-line results from our KALM-2 pivotal Phase 3 trial of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in hemodialysis patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. The trial met the primary and key secondary endpoints after 12 weeks of treatment. The open label extension phase of this trial is also complete.

The study met the primary efficacy endpoint with 54% of the patients receiving 0.5 mcg/ kg of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection versus 42% of patients receiving placebo achieving at least a three-point improvement from baseline with respect to the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching intensity numeric rating scale, or NRS,

Table of Contents

score at week 12 (p= 0.02). The study also met the key secondary endpoint with 41% of patients receiving KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection achieving a four-point or greater improvement from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 12 versus 28% for patients receiving placebo (p= 0.01). In this trial, KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection was generally well-tolerated with a safety profile consistent with that seen in KALM-1 and the KORSUVA clinical program in patients with CKD-aP. Overall, the incidence of adverse effects, or AEs, and serious AEs were similar across both KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection and placebo groups. The most common treatment emergent AEs reported in greater than 5% of patients were diarrhea (8.1% KORSUVA vs 5.5% placebo), falling (6.8% KORSUVA vs 5.1% placebo), vomiting (6.4% KORSUVA vs 5.9% placebo), nausea (6.4% KORSUVA vs 4.2% placebo) and dizziness (5.5% KORSUVA vs 5.1% placebo).

In May 2019, we announced positive results from the double blinded phase of our KALM-1 pivotal Phase 3 efficacy trial (KALM-1) of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the treatment of CKD-aP in patients undergoing hemodialysis. The trial met the primary and all secondary endpoints after 12 weeks of treatment. The open label extension phase of this trial is also complete.

The study met the primary efficacy endpoint with 51% of the patients receiving 0.5 mcg/ kg of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection versus 28% of patients receiving placebo achieving at least a three-point improvement from baseline with respect to the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching intensity NRS score at week 12 (p= 0.000019). The study also met all secondary endpoints, including assessment of itch-related quality of life changes measured using self-assessment Skindex-10 (patients receiving KORSUVA experienced 43% improvement versus patients receiving placebo, p= 0.0004) and 5-D Itch scales (patients receiving KORSUVA experienced 35% improvement versus patients receiving placebo, p= 0.0009). In addition, 39% of patients receiving KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection achieved a four-point or greater improvement from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 12 versus 18% for patients receiving placebo (p= 0.000032), another key secondary endpoint. In this trial, KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection was generally well-tolerated with a safety profile consistent with that seen in earlier trials. Overall, the incidence of AEs and serious AEs were similar across both KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection and placebo groups. The most common treatment emergent AEs reported in greater than 5% of patients were diarrhea (9.5% KORSUVA vs 3.7% placebo), dizziness (6.9% KORSUVA vs 1.1% placebo), vomiting (5.3% KORSUVA vs 3.2% placebo) and nasopharyngitis (3.2% KORSUVA vs 5.3% placebo).

Oral KORSUVA (CR845/Difelikefalin) for Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Pruritus (CKD-aP)

In December 2019, we announced top-line data from our Phase 2 trial of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the treatment of pruritus in stage III - V (moderate-to-severe) CKD patients. The Phase 2, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-week trial is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of three tablet strengths (0.25 mg, 0.5 mg and 1 mg, once daily administration) of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) versus placebo in approximately 240 stage III - V (moderate to severe) CKD patients with moderate-to-severe pruritus. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 12 of the treatment period. Secondary endpoints include change from baseline in itch-related quality of life scores at the end of week 12, as assessed by the total Skindex-10 and 5-D itch scores, as well as the proportion of patients achieving an improvement from baseline ≥3 points with respect to the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 12.

Patients treated with the 1.0 mg tablet strength of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) achieved the primary endpoint of statistically significant reduction in weekly mean of the daily worst itching NRS scores vs. placebo after the 12-week treatment period (-4.4 KORSUVA vs. -3.3 placebo, p=0.018). The treatment was statistically significant after two weeks of treatment and sustained through the 12-week treatment period. Regarding secondary endpoints, the proportion of patients on 1.0 mg tablet strength achieving a 3 point or greater improvement from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily worst itching NRS score at week 12 was 72% vs. 58% for placebo but did not achieve statistical significance. Furthermore, patients on 1.0 mg tablet strength showed positive improvements vs. placebo in itch quality of life endpoints as measured using self-assessment Skindex-10 and 5-D Itch scales but did not achieve statistical significance. Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) was generally well-tolerated with a safety profile consistent with that seen in earlier KORSUVA clinical trials. Overall, the incidence of treatment AEs were similar across KORSUVA

Table of Contents

and placebo groups. The most common AEs reported in >5% of patients in the 1.0 mg KORSUVA group vs. placebo were dizziness (7.5% KORSUVA vs. 0% placebo), fall (6% KORSUVA vs. 0% placebo), diarrhea (6% KORSUVA vs. 1.5% placebo) and constipation (6% KORSUVA vs. 3% placebo).

We expect to conduct an End of Phase 2 Meeting with the FDA in the second quarter of 2021 and intend to initiate the Phase 3 program for Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the treatment of pruritus in stage III - V (moderate-to-severe) CKD in the second half of 2021.

Oral KORSUVA (CR845/Difelikefalin) for Treatment of Chronic Liver Disease-Associated Pruritus (CLD-aP)

Pruritus is a common and serious symptom in patients with CLD, especially those with chronic cholestatic disease. Pruritus has a prevalence of up to 70% in patients with PBC. Severe pruritus can have debilitating effects and can lead to a significant reduction in a patient’s quality of life. Although the pathogenesis of CLD-aP remains poorly understood, it is likely multifactorial including evidence for an imbalance in the endogenous opioid system driven by higher mu receptor activation (pruritic) versus kappa receptor activation (antipruritic). Consequently, the use of selective kappa-opioid receptor agonists has been suggested for the treatment of pruritus in patients with CLD.

In June 2019, we announced the initiation of a Phase 2 trial of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the treatment of pruritus in patients with hepatic impairment due to PBC. The Phase 2 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 16-week trial is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 1 mg tablet of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) taken twice daily or BID versus placebo in approximately 60 patients with PBC and moderate-to-severe pruritus. The primary efficacy endpoint is the change from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 16 of the treatment period. Secondary endpoints include change from baseline in itch-related quality of life scores at the end of week 16 as assessed by the Skindex-10 and 5-D itch scales, as well as the assessment of proportion of patients achieving an improvement from baseline of ≥3 points with respect to the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 16. We continue to screen patients in this ongoing Phase 2 trial of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) and aim to have top-line data in the second half of 2021, due in part to delays related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

In the fourth quarter of 2017, we submitted an investigational new drug application, or IND, to the FDA for Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the symptomatic relief of CLD-aP and initiated a Phase 1 safety and PK clinical trial of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) in patients with CLD in the first quarter of 2018. The open-label study was designed to evaluate the safety and PK profile of repeated doses of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) taken twice daily in up to 60 patients with CLD and up to 12 matched healthy control subjects. Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) was evaluated over an eight-day treatment period in patients with CLD based on their Child-Pugh classification (i.e., Class A, B and C). The study is now complete. The PK parameters were dose-proportional in patients with mild-to-moderate CLD and Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) was generally well tolerated with no unexpected safety signals reported.

Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Pruritus Associated with Atopic Dermatitis (AD)

In July 2019, we initiated a Phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for moderate-to-severe pruritus in approximately 240 adult subjects with AD. Subjects will be randomized to three tablet strengths of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin): 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg and 1 mg twice daily versus placebo for 12 weeks followed by a 4-week active extension phase. The primary efficacy endpoint is the change from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 12 of the treatment period. Secondary endpoints include proportion of patients achieving > 4 point improvement in itch NRS score at week 12, as well as change from baseline in itch-related quality of life scores at the end of week 12 as assessed by the total Skindex-10 and 5-D itch scales, and itch related Sleep Quality Assessment. Safety endpoints used to evaluate the overall safety and tolerability of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) will also be included.

In January 2020, we expanded this Phase 2 trial to include approximately 320 adult AD patients with moderate-to-severe pruritus and incorporated an interim conditional power assessment into the design, to be conducted after

Table of Contents

approximately 50% of the targeted patient number complete the designated 12-week treatment period. In June 2020, we announced that based on the Independent Data Monitoring Committee’s, or IDMC’s, recommendation, the trial would be increased by approximately 28%, from the previous enrollment target of 320 patients to 410 patients, to maintain the prespecified statistical power of 80% or greater on the trial’s primary endpoint of change from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score and key secondary endpoint of proportion of patients achieving a > 4 point improvement in itch NRS score at week 12. The IDMC’s recommendation was based on the results of the prespecified interim conditional power assessment conducted after approximately 50% of the originally targeted patient number completed the designated 12-week treatment period. In December 2020, we completed full enrollment, having enrolled approximately 400 patients at multiple clinical sites across the United States. We aim to report the top-line results from this trial in the first half of 2021, subject to any delays related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Pruritus Associated with Notalgia Paresthetica (NP)

In January 2021, we initiated a Phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for moderate-to-severe pruritus in approximately 120 adult subjects with NP. Subjects will be randomized to receive Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) 2.0 mg twice daily versus placebo for eight weeks followed by a 4-week active extension period and follow up visit approximately 14 days after the last dose of the study. The primary efficacy endpoint is the change from baseline in the weekly mean of the daily 24-hour worst itching NRS score at week 8 of the treatment period. Secondary endpoints include improvement in itch-related quality of life assessed by the change from baseline to Week 8 and a change from baseline in itch-related sleep disturbance subscale measured by the itch medical outcomes study at week 8.

Intravenous CR845/Difelikefalin for Treatment of Acute Postoperative Pain

We have also investigated CR845/difelikefalin for the treatment of pain in an acute care setting. CR845/difelikefalin is designed to provide pain relief without stimulating mu opioid receptors and therefore potentially without mu opioid-related side effects, such as nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression and euphoria.

In June 2018, we reported positive top-line date from the adaptive Phase 2/3 study of CR845/difelikefalin in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. CR845 injection achieved statistical significance for the primary endpoint of pain relief as measured by Area Under the Curve, or AUC, over 24 hours (AUC 0-24) post-surgery with the 1.0 mcg/kg dose versus placebo (p=0.032). The 0.5 mcg/kg dose did not achieve statistical significance over the 0-24 hour period (p=0.076). In addition, improvement in pain AUC was statistically significant for both the 0.5 and 1.0 mcg/kg doses over 0 to 6 hours (p=0.041, p=0.001) and 0 to 12 hours (p=0.035, p=0.004) periods and also statistically significant for the 1.0 mcg/kg dose over the 0 to 18-hour period (p=0.013) post-surgery. At 6 and 24 hours after baseline dose post-surgery, there were statistically significant improvements in PONV impact scores with both doses of CR845 injection compared to placebo: 0.5 mcg/kg (6 hrs.: p=0.0072, 24 hrs.: p<0.006) and 1.0 mcg/kg (6 hrs.: p<0.0001, 24 hrs.: p<0.0001). There were statistically significant differences between placebo and both doses of CR845 with respect to the total use of anti-emetic medication over the first 24 hours post-surgery (0.5 mcg/kg: p=0.0003; 1.0 mcg/kg: p< 0.0001). There was a 73% reduction in the incidence of patient-reported vomiting in the group receiving the 1.0 mcg/kg dose versus placebo (p=0.029). Although the 0.5 mcg/kg also showed reduction in vomiting, it did not reach statistical significance. Both doses of CR845 exhibited numerical trends toward reduced use of rescue analgesic medication compared to placebo, but did not achieve statistical significance. There was no significant effect, compared to placebo, on patient’s global assessment of medication for either dose of CR845 over the 24-hour period. Common adverse effects reported in the placebo and both CR845 groups were generally low and similar in incidence, and included nausea, constipation, vomiting, flatulence, headache and dyspepsia.

We have completed an advisory meeting with the FDA regarding the potential regulatory path forward for PONV and we are currently evaluating potential next steps.

Table of Contents

Human Abuse Liability Trial of CR845/Difelikefalin Injection

In the fourth quarter of 2014, we successfully completed a Human Abuse Liability, or HAL, trial of CR845/difelikefalin injection. The results from this HAL trial indicate that I.V. CR845/difelikefalin (5 mcg/kg or 15 mcg/kg) demonstrates statistically significant lower “drug liking” scores as measured by VAS Emax (p <0.0001) when compared to I.V. pentazocine (0.5 mg/kg), an approved Schedule I.V. opioid receptor agonist. I.V. CR845 also demonstrated highly statistically significant lower “feeling high,” “overall liking,” and “take drug again” scores (p <0.0001) as compared to pentazocine. Additionally, CR845/difelikefalin injection showed no “drug liking” dose response as both doses of CR845/difelikefalin injection exhibited similar responses and were not different from placebo injection. Those scores represent standard subjective measures recommended by the FDA to assess a drug’s abuse liability. We believe that the totality of the results from the HAL trial are supportive of the potential for CR845/difelikefalin to be the first non-scheduled or low (Schedule V) scheduled peripheral kappa opioid for pruritus or additional indications.

Respiratory Safety Phase 1 Trial of CR845/Difelikefalin Injection

In April 2017, we announced summary results from our quantitative Phase 1 trial evaluating respiratory safety of CR845/difelikefalin injection. Respiratory depression remains the most life-threatening side effect of traditional, centrally acting, opioid analgesics, the most commonly used drug class for current treatment of postoperative pain in the United States. The Phase 1 trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover trial of two doses of CR845/difelikefalin injection (1.0 mcg/kg and 5.0 mcg/kg) versus placebo on three measures of respiratory drive in 15 healthy volunteers. The primary safety endpoints were: a >10 mmHg sustained (>30 seconds duration) increase in end-tidal CO2, or ETCO2, above baseline or to >50 mmHg, and a sustained reduction in oxygen saturation, or SpO2, to <92%.

There were no statistically significant differences in any respiratory measures observed between groups throughout the four-hour observation period post-dosing and no individual subject met the threshold for a respiratory safety event. Additionally, all treatment-emergent adverse events were previously reported with CR845/difelikefalin administration and were mild, resolving without intervention.

Collaboration and License Agreements

Vifor (International) Ltd.

On October 15, 2020, we entered into a license agreement, or the Vifor Agreement, with Vifor under which we granted Vifor an exclusive license solely in the United States to use, distribute, offer for sale, promote, sell and otherwise commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for all therapeutic uses relating to the inhibition, prevention or treatment of itch associated with pruritus in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients in the United States. Under the Vifor Agreement, we retain all rights with respect to the clinical development of, and activities to gain regulatory approvals of, KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the United States.

Under the terms of the Vifor Agreement, we received from Vifor an upfront payment of $100.0 million and an additional payment of $50.0 million for the purchase of an aggregate of 2,939,552 shares of our common stock at a price of $17.0094 per share, which represents a premium over a pre-determined average closing price of our common stock. Upon U.S. regulatory approval of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection, we will also be eligible to receive an additional $50.0 million common stock investment at a 20% premium to the 30-day trailing average price of our common stock as of such date. In addition, pursuant to the Vifor Agreement, we are eligible to receive payments of up to $240.0 million upon the achievement of certain sales-based milestones.

The Vifor Agreement provides full commercialization rights in dialysis clinics to Vifor in the United States under a profit-sharing arrangement. Pursuant to the profit-sharing arrangement, we will generally be entitled to 60% of the net profits (as defined in the Vifor Agreement) from sales of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the United States (excluding sales to Fresenius Medical Center dialysis clinics, compensation for which is governed by the VFMCRP Agreement) and Vifor is entitled to 40% of such net profits, subject to potential temporary adjustment in

Table of Contents

future years based on certain conditions. Under the Vifor Agreement, in consideration of Vifor’s conduct of the marketing, promotion, selling and distribution of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the United States, we will pay a marketing and distribution fee to Vifor based on the level of annual net sales. This fee will be deducted from product sales in calculating the net profits that are subject to the profit-sharing arrangement under the Vifor Agreement.

The Vifor Agreement will continue in effect until its expiration upon the cessation of commercial sale of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the United States by Vifor and its affiliates and sublicensees, or until the earlier termination of the Vifor Agreement.

In addition, upon the earlier of: (1) the acceptance for filing of an NDA covering KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection submitted to the FDA; or (2) October 15, 2023, the Vifor Agreement may be terminated by Vifor in its entirety, with such termination effective upon 12 months’ notice.

In connection with the Vifor Agreement, the parties entered into a separate stock purchase agreement, or the Vifor Purchase Agreement, governing the issuance of our common stock to Vifor. Pursuant to the Vifor Purchase Agreement, Vifor will not, and will not cause any direct or indirect affiliate to, during the period beginning on October 15, 2020 and ending at the close of business on the earlier of (a) October 15, 2022 and (b) the date that we publicly disclose the receipt of a complete response letter from the FDA with respect to our NDA for KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection, or the Restricted Period, (i) offer, pledge, sell, contract to sell, sell any option or contract to purchase, purchase any option or contract to sell, grant any option, right or warrant to purchase, lend, or otherwise transfer or dispose of, directly or indirectly, any shares of our common stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for our common stock (including without limitation, common stock or such other securities which may be deemed to be beneficially owned by Vifor in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and securities which may be issued upon exercise of a stock option or warrant) owned by Vifor as of the date hereof or acquired prior to the end of the Restricted Period (collectively with the common stock, referred to as the Lock-Up Securities, except any such sale, option or contract by and between Vifor and one of its affiliates (including Vifor Pharma Group Ltd. or VFMCRP), (ii) enter into any hedging, swap or other agreement or transaction that transfers, in whole or in part, any of the economic consequences of ownership of the Lock-Up Securities, whether any such transaction described in clause (i) or (ii) above is to be settled by delivery of Lock-Up Securities, in cash or otherwise, (iii) make any demand for or exercise any right with respect to the registration of any Lock-Up Securities, or (iv) publicly disclose the intention to do any of the foregoing.

Under the Vifor Purchase Agreement, the parties also agreed that, in certain circumstances, upon the request of Vifor, the parties will enter into a registration rights agreement prior to the end of the Restricted Period that would provide Vifor (or its affiliate transferee) customary registration rights with respect to the shares of common stock issued pursuant to the stock purchase agreement following the expiration of the Restricted Period.

Vifor Fresenius Medical Care Renal Pharma Ltd.

In May 2018, we entered into a license agreement, or the VFMCRP Agreement, with VFMCRP, a joint venture between Vifor Pharma Group and Fresenius Medical Care, under which we granted VFMCRP a license to seek regulatory approval to commercialize, import, export, use, distribute, offer for sale, promote, sell and otherwise commercialize KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for all therapeutic uses to prevent, inhibit or treat itch associated with pruritus in hemodialysis and peritoneal-dialysis patients worldwide (excluding the United States, Japan and South Korea). We retain full development and commercialization rights for KORSUVA injection for the treatment of CKD-aP in dialysis patients in the U.S. except in the dialysis clinics of Fresenius Medical Care North America, or FMCNA, where we and VFMCRP will promote KORSUVA injection under a profit-sharing arrangement.

Upon entry into the VFMCRP Agreement, VFMCRP made a non-refundable, non-creditable $50 million upfront payment to us and Vifor purchased 1,174,827 shares of our common stock for $20 million, at a premium for the price of $17.024 per share. We are eligible to receive from VFMCRP regulatory and commercial milestone payments in the aggregate of up to $470 million, consisting of up to $30 million in regulatory milestones and up to $440 million in tiered commercial milestones, all of which are sales-related. We are also eligible to receive tiered double-digit royalty payments based on annual net sales, as defined, of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the licensed territories.

Table of Contents

In the United States, we and VFMCRP will promote KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the dialysis clinics of FMCNA under a profit-sharing arrangement (subject to the terms and conditions of the VFMCRP Agreement) based on net FMCNA clinic sales recorded by us.

Maruishi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

In April 2013, we entered into a license agreement with Maruishi, or the Maruishi Agreement, under which we granted Maruishi an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize drug products containing CR845/difelikefalin in Japan in the acute pain and uremic pruritus fields. Maruishi has a right of first negotiation for any other indications for which we develop CR845/difelikefalin and, under certain conditions, Maruishi may substitute another pruritus indication for the uremic pruritus indication originally included in its license from us. If we abandon development of CR845/difelikefalin and begin development of another kappa opioid receptor agonist that is covered by the claims of the patents we licensed to Maruishi, such other agonist will automatically be included in the license to Maruishi. Maruishi is required to use commercially reasonable efforts, at its expense, to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize CR845/difelikefalin in Japan. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts, at our expense, to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize CR845/difelikefalin in the United States.

Under the terms of the Maruishi Agreement, we received a non-refundable and non-creditable upfront license fee of $15.0 million and are eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $10.5 million in clinical development and regulatory milestones, of which $2.5 million (before contractual foreign currency exchange adjustments) has been received as of December 31, 2020. In January 2021, we met the milestone criteria, as set forth in the Maruishi Agreement, for Maruishi’s first initiation of a Phase III trial for uremic pruritus in Japan. As a result, we received a milestone payment of $2.0 million ($1.9 million after contractual foreign currency exchange adjustments) from Maruishi. We are also eligible to receive a one-time sales milestone of one billion Yen when a certain sales level is attained. We also receive a mid-double-digit percentage of all non-royalty payments received by Maruishi from its sublicensees, if any. We are also eligible to receive tiered royalties based on net sales, if any, with minimum royalty rates in the low double digits and maximum royalty rates in the low twenties. Maruishi’s obligation to pay us royalties continues, on a product-by-product basis, until the expiration of the last-to-expire licensed patent covering such product or the later expiration of any market exclusivity period. The Maruishi Agreement continues until terminated. Either we or Maruishi may terminate the Maruishi Agreement for the other party’s breach of the agreement or bankruptcy. Maruishi may terminate the agreement at any time at will. We may terminate the agreement as a whole if Maruishi challenges the licensed patent rights, and we may terminate the agreement with respect to any indication if Maruishi discontinues its development activities. In addition, in connection with the Maruishi Agreement, Maruishi made an $8.0 million equity investment in our company.

Chong Kun Dang Pharmaceutical Corporation

In April 2012, we entered into a license agreement with CKDP, or the CKDP Agreement, under which we granted CKDP an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize drug products containing CR845/difelikefalin in South Korea. CKDP is required to use commercially reasonable efforts, at its expense, to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize CR845/difelikefalin in South Korea. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts, at our expense, to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize CR845/difelikefalin in the United States.

Under the terms of the CKDP Agreement, we received a non-refundable and non-creditable $0.6 million upfront payment and are eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.8 million in development and regulatory milestones (before South Korean withholding taxes). In May 2020, we met the milestone criteria, as set forth in the CKDP Agreement, for completion of a Phase 3 trial for uremic pruritus in the United States. As a result, in June 2020, we received a milestone payment of $0.6 million (net of South Korean withholding tax) from CKDP. As of December 31, 2020, we have received $2.3 million (before South Korean withholding tax) of development and regulatory milestones. We are also eligible to receive a mid-double-digit percentage of all non-royalty payments received by CKDP from its sublicensees, if any, and tiered royalties ranging from the high single digits to the high teens based on net sales, if any. CKDP’s obligation to pay us royalties continues, on a product-by-product basis, until the expiration of the last-to-expire licensed patent covering such product or the later expiration of any market exclusivity period. The CKDP Agreement continues until CKDP no longer has any obligation to pay us royalties on any product. Either we or CKDP may terminate the

Table of Contents

CKDP Agreement for the other party’s breach of the CKDP Agreement or bankruptcy. CKDP may terminate the CKDP Agreement if any of the licensed patent rights is invalid, unenforceable, is narrowed in scope or is deemed unpatentable, except as a result of a challenge by CKDP, or a third party commercializes a product containing a compound identical to CR845/difelikefalin without infringing any of the licensed patent rights in South Korea. We may terminate the CKDP Agreement if CKDP challenges the licensed patent rights or if a third party in South Korea owns an issued patent that claims CR845/difelikefalin and CKDP’s sale of products would infringe that patent. In addition, in connection with the CKDP Agreement, CKDP made a $0.4 million equity investment in our company.

Manufacturing and License Agreements

Enteris Biopharma, Inc.

In August 2019, we entered into a Non-Exclusive License Agreement, or the Enteris License Agreement, with Enteris. Pursuant to the Enteris License Agreement, Enteris granted to us a non-exclusive, royalty-bearing license, including the right to grant sublicenses, under certain proprietary technology and patent rights related to or covering formulations for oral delivery of peptide active pharmaceutical ingredients with functional excipients to enhance permeability and/or solubility, known as Enteris’s Peptelligence® technology, to develop, manufacture and commercialize products using such technology worldwide, excluding Japan and South Korea.

As consideration for the licensed rights under the Enteris License Agreement, we paid an upfront fee equal to $8.0 million, consisting of $4.0 million in cash and $4.0 million in shares of our common stock pursuant to the Enteris Purchase Agreement described below.

We are also obligated, pursuant to the Enteris License Agreement, to pay Enteris (1) milestone payments upon the achievement of certain development, regulatory and commercial milestones and (2) low-single digit royalty percentages on net sales of licensed products, subject to reductions in specified circumstances. Until the second anniversary of the entry into the Enteris License Agreement, we have the right, but not the obligation, to terminate our obligation to pay any royalties under the Enteris License Agreement in exchange for a lump sum payment in cash, or the Royalty Buyout. Subject to certain conditions, we may elect to pay 50% of the lump sum due under the Royalty Buyout in shares of our common stock pursuant to the Enteris Purchase Agreement. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we paid $5.0 million to Enteris for a milestone earned during the year ended December 31, 2020 in relation to the Enteris License Agreement.

The Enteris License Agreement will expire on a country-by-country, licensed product-by-licensed product basis upon the later of (1) the expiration (or invalidation) of all valid claims in licensed patent rights that cover such product in such country, (2) the end of the calendar quarter in which generic competition (as defined in the Enteris License Agreement) occurs for such product in such country and (3) ten years from the first commercial sale of such product.

Either party may terminate the Enteris License Agreement upon written notice if the other party has failed to remedy a material breach within 60 days (or 30 days in the case of a material breach of a payment obligation). Enteris may terminate the Enteris License Agreement upon 30 days’ written notice to us if we or any of our affiliates formally challenge the validity of any licensed patent rights or assists a third party in doing so. We may terminate the Enteris License Agreement for any reason or no reason (a) prior to receipt of first regulatory approval for a licensed product in the United States for any indication upon 30 days’ prior written notice to Enteris or (b) on or after receipt of first regulatory approval for a licensed product in the United States for any indication upon 60 days’ prior written notice to Enteris.

In connection with the Enteris License Agreement, in August 2019, we entered into the Enteris Purchase Agreement with Enteris and its affiliate, EBP Holdco LLC, collectively referred to as Purchaser, pursuant to which we issued and sold to Purchaser 170,793 shares of our common stock in a private placement. Such shares were issued in satisfaction of the $4.0 million portion of the upfront fee payable in shares of our common stock pursuant to the Enteris License Agreement and for no additional consideration, based on a purchase price of $23.42 per share, which was equal to the 30-day volume weighted average price of our common stock on August 20, 2019. In addition, if we exercise our Royalty Buyout option, we may elect to make 50% of the payment in stock by issuing additional shares of our common

Table of Contents

stock valued at the 30-day volume weighted average price of our common stock as of such exercise. Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, we effected the registration and sale of the shares issued and sold to Purchaser thereunder in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, which included the filing of a registration statement with the SEC on September 9, 2019. In addition, the Purchase Agreement includes customary representations, warranties and covenants by us.

Patheon UK Limited

In July 2019, we entered into an MSA with Patheon UK Limited, or Patheon. The MSA governs the general terms under which Patheon, or one of its affiliates, will provide non-exclusive manufacturing services to us for the drug products specified by us from time to time. Pursuant to the MSA, we have agreed to order from Patheon at least a certain percentage of our commercial requirements for a product under a related Product Agreement. Each Product Agreement that we may enter into from time to time will be governed by the terms of the MSA, unless expressly modified in such Product Agreement.

The MSA has an initial term ending December 31, 2023, and will automatically renew after the initial term for successive terms of two years each if there is a Product Agreement in effect, unless either party gives notice of its intention to terminate the MSA at least 18 months prior to the end of the then current term.

Either party may terminate the MSA or a Product Agreement upon written notice if the other party (1) has failed to remedy a material breach within a specified time or (2) is declared insolvent or bankrupt, voluntarily files a petition of bankruptcy or assigns such agreement for the benefit of creditors. We may terminate a Product Agreement (a) upon 90 days’ prior written notice if any governmental agency takes any action that prevents us from selling the relevant product in the relevant territory, (b) upon six months’ prior written notice if we do not intend to order manufacturing services due to a product’s discontinuance in the market, or (c) upon 90 days’ prior written notice if we determine that the manufacture or supply of a product likely infringes third-party rights. Patheon may terminate the MSA or a Product Agreement (i) upon six months’ prior written notice if we assign such agreement to an assignee that is unacceptable to Patheon for certain reasons, or (ii) upon 30 days’ prior written notice if, after the first year of commercial sales, we forecast zero volume for 12 months.

The MSA contains, among other provisions, customary representations and warranties by the parties, a grant to Patheon of certain limited license rights to our intellectual property in connection with Patheon’s performance of the services under the MSA, certain indemnification rights in favor of both parties, limitations of liability and customary confidentiality provisions.

Also in July 2019, we entered into two related Product Agreements under the MSA, one with each of Patheon and Patheon Manufacturing Services LLC, or Patheon Greenville, to govern the terms and conditions of the manufacture of commercial supplies of CR845/difelikefalin injection, our lead product candidate. Pursuant to the Product Agreements, Patheon and Patheon Greenville will manufacture commercial supplies of CR845/difelikefalin injection at the Monza, Italy and Greenville, North Carolina manufacturing sites, respectively, from active pharmaceutical ingredient supplied by us. Patheon and Patheon Greenville will be responsible for supplying the other required raw materials and packaging components, and will also provide supportive manufacturing services such as quality control testing for raw materials, packaging components and finished product.

Sales and Marketing

In executing our strategy, our goal is to commercialize CR845/difelikefalin injection in the dialysis setting by partnering with out-licensing agreements, and to maintain significant control over the development process and commercial execution for the Oral formulation of CR845/difelikefalin, if approved.

We have executed out-licensing agreements on KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection in the dialysis setting in the United States and the rest of the world.

Table of Contents

For Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin), we plan to develop and commercialize our drug candidate in pruritus indications, such as CKD-aP, AD, and potentially others, on our own in the United States, while exploring partnerships for development and commercialization in geographical territories outside the United States.

In 2015, we commissioned a qualitative market research study of nephrologists to evaluate the commercial potential of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for CKD-aP. The study suggests KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) would be well received by nephrologists, if approved. The key findings from the study were:

● There is a clear unmet need to manage CKD-aP among dialysis patients.

● Currently, there are no effective options for severe CKD-aP.

● CR845/difelikefalin demonstrates impressive efficacy for CKD-aP.

● Physicians were impressed with placebo-like adverse event profile.

As a result, we believe that, if successful, KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) is well positioned to address the unmet needs for hemodialysis patients suffering from CKD-aP.

We had also commissioned market research for I.V. CR845/difelikefalin for the treatment of PONV that suggests it would be well received by physicians, if approved. This research indicated that anesthesiologists rated efficacy in high-risk patients and the scarcity of rescue medications as the highest unmet needs. There is an opportunity for greater efficacy in high-risk patients who typically receive three or more products prophylactically. Anesthesiologists stated the most favorable attributes of CR845 included its novel mechanism of action, positive efficacy results and favorable side effect profile. The novel mechanism of action was favorable given its potential additive effect on existing multimodal treatment regimens as well as its potential as a new option for rescue therapy, a therapy that is used when prophylactic agents have failed to prevent nausea and vomiting. Anesthesiologists indicated a preference to utilize CR845 in combination with existing regimens for high-risk patients particularly in invasive surgeries that require narcotics. In our three Phase 2 trials, I.V. CR845/difelikefalin demonstrated statistically significant reductions in PONV as well as statistically significant reductions in pain relief. As a result, we believe that, if successful, I.V. CR845/difelikefalin is well positioned to address unmet needs in the PONV market.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect the proprietary technologies that we believe are important to our business, including seeking and maintaining patent protection intended to cover the composition of matter of our product candidates, their methods of use, related technology and other inventions that are important to our business. As more fully described below, patent applications have been filed covering compositions of matter for and novel formulations of these compositions, as well as methods of using CR845/difelikefalin. We own the patent portfolio of seventeen issued U.S. patents covering kappa opioid receptor agonists, fifteen of which cover CR845/difelikefalin and its uses; six of these include composition of matter claims directed to CR845/difelikefalin, and nine include claims to its uses. All of these U.S. patents are expected to expire no earlier than 2027. Additionally, three U.S. patents have been granted with claims to CR845/difelikefalin-like dimer compounds and their uses. We have filed patent applications in the U.S. and internationally claiming novel oral formulations of CR845/difelikefalin, which if granted would be expected to expire no earlier than 2039. We also rely on trade secrets and careful monitoring of our proprietary information to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection.

Our success will depend significantly on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for commercially important technology, inventions and know-how related to our business, defend and enforce our patents, maintain our licenses to use intellectual property owned by third parties, preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets and operate without infringing valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties. We also

Table of Contents

rely on know-how, and continuing technological innovation to develop, strengthen, and maintain our proprietary position in the field of peripheral analgesia and treatment of pruritus.

A third party may hold intellectual property, including patent rights, which are important or necessary to the development of our products. It may be necessary for us to use the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our products, in which case we would be required to obtain a license from these third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or our business could be harmed, possibly materially. If we were not able to obtain a license or were not able to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms, our business could be harmed, possibly materially.

We plan to continue to expand our intellectual property estate by filing patent applications directed to novel peripheral analgesics, novel formulations and novel uses of our proprietary compounds. We anticipate seeking patent protection in the United States and internationally for the chemistries and processes for manufacturing these compounds and novel formulations and uses of these compounds in a variety of therapies.

The patent positions of biopharmaceutical companies like us are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and the patent’s scope can be modified after issuance by later judicial decisions. Consequently, we do not know whether any of our product candidates will be adequately protectable or remain protected by enforceable patents. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient proprietary protection from competitors. Any patents that we hold may be challenged, circumvented or invalidated by third parties.

Because patent applications in the United States and certain other jurisdictions are maintained in secrecy for up to 18 months, and since publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain of our entitlement to the inventions covered by pending patent applications. Moreover, although unlikely, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, to determine priority of invention, or in post-grant challenge proceedings in the USPTO, or a foreign patent office such as oppositions, inter-partes review, post grant review, or a derivation proceeding, that challenge our entitlement to an invention or the patentability of one or more claims in our patent applications or issued patents. Such proceedings could result in substantial cost, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

The patent portfolios for our most advanced programs are summarized below.

CR845/Difelikefalin

Our synthetic peptide amide kappa opioid agonist patent portfolio is wholly owned by us. The portfolio includes seventeen issued U.S. patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,402,564; 7,713,937; 7,727,963; 7,842,662; 8,217,007; 8,236,766; 8,486,894; 8,536,131; 8,906,859; 8,951,970; 9,321,810; 9,334,305; 9,359,399; 10,017,536; 10,138,270; 10,913,769 and 10,793,596) with claims to compositions of a wide range of synthetic peptide amide kappa opioid agonists, including CR845/difelikefalin and related molecules, as well as methods of using these compounds. These patents claiming CR845/difelikefalin compositions are due to expire November 12, 2027, although the patent term of one of the patents listed in the FDA Orange Book is expected to be extended for up to a further five (5) years, i.e. to November 12, 2032, based upon the Hatch-Waxman Act. The CR845/difelikefalin patent portfolio also includes pending U.S. patent applications which claim additional uses and methods of administering CR845/difelikefalin. Related foreign applications were filed in more than 40 other countries. National patents have been granted in 31 European countries, as well as in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Russia, Singapore, South Africa and South Korea. These granted foreign patents with claims to CR845/difelikefalin are due expire no earlier than November 12, 2027. The Brazilian patent law provides for a patent term extension of up to ten years for pharmaceutical patents to compensate for the loss of patent term during prosecution.

Table of Contents

Other Cara Patents and Patent Applications

We also own several other U.S. Patents including U.S. Patent Nos. 7,741,350; 7,960,376; 7,960,377; and 8,211,926 with claims to other cannabinoid compounds and U.S. Patent No. 8,217,000 with claims to regulation of prolactin in mammals including humans.

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a PCT application or a non-provisional patent application. The term of a patent in the United States can be adjusted and extended due to the failure of the USPTO following certain statutory and regulation deadlines for progressing prosecution and issuing a patent.

In the United States, the patent term of a patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may also be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for a portion of the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the drug is under regulatory review. Patent extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only one patent applicable to an approved drug may be extended. Similar provisions are available in Europe and other non-United States jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug. In the future, if and when our pharmaceutical products receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering those products. Although we intend to seek patent term extensions to any of our issued patents in any jurisdiction where these are available there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA in the United States, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such extensions.

We also rely on trade secret protection for our confidential and proprietary information. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology. Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information concerning our business or financial affairs developed or made known to the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. In the case of employees, the agreements provide that all inventions conceived by the individual, and which are related to our current or planned business or research and development, or R&D, or made during normal working hours, on our premises or using our equipment or proprietary information, are our exclusive property.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. While we believe that our technology, knowledge, experience and scientific resources provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical and generic drug companies, and medical technology companies. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.

There are a large number of companies developing or marketing therapies for the indications that we are pursuing. Many of our competitors, including many of the organizations named below, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of products and the commercialization of those products. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of competitors. Small or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. We also compete with these

Table of Contents

companies in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials.

We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our product candidates, if approved for marketing, are likely to be their safety, efficacy and tolerability profile, reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement from government and third-party payers. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payers seeking to encourage the use of generic products. Generic products that broadly address these indications are currently on the market for the indications that we are pursuing, and additional products are expected to become available on a generic basis over the coming years. If our product candidates achieve marketing approval, we expect that they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products.

If our product candidates are approved for the indications for which we are currently undertaking clinical trials, they will compete with the therapies and currently marketed drugs discussed below:

KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection - Uremic Pruritus or CKD-aP. We are developing KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection for the management of CKD-aP in hemodialysis patients. Currently, there are no approved products for management of CKD-aP in the United States. However, there are many products that are used to help manage CKD-aP. The most common of these agents are anti-itch creams and emollients as well as oral or injectable antihistamines. All of these products have limited degrees of efficacy and are available generically. Additionally, patients may try several other agents such as gabapentin or naltrexone, generally with limited success or therapies such as UVB light therapy with limited availability.

Because of the substantial unmet need for products that are safe and effective in CKD-aP, there are other companies that either were in the past or are currently involved in the discovery, development, and/or marketing of such products for CKD-aP or related conditions. Some of such product candidates or products include SK-1405 from Sanwa Kagaku Kenkyusho and Remitch® or nalfurafine from Toray Industries.

Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) – Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Pruritus (CKD-aP) and Chronic Liver Disease-Associated Pruritus (CLD-aP). We are developing Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the management of moderate-to-severe chronic pruritus conditions like CKD-aP or CLD-aP. There are currently no products approved in the United States for CKD-aP or CLD-aP. The market for the management of moderate-to-severe chronic pruritus is highly fragmented and includes numerous generic products, including oral formulations of corticosteroids and antihistamines. The most common corticosteroids and antihistamines are available generically. Because of the size and untapped potential of the chronic pruritus market and the substantial unmet need for products that are safe and effective, there are other companies involved in the discovery, development, and/or marketing of new products for pruritus.

Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) – Atopic Dermatitis-Associated Pruritus (AD). We are developing Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) for the management of moderate-to-severe chronic pruritus associated with AD. There are currently two products specifically approved in the United States to treat AD and the itching associated with it: Dupixent (dupilumab) and Eucrisa (crisaborole). Additionally, the market for the management of mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe AD includes numerous generic products, including topical and oral formulations of corticosteroids and antihistamines. Because of the size and untapped potential of the AD market, there are other companies involved in the discovery, development, and/or marketing of new products for pruritus. Multiple companies are studying IL-13 inhibitors (e.g. tralokinumab, lebrikizumab), IL-31 inhibitors (e.g. nemolizumab), JAK inhibitors (e.g. baricitinib, upadacitinib and abrocitinib) and OX40 inhibitors for treatment of AD.

I.V. CR845/difelikefalin – Post-Operative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) Management. The market for the prevention and treatment of PONV is highly fragmented. Anesthesiologists utilize a number of different agents alone or in combination (particularly in patients with a high risk for PONV) with different mechanism of actions to try to manage

Table of Contents

PONV. If approved, I.V. CR845/difelikefalin would likely be competing within the overall PONV market, although we expect that it would primarily be utilized as an add-on therapy in patients with a higher risk of PONV. Although most of the PONV products are generically available, there is still a significant segment of high-risk patients where their PONV is not adequately managed, which can increase the hospital length of stay and add significant cost to managing a post-operative patient.

Manufacturing

We do not have any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture if our product candidates receive marketing approval. At this time, none of our contract manufacturing agreements limit where, or with whom we can contract for commercial manufacture or distribution. It is our intention that by the time of any regulatory approvals for commercialization, we will have negotiated long-term commitments with at least one primary supplier for each manufacturing and distribution function. At this time, we have entered into a non-exclusive commercial manufacturing agreement with Patheon for KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection.

All of our product candidates are either small peptides or organic small molecules and are manufactured in reliable and reproducible synthetic processes from readily available starting materials. The chemistry is amenable to scale up and does not require any special equipment or technology in the manufacturing process. We expect to continue to develop product candidates that can be produced cost-effectively at contract manufacturing facilities.

Government Regulation and Product Approval

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, import and export of pharmaceutical products such as those we are developing. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries, along with subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

FDA Regulation

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and its implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable United States requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as the FDA’s refusal to approve pending NDAs, withdrawal of an approval, imposition of a clinical hold, issuance of warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties.

The process required by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

Table of Contents

● submission to the FDA of an NDA;

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

● FDA review and approval of the NDA; and

Preclinical Studies. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of drug substance chemistry, toxicity and drug product formulation, as well as animal studies to assess potential safety and efficacy. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data and any available clinical data or literature, among other things, to the FDA as part of an IND. Manufacture of drug substance, drug product and the labeling and distribution of clinical supplies must all comply with cGMP standards. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on a clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence.

Clinical Trials. Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with cGCP requirements, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent in writing for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical trial and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. In addition, an IRB at each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that institution, and the IRB must continue to oversee the clinical trial while it is being conducted. Information about certain clinical trials must be submitted within specific timeframes to the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, for public dissemination on their ClinicalTrials.gov website.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap or be combined. In Phase 1, the drug is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition and tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, excretion and, if possible, to gain an initial indication of its effectiveness. In Phase 2, the drug typically is administered to a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific targeted diseases and to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage. In Phase 3, the drug is administered to an expanded patient population, generally at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, in well-controlled clinical trials to generate enough data to statistically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the product for approval, to establish the overall risk-benefit profile of the product and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the product.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and more frequently if serious adverse events occur. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, or at all. Furthermore, the FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at

Table of Contents

any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Marketing Approval. Assuming successful completion of the required clinical testing, the results of the preclinical and clinical studies, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacture, controls and proposed labeling, among other things, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. In most cases, the submission of an NDA is subject to a substantial application user fee. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, guidelines that are currently in effect, the FDA has agreed to certain performance goals regarding the timing of its review of an application.

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, an NDA or supplement to an NDA must contain data that are adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations, and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of the applicant, grant deferrals for submission of some or all pediatric data until after approval of the product for use in adults, or full or partial waivers from the pediatric data requirements.

The FDA also may require submission of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to mitigate any identified or suspected serious risks and ensure safe use of the drug. The REMS plan could include medication guides, physician communication plans, assessment plans, and elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries or other risk minimization tools.

The FDA conducts a preliminary review of all NDAs within the first 60 days after submission, before accepting them for filing, to determine whether they are sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the application must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the drug is safe and effective and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, quality and purity.

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

Before approving an NDA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured, referred to as a Pre-Approval Inspection. 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 an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with cGCP.

The testing and approval process for an NDA requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and each may take several years to complete. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical testing are not always conclusive and may be susceptible to varying interpretations, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. The FDA may not grant approval of an NDA on a timely basis, or at all.

After evaluating the NDA and all related information, including the advisory committee recommendation, if any, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA may issue an approval letter, or, in some cases, a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA and may require additional clinical or

Table of Contents

preclinical testing in order for FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA may issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. For some products, an additional step of DEA review and scheduling is required.

Even if the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, including a boxed warning, require that post-approval studies, including Phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing studies or surveillance programs. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes, and additional labeling claims, are subject to further testing requirements and FDA review and approval.

Breakthrough Therapy Designation. The FDA may expedite the review of a product candidate designated as a breakthrough therapy, which is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. A sponsor may request the FDA to designate a drug as a breakthrough therapy at the time of, or any time after, the submission of an IND application for the drug. If the FDA designates a drug as a breakthrough therapy, it must take actions appropriate to expedite the development and review of the application, which may include holding meetings with the sponsor and the review team throughout the development of the drug; providing timely advice to, and interactive communication with, the sponsor regarding the development of the drug to ensure that the development program to gather the nonclinical and clinical data necessary for approval is as efficient as practicable; involving senior managers and experienced review staff, as appropriate, in a collaborative, cross-disciplinary review; assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the FDA review team to facilitate an efficient review of the development program and to serve as a scientific liaison between the review team and the sponsor; and taking steps to ensure that the design of the clinical trials is as efficient as practicable, when scientifically appropriate, such as by minimizing the number of patients exposed to a potentially less efficacious treatment. The FDA may rescind a Breakthrough Therapy designation in the future if further clinical development later shows that the criteria for designation are no longer met. Breakthrough Therapy designation does not change the standards for approval, but may expedite the development or review process.

Post-Approval Requirements. Drugs manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, and compliance with any post-approval requirements imposed as a condition of approval, such as Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to assess safety and effectiveness after commercialization. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual program user fee requirements for any marketed products, as well as new application fees for supplemental applications with clinical data. In addition, drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and state agencies and are subject to periodic announced and unannounced inspections by the FDA and these state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and often require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon the sponsor and any third-party manufacturers that the sponsor may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market.

Table of Contents

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 mandatory revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

● fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;

● injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Although physicians, in the practice of medicine, may prescribe approved drugs for unapproved indications, pharmaceutical companies are required to promote their drug products only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability. However, physicians may, in their independent medical judgment, prescribe legally available products for off-label uses. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments but the FDA does restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

In addition, the distribution of prescription pharmaceutical products is subject to the Prescription Drug Marketing Act, or PDMA, which regulates the distribution of drugs and drug samples at the federal level, and sets minimum standards for the registration and regulation of drug distributors by the states. Both the PDMA and state laws limit the distribution of prescription pharmaceutical product samples and impose requirements to ensure accountability in distribution.

DEA Regulation

I.V. CR845/difelikefalin, Oral CR845/difelikefalin or any of our future product candidates, if approved, may be regulated as a “controlled substance” as defined in the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, or CSA, which establishes registration, security, recordkeeping, reporting, storage, distribution and other requirements administered by the DEA. The DEA is concerned with the control of handlers of controlled substances, and with the equipment and raw materials used in their manufacture and packaging, in order to prevent loss and diversion into illicit channels of commerce.

The DEA regulates controlled substances as Schedule I, II, III, IV or V substances. Schedule I substances by definition have no established medicinal use and may not be marketed or sold in the United States. A pharmaceutical product may be listed as Schedule II, III, IV or V, with Schedule II substances considered to present the highest risk of abuse and Schedule V substances the lowest relative risk of abuse among such substances. The manufacture, shipment, storage, sale and use of Schedule II substances are subject to a high degree of regulation.

Annual registration is required for any facility that manufactures, distributes, dispenses, imports or exports any controlled substance. The registration is specific to the particular location, activity and controlled substance schedule. For example, separate registrations are needed for import and manufacturing, and each registration will specify which schedules of controlled substances are authorized.

Table of Contents

The DEA typically inspects a facility to review its security measures prior to issuing a registration. Security requirements vary by controlled substance schedule, with the most stringent requirements applying to Schedule I and Schedule II substances. Required security measures include background checks on employees and physical control of inventory through measures such as cages, surveillance cameras and inventory reconciliations. Records must be maintained for the handling of all controlled substances, and periodic reports made to the DEA, for example distribution reports for Schedule I and II controlled substances, Schedule III substances that are narcotics, and other designated substances. Reports must also be made for thefts or losses of any controlled substance, and to obtain authorization to destroy any controlled substance. In addition, special authorization and notification requirements apply to imports and exports.

In addition, a DEA quota system controls and limits the availability and production of controlled substances in Schedule I or II. Distributions of any Schedule I or II controlled substance must also be accompanied by special order forms, with copies provided to the DEA. The DEA may adjust aggregate production quotas and individual production and procurement quotas from time to time during the year, although the DEA has substantial discretion in whether or not to make such adjustments. Our quota of an active ingredient may not be sufficient to meet commercial demand or complete clinical trials. Any delay or refusal by the DEA in establishing our quota for controlled substances could delay or stop our clinical trials or product launches.

To meet its responsibilities, the DEA conducts periodic inspections of registered establishments that handle controlled substances. Individual states also regulate controlled substances, and we and our collaborators will be subject to state regulation with respect to the distribution of these products.

Fraud and Abuse, Data Privacy and Security and Transparency Laws and Regulations

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, federal and state health care regulatory laws restrict business practices in the biopharmaceutical industry. These laws include, among other things, anti-kickback and false claims laws and regulations, physician payment transparency laws and regulations, as well as data privacy and security laws and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease, or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases, or recommendations 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 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.

Additionally, the intent standard under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “Health Care Reform Law”), to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the Health Care Reform Law provided that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act.

Federal false claims laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act prohibit, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, 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. The federal civil False Claims Act has been used to assert liability on the

Table of Contents

basis of kickbacks and other improper referrals, improperly reported government pricing metrics such as Best Price or Average Manufacturer Price, improper use of Medicare provider or supplier numbers when detailing a provider of services, improper promotion of off-label uses not expressly approved by FDA in a drug’s label, and allegations as to misrepresentations with respect to the services rendered. Additionally, the civil monetary penalties statute, which, among other things, imposes fines against any person or entity who is determined to have presented, or caused to be presented, claims to a federal healthcare program that the person knows, or should know, is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent. The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payers and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters. Also, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer.

In addition, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, including the Final HIPAA Omnibus Rule published on January 25, 2013, imposes specified requirements on certain types of individuals and entities subject to the law, known as covered entities, such as certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, as well as their business associates that process individually identifiable health information on their behalf, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information as well as their covered subcontractors. Among other things, HITECH makes security standards and certain privacy standards directly applicable to the business associates of covered entities that perform services for them that involve the creation, use, maintenance or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created four 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 attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state laws may govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Additionally, federal transparency laws, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act created under Section 6002 of the Health Care Reform Law and its implementing regulations, require that manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians (defined to include doctors of medicine, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), generally, with some exceptions, and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals. Additionally, applicable manufacturers and applicable group purchasing organizations are required to report annually to CMS certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians (as defined above) and their immediate family members. Beginning in 2022, applicable manufacturers also will be required to report such information regarding payments and transfers of value provided during the previous year to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified nurse anesthetists and certified nurse-midwives.

There are also an increasing number of analogous state laws that require manufacturers to file reports with states on pricing and marketing information, such as tracking and reporting of gifts, compensations, other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and healthcare entities. Many of these laws contain ambiguities as to what is required to comply with such laws. For example, several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical companies to, among other things, establish and implement commercial compliance programs, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities and/or register their sales representatives. Certain state laws also regulate manufacturers’ use of prescriber-identifiable data. These laws may affect our future sales, marketing and other promotional activities by imposing administrative and compliance

Table of Contents

burdens. In addition, given the lack of clarity with respect to these laws and their implementation, our reporting actions once we commercialize could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent state and federal authorities.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the health regulatory laws described above or any other laws that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including significant criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. To the extent that any of our products are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws, and implementation of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or transfers of value to healthcare professionals.

Coverage and Reimbursement Generally

The commercial success of our product candidates and our ability to commercialize any approved product candidates successfully will depend in part on the extent to which governmental payer programs at the federal and state levels, including Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payers provide coverage for and establish adequate reimbursement levels for our product candidates. In the United States, private health insurers and other third-party payers often provide reimbursement for products and services based on the level at which the government provides reimbursement through the Medicare or Medicaid programs for such products and services.

Patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers performing the prescribed services generally rely on third-party payers to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. In addition, many U.S. hospitals receive a fixed reimbursement amount per procedure for certain surgeries and other treatment therapies they perform, or a predetermined rate for all hospital inpatient care provided as payment in full. Because this amount may not be based on the actual expenses the hospital incurs, hospitals may choose to use therapies which are less expensive when compared to our product candidates. Sales of our product candidates will therefore depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our products will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by government health administration authorities, such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payers. Third-party payers are increasingly imposing additional requirements and restrictions on coverage and limiting reimbursement levels for medical products, including pharmaceuticals. For example, federal and state governments reimburse covered prescription drugs at varying rates generally below average wholesale price. These restrictions and limitations influence the purchase of healthcare services and products. Third-party payers may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drug products for a particular indication. Additionally, third-party payers are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. Therefore, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain the FDA approvals. Our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. Moreover, a payer’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved, and one payer’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payers will also provide coverage. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in drug development. Legislative proposals to reform healthcare or reduce costs under government insurance programs may result in lower reimbursement for our products and product candidates or exclusion of our products and product candidates from coverage. The cost containment measures that healthcare payers and providers are instituting and any healthcare reform could significantly reduce our revenues from the sale of any approved product candidates.

Healthcare Regulatory Developments

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, the legislative landscape with respect to healthcare continues to evolve. There have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our

Table of Contents

ability to sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payers in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives.

For example, the Health Care Reform Law was passed in March 2010 and includes provisions that have substantially changed healthcare financing by both governmental and private insurers. Among other provisions that could have an impact on our business, the Health Care Reform Law revised the methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers to the state and federal government for covered outpatient drugs under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by most manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extended the Medicaid Drug Rebate program to utilization of prescriptions of individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, subjected manufacturers to new annual fees and taxes for certain branded prescription drugs, and provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research. Additionally, the Health Care Reform Law implemented a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program in which manufacturers must now agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for the outpatient drugs being covered under Medicare Part D. The Health Care Reform Law’s future impact on our business is unclear.

There have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Health Care Reform Law. For example, President Trump has signed several Executive Orders and other directives designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the Health Care Reform Law or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the Health Care Reform Law. Concurrently, Congress considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of the Health Care Reform Law. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, several bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the Health Care Reform Law have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or TCJA, includes a provision that repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Health Care Reform Law on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate”. In addition, the 2020 federal spending package permanently eliminates, effective January 1, 2020, the Health Care Reform Law’s mandated “Cadillac” tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax, and effective January 1, 2021, also eliminated the health insurer tax. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the Health Care Reform Law is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the TCJA. Additionally, on December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the District Court ruling that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the Health Care Reform Law are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing this case, although it is unclear when a decision will be made. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has yet ruled on the constitutionality of the Health Care Reform Law, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through May 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the Health Care Reform Law marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the Health Care Reform Law. It is also unclear how the Supreme Court ruling, other such litigation and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the Health Care Reform Law and our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Health Care Reform Law was enacted. In August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, as amended, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend proposals in spending reductions to Congress. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction did not achieve its targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reductions to several government programs. These reductions include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year starting in 2013 and, following passage of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, and subsequent legislative amendments, including the BBA, will remain in effect until 2030, except for a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, President

Table of Contents

Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

In the United States, the European Union, or EU, and other potentially significant markets for our product candidates, government authorities and third-party payers are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate the price of medical products and services, particularly for new and innovative products and therapies, which often has resulted in average selling prices lower than they would otherwise be. Further, the increased emphasis on managed healthcare in the United States and on country and regional pricing and reimbursement controls in the EU will put additional pressure on product pricing, reimbursement and utilization, which may adversely affect our future product sales and results of operations. For example, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. At the federal level, the Trump administration used several means to propose or implement drug pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. For example, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the Trump administration announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that seek to implement several of the administration’s proposals. As a result, the FDA released a final rule on September 24, 2020, effective November 30, 2020, providing guidance for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The implementation of the rule has been delayed by the Biden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, the implementation of which have also been delayed pending review by the Biden administration until March 22, 2021. On November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. On December 28, 2020, the United States District Court in Northern California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against implementation of the interim final rule. It is unclear whether the Biden administration will work to reverse these measures or pursue similar policy initiatives. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. These pressures can arise from rules and practices of managed care groups, judicial decisions and laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and healthcare reform, pharmaceutical coverage and reimbursement policies and pricing in general.

These and other healthcare reform initiatives may result in additional reductions in Medicare payments and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial operations. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, particularly in light of the new incoming Presidential administration, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could further limit the prices we are able to charge, or the amounts of reimbursement available, for our product candidates once they are approved. Further, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

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 regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of our products. For example, in the EU, we must obtain authorization of a clinical trial application, or CTA, in each member state in which we intend to conduct a clinical trial. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we would need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and can involve additional product

Table of Contents

testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries might differ from and be longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may negatively impact the regulatory process in others.

Employees and Human Capital

As of February 22, 2021, we had 80 employees, all of whom are located in the United States. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing, and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors, and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.

Website Access to Reports

Our website is www.caratherapeutics.com. We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and file or furnish reports, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to reports filed pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. We make copies of these reports and other information available free of charge through our website (under the heading “SEC Filings”) as soon as reasonably practicable after we file or furnish them with the SEC. The SEC maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov. The information contained on the websites referenced in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is not incorporated by reference into this filing, and the website addresses are provided only as inactive textual references.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

In addition to other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the following risks should be considered in evaluating our business and future prospects and an investment in our common stock. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. If any of the following risks and uncertainties develops into actual events, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected. In that case, the price of our common stock could decline and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We have incurred significant losses from our inception, and although we generated net income in 2020, we anticipate that we may incur losses in the foreseeable future, and may never maintain profitability.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company. For the last several years, we have focused our efforts primarily on developing I.V. and Oral CR845/difelikefalin with the goal of achieving regulatory approval. Since inception, we have incurred significant operating and net losses. We incurred net losses of $106.4 million and $74.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $392.3 million. Although we generated net income for the year ended December 31, 2020 as a result of a commercial license transaction, we expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating and net losses in the foreseeable future, as we continue to develop and seek marketing approval for I.V. and Oral CR845/difelikefalin. Our financial results may fluctuate significantly from year to year, depending on the timing of our clinical trials, the receipt of additional milestone payments, if any, under our agreements with Vifor, VFMCRP, Maruishi and CKDP, the receipt of payments under any future agreements we may enter into, and our expenditures on other R&D activities as well as any payments owed under the License Agreement with Enteris and any future similar agreements.

Table of Contents

In addition, we expect to incur significant sales, marketing and manufacturing expenses related to the commercialization of I.V. and Oral CR845/difelikefalin, if they are approved by the FDA. As a result, we expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future as we:

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

● hire additional clinical, quality control and scientific personnel; and

To become and remain profitable from product sales, we must succeed in developing and eventually commercializing one or more products that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including successful registration of KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin) injection and Oral KORSUVA (CR845/difelikefalin), discovering additional product candidates and completing preclinical testing and clinical trials for those product candidates, potentially entering into collaboration and license agreements, obtaining regulatory approval for product candidates and manufacturing, marketing and selling any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never achieve profitability.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. If we are required by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, to perform studies in addition to those currently expected, or if there are any delays in completing our clinical trials or the development of any of our product candidates, our expenses could increase.

Even if we do achieve profitability from product sales, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would depress the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our R&D efforts, diversify our product offerings or even continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

Our operating history makes it difficult to evaluate our business and prospects.

TVRD US Equity

TVRD · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item 1. Business.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

TVRD US Equity☆

TVRD · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item 1. Business.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

TVRD US Equity