ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as general economic and business risks and the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The occurrence of any of the events or circumstances described below or other adverse events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline. Additional risks or uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also harm our business.

Risks Factors Summary

Our business is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those risks discussed below. These risks include, among others, the following:

• Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Needs

• Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

• Risks Related to the Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

• Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties

• Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

• Risks Related to Legal and Regulatory Compliance Matters

• Risks Related to Employee Matters and Managing Our Growth

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Needs

We have incurred significant losses since our inception. We expect to incur losses over the next several years and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We are a clinical-stage dermatology therapeutics company with limited operating history. Since inception, we have incurred significant net losses. We incurred net losses of $42.7 million and $28.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $103.9 million. Since inception, we have financed our operations with $123.2 million in gross proceeds raised in our initial public offering and private placements of convertible debt and convertible preferred stock. We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts to the development of our novel topical solution of cantharidin and our lead product candidate, VP-102, for the treatment of molluscum, including preclinical studies and clinical trials. We have completed two pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials and submitted an NDA for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum. In addition to developing VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, we are also developing VP-102 as a treatment for common warts and external genital warts. We also intend to develop our second cantharidin-based product candidate, VP-103, for the treatment of plantar warts and our third product candidate, LTX-315, for the treatment of dermatological oncology indications.

Therefore, we expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we:

• seek to discover and develop additional product candidates;

• maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio;

• hire additional clinical, manufacturing and scientific personnel;

To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing and eventually commercializing product candidates that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical testing and clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval, and manufacturing, marketing and selling any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval, as well as discovering and developing additional product candidates. We are only in the preliminary stages of most of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenue that is significant enough to achieve profitability.

In cases where we are successful in obtaining regulatory approval to market one or more of our product candidates, our revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval, the accepted price for the product, the ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement, and whether we own the commercial rights for that territory. If the number of our addressable patients is not as significant as we estimate, the indication approved by regulatory authorities is narrower than we expect, or the treatment population is narrowed by competition, physician choice or treatment guidelines, we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, even if approved.

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

Even if we achieve profitability, 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 development efforts, obtain product approvals, diversify our offerings or continue our operations.

We may need substantial additional funding to meet our financial obligations and to pursue our business objectives. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to curtail our planned operations and the pursuit of our growth strategy.

Identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials is a time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years as we seek marketing approval for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, pursue clinical trials and marketing approval for VP-102 for the treatment of common warts, external genital warts and other indications, pursue clinical trials and marketing approval for VP-103 for the treatment of plantar warts, LTX-315 for the treatment of dermatological oncology indications, and advance any of our other product candidates we may develop or otherwise acquire. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our revenue, if any, will be derived from sales of products that are not

currently commercially available. If we obtain marketing approval for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum or common warts or any other product candidates that we develop, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, distribution and manufacturing.

As of December 31, 2020, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $65.5 million. On March 10, 2020, we entered into (i) a mezzanine loan and security agreement, or the Mezzanine Loan Agreement, with Silicon Valley Bank, as administrative agent and collateral agent, or the Agent, and Silicon Valley Bank and West River Innovation Lending Fund VIII, L.P., as lenders, or the Mezzanine Lenders, pursuant to which the Mezzanine Lenders have agreed to lend the Company up to $50.0 million in a series of term loans, and (ii) a loan and security agreement, or the Senior Loan Agreement, and together with the Mezzanine Loan Agreement, the Loan Agreements, with Silicon Valley Bank, as lender, or the Senior Lender, and together with the Mezzanine Lenders, the Lenders, pursuant to which the Senior Lender has agreed to provide the Company a revolving line of credit of up to $5.0 million. Upon entering into the Loan Agreements, the Company borrowed $35.0 million in term loans from the Mezzanine Lenders. We entered into amendments to the Loan Agreements in October 2020, under which we borrowed an additional $5.0 million in term loans on March 1, 2021.

We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities as of December 31, 2020 combined with the $11.5 million up-front payment we are entitled to receive pursuant to the Torii Agreement, will be sufficient to support our planned operations at least through the first quarter of 2022. This estimate is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we expect. Changes may occur beyond our control that would cause us to consume our available capital before that time, including changes in and progress of our development activities, acquisitions of additional product candidates, and changes in regulation. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

• the costs, timing and outcome of regulatory review of our product candidates;

We may require additional capital to commercialize VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, common warts and/or external genital warts, and/or VP-103 for the treatment of plantar warts and/or LTX-315 for the treatment of dermatological oncology indications. If we receive regulatory approval for VP-102, VP-103 or LTX-315 for these indications, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, sales, marketing and distribution, depending on where we choose to commercialize. Additional funds may not be available on a timely basis, on favorable terms, or at all, and such funds, if raised, may not be sufficient to enable us to continue to implement our long-term business strategy. If we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital, we could be forced to curtail our planned operations and the pursuit of our growth strategy.

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

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenue, we may finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings and license and collaboration agreements. We do not currently have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. For instance, under the Loan Agreements as described below, we are restricted from paying dividends or making other distributions or payments on our capital stock, subject to limited exceptions.

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

We have a limited operating history and no history of commercializing products, which may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

We commenced operations in 2013, and our operations to date have been largely focused on raising capital and developing our novel topical solution of cantharidin and our lead product candidate, VP-102, for the treatment of molluscum and common warts, including undertaking preclinical studies and conducting clinical trials. VP-102 is our only product candidate for which we have conducted clinical trials. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a product on a commercial scale, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing products.

We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known or unknown factors in achieving our business objectives. We will need to transition at some point from a company with a development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service our indebtedness.

We have entered into a Mezzanine Loan Agreement and a Senior Loan Agreement with our Lenders, pursuant to which we have borrowed an aggregate of $40.0 million. Our obligations under the Senior Loan Agreement and the Mezzanine Loan Agreement are secured by, respectively, a first priority perfected security interest and second priority perfected security interest in substantially all of our current and future assets, other than our intellectual property (except rights to payment from the sale, licensing or disposition of such intellectual property). We have also agreed not to encumber our intellectual property assets, except as permitted by the Loan Agreements.

We are subject to a number of affirmative and restrictive covenants pursuant to the Loan Agreements, including covenants regarding maintaining minimum liquidity requirements, achieving minimum product revenues, delivery of financial statements, maintenance of inventory, payment of taxes, maintenance of insurance, protection of intellectual property rights, dispositions of property, business combinations or acquisitions, incurrence of additional indebtedness or liens, investments and transactions with affiliates, among other customary covenants. Our obligations under the Loan Agreements are subject to acceleration upon the occurrence of specified events of default, including our failure to satisfy our payment obligations under the Loan Agreements, the breach of certain of our other covenants under the Loan Agreements, or the occurrence of a material adverse change, cross defaults to other indebtedness or material agreements, judgment defaults and defaults related to failure to maintain governmental approvals failure of which to maintain could result in a material adverse effect. We are currently in

compliance with these covenants. We may also enter into other debt agreements in the future which may contain similar or more restrictive terms.

Our ability to make scheduled monthly payments or to refinance our debt obligations depends on numerous factors, including the amount of our cash reserves and our actual and projected financial and operating performance. These amounts and our performance are subject to certain financial and business factors, as well as prevailing economic and competitive conditions, some of which may be beyond our control. We cannot assure you that we will maintain a level of cash reserves or cash flows from operating activities sufficient to permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on our existing or future indebtedness. If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets or operations, seek additional capital or restructure or refinance our indebtedness. We cannot assure you that we would be able to take any of these actions, or that these actions would permit us to meet our scheduled debt service obligations. Failure to comply with the conditions of the Loan Agreements could result in an event of default, which could result in an acceleration of amounts due under the Loan Agreements. We may not have sufficient funds or may be unable to arrange for additional financing to repay our indebtedness or to make any accelerated payments, and the Lenders could seek to enforce security interests in the collateral securing such indebtedness, which would harm our business.

Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

Our lead product candidate, VP-102, is being developed for the treatment of molluscum, common warts and external genital warts, for which we are currently conducting clinical trials. If we are unable to successfully develop, receive regulatory approval for and commercialize VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, common warts, external genital warts or any other indications, or successfully develop any other product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be harmed.

We currently have no products that are approved for commercial sale. We have only one product candidate, VP-102 for which we have conducted clinical trials. We have completed two pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials and submitted a New Drug Application, or (NDA) for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum in the U.S. Our NDA is presently under review by FDA and there can be no assurance that we will receive approval. In addition to developing VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, we are also developing VP-102 as a treatment for common warts and external genital warts. In addition, we plan to develop our second cantharidin-based product candidate, VP-103, for the treatment of plantar warts. We also plan to develop our third product candidate, LTX-315, for the treatment of dermatological oncology indications. We have not completed the development and regulatory approval process of any product candidates and we may never be able to develop marketable products. We have invested substantially all of our efforts and financial resources in the development of our cantharidin formula and VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, common warts and genital warts. Our ability to generate revenue from our product candidates, will depend heavily on their successful development, regulatory approval and eventual commercialization of these product candidates. The success of VP-102, VP-103, LTX-315 or any other product candidates that we develop or otherwise may acquire will depend on several factors, including: timely and successful completion of preclinical studies and our clinical trials;

• receipt of timely marketing approvals from applicable regulatory authorities;

• launching commercial sales of products, if approved;

• competing effectively with other procedures; and

Whether regulatory approval will be granted is unpredictable and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. Our product candidates’ success in clinical trials is not guaranteed, and even if clinical trials are successful, it will not guarantee regulatory approval. Following submission of an NDA, it may not be accepted for substantive review, or even if it is accepted for substantive review, the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require that we conduct additional studies or clinical trials, provide additional data, take additional manufacturing steps, or require other conditions before they will reconsider or approve our application. If the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities require additional studies, clinical trials or data, we would incur increased costs and delays in the marketing approval process, which may require us to expend more resources than we have available. In addition, the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not consider sufficient any additional required studies, clinical trials, data or information that we perform and complete or generate, or we may decide to abandon the program.

It is possible that VP-102, VP-103, LTX-315 or any of our other product candidates we may develop or otherwise acquire will never obtain regulatory approval, even if we expend substantial time and resources seeking such approval. If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would harm our business.

Clinical product development involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

The risk of failure for product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will prove effective or safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical development and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is inherently uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing or at any time during the trial process. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products.

We cannot assure you that any clinical trial that we have conducted, are currently conducting, or may conduct in the future, will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates.

We may experience delays in ongoing clinical trials for our product candidates, and we do not know whether future clinical trials, if any, will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll an adequate number of patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. For example, following the initiation of our Phase 2 trial of VP-102 for the treatment of common warts, we discovered the need to amend the treatment regimen of the protocol in order to introduce greater flexibility of the treatment interval. We amended the trial protocol in order to add a second cohort to the trial with the desired treatment frequency. We may experience numerous unforeseen events during or as a

result of clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the institutional review boards of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the data safety monitoring board for such trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not favorable or if there are safety concerns, we may:

• be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates;

• not obtain marketing approval at all;

• be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; or

• have the product removed from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

Our product development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals. We do not know whether any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant preclinical study or clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize, or receive approval for, our product candidates. For example, if a competitor obtained FDA approval for a product containing cantharidin before we are able to obtain approval for our product, this could result in the approval of our product being delayed until the expiration of any NCE exclusivity or other regulatory exclusivity received by such competitor.

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

Successful and timely completion of clinical trials will require that we enroll a sufficient number of patients. Patient enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the patient population. Trials may be subject to delays as a result of patient enrollment taking longer than anticipated or patient withdrawal. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States. We cannot predict how successful we will be at enrolling subjects in future clinical trials. Subject enrollment is affected by other factors including:

• the eligibility criteria for the trial in question;

• the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate in the trial;

• the willingness of patients to be enrolled in our clinical trials;

• the efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;

• the patient referral practices of physicians;

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

Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for clinical trials would result in significant delays and could require us or them to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. For example, parents may be reluctant to enroll their children in our clinical trials that have a relatively high risk of their child being assigned to placebo when in the alternative, they could decline participation, and receive compounded cantharidin outside of the clinical trial, if available, or pursue other alternative therapies. Enrollment delays in these clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, which would cause the value of our company to decline and limit our ability to obtain additional financing. Furthermore, we rely on and expect to continue to rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and we will have limited influence over their performance.

Furthermore, even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining patients in our clinical trials.

Success in preclinical studies or earlier clinical trials may not be indicative of results in future clinical trials.

Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will generate the same results or otherwise provide adequate data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of a product candidate. Preclinical tests and Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials are primarily designed to test safety, to study pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and to understand the side effects of product candidates at various doses and schedules. Success in preclinical or animal studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later large-scale

efficacy trials will be successful, nor does it predict final results. Our product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite positive results in preclinical studies or having successfully advanced through initial clinical trials.

In addition, the design of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support approval of a product and flaws in the design of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced. As an organization, we have limited experience designing clinical trials and may be unable to design and execute a clinical trial to support regulatory approval. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in preclinical testing and earlier-stage clinical trials. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. In addition, we may experience regulatory delays or rejections as a result of many factors, including changes in regulatory policy during the period of our product candidate development. Any such delays could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Interim “top-line” and preliminary results from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary results from our clinical trials. Interim results from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or top-line results also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects and may cause the trading price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly.

Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates, or serious adverse or unacceptable side effects may be identified during the development of our product candidates, which could prevent or delay regulatory approval and commercialization, increase our costs or necessitate the abandonment or limitation of the development of some of our product candidates.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for use in each target indication, and failures can occur at any stage of testing. Clinical trials often fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication.

If our product candidates are associated with side effects in clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may need to abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses in which the side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. The FDA or an institutional review board may also require that we suspend, discontinue, or limit our clinical trials based on safety information, or that we conduct additional animal or human studies regarding the safety and efficacy of our product candidates which we have not planned or anticipated. Such findings could further result in regulatory authorities failing to provide marketing authorization for our product candidates or limiting the scope of the approved indication, if approved. Many product candidates that initially showed promise in early stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the product candidate.

Additionally, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

• regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product;

• regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the labels;

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

• our reputation and physician or patient acceptance of our products may suffer.

There can be no assurance that we will resolve any issues related to any product-related adverse events to the satisfaction of the FDA or any regulatory agency in a timely manner or at all. Moreover, any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

While we have negotiated a SPA agreement with the FDA relating to one of our Phase 3 clinical trials for VP-102, this agreement does not guarantee approval of VP-102 or any other particular outcome with respect to regulatory review of the study or the product candidate.

We have completed two Phase 3 clinical trials of VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, one of which was conducted under a SPA with the FDA. The FDA’s SPA process is designed to facilitate the FDA’s review and approval of drugs by allowing the FDA to evaluate the proposed design and size of Phase 3 clinical trials that are intended to form the primary basis for determining a drug product’s efficacy. Upon specific request by a clinical trial sponsor, the FDA will evaluate the protocol and respond to a sponsor’s questions regarding, among other things, primary efficacy endpoints, trial conduct and data analysis, within 45 days of receipt of the request. The FDA ultimately assesses whether the protocol design and planned analysis of the trial are acceptable to support regulatory submission for the product candidate with respect to the indication studied. All agreements and disagreements between the FDA and the sponsor regarding a SPA must be clearly documented in a SPA letter or the minutes of a meeting between the sponsor and the FDA.

However, a SPA agreement does not guarantee approval of a product candidate, and even if the FDA agrees to the design, execution, and analysis proposed in protocols reviewed under the SPA process, the FDA may revoke or alter its agreement in certain circumstances. In particular, a SPA agreement is not binding on the FDA if public health concerns emerge that were unrecognized at the time of the SPA agreement, other new scientific concerns regarding product safety or efficacy arise, the sponsor fails to comply with the agreed upon trial protocols, or the relevant data, assumptions or information provided by the sponsor in a request for the SPA change or are found to be false or omit relevant facts. After a SPA agreement is finalized, the SPA agreement may be modified, and such modification will be deemed binding on the FDA review division, except under the circumstances described above, if the FDA and the sponsor agree in writing to modify the protocol and such modification is intended to improve the study. The FDA retains significant latitude and discretion in interpreting the terms of the SPA agreement and the data and results from any study that is the subject of the SPA agreement.

We cannot assure you that our Phase 3 clinical trial conducted under the SPA will be deemed acceptable to the FDA under our SPA agreement or will result in any FDA approval for VP-102. If the FDA revokes or alters its agreement under the SPA, believes that the manner in which the study was conducted was not consistent with the terms of our SPA, or interprets the data collected from the clinical trial differently than we do, the FDA may not deem the data sufficient to support an application for marketing approval, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

VP-102 is a drug-device combination involving a proprietary applicator, which may result in additional regulatory and other risks.

VP-102 is a drug-device combination product for administration of our cantharidin formulation through our proprietary applicator. We may experience delays in obtaining regulatory approval of VP-102 given the increased complexity of the review process when approval of a drug and a delivery device is sought under a single marketing application. VP-102 will be regulated as a drug-device combination product, which requires coordination within the FDA and similar foreign regulatory agencies for review of the product candidate’s device and drug components. We have filed a single marketing application for the approval of a drug-device combination product, with guidance by the FDA. Although the FDA and similar foreign regulatory agencies have systems in place for the review and approval of combination products such as ours, we may experience delays in the development, approval, and commercialization of our product candidate due to regulatory timing constraints and uncertainties in the product development and approval process, the inherent complexities of combination products, as well as coordination between two different centers within FDA responsible for review of the different components of the combination product.

Failure to successfully develop or supply the device, delays in or failure of the studies conducted by us, our collaborators, or third-party providers, or failure of our company, our collaborators, or third-party providers to obtain or maintain regulatory approval or clearance of the device component of VP-102 could result in increased development costs, delays in or failure to obtain regulatory approval, and associated delays in VP-102 reaching the market. Further, failure to successfully develop or supply the device, or to gain or maintain its approval, could adversely affect sales of VP-102.

Changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing or formulation may result in additional costs or delay.

As product candidates proceed through preclinical studies to late-stage clinical trials towards potential approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. Such changes may also require additional testing, FDA notification or FDA approval. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue.

We may not be successful in our efforts to increase our pipeline of product candidates, including by pursuing additional indications for our current product candidate or in-licensing or acquiring additional product candidates for other dermatological conditions.

A key element of our strategy is to build and expand our pipeline of product candidates, including by developing VP-102 for the treatment of common warts and external genital warts and potentially other dermatological conditions and VP-103 for the treatment of plantar warts. In addition, we intend to in-license or acquire additional product candidates for other dermatological conditions to build a fully integrated dermatology company. We may not be able to identify or develop product candidates that are safe, tolerable and effective. Even if we are successful in continuing to build our pipeline, the potential product candidates that we identify, in-license or acquire may not be suitable for clinical development, including as a result of being shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be products that will receive marketing approval and achieve market acceptance.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and management resources, we focus on development programs and product candidates that we identify for specific indications. As such, we are currently primarily focused on the development of VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum, common warts and external genital warts, as well as VP-103 for the treatment of plantar warts and LTX-315, for the treatment of dermatological oncology indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications for VP-102, VP-103, and LTX-315 that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable. If we are not able to obtain required regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval or other marketing authorizations by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition,

approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for VP-102 or any product candidate and it is possible that neither VP-102 nor any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval. Neither we nor any future collaborator is permitted to market VP-102 or any future drug product candidates in the United States until we receive regulatory approval of an NDA from the FDA. To date, we have not met or discussed with the European Medicines Agency or any other comparable foreign authority regarding regulatory approval for VP-102 or any other product candidate outside of the United States.

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize VP-102 and any other drug product candidate in the United States or abroad, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from nonclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the nonclinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. The FDA may also require us to conduct additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or after approval, or it may object to elements of our clinical development program.

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

We have invested a significant portion of our time and financial resources in the development of VP-102. Our business is dependent on our ability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development of, obtain regulatory approval for, and, if approved, successfully commercialize VP-102 and any future product candidates in a timely manner.

Even if we eventually complete clinical testing and receive approval of an NDA or foreign marketing application for VP-102 or any future product candidates, the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory agency may grant approval or other marketing authorization contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials, including post-market clinical trials. The FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory agency also may approve or authorize for marketing a product candidate for a more limited indication or patient population that we originally request, and the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory agency may not approve or authorize the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of a product candidate. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval or other marketing authorization would delay or prevent commercialization of that product candidate and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.

In addition, the FDA and other regulatory authorities may change their policies, issue additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay approval of our future products under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain approvals, increase the costs of compliance or restrict our ability to maintain any marketing authorizations we may have obtained.

Furthermore, even if we obtain regulatory approval for VP-102 and any future product candidates, we will still need to develop a commercial organization, establish a commercially viable pricing structure and obtain approval for adequate reimbursement from third-party and government payors. If we are unable to successfully commercialize VP-102 and any future product candidates, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

Risks Related to the Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

Even if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, it may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, it may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant revenue and we may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

• our ability to offer our products for sale at competitive prices;

• our ability to hire and retain a sales force in the United States;

• the strength of marketing and distribution support;

• the prevalence and severity of any side effects; and

• any restrictions on the use of our products together with other medications.

In the case of VP-102, the failure of healthcare professionals or patients to perceive the benefits of using VP-102 instead of compounded cantharidin or other alternative therapies, such as curettage or cryotherapy, would adversely affect the commercial success of VP-102, if approved.

If we are unable to establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for VP-102 or any other product candidate that may receive regulatory approval, we may not be successful in commercializing those product candidates if and when they are approved.

We do not have sales or marketing infrastructure. To achieve commercial success for VP-102 and any other product candidate for which we may obtain marketing approval, we will need to establish a sales and marketing organization. In the future, we expect to build a focused sales and marketing infrastructure to market or co-promote some of our product candidates in the United States, if and when they are approved. There are risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.

Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our products on our own include:

If we are unable to establish our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and are forced to enter into arrangements with, and rely on, third parties to perform these services, our revenue and our profitability, if any, are likely to be lower than if we had developed such capabilities ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell, market and distribute our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we do not establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates.

We face substantial competition, including from compounded cantharidin products that may compete with VP-102 and any other product candidates, which may result in a smaller than expected commercial opportunity and/or others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do.

The development and commercialization of new products is highly competitive. We face competition with respect to our current product candidates and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical and specialty pharmaceutical companies, compounding facilities, academic institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions.

We are aware of several other product candidates in earlier stages of development as potential treatments for the indications we intend to target. Veloce Biopharma, Leo Pharma, and Novan have initiated clinical trials with different programs in molluscum. There are a number of other companies developing products for common warts, including Aclaris Therapeutics, or Aclaris. Aclaris has conducted late-stage clinical trials and is pursuing strategic alternatives to further develop and obtain regulatory approval for its product candidate for the treatment of common warts. In addition, other drugs have been and may continue to be used off label as treatment for molluscum, common warts, external genital warts, and plantar warts, and there are other existing alternative therapies such as curettage or cryotherapy.

Currently some of the market demand for cantharidin may be satisfied by compounding pharmacies and registered outsourcing facilities regulated under Sections 503A and 503B of the FDCA. If we receive approval for VP-102, any compounding by licensed pharmacists or licensed physicians under Section 503A would not be legally permitted to include, regularly or in inordinate amounts, the compounding of any drug that is essentially a copy of VP-102. The FDA has announced that it intends to consider a compounded drug product to be essentially a copy of a commercially available drug under Section 503A if it has the same API, has the same, similar, or an easily substitutable dosage strength, and can be used by the same route of administration. However, a compounded product would not be considered essentially a copy of VP-102, and could be compounded under Section 503A, if there were a difference between the compounded product and VP-102 that was made for an individual patient, and which the prescribing practitioner determines produces a significant difference for that patient. Similarly, any compounding by outsourcing facilities under Section 503B would not be legally permitted to include the compounding of a drug that is essentially a copy of VP-102, if approved, where the compounded drug would be considered essentially a copy if it were identical or nearly identical to VP-102 (which the FDA has interpreted to mean that it has the same active ingredient(s), route of administration, dosage form, dosage strength and excipients as the approved drug), or if it contains the active ingredient in VP-102 (cantharidin), unless there is a change from the approved drug that produces a clinical difference for an individual patient as determined by the prescribing practitioner.

Compounding pharmacies and registered outsourcing facilities may therefore be permitted to compound cantharidin drug products, even if we receive approval for VP-102, if a prescribing practitioner determines that a compounded product prescribed for a specific patient features a change from VP-102 that produces a significant difference for the patient (under Section 503A), or if a prescribing practitioner determines that a compounded cantharidin product features a change from VP-102 that produces a clinical difference for the patient (under

Section 503B). Physicians may determine that such differences exist for some or all of their patients and may choose to prescribe compounded cantharidin products for such patients. Moreover, under Section 503B, outsourcing facilities are not limited to compounding in response to prescriptions for identified, individual patients, and could compound using bulk cantharidin provided cantharidin appears on a list established by the FDA of bulk drug substances for which there is a clinical need or satisfies certain other limited conditions. Although the FDA has not yet established a list of bulk drug substances for which there is a clinical need, the FDA has announced an interim policy pursuant to which bulk drug substances may be nominated for inclusion on such list and, provided certain conditions are met, outsourcing facilities may compound with such bulk drug substances pending evaluation of the substances for inclusion on the FDA’s list of bulk drug substances for which there is a clinical need. Cantharidin is currently listed among those nominated substances for which bulk drug substance may be used in compounding by outsourcing facilities pending FDA’s evaluation.

In March 2019, the FDA issued Guidance for Industry addressing the criteria by which the FDA intends to evaluate whether there exists a clinical need for compounding with a bulk drug substance, including, in the case of a bulk drug substance that is a component of an FDA-approved drug, an evaluation of whether there exists an attribute of the approved drug that makes it medically unsuitable to treat certain patients; whether the drug product proposed to be compounded is intended to address that attribute; and whether the drug product proposed to be compounded must be compounded from a bulk drug substance rather than from the finished, FDA-approved drug product. If the FDA implements these criteria as in the Guidance for Industry, and if VP-102 is approved, an outsourcing facility may be permitted to compound a cantharidin product using bulk cantharidin notwithstanding our approval provided it satisfies these and other criteria set forth in the FDA’s guidance.

In addition, the FDA may, in its enforcement discretion, not prioritize enforcement of the restrictions under Sections 503A and 503B on compounding drugs that are essentially copies of VP-102, if approved, in which case compounded drug product that is essentially a copy of VP-102 could be made available to physicians and their patients. In the event compounders are authorized to continue to compound cantharidin products following approval of VP-102, if approved, we could be subject to significant competition.

In addition, 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 VP-102 or any other product 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 our product, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market or, if a competitor obtained FDA approval for a product containing cantharidin before we are able to obtain approval for our product, could result in the approval of our product being delayed until the expiration of any NCE exclusivity or other regulatory exclusivity received by such competitor.

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

We intend to seek NCE exclusivity and/or pediatric exclusivity for VP-102 and future product candidates, and we may be unsuccessful.

As part of our business strategy, we intend to seek NCE exclusivity for VP-102 or future product candidates. In the United States, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may obtain five years of non-patent exclusivity upon NDA approval of an NCE which is a drug that contains an active moiety that has not been approved by the FDA in any other NDA. An “active moiety” is defined as the molecule or ion responsible for the drug substance’s physiological or pharmacologic action. During the five-year exclusivity period, the FDA cannot accept for filing any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug or any 505(b)(2) NDA for the same active moiety and that relies

on the FDA’s findings regarding that drug, except that FDA may accept an application for filing after four years if the follow-on applicant makes a paragraph IV certification. This exclusivity period may be extended by an additional six months if certain requirements are met to qualify the product for pediatric exclusivity, including the receipt of a written request from the FDA that we conduct certain pediatric studies, the submission of study reports from such studies to the FDA after receipt of the written request and satisfaction of the conditions specified in the written request. We believe that cantharidin constitutes an NCE, such that VP-102 should, if approved, be eligible for NCE exclusivity and that our planned clinical trials will qualify VP-102 for pediatric exclusivity if a written request from the FDA is received. However, there can be no guarantee that we will successfully obtain such exclusivity, and if any of our competitors obtains FDA approval of an NDA for a cantharidin drug product before we do, they, and not us, may be eligible for NCE exclusivity. If we do not obtain NCE exclusivity for VP-102, or if a competitor obtains NCE exclusivity for a cantharidin product before we receive approval of an NDA for VP-102, our ability to commence sales and generate revenue would be adversely affected.

Moreover, even if we obtain NCE exclusivity and/or pediatric exclusivity for VP-102, such exclusivity would not block the sale of compounded cantharidin products in those situations where compounding would be permitted under Sections 503A or 503B of the FDCA.

The success of VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum and common warts will depend significantly on coverage and adequate reimbursement or the willingness of patients to pay for these procedures.

We believe our success depends on continued coverage and adequate reimbursement for procedures using VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum and/or common warts or, in the absence of coverage and adequate reimbursement, on the extent to which patients will be willing to pay out of pocket for such procedures. Obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with drugs administered under the supervision of a physician. Separate reimbursement for the product itself or the treatment or procedure in which our product is used may not be available. Even if the procedure using our product is covered, third-party payors may package the cost of the drug into the procedure payment and not separately reimburse the physician for the costs associated with our product. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover or separately reimburse for our products could reduce physician utilization of our products once approved. Additionally, in the United States, there is no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement among third-party payors. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided is made on a payor-by-payor basis. One payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement.

Third-party payors determine which medical procedures they will cover and establish reimbursement levels. Even if a third-party payor covers a particular procedure, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate. Patients who are treated in-office for a medical condition generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with the procedure and may be unwilling to undergo such procedures for the treatment of molluscum and/or common warts in the absence of such coverage and adequate reimbursement. Physicians may be unlikely to offer procedures for such treatment if they are not covered by insurance and may be unlikely to purchase and use our product candidates, if approved, for molluscum and/or common warts unless coverage is provided, and reimbursement is adequate.

Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that a procedure is safe, effective and medically necessary; appropriate for the specific patient; cost-effective; supported by peer-reviewed medical journals; included in clinical practice guidelines; and neither cosmetic, experimental, nor investigational.

Further, from time to time, typically on an annual basis, payment rates are updated and revised by third-party payors. Such updates could impact the demand for our product candidates, to the extent that patients who are prescribed our product candidates, if approved, are not separately reimbursed for the cost of the product candidates. An example of payment updates is the Medicare program updates to physician payments, which is done on an annual basis. In the past, when the application of the formula resulted in lower payment, Congress has passed interim legislation to prevent the reductions. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, or MACRA, ended the use of the statutory formula and also referred to as the Sustainable Growth Rate, for certain

payment and established a quality payment incentive program, also referred to as the Quality Payment Program. This program provides clinicians with two ways to participate, including through the Advanced Alternative Payment Models, or APMs and the Merit-based Incentive Payment System, or MIPS. In November 2019, CMS issued a final rule finalizing the changes to the Quality Payment Program. At this time, it is unclear how the introduction of the Quality PaymentProgram will impact overall physician reimbursement under the Medicare program. Any resulting decrease in payment under the merit-based reimbursement system may adversely affect our revenue and results of operations. In addition, the Medicare physician fee schedule has been adapted by some private payors into their plan-specific physician payment schedule. We cannot predict how pending and future healthcare legislation will impact our business, and any changes in coverage and reimbursement that further restricts coverage of our product candidates or lowers reimbursement for procedures using our products could harm our business.

Foreign governments also have their own healthcare reimbursement systems, which vary significantly by country and region, and we cannot be sure that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be made available with respect to the treatments in which our products are used under any foreign reimbursement system.

There can be no assurance that VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum and/or common warts, if approved for sale in the United States or in other countries, will be considered medically reasonable and necessary, that they will be considered cost-effective by third-party payors, that coverage or an adequate level of reimbursement will be available, or that reimbursement policies and practices in the United States and in foreign countries where our products are sold will not adversely affect our ability to sell our product candidates profitably, if they are approved for sale.

The market for VP-102 and any other product candidates may not be as large as we expect.

Our lead indications for VP-102 are for molluscum and common warts, both of which are skin diseases that are currently undertreated with no standard of care. If VP-102 is approved for either indication, individuals may continue to decline treatment for molluscum and/or common warts as, if left untreated, these skin diseases will eventually be resolved by the body’s immune system.

In addition, our estimates of the potential market opportunity for VP-102 and any other product candidates include several key assumptions based on our industry knowledge, industry publications, third-party research reports and surveys of dermatologists commissioned by us. These assumptions include the prevalence of molluscum, common warts and other skin diseases as well as the estimated reimbursement levels for VP-102, if approved. However, there can be no assurance that any of these assumptions are, or will remain, accurate. Furthermore, even if our estimates relating to the prevalence of molluscum, common warts and other skin diseases as well as the estimated reimbursement levels for VP-102, if approved, are accurate, the degree of market acceptance by the medical community and those infected by such skin diseases following regulatory approval, if any, could impact our assumptions and reduce the market size for VP-102 in molluscum, common warts or any other indication. For example, if VP-102 is approved for either molluscum or common warts, there can be no assurance that the medical community will prescribe VP-102 for patients over current forms of available alternative therapies. Furthermore, the market research study we commissioned surveying payor organizations has no bearing on the payors, and any assumptions or interpretations based on the results of this study, may ultimately be inaccurate. If the actual market for VP-102 in molluscum, common warts or any other indication we may pursue for VP-102 or for any other product candidate we may develop is smaller than we expect, our revenues, if any, may be limited and it may be more difficult for us to achieve or maintain profitability.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and to limit commercialization of any products that we may develop.

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell any products that we may develop. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or drugs caused injuries, we will incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

• decreased demand for any product candidates or drugs that we may develop;

• injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;

• withdrawal of clinical trial participants;

• significant costs to defend the related litigation;

• substantial monetary awards paid to trial participants or patients;

• loss of revenue;

• reduced resources of our management to pursue our business strategy; and

• the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop.

We currently hold $10 million in product liability insurance coverage in the aggregate, with a per incident limit of $10 million, which may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We may need to increase our insurance coverage as we expand our clinical trials or if we commence commercialization of our product candidates. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.

Our business activities involve the use of hazardous materials, which require compliance with environmental and occupational safety laws regulating the use of such materials. If we or our vendors violate these laws, we could be subject to significant fines, liabilities or other adverse consequences.

Our business activities involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, including corrosive, explosive and flammable chemicals and other hazardous compounds in addition to certain biological hazardous waste. Ultimately, the activities of our third-party product manufacturers when a product candidate reaches commercialization will also require the use of hazardous materials. Accordingly, we are subject to federal, state and local laws governing the use, handling and disposal of these materials. For example, cantharidin is classified as an extremely hazardous substance in the United States and is subject to strict reporting requirements. Furthermore, the excipients in our product candidate are combustible and flammable. If not handled properly, there is a risk of explosion which could carry liability risk and affect the availability or capacity of the affected vendor. Although we believe that our and our vendors’ safety procedures for handling and disposing of these materials comply in all material respects with the standards prescribed by local, state and federal regulations, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In addition, our collaborators may not comply with these laws. In the event of an accident or failure to comply with environmental laws, we could be held liable for damages that result, and any such liability could exceed our assets and resources, or we could be subject to limitations or stoppages related to our use of these materials which may lead to an interruption of our business operations or those of our third-party contractors. While we believe that our existing insurance coverage is generally adequate for our normal handling of these hazardous materials, it may not be sufficient to cover pollution conditions or other extraordinary or unanticipated events. Furthermore, an accident could damage or force us to shut down our operations or one of our vendors. Changes in environmental laws may impose costly compliance requirements on us or otherwise subject us to future liabilities and additional laws relating to the management, handling, generation, manufacture, transportation, storage, use and disposal of materials used in or generated by the manufacture of our products or related to our clinical trials. In addition, we cannot predict the effect that these potential requirements may have on us, our suppliers and contractors or our customers.

Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties

We will rely on third parties to conduct our future clinical trials for product candidates, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such trials.

We have engaged a CRO historically to conduct our clinical trials and expect to engage a CRO for future clinical trials for VP-102 or other product candidates that we may progress to clinical development. We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct those clinical trials. If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to timely enter into arrangements with alternative third parties or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, any third parties conducting our clinical trials will not be our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our clinical programs. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory

requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. Consequently, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase substantially and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed significantly.

Switching or adding CROs involves substantial cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we intend to carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and generally do not control their activities. Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practices, or GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions. If we or any of our CROs or other third parties, including trial sites, fails to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials complies with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP conditions. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the trial. The FDA may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of VP-102 and any other product candidates.

We also expect to rely on other third parties to store and distribute product supplies for our clinical trials. Any performance failure on the part of our distributors could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates or commercialization of our products, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential revenue.

We currently rely on a third party to supply our raw material used in VP-102, and if we encounter any extended difficulties in procuring, or creating an alternative for, our raw material in VP-102 or any of our other product candidates we may develop, our business operations would be impaired.

To date, we have obtained naturally-sourced cantharidin, which is the raw material used to manufacture the API for VP-102 and is obtained from blister beetles, directly or indirectly from suppliers based in the People’s Republic of China, or the PRC. We are exposed to a number of environmental risks, including:

• risk of disease in the beetles.

In addition, any business,public health or economic challenges our existing supplier faces, whether in the ordinary course or not, could impair its ability to meet our cantharidin supply needs.Accordingly, there is a risk that supplies of our product may be significantly delayed by or may become unavailable for an extended period of time as a result of any issues affecting our supplier’s supply and production of naturally-sourced cantharidin.

Furthermore, our supplier’s operations may be curtailed or delayed in the event the regulators in the PRC determine that our supplier is not acting in accordance with laws or under appropriate permits or licenses. We may also face additional supply chain risks due to the regulatory and political structure of the PRC, or as a result of the international relationship between the PRC and the United States or any of the other countries in which our products are marketed. For example, any deterioration in the trade relationship between the U.S. and China, which imposes any restrictions, tariffs or limitations on the export of cantharidin from China would impact our ability to meet our raw material needs. We are also exposed to foreign exchange risks, and fluctuations in exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and the Renminbi could negatively impact the commercial viability of importing cantharidin from the PRC.

While we have successfully developed a lab scale process for synthesizing the cantharidin molecule, there is risk that we will be unable to scale the process to produce a sufficient quantity of synthetically derived cantharidin to meet our needs and, even if we are ultimately able to scale the proposed process successfully, we cannot predict when we will be able to do so. Intermediate compounds in this proposed synthetic process have been successfully synthesized to a pilot scale. If we are unable to scale the developed process for manufacturing cantharidin synthetically to a satisfactory commercial scale, we may be forced to continue to rely on naturally sourced cantharidin.

Any extended difficulties we face in maintaining our supply of cantharidin, or limitations we face in increasing our supply to meet commercial needs for VP-102 or any of our other product candidates, whether such cantharidin is naturally sourced or synthetically derived, would impair our business operations.

COVID-19 has adversely impacted and could continue to adversely impact our business.

In December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, COVID-19, was reported to have surfaced in Wuhan, China. Since then, COVID-19 has spread to multiple countries, including the United States. As a direct result of COVID-19, we have decided to delay the initiation of our Phase 3 clinical trials to evaluate VP-102 in subjects with common warts as well as our planned Phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate VP-103 in subjects with plantar warts. As COVID-19 continues to rapidly evolve in the United States, we may experience continued and additional disruptions or impairments that could severely impact our business, supply chain, clinical trials, or ability to obtain regulatory approval for, or commercialize, VP-102, including:

• delays or inability to obtain raw material, ingredients, or components;

• further delays or difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials;

We are closely monitoring the pandemic and do not yet know the extent to which COVID-19 may materially impact our business, supply chain, clinical trials and regulatory filings will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, such as the ultimate geographic spread of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, travel restrictions and social distancing in the United States and other countries, business closures or business disruptions and the effectiveness of actions taken in the United States and other countries to contain and treat the disease.

We contract with third parties for the manufacture of VP-102 for preclinical and clinical testing and expect to continue to do so for commercialization. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of VP-102 or such quantities at an acceptable cost, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

We do not have any manufacturing facilities or personnel. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of VP-102, or any other product candidates which we may pursue, for preclinical and clinical testing as well as for commercial manufacture if VP-102 or any other product candidate which we may pursue receives marketing approval. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of VP-102 or be able to obtain quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our ability to timely conduct our clinical trials or our other development or commercialization efforts.

We also expect to rely on third-party manufacturers or third-party collaborators for the manufacture of commercial supply of VP-102 or any other product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted prior to approval of our NDA, if at all, and in the future of additional NDAs or comparable marketing application to the FDA or other regulatory authority. We do not have control over a supplier’s or manufacturer’s compliance with laws, regulations and applicable cGMP standards and other laws and regulations, such as those related to environmental health and safety matters. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to secure and maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved.

We may be unable to establish any agreements with future third-party manufacturers or to do so on acceptable terms. Even if we are able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers, qualifying and validating such manufacturers may take a significant period of time and reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

• reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance;

• the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party;

Third-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP regulations or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or drugs, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products.

Our product candidates and any drugs that we may develop may compete with other product candidates and drugs for access to manufacturing facilities. There are no assurances we would be able to enter into similar commercial arrangements with other manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that might be capable of manufacturing for us. Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers could delay clinical development or marketing approval.

To date, all assembly of our single-use precision applicators has been done using manual processes. In order to meet anticipated volume requirements, we will need to successfully validate our proposed automated assembly process as designed. If our current contract manufacturers cannot perform as agreed, we may be required to replace such manufacturers. We may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement. We expect to continue to depend on third-party contract manufacturers for the foreseeable future. Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates or drugs may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any drugs that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis. If there is any disruption in our supply chain, it could take a significant period of time to qualify and validate a replacement on terms acceptable to us, if we are able to at all.

We have entered into, and may seek additional, collaborations with third parties for the development or commercialization of our product candidates. If those collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of these product candidates.

On March 17, 2021, we entered into the Torii Agreement, pursuant to which we granted Torii an exclusive license to develop and commercialize our product candidates that contain a topical formulation of cantharidin for the treatment of molluscum contagiosum and common warts in Japan, including VP-102. Additionally, we granted Torii a right of first negotiation with respect to additional indications for the licensed products and certain additional products for use in the licensed field, in each case in Japan. We may seek additional third-party collaborators for the development and commercialization of our product candidates, including for the commercialization of any of our product candidates that are approved for marketing outside the United States. Our likely collaborators for any collaboration arrangements include large and mid-size pharmaceutical companies, regional and national pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. Such agreements may provide us limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development or commercialization of our product candidates. For instance, Torii is responsible for all development activities and costs in support of obtaining regulatory approval of the licensed products in Japan, provided that Torii’s activities will be overseen by a joint steering committee.

Our ability to generate revenue from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements.

Collaborations involving our product candidates would pose the following risks to us:

• collaborators may not perform their obligations as expected;

Collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all. If a present or future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program could be delayed, diminished or terminated. Further cannot guarantee these relationships, including our relationship with Torii, will continue or that we will be able to receive the milestone or transfer price payments pursuant to the Torii Agreement or any other future collaboration agreement.

If we are not able to establish additional collaborations, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans.

Our product development programs and the potential commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional capital. For some of our product candidates, we may decide to collaborate with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for the development and potential commercialization of those product candidates. For instance, we have entered into the Torii Agreement, pursuant to which we granted Torii an exclusive license to develop and commercialize our product candidates that contain a topical formulation of cantharidin for the treatment of molluscum contagiosum and common warts in Japan, including VP-102.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge and industry and market

conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. Collaborations are complex and time- consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators.

We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of such product candidate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate revenue.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights related to any of our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

We plan to rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection, and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our product candidates. The issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, strength, and commercial value of patents in the pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. We currently have one issued patent, and the patent applications that we own may fail to result in other issued patents with claims that cover the product candidates in the United States or in foreign jurisdictions. If this were to occur, early generic competition could be expected against our product candidates in development. There may be relevant prior art relating to our future patents and patent applications which could invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing based on a pending patent application. In particular, because the API in many of our product candidates has been available and used for many years, it is possible that these products have previously been used in such a manner that such prior usage would affect our ability to obtain patents based on our patent applications. Moreover, because numerous parties have developed and/or commercialized, or are developing, a wide variety of applicator devices for use with topical dermatological medications, it is possible that prior art related to applicator devices could affect our ability to obtain patent protection for our planned product applicator device or that disputes may arise related to whether third-party applicator devices infringe patents we have applied for.

The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming. We may not be able to prepare, file, and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications for a commercially reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions. It is also possible that we may fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them. Moreover, depending on the terms of any future in-licenses to which we may become a party, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology in-licensed from third parties. Therefore, these patents and patent applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

In addition to the protection we hope to receive from patents we have applied for, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our drug development and reformulation processes that involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents. Although we generally require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors, and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop knowledge, methods and know-how equivalent to our trade secrets. Competitors could purchase our products and replicate some or all of the competitive advantages we derive from our development efforts for technologies on which we do not have patent protection. If any of our trade secrets were to

be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. Also, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA is considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, and there is no guarantee that we will have any such enforceable trade secret protection, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may enjoy only limited geographical protection with respect to certain patents and we may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing and prosecuting patent applications and defending patents covering our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as that in the United States or Europe. These products may compete with our product candidates, and our current and future patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

In addition, we may decide to abandon national and regional patent applications before grant. The examination of each national or regional patent application is an independent proceeding. As a result, patent applications in the same family may issue as patents in some jurisdictions, such as in the United States, but may issue as patents with claims of different scope or may even be refused in other jurisdictions. It is also quite common that depending on the country, the scope of patent protection may vary for the same product candidate or technology.

While we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in our expected significant markets, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our product candidates. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates in all of our expected significant foreign markets. If we encounter difficulties in protecting, or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting, the intellectual property rights important for our business in such jurisdictions, the value of these rights may be diminished, and we may face additional competition from others in those jurisdictions.

The laws of some jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws or rules and regulations in the United States and Europe, and many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in such jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property rights, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our future patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in other jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our future patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing as patents, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Some countries also have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies

or government contractors. In those countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patents. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired.

Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our future patents.

Our ability to obtain patents is highly uncertain because, to date, some legal principles remain unresolved, there has not been a consistent policy regarding the breadth or interpretation of claims allowed in patents in the United States and the specific content of patents and patent applications that are necessary to support and interpret patent claims is highly uncertain due to the complex nature of the relevant legal, scientific, and factual issues. Changes in either patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

For example, on September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, only became effective in March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act has also introduced procedures making it easier for third parties to challenge issued patents, as well as to intervene in the prosecution of patent applications. Finally, the Leahy-Smith Act contains new statutory provisions that require the USPTO to issue new regulations for their implementation, and it may take the courts years to interpret the provisions of the new statute. It is too early to tell what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business and the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our future patents. Further, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have owned or licensed or that we might obtain in the future. An inability to obtain, enforce, and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition.

Similarly, changes in patent laws and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions or changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we may obtain in the future. Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. For example, if the issuance to us, in a given country, of a patent covering an invention is not followed by the issuance, in other countries, of patents covering the same invention, or if any judicial interpretation of the validity, enforceability, or scope of the claims, or the written description or enablement, in a patent issued in one country is not similar to the interpretation given to the corresponding patent issued in another country, our ability to protect our intellectual property in those countries may be limited. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may materially diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment, and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our patents and/or applications and any patent rights we may obtain in the future. We rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent

application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market, and this circumstance could harm our business.

The patent applications that we have covering our product candidates are limited to specific formulations, preparations and devices, and methods of use and manufacturing processes, and our market opportunity for our product candidates may be limited by the lack of patent protection for the active ingredient itself and by competition from other formulations and manufacturing processes, as well as administration methods that may be developed by competitors.

Cantharidin is a naturally occurring compound found in many species of blister beetles and has been used since ancient times for medicinal purposes. Therefore, the composition of matter for the chemical structure of cantharidin itself, which is the API used in our product candidates, is not eligible for patent protection. We seek to obtain patent protection for our manufacturing technology, drug administering technology and our product candidates, including specific formulations, preparations and devices, and methods of use and manufacturing processes. Although the protection afforded by our patent and patent applications may be significant with respect to VP-102, when looking at the ability of the patent and applications to block competition, the protection offered by the patent and applications may be, to some extent, more limited than the protection provided by a patent claiming the composition of matter of an entirely new chemical entity previously unknown. As a result, generic products that do not infringe the claims of our future patents covering formulations, preparations, devices, methods of use, and manufacturing processes may be available while we are marketing our products. In general, method of use patents are more difficult to enforce than composition of matter patents because, for example, of the risks that the FDA may approve alternative uses of the subject compound not covered by method of use patents, and others may engage in off-label sale or use of the subject compound. Physicians are permitted to prescribe an approved product for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling. Although off-label prescriptions may infringe the method of use patents we have applied for, the practice is common across medical specialties and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute. In addition, competitors who obtain the requisite regulatory approval will be able to commercialize products with the same active ingredient as our product candidates so long as the competitors do not infringe any process, use, formulation, preparation or device patents that we have applied for to protect our product candidates, subject to any regulatory exclusivity we may be able to obtain for our product candidates.

The number of patents and patent applications covering products containing the same active ingredient as our product candidates indicates that competitors have sought to develop and may seek to commercialize competing formulations that may not be covered by our patents and patent applications. The commercial opportunity for our product candidates could be significantly harmed if competitors are able to develop and commercialize alternative formulations of our product candidates that are different from ours and do not infringe our issued patents covering our product candidates, our device, our manufacturing process or uses of our product candidates.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe the patents we have applied for. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. If we initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product or product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are common, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review, inter partes review (IPR), and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect

to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our patent counsel, and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could have a material adverse impact on our business.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain.

As our current and future product candidates progress toward commercialization, the possibility of a patent infringement claim against us increases. There can be no assurance that our current and future product candidates do not infringe other parties’ patents or other proprietary rights, and competitors or other parties may assert that we infringe their proprietary rights in any event. We may become party to, or threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current and future product candidates, including interference or derivation proceedings before the USPTO. Even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could have a negative impact on our ability to commercialize VP-102 and any future product candidates. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. Moreover, given the vast number of patents in our field of technology, we cannot be certain that we do not infringe existing patents or that we will not infringe patents that may be granted in the future. Because numerous parties have developed and/or commercialized, or are developing, a wide variety of applicator devices for use with topical dermatological medications, it is possible that third parties may assert that our applicator device infringes patents they own or have applied for. While we may decide to initiate proceedings to challenge the validity of these or other patents in the future, we may be unsuccessful, and courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad could uphold the validity of any such patent. Furthermore, because patent applications can take many years to issue and may be confidential for 18 months or more after filing, and because pending patent claims can be revised before issuance, there may be applications now pending which may later result in issued patents that may be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates. Regardless of when filed, we may fail to identify relevant third-party patents or patent applications, or we may incorrectly conclude that a third-party patent is invalid or not infringed by our product candidates or activities. If a patent holder believes our drug or product candidate infringes its patent, the patent holder may sue us even if we have received patent protection for our technology. Moreover, we may face patent infringement claims from non-practicing entities that have no relevant drug revenue and against whom our own patent portfolio may thus have no deterrent effect. If a patent infringement suit were threatened or brought against us, we could be forced to stop or delay research, development, manufacturing or sales of the drug or product candidate that is the subject of the actual or threatened suit.

If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue commercializing our product candidates. However, we may not be able to obtain

any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if a license can be obtained on acceptable terms, the rights may be non-exclusive, which could give our competitors access to the same technology or intellectual property rights licensed to us. If we fail to obtain a required license, we may be unable to effectively market product candidates based on our technology, which could limit our ability to generate revenue or achieve profitability and possibly prevent us from generating revenue sufficient to sustain our operations. Alternatively, we may need to redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Under certain circumstances, we could be forced, including by court orders, to cease commercializing our product candidates. In addition, in any such proceeding or litigation, we could be found liable for substantial monetary damages, potentially including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could harm our business. Any claims by third parties that we have misappropriated their confidential information or trade secrets could have a similar negative impact on our business.

The cost to us in defending or initiating any litigation or other proceeding relating to patent or other proprietary rights, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial, and litigation would divert our management’s attention. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could delay our research and development efforts and limit our ability to continue our operations.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of our employees’ former employers or other third parties. We may also be subject to claims that former employers or other third parties have an ownership interest in our future patents. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. There is no guarantee of success in defending these claims, and even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and other employees.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our future patents and other intellectual property.

We may also be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patent and applications, our future patents, or other intellectual property. We may be subject to ownership disputes in the future arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Although it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own, and we cannot be certain that our agreements with such parties will be upheld in the face of a potential challenge, or that they will not be breached, for which we may not have an adequate remedy. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

If we rely on third parties to manufacture or commercialize VP-102 or any future product candidates, or if we collaborate with additional third parties for the development of VP-102 or any future product candidates, we must, at

times, share trade secrets with them. We may also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnerships or similar agreements. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, we may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical know-how or other trade secrets by the parties to these agreements. Moreover, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our confidential information or proprietary technology and processes. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. If any of the collaborators, scientific advisors, employees, contractors and consultants who are parties to these agreements breaches or violates the terms of any of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation, and we could lose our trade secrets as a result. Moreover, if confidential information that is licensed or disclosed to us by our partners, collaborators, or others is inadvertently disclosed or subject to a breach or violation, we may be exposed to liability to the owner of that confidential information. Enforcing a claim that a third-party illegally obtained and is using our trade secrets, like patent litigation, is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. The following examples are illustrative:

• the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business.

Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Legal and Regulatory Compliance Matters

Our relationships with customers, physicians, and third-party payors may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, health information privacy and security laws, and other healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, principal investigators, consultants, customers and third-party payors may subject us to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws and other healthcare laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil and criminal false claims laws and the law commonly referred to as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and regulations. These laws will impact, among other things, our clinical research, proposed sales, marketing and educational programs, and other interactions with healthcare professionals. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy laws by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct or may conduct our business. The laws that will affect our operations include, but are not limited to:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participating in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

The risk of our being found in violation of these laws is increased by the fact that many of them have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. The shifting compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance and/or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses.

If VP-102 or other product candidates that we may identify are approved and we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses of those products, we may become subject to significant liability. The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about prescription products, such as our product candidates, if approved. In particular, generally, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. 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. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion of off-label use and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also required that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of our product candidates, if approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for VP-102 or any future product candidates, they will remain subject to ongoing regulatory oversight.

Even if we obtain any regulatory approval for VP-102 or any future product candidates, such product candidates, once approved, will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promoting, sampling, record-keeping and submitting of safety and other post-market information among other things. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for VP-102 or any future product candidates may also be subject to a REMS, limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the drug may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 trials, and surveillance to monitor the quality, safety and efficacy of the drug. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval. We will further be required to immediately report any serious and unexpected adverse events and certain quality or production problems with our products to regulatory authorities along with other periodic reports.

Any new legislation addressing drug safety issues could result in delays in product development or commercialization, or increased costs to assure compliance. We will also have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drug products are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. As such, we will not be allowed to promote our products for indications or uses for which they do not have approval. The holder of an approved NDA must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain prior approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process.

In addition, drug manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP requirements and adherence to commitments made in the NDA or foreign marketing application. If we, or a regulatory authority, discover previously unknown problems with a drug, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the drug is manufactured or if a regulatory authority disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of that drug, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions relative to that drug, the manufacturing facility or us, including requesting a recall or requiring withdrawal of the drug from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of VP-102 or any future product candidates, a regulatory authority may:

• suspend or withdraw regulatory approval;

• suspend any ongoing clinical trials;

• restrict the marketing or manufacturing of the drug;

• refuse to permit the import or export of product candidates; or

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize VP-102 or any future product candidates and harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Healthcare legislative or regulatory reform measures may have a negative impact on our business and results of operations.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and continue to be, several legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

Among policy makers and payors 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/or 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. In March 2010, the ACA was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things: (i) increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; (ii) established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents apportioned among these entities according to their market share in some government healthcare programs; (iii) expanded the availability of lower pricing under the 340B drug pricing program by adding new entities to the program; (iv) increased the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, to 23.1% and 13% of the average manufacturer price for most branded and generic drugs, respectively and capped the total rebate amount for innovator drugs at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price, or AMP; (v) expanded the eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; (vi) created a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and (vii) established a Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug spending.

There remain judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the ACA have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or Tax Act includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA 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 ACA-mandated “Cadillac” tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax and, effective January 1, 2021, also eliminates the health insurer tax. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or the BBA, among other things, amended the ACA, effective January 1, 2019, to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole.” In December 2018, CMS published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain ACA qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the ACA risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of federal district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the

ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Act. Additionally, on December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th 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 ACA are invalid as well.The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case, although it is unknown when a decision will be made. Further, although the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of the ACA, 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 ACA 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 ACA. It is unclear how the Supreme Court ruling, other such litigation, and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011, which began in 2013, and due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including the BBA, will remain in effect through 2030 with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 unless additional Congressional action is taken. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have an adverse effect on customers for our product candidates, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

Additionally, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. 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. Further, 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 new 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 the Trump administration’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. The likelihood of implementation of these, or any of the other Trump administration reform initiatives is uncertain, particularly in light of the new Biden administration. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. It is also possible that additional governmental action will be taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

VRCA US Equity

VRCA · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

VRCA US Equity☆

VRCA · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

VRCA US Equity