Soleno Therapeutics (SLNO) Risk Analysis

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or topline data from our nonclinical studies and clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or clinical trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data 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, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data become available. Furthermore, regulatory agencies may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and investors or regulatory authorities may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. If the interim, topline, or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement and other violations of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. Patent and other intellectual property litigation is prevalent in our sectors. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the U.S., involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, derivation and administrative law proceedings, inter partes review and post-grant review before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as well as oppositions and similar processes in foreign jurisdictions. Our commercial success depends upon our ability and the ability of our distributors, contract manufacturers, and suppliers to manufacture, market, and sell our planned products, and to use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the proprietary rights or intellectual property of third parties. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, and as we gain greater visibility and market exposure, the risk increases that our commercialization of VYKAT XR or other business activities may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent and other proprietary rights of third parties. Third parties may assert that we are infringing their patents or employing their proprietary technology without authorization. We may become party to, or be threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing or future intellectual property rights. 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 developing and marketing our products. We may also elect to enter into such a license in order to settle pending or threatened litigation. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same intellectual property licensed to us and could require us to pay significant royalties and other fees. Also, there may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of VYKAT XR. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patent rights in the future and claim that use of our products infringes upon these rights. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of VYKAT XR, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize VYKAT XR unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. Similarly, if any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture or methods of use, including combination therapy, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize our product unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. In addition, we may be subject to claims that we are infringing other intellectual property rights, such as trademarks or copyrights, or misappropriating the trade secrets of others, and to the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use intellectual property or proprietary information owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing product. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our planned products or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful infringement or other intellectual property claim against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys' fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Even if we are successful in defending against intellectual property claims, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to such claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce our resources available for development activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of litigation or other intellectual property related proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

Once marketing approval has been obtained, the approved product and its manufacturer are subject to continual review by the FDA or non-U.S. regulatory authorities, including, among other things, recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion and reporting of adverse experiences with the product. The drug name will also be subject to review and approval by the FDA and other non-U.S. regulatory authorities, and may not be the same in all geographies, which may cause confusion. Future approvals may contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing follow-up studies to monitor the safety and effectiveness of the approved product. In addition, we are subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements by the FDA, EMA and other regulatory authorities with regard to the labeling, packaging, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for our products. In addition, we are required to comply with cGMP and foreign regulations regarding the manufacture of our drugs, which include requirements related to quality control and quality assurance as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation. Further, regulatory authorities must approve these manufacturing facilities before they can be used to manufacture drug products, and these facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA, EMA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP and foreign regulations. If we or a third party discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturer or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. In addition, in June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo reversed its longstanding approach under the Chevron doctrine, which gave deference to regulatory agencies in litigation against the FDA and other agencies. As a result, more companies may bring lawsuits against the FDA to challenge longstanding decisions and policies of the FDA, which could undermine the FDA's authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA's normal operations, which could delay the FDA's review of our future marketing applications. Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market, though the FDA must provide an application holder with notice and an opportunity for a hearing in order to withdraw its approval of an application. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things: - restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;- fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;- refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of product approvals;- product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and - injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. The FDA strictly regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of drug and device products that are placed on the market. While physicians may prescribe drugs and devices for off label uses, manufacturers may only promote for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off label uses may be subject to significant liability. For example, drugs that are developed for rare diseases can be designated as Orphan Drugs. In the U.S., the disease or condition has an incidence of less than 200,000 persons and in the E.U. the prevalence of the condition must be not more than 5 in 10,000 persons. In the U.S., orphan-designated drugs are granted up to 7-year market exclusivity. In the E.U., products granted orphan designation are subject to reduced fees for protocol assistance, marketing authorization applications, inspections before authorization, applications for changes to marketing authorizations, and annual fees, and potentially benefit from 10 years of market exclusivity (which period of market exclusivity may be extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed pediatric investigation plan), during which time the EMA is generally precluded from accepting a MAA for a similar medicinal product. Applicants must first satisfy the orphan designation criteria and apply for orphan designation before making the application for marketing authorization. The applicant must then successfully maintain the orphan designation at the time of the MAA in order to qualify for 10 years of orphan market exclusivity. It is important to note that the regulatory protection afforded to medicinal products such as data exclusivity, marketing protection, market exclusivity for orphan indications and pediatric extension are currently under review at the E.U. level. The protection currently afforded in the E.U. could be reduced in the future. On April 26, 2023, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new Directive and a new Regulation. If enacted into law, this proposal will revise and replace the existing general pharmaceutical legislation and will affect the existing period of regulatory protections afforded to medicinal products. The proposal is now undergoing the legislative process and the text of the initial proposal is likely to be amended by the European Parliament and the European Council. While the Catalyst Pharms., Inc. v. Becerra, 14 F.4th 1299 (11th Cir. 2021) decision created uncertainty in the application of the orphan drug exclusivity, on January 24, 2023, the FDA published a notice in the Federal Register to clarify that while the agency complies with the court's order in Catalyst, the FDA intends to continue to apply its longstanding interpretation of the regulations to matters outside of the scope of the Catalyst order - that is, the agency will continue tying the scope of orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which a drug is approved, which permits other sponsors to obtain approval of a drug for new uses or indications within the same orphan designated disease or condition that have not yet been approved. It is unclear how future litigation, legislation, agency decisions, and administrative actions will impact the scope of the orphan drug exclusivity. Further, orphan exclusivity in the U.S. and other jurisdictions may be lost if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to ensure that we will be able to manufacture sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. In the U.S. and other jurisdictions, orphan drug exclusivity may not effectively protect an approved product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties may be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the regulatory authorities can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the applicable regulatory authorities conclude that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity.

Our manufacturing processes currently require the controlled use of potentially harmful chemicals. We cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury to employees or third parties from the use, storage, handling or disposal of these materials. In the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources or any applicable insurance coverage we may have. Additionally, we are subject to, on an ongoing basis, federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. The cost of compliance with these laws and regulations may become significant and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In the event of an accident or if we otherwise fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could lose our permits or approvals or be held liable for damages or penalized with fines.

To generate demand for VYKAT XR, we will need to educate physicians and other health care professionals on the clinical utility, benefits and value of the tests we provide through published papers, presentations at scientific conferences, educational programs and one-on-one education sessions by members of our sales force. In addition, we will need support of physicians, hospital administrators, patients, healthcare payers and others in the medical community that the clinical and economic utility of our products justifies payment for VYKAT XR at adequate pricing levels. We will need to hire additional commercial, scientific, technical and other personnel to support this process.

We do not currently have nor do we plan to acquire the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture or distribute VYKAT XR. We are currently dependent on sole source suppliers to produce raw materials, active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), the finished drug product and the associated packaging for VYKAT XR. If there is an interruption in supply from these sole source suppliers, for any reason, there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain adequate quantities of the raw materials within a reasonable time or at commercially reasonable prices. Interruptions in supplies due to pricing, timing, availability, or other issues with our sole source suppliers could have a negative impact on our contract manufacturer's ability to manufacture VYKAT XR, which in turn could adversely affect the commercialization of VYKAT XR. Regardless of whether a sole source supplier enters into a written supply arrangement with us, such supplier could still delay, suspend, or terminate supply of raw materials to us for a number of reasons, including manufacturing or quality issues, payment disputes with us, or bankruptcy or insolvency situations. Manufacturing or quality assurance difficulties at our contractors and suppliers, the failure or refusal of a supplier or contract manufacturer to supply contracted quantities, or increases in demand on a supplier with constrained capacity could result in delays and disruptions in the manufacturing, distribution, and sale of VYKAT XR, leading to lost revenue or reduced market opportunities. Supply constraints may also lead to pauses, discontinuations, or other product availability issues, which could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and cash flows. Further, cost inflation and transportation and logistics challenges in the future may cause delays in, and increase costs related to, procurement activity, and supplier or contract manufacturer arrangements. If a sole source supplier ceases supply of drug substance, drug product or labeled finished product, there is no guarantee that we will find an alternative supplier on terms acceptable to us, or at all. Finding alternative suppliers may not be feasible or could take a significant amount of time and involve significant expense due to the nature of VYKAT XR. Further the qualification process for a new vendor could take months or years, and any such delay in qualification could significantly harm our business.

In the U.S., there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system in ways that could affect our future revenue and profitability and the future revenue and profitability of our potential customers. Federal and state lawmakers regularly propose and, at times, enact legislation that would result in significant changes to the healthcare system, some of which are intended to contain or reduce the costs of medical products and services. For example, one of the most significant healthcare reform measures in decades, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA), was enacted in 2010. The PPACA contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollments in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement changes and fraud and abuse measures, all of which will impact existing government healthcare programs and will result in the development of new programs. The PPACA, among other things: - could result in the imposition of injunctions;- requires collection of rebates for drugs paid by Medicaid managed care organizations; and - requires manufacturers to participate in a coverage gap discount program, under which they must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable branded drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer's outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D. Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the PPACA. In June 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the PPACA without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Thus, the ACA remains in force in its current form. Any changes to the PPACA are likely to have an impact on our results of operations and may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. We cannot predict what other health care programs and regulations will ultimately be implemented at the federal or state level or the effect of any future legislation or regulation in the U.S. may have on our business. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the PPACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend proposals for spending reductions to Congress. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, which triggered the legislation's automatic reduction to several government programs, including aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, starting in 2013. In January 2013, former President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA), which delayed for another two months the budget cuts mandated by the sequestration provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2011. The ATRA, among other things, also reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. In March 2013, the President signed an executive order implementing sequestration, and in April 2013, the 2% Medicare reductions went into effect. We cannot predict how any additional legislative changes or changes in presidential administrations will affect our business. There likely will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals at the federal and state levels directed at containing or lowering the cost of health care. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future or their full impact. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payers of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of health care may adversely affect: - our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our products;- our ability to generate revenue and achieve or maintain profitability; and - the availability of capital. There has recently been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted legislation designed, among other things, to bring more transparency to product pricing, to review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and to reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products. For example, in August 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), which includes prescription drug provisions that have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry and Medicare beneficiaries, including allowing the federal government to negotiate a maximum fair price for certain high-priced single source Medicare drugs, imposing penalties and excise tax for manufacturers that fail to comply with the drug price negotiation requirements, requiring inflation rebates for all Medicare Part B and Part D drugs, with limited exceptions, if their drug prices increase faster than inflation, and redesigning Medicare Part D to reduce out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for beneficiaries, among other changes. Only high-expenditure single-source drugs that have been approved for at least 7 years (11 years for single-source biologics) can qualify for negotiation, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. For 2026, the first year in which negotiated prices become effective, CMS selected 10 high-cost Medicare Part D drugs in 2023, negotiations began in 2024, and the negotiated maximum fair price for each drug has been announced. CMS has selected 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs for negotiated maximum fair pricing in 2027. For 2028, up to an additional 15 drugs, which may be covered under either Medicare Part B or Part D, will be selected, and for 2029 and subsequent years, up to 20 additional Part B or Part D drugs will be selected. Various industry stakeholders, including certain pharmaceutical companies and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, have initiated lawsuits against the federal government asserting that the price negotiation provisions of the IRA are unconstitutional. The current administration has issued executive orders focused on decreasing prescription drug prices, including directing the Secretary of HHS to establish a mechanism through which American patients can buy drugs directly from manufacturers who sell at a most-favored-nation price and directing the U.S. Trade Representative and Secretary of Commerce to take action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the U.S. If HHS begins to set most-favored-nation pricing targets for prescription drugs, including the use of international pricing reference to set drug prices in the U.S., or increases generic and biosimilar drug entry sooner than expected, that can have a material adverse effect on our industry, ability to set adequate pricing for new drugs to recover R&D costs, ability to attract potential investors and potential buyers in the future. We cannot predict the full impact of the executive orders focused on reducing prescription drug prices or increasing domestic drug manufacturing capacity, or other measures that may be implemented by the current administration related to drug pricing, drug supply chain and manufacturing in the U.S. Such cost containment policies and executive orders could substantially and negatively impact the prices we may charge for any approved products, which could harm our valuation, ability to generate revenue and achieve and sustain profitability. In addition, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which was signed into law in July 2025, includes provisions that will impact the United States healthcare system in various ways, including budget cuts to Medicaid and introducing new participant work and eligibility requirements for Medicaid coverage, which are expected to significantly change the administration and applicability of Medicaid coverage. The OBBBA also expanded exemptions for orphan designated drugs for Medicare drug price negotiations, which is expected to incentivize development of orphan designated drugs or increase competition for drug development in orphan diseases or conditions. Although the full impact of the OBBBA on the healthcare system and our business is uncertain, the resulting changes may increase the cost and complexity of completing clinical development of and launching any product candidates for which we may receive regulatory approval or increase our competition in the marketplace, any of which could adversely affect our business and prospects. The impact of ongoing and future judicial challenges, as well as future legislative, executive, and administrative actions and healthcare measures and agency rules implemented by the government on us and the pharmaceutical industry as a whole is unclear. To the extent changes lead to disruptions in federal agencies, greater uncertainty in the industry, or impose more constraints on drug pricing, such as the introduction of the most-favored nation pricing or international reference pricing, our business may be materially impacted. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may negatively impact the valuation of our company or prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our product candidates if approved. In addition, individual states in the U.S. have also become increasingly active in implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical 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, mechanisms to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. A number of states are considering or have recently enacted state drug price transparency and reporting laws that could substantially increase our compliance burdens and expose us to greater liability under such state laws. Further, the FDA has authorized the State of Florida to develop a program to import certain prescription drugs from Canada for a limited time-period to help reduce drug costs, provided that Florida's Agency for Health Care Administration meets the requirements set forth by the FDA. Other states may follow Florida. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products or product candidates. Further, changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may occur and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols of ongoing studies to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols IRBs for reexamination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial. In light of widely publicized events concerning the safety risk of certain drug products, regulatory authorities, members of Congress, the Governmental Accounting Office, medical professionals and the general public have raised concerns about potential drug safety issues. These events have resulted in the recall and withdrawal of drug products, revisions to drug labeling that further limit use of the drug products and establishment of risk management programs that may, for instance, restrict distribution of drug products or require safety surveillance or patient education. The increased attention to drug safety issues may result in a more cautious approach by the FDA to clinical trials and the drug approval process. Data from clinical trials may receive greater scrutiny with respect to safety, which may make the FDA or other regulatory authorities more likely to terminate or suspend clinical trials before completion or require longer or additional clinical trials that may result in substantial additional expense and a delay or failure in obtaining approval or approval for a more limited indication than originally sought. Given the serious public health risks of high-profile adverse safety events with certain drug products, the FDA may require, as a condition of approval, costly risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, which may include safety surveillance, restricted distribution and use, patient education, enhanced labeling, special packaging or labeling, expedited reporting of certain adverse events, preapproval of promotional materials and restrictions on direct-to-consumer advertising.

A variety of risks associated with international operations could materially adversely affect our business, including: - different regulatory requirements for drug approvals in foreign countries;- reduced protection for intellectual property rights;- unexpected changes in tariffs, trade wars, trade barriers, trade restrictions, export or import sanctions, and regulatory requirements;- economic weakness, including inflation or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;- compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad;- foreign taxes, including withholding of payroll taxes;- foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenue, and other obligations incident to doing business in another country;- workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the U.S.;- production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad; and - business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism, including the outbreak of hostilities in the Ukraine, the Middle East, outbreaks of disease, or natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires. In particular, there is currently significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and various other countries with respect to trade policies, treaties, tariffs, taxes and other limitations on cross-border operations. Since beginning his second term in office, President Trump has made and continues to make significant additional changes in U.S. trade policy and may continue to take future actions that could negatively impact U.S. trade. Such trade policies and tariff implementations, and any related retaliatory trade policies and tariff implementations by foreign governments, may result in any materials that we import to the U.S. from countries subject to tariffs becoming more expensive or increase the price of VYKAT XR in other countries, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot predict what actions may ultimately be taken with respect to trade relations between the United States and other countries, what products and services may be subject to such actions or what actions may be taken by the other countries in retaliation. If we are unable to obtain or use services from existing service providers or become unable to export or sell our products to any of our customers or service providers, our business, liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.