Regeneron (REGN) Risk Analysis

We cannot sell or market products without regulatory approval or other authorization. If we or our collaborators do not maintain regulatory approval for our marketed products, or obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates or new indications of our marketed products (or are materially delayed in doing so), the value of our Company and our business, prospects, operating results, and financial condition may be materially harmed. In the United States, we (which, for purposes of this risk factor, includes our collaborators, unless otherwise stated or required by the context) must obtain and maintain approval from the FDA for each drug and biologic we intend to sell. We must obtain and maintain similar regulatory approvals from comparable foreign regulatory authorities in order to sell drugs and biologics outside the United States. Obtaining FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority approval for a new drug or biologic or indication is typically a lengthy and expensive process, and approval is highly uncertain. We cannot predict with certainty if or when we might submit for regulatory approval for our product candidates currently under development. Any approvals we may obtain may not cover all of the clinical indications for which we are seeking approval. Also, an approval might contain significant limitations in the form of narrow indications, warnings, precautions, or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use. Additionally, in the United States, the FDA may determine that a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy ("REMS") is necessary to ensure that the benefits of a new product outweigh its risks, and the product can therefore be approved. A REMS may include various elements, ranging from a medication guide or patient package insert to limitations on who may prescribe or dispense the drug or biologic, depending on what the FDA considers necessary for the safe use of the drug or biologic. The FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process (including with respect to setting specific conditions for submission) and may either refuse to accept an application for substantive review or may form the opinion after review of an application that the application is insufficient to allow approval of a product candidate. If the FDA does not accept from us an application for review or approve our application, it may require that we conduct additional clinical, preclinical, or manufacturing validation studies or additional analyses of data from existing studies and submit the data before it will reconsider our application. Depending on the extent of these or any other studies or analyses that might be required, approval of any applications that we submit may be delayed significantly, or we may be required to expend considerably more resources. Any such additional studies or analyses, if performed and completed, may not be considered sufficient by the FDA to make our applications approvable. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to delay or abandon applications for approval. For example, in October 2023, the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter ("CRL") for the sBLA for Dupixent in CSU stating that additional efficacy data were required to support an approval, which delayed by nearly 18 months the FDA's April 2025 approval of Dupixent in this indication. In certain instances (such as when we use a biomarker-based test to identify and enroll specific patients in a clinical trial), regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic to our therapeutic product candidate may be required as a condition for regulatory approval of the therapeutic product candidate. We may need to rely on third parties to provide companion diagnostics for use with our product candidates. Such third parties may be unable or unwilling on terms acceptable to us to provide such companion diagnostics or to obtain timely regulatory approval of or product labeling updates for such companion diagnostics, which could negatively impact regulatory approval of our product candidates or may result in increased development costs or delays. The FDA may also require us to conduct additional clinical trials after granting approval of a product. The FDA has the explicit authority to require post-marketing studies (also referred to as post-approval studies), labeling changes based on new safety information, and compliance with FDA-approved REMS. Post-approval studies, whether conducted by us or by others and whether mandated by regulatory agencies or voluntary, and other data about our marketed products (or data about products similar to our marketed products that implicate an entire class of products or are perceived to do so) may result in changes in product labeling, restrictions on use, product withdrawal or recall, loss of approval, or lower sales of our products. Obligations equivalent in scope, but which can vary widely in application, apply in jurisdictions outside the United States. According to the FDA policies under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the FDA system of review times for new drugs and biologics includes standard review and priority review. While the FDA has performance goals that provide for action on NDA and BLA submissions by certain deadlines, the FDA's review goals are subject to change and the duration of the FDA's review depends on a number of factors, including the number and types of other applications that are submitted to the FDA around the same time period or are pending. The FDA's review of our regulatory submissions has in the past been delayed, and may be delayed in the future, due to the FDA's request for additional information or for other reasons, including those beyond our control (such as recent changes in FDA leadership, the 2025 reduction in staffing at the FDA, and any future reductions of staffing or other resources at the FDA, as discussed further below). The functioning of the FDA is affected by a variety of factors, such as shifting government priorities, budgets and funding levels, authorization and payment of user fees, the ability to hire and retain key personnel, as well as other statutory, regulatory, and policy changes impacting HHS, the FDA, or other HHS agencies. U.S. policy changes have recently been implemented at a rapid pace, and additional changes may occur. For example, there have been recent efforts to reduce the size and budgets of U.S. government agencies, downsize the federal workforce, and restructure parts of the executive branch of the federal government. These efforts have directly or indirectly impacted agencies that support research and development activities or are otherwise important to our business, including the HHS and the FDA. There have also been ongoing senior leadership changes at the HHS and the FDA. If legislation, administrative action, changes in policy, or the continued loss of experienced senior leadership and career staff prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting routine inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to provide feedback on our clinical programs, meet with or engage in other informal interactions with us, and review and process our regulatory submissions (including our pending regulatory submissions) in a timely manner. These developments may also reduce the FDA's capacity to engage in pre-approval or guidance meetings or meetings to negotiate labeling or post-marketing commitments. Furthermore, changes in FDA personnel and policy (such as those referenced above) may negatively impact the transparency of agency actions, lead to modifications in FDA approval requirements and related FDA review and approval delays, and alter the FDA's existing guidance pertinent to the development strategy for our products and product candidates. In addition, the U.S. government has shut down multiple times in the recent past and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough employees and stop some of their activities. A prolonged government shutdown or a widespread freeze on federal funding could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions or cause other agencies that support the FDA to slow their work. Any such factors could have a material adverse effect on our business. If we believe we meet eligibility requirements, we may apply for various regulatory incentives in the United States, such as breakthrough therapy designation, fast track designation, accelerated approval, priority review, or the Commissioner's National Priority Voucher (CNPV) program, where potentially available, that serve to expedite drug development and/or review, and we may also seek similar designations elsewhere in the world. Often, regulatory agencies have broad discretion in determining whether or not product candidates qualify for such regulatory incentives and benefits, and we may fail to obtain beneficial regulatory designations from the FDA or other regulatory agencies. Even if obtained, such designations may not result in faster development processes, reviews, or approvals compared to drugs or biologics considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures. In addition, the FDA may later decide that any of our development programs no longer meets the conditions for a beneficial regulatory designation (including due to factors beyond our control, such as intervening competitive developments) or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. FDA guidance relating to accelerated approval of oncology therapeutics indicates that a confirmatory trial for a particular oncology product candidate should be underway when the related marketing application is submitted to the FDA and also states that the FDA may require that a confirmatory trial for a particular oncology product candidate be well underway, if not fully enrolled, by the time of the accelerated approval action. Application of this guidance and related rules to our product candidates may result in a delay of the FDA review and approval process despite any earlier beneficial regulatory designation such product candidates may have received. For example, in March 2024, the FDA issued CRLs concerning our BLA for odronextamab for the treatment of relapsed/refractory FL and DLBCL due to the enrollment status of confirmatory Phase 3 trials, which, along with the July 2025 CRL discussed below, has delayed the potential FDA approval of odronextamab. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities enforce Good Clinical Practice requirements ("GCPs") and other regulations and legal requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical research organizations ("CROs"), principal investigators, and trial sites. If we or any of the third parties conducting our clinical studies are determined to have failed to fully comply with GCPs, the study protocol or applicable regulations, the clinical data generated in those studies may be deemed unreliable. This and similar instances of non-compliance with GCPs could result in non-approval of our product candidates by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities such as the EC, or we or the FDA or such other regulatory authorities may decide to conduct additional inspections or require additional clinical studies, which would delay our development programs, require us to incur additional costs, and could substantially harm our business, prospects, operating results, and financial condition. Before approving a new drug or biological product, the FDA and such comparable foreign regulatory authorities require that the facilities at which the product will be manufactured or advanced through the supply chain be in compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, requirements and regulations governing the manufacture, shipment, and storage of the product. Additionally, manufacturers of drugs and biological products and their facilities are subject to payment of substantial user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations and adherence to any commitments made in the applicable NDA or BLA. These cGMP requirements and regulations are not prescriptive instructions on how to manufacture products, but rather a series of principles that must be observed during manufacturing; as a result, the manner in which such principles are implemented may not be specifically delineated, which can be challenging as the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities increasingly scrutinize compliance with these requirements and regulations. As a result, manufacturing product candidates in compliance with these regulatory requirements is complex, time-consuming, and expensive. To be successful, our products must be manufactured in compliance with regulatory requirements, and at competitive costs. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers, product packagers, labelers, or other parties performing steps in the supply chain are unable to maintain regulatory compliance with cGMP, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities can impose monetary penalties or other civil or criminal sanctions, including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a new drug or biological product, or revocation of a pre-existing approval. We have recently received several CRLs from the FDA for regulatory submissions concerning our products or product candidates due to the FDA's findings from inspections at third-party manufacturers responsible for filling drug product. These include the July 2025 CRL concerning the BLA for odronextamab in relapsed/refractory FL, which has delayed further the potential FDA approval of odronextamab in this indication; and the October 2025 CRL concerning our regulatory application seeking approval of the EYLEA HD pre-filled syringe, which has delayed further the potential FDA approval of the EYLEA HD pre-filled syringe. For additional information, see "Risks Related to Manufacturing and Supply - Our or our collaborators' or contract manufacturers' failure to meet the stringent requirements of governmental regulation in the manufacture of drug products or product candidates could result in incurring substantial remedial costs, delays in the development or approval of our product candidates or new indications for our marketed products and/or in their commercial launch if regulatory approval is obtained, and a reduction in sales." Our business, prospects, operating results, and financial condition may be materially harmed as a result of noncompliance with the requirements and regulations described in this paragraph. We are also subject to ongoing requirements imposed by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities governing the labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, advertising, promotion, record-keeping, and reporting of safety and other post-marketing information. The holder of an approved NDA, BLA, or foreign equivalent is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the application. The holder of an approved NDA, BLA, or foreign equivalent must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA regulations and those of foreign regulatory authorities and may be subject to other potentially applicable federal and state laws. The applicable regulations in jurisdictions outside the U.S. grant similar powers to the competent authorities and impose similar obligations on companies. In addition to the FDA and other regulatory agency regulations in the United States, we are subject to a variety of foreign regulatory requirements governing human clinical trials, manufacturing, marketing and approval, and commercial sale and distribution of drugs and biologics in jurisdictions outside the United States. The foreign regulatory approval process is similarly a lengthy and expensive process, the result of which is highly uncertain, and foreign regulatory requirements generally include the risks associated with FDA approval as well as jurisdiction-specific regulations. We and our collaborators must maintain regulatory compliance for the products we or they commercialize in jurisdictions outside the United States. From time to time, we may hold a product's marketing approval in a jurisdiction outside the United States where we have less experience and where our regulatory capabilities are more limited; for example, this is now the case for Libtayo in many jurisdictions outside the United States (including Europe and Japan) due to our acquisition of the worldwide rights to Libtayo in 2022. In addition, actions by a regulatory agency in a country or region with respect to a product candidate may have an impact on the approval process for that product candidate in another country or region. Foreign regulatory authorities may ask for additional data in order to begin a clinical study, including Phase 3 clinical trials required to submit an MAA in the EU. In addition, such authorities often have the authority to require post-approval studies, such as a post-authorization safety study ("PASS") and/or a post-authorization efficacy study ("PAES"), which involve various risks similar to those described above. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product in the United States, we must obtain approval of the product by the comparable regulatory authorities in jurisdictions outside the United States before we can market that product or any other product in those jurisdictions. Furthermore, we are subject to extensive pharmacovigilance reporting and other pharmacovigilance requirements, which may differ in the numerous jurisdictions in which we conduct clinical trials or commercialize a product. Failure to comply with any such requirements may result in the premature closure of the clinical trials and other enforcement actions by the relevant regulatory authorities. For example, if we do not manage to retain a Qualified Person Responsible for Pharmacovigilance ("QPPV"), to maintain a Pharmacovigilance System Master File ("PSMF"), or to comply with other pharmacovigilance obligations in the European Economic Area ("EEA"), our clinical trials may be closed prematurely, our marketing authorization may be suspended, and we may be subject to other enforcement actions by the national competent authorities of the EEA or the EC.