Ardelyx (ARDX) Risk Analysis

We are required to report certain information about adverse medical events if our products may have caused or contributed to those adverse events. The timing of our obligation to report is triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report adverse events we become aware of within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to appreciate that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of our products. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or a foreign regulatory agency could take action, including criminal prosecution, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, seizure of our products or delay in approval or clearance of future products.

The regulations relating to the promotion of products for unapproved uses and the design and implementation of patient assistance programs are complex and subject to substantial interpretation by the FDA and other government agencies. With respect to the commercialization of IBSRELA and/or XPHOZAH, we are restricted from marketing the product outside of its approved labeling, also referred to as off-label promotion. However, physicians may nevertheless prescribe an approved product to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label, which is an off-label use. We have implemented compliance and training programs designed to ensure that our sales and marketing practices comply with applicable regulations regarding off-label promotion. Notwithstanding these programs, the FDA or other government agencies may allege or find that our practices constitute prohibited promotion of our product candidates for unapproved uses. We also cannot be sure that our employees will comply with company policies and applicable regulations regarding the promotion of products for unapproved uses. Over the past several years, a significant number of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have been the target of inquiries and investigations by various federal and state regulatory, investigative, prosecutorial and administrative entities in connection with the promotion of products for unapproved uses, other sales practices, as well as the design and implementation of patient assistance programs, including the Department of Justice and various U.S. Attorneys' Offices, the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services, the FDA, the FTC and various state Attorneys General offices. These investigations have alleged violations of various federal and state laws and regulations, including claims asserting antitrust violations, violations of the FFDCA, the False Claims Act, the Prescription Drug Marketing Act, anti-kickback laws, and other alleged violations in connection with the promotion of products for unapproved uses, pricing and Medicare and/or Medicaid reimbursement. Many of these investigations originate as "qui tam" actions under the False Claims Act. Under the False Claims Act, any individual can bring a claim on behalf of the government alleging that a person or entity has presented a false claim, or caused a false claim to be submitted, to the government for payment. The person bringing a qui tam suit is entitled to a share of any recovery or settlement. Qui tam suits, also commonly referred to as "whistleblower suits," are often brought by current or former employees. In a qui tam suit, the government must decide whether to intervene and prosecute the case. If it declines, the individual may pursue the case alone. If the FDA or any other governmental agency initiates an enforcement action against us or if we are the subject of a qui tam suit and it is determined that we violated FDA or other regulations relating to the promotion of our products and/or the design and implementation of our patient assistance programs, we could be subject to substantial civil or criminal fines or damage awards and other sanctions such as consent decrees and corporate integrity agreements pursuant to which our activities would be subject to ongoing scrutiny and monitoring to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Any such fines, awards or other sanctions would have an adverse effect on our revenue, business, financial prospects and reputation.

All entities involved in the preparation of product for commercial sale, or product candidates for clinical trials, including our existing CMOs, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP regulations. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our products or product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We or our CMOs must supply all necessary documentation in support of an NDA or comparable regulatory filing on a timely basis and must adhere to cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA and other regulatory agencies through their facilities inspection programs. In addition, before approving an NDA, the facilities and quality systems of some, or all, of the relevant CMOs must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of our product candidates. The FDA will not approve a product candidate unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the manufacture of our product or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. We enter into quality agreements with our CMOs, pursuant to which we expect our CMOs to comply with cGMPs and applicable regulatory requirements. Although we oversee the CMOs, we cannot control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our CMOs for compliance with the regulatory requirements. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, regulatory approval of the products may not be granted or may be substantially delayed until any violations are corrected to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority, if ever. In addition, we have no direct control over the ability of our CMOs to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If our CMOs cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict requirements of relevant regulatory authorities, and pass regulatory inspections, on the timelines we expect or at all, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities with respect to our products, which could materially impact our ability to supply product and harm our business. The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit the manufacturing facilities of our CMOs. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time consuming for us or a third party to implement, and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical study or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent suspension of production or closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or other applicable regulatory authority can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a new drug product, withdrawal of an approval, or suspension of production. As a result, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially harmed. Additionally, if supply from one approved manufacturer is interrupted, an alternative manufacturer would need to be qualified through an NDA, a supplemental NDA or equivalent foreign regulatory filing, which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and may result in delays to our desired clinical and commercial timelines. These factors could cause us to incur higher costs and could cause the delay or termination of clinical studies, regulatory submissions, required approvals, or commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our clinical studies may be delayed, or we could lose potential revenue.

Even after a drug is approved by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, pharmacovigilance, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMPs and GCP regulations for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. As such, we and our third-party CMOs will be subject to continual review and periodic inspections to assess compliance with regulatory requirements. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money, and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production, and quality control. Regulatory authorities may also impose significant restrictions on a product's indicated uses or marketing or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-marketing studies. Furthermore, any new legislation addressing drug safety issues could result in delays or increased costs to assure compliance. We will also be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA, and to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs 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 may not promote our products for indications or uses for which they do not have FDA approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory, agency or other requirements, may result in, among other things: - warning or untitled letters or fines;- restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;- injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties;- suspension or revocation of existing regulatory approvals;- suspension of any of our ongoing clinical trials;- refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications submitted by us;- restrictions on our or our CMOs' operations; or - product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products. Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize IBSRELA and XPHOZAH. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected. In addition, the FDA's policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the U.S. or abroad.

In the U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could, among other things, restrict or regulate post approval activities with respect to our approved products and affect our ability to profitably sell our products. In the U.S., the ACA was enacted in 2010 with a goal of reducing the cost of healthcare and substantially changing the way healthcare is financed by both government and private insurers. The ACA, among other things, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the MDRP, extended manufacturer rebate liability from fee-for-service Medicaid utilization to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations and established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs. Since its enactment, certain provisions of the ACA have been subject to judicial, executive, and legislative challenges. For example, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. There have also been ongoing changes to the implementation of the ACA since its adoption. For example, the availability of enhanced premium tax credits and other subsidies under the ACA expired as of December 31, 2025, and absent legislative action to reinstate or replace them, many individuals may experience higher out-of-pocket premium costs. These changes could result in an increase in uninsured or underinsured patients, which could negatively affect patients' ability or willingness to start or continue treatment with our products or future product candidates, if successfully developed and approved, or may otherwise increase prescription abandonment rates or place greater downward pressure on drug pricing generally. Moreover, on January 1, 2025, XPHOZAH, along with other oral drugs for ESRD patients on dialysis without injectable or intravenous equivalents, became part of the ESRD PPS and coverage under Medicare Part D was eliminated. See "-XPHOZAH became part of the ESRD PPS on January 1, 2025, which means coverage for XPHOZAH for Medicare beneficiaries is not available under Medicare Part D; this resulted in a negative and material impact on our XPHOZAH revenue in 2025; and the continued lack of Medicare Part D coverage for XPHOZAH will result in a materially lower pace of revenue growth as compared to expectations before XPHOZAH became part of the ESRD PPS" above. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the U.S. since the ACA was enacted. These laws, among other things, included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers that will remain in effect through 2032, unless additional action is taken by Congress, additional specific reductions in Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and an increase in the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug's AMP. There has also been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills 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 drug products. In 2022, the IRA was signed into law in August 2022. This statute marks the most significant action by Congress with respect to the pharmaceutical industry since adoption of the ACA in 2010. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation; redesigns the Medicare Part D benefit; and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new manufacturer discount program. CMS has published the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which went into effect in January 2026, and the subsequent 15 drugs, which will first be effective in 2027. CMS has also published the next set of 15 drugs that will be subject to negotiation. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. While the impact of the IRA on us and the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined, it is likely to be significant. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted in July 2025, imposes significant reductions in the funding of the Medicaid program. Such reductions are expected to decrease the number of persons enrolled in Medicaid and reduce the services covered by Medicaid, which could adversely affect our sales of our partner's products or of any product candidate that we commercialize. The current administration is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. While it is unclear whether and how these proposals will be implemented, the current administration's policies are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and on our ability to receive adequate revenues for IBSRELA and XPHOZAH. On the one hand, President Trump has threatened to impose significant tariffs on pharmaceutical manufacturers that do not adopt pricing policies such as most favored nation pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. In response, multiple manufacturers have entered into confidential pricing agreements with the federal government. On the other hand, the current administration is pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies and published two proposed regulations in December 2025, referred to as GLOBE and GUARD. If finalized, these regulations would implement mandatory payment models under which manufacturers of eligible drugs would be required to pay rebates to the federal government on a portion of the units of their drugs that are reimbursed by Medicare, with the rebate amount based on most favored nation pricing. Imposing a rebate in the U.S. that is based on drug prices outside the U.S. would mark a drastic and unprecedented shift in the U.S. pharmaceutical market, and while the impact of the GLOBE and GUARD proposed regulations, if finalized, cannot yet be determined, it is likely to be significant. Even regulatory proposals or executive actions that are ultimately deemed unlawful could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business. In addition, pharmaceutical pricing and marketing has long been the subject of considerable discussion in Congress and among policymakers, and it is possible that Congress could enact additional laws that negatively affect the pharmaceutical industry. Additionally, individual states have become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access, and to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Some states have enacted legislation creating so-called prescription drug affordability boards, which ultimately may attempt to impose price limits on certain drugs in these states, and at least one state board is imposing an upper payment limit. States are also seeking to implement general, across the board price caps for pharmaceuticals, or are seeking to regulate drug distribution. We cannot predict the reform initiatives that may be adopted in the future or whether initiatives that have been adopted will be repealed or modified. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect the demand for any drug products for which we may obtain regulatory approval, our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our products, our ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement approval for a product, our ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability, and the level of taxes that we are required to pay.

From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the regulatory clearance or approval, manufacture, and marketing of regulated products or the reimbursement thereof. In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of our product candidates. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: - additional clinical trials to be conducted prior to obtaining approval;- changes to manufacturing methods;- recall, replacement, or discontinuance of one or more of our products; and - additional record keeping. Each of these would likely entail substantial time and cost and could materially harm our business and our financial results. In addition, delays in receipt of or failure to receive regulatory clearances or approvals for any future products would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We and our collaboration partners are subject to additional healthcare statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate as a commercial organization include: - the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;- federal false claims laws, including the False Claims Act, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payors that are false or fraudulent. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act;- the federal Civil Monetary Penalties law, which prohibits, among other things, offering or transferring remuneration to a federal healthcare beneficiary that a person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary's decision to order or receive items or services reimbursable by the government from a particular provider or supplier;- federal criminal laws that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of these statutes or specific intent to violate them in order to have committed a violation;- the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requirements under the ACA, which requires manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics, and medical supplies to report annually to CMS information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians, (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician practitioners (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse anesthetists, anesthesiologist assistants and certified nurse midwives), and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians (as defined by the statute) and their immediate family members;- state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers;- state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry's voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources;- state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or pricing information and marketing expenditures; and - European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. 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. 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. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and imprisonment, any of which could adversely affect our ability to market our products and adversely impact our financial results.

In order to market any product in the EEA (which is composed of the 27 Member States of the European Union plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein), and many other foreign jurisdictions, separate regulatory approvals are required. In the EEA, medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a Marketing Authorization. Before the Marketing Authorization is granted, the European Medicines Agency or the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the product on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy. The approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional clinical testing, and the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one or more foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. However, a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. We may not be able to file for regulatory approvals or to do so on a timely basis, and even if we do file, we may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize our products in any market.