VYNE Therapeutics (VYNE) Risk Analysis

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that our directors, officers or holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our common stock. Moreover, certain holders of shares of our common stock have rights, subject to certain conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. We have registered and intend to continue to register all shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plans. Once we register these shares, they can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to volume limitations applicable to affiliates.

The trading market for our common stock may be influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. We do not have any control over the analysts, or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline. If our operating results fail to meet the forecast of analysts, our stock price will likely decline.

Although our common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq Capital Market, an active trading market for our common stock may not be sustained. The lack of an active market may impair the ability of holders of our common stock to sell their shares at the time they wish to sell them or at a price that they consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of our common stock, and may cause the trading price of our common stock to be more volatile. The lack of an active market may contribute to volatility of our stock price and impair our ability to raise capital.

We are eligible to report as a smaller reporting company. For as long as we continue to be eligible to report as a "smaller reporting company," we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not "smaller reporting companies," including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting, as well as reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports, proxy statements and registration statements. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer a smaller reporting company. We will remain a smaller reporting company until the last day of any fiscal year for so long as either (1) the market value of our shares of common stock held by non-affiliates does not equal or exceed $250.0 million as of the prior June 30th, or (2) our annual revenues did not equal or exceed $100.0 million during such completed fiscal year and the market value of our shares of common stock held by non-affiliates did not equal or exceed $700.0 million as of the prior June 30th. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our securities less attractive because we rely on any of these exemptions, there may be a less active trading market for our securities and the price of our securities may be more volatile.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws, any action to interpret, apply, enforce, or determine the validity of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws, or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. In addition, our amended and restated bylaws provide that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States is the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, against us, our officers, directors, employees or underwriters. These choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder's ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent changes in control or changes in our management without the consent of our board of directors. These provisions include the following: - a classified board of directors with three-year staggered terms, which may delay the ability of stockholders to change the membership of a majority of our board of directors;- no cumulative voting in the election of directors, which limits the ability of minority stockholders to elect director candidates;- the exclusive right of our board of directors to elect a director to fill a vacancy created by the expansion of the board of directors or the resignation, death or removal of a director, which prevents stockholders from being able to fill vacancies on our board of directors;- the ability of our board of directors to authorize the issuance of shares of preferred stock and to determine the price and other terms of those shares, including preferences and voting rights, without stockholder approval, which could be used to significantly dilute the ownership of a hostile acquirer;- the ability of our board of directors to alter our bylaws without obtaining stockholder approval;- the required approval of at least 66 2/3% of the shares entitled to vote at an election of directors to adopt, amend or repeal our bylaws or repeal the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation regarding the election and removal of directors;- a prohibition on stockholder action by written consent, which forces stockholder action to be taken at an annual or special meeting of our stockholders;- the requirement that a special meeting of stockholders may be called only by the chief executive officer or the president or the board of directors, which may delay the ability of our stockholders to force consideration of a proposal or to take action, including the removal of directors; and - advance notice procedures that stockholders must comply with in order to nominate candidates to our board of directors or to propose matters to be acted upon at a stockholders' meeting, which may discourage or deter a potential acquiror from conducting a solicitation of proxies to elect the acquiror's own slate of directors or otherwise attempting to obtain control of us. In addition, these provisions would apply even if we were to receive an offer that some stockholders may consider beneficial. We are also subject to the anti-takeover provisions contained in Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. Under Section 203, a corporation may not, in general, engage in a business combination with any holder of 15% or more of its capital stock unless the holder has held the stock for three years or, among other exceptions, the board of directors has approved the transaction.

We have historically incurred substantial net losses, including net losses of $28.5 million and $23.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $691.3 million. We expect our losses to continue as we continue to devote a substantial portion of our resources to our research and development efforts. These losses have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our working capital, total assets, and shareholders' equity. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with our research and development, we are unable to predict when we will become profitable, and we may never become profitable. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our inability to achieve and then maintain profitability would negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we: - continue to develop product candidates and conduct preclinical studies and clinical trials;- initiate and continue research and development, including preclinical, clinical and discovery efforts for any future product candidates;- seek to identify additional product candidates;- seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates that may successfully complete clinical development;- add personnel to support our product candidate development;- hire and retain additional personnel, such as clinical, quality control, scientific, and administrative personnel;- maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio; and - acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies. Our expenses could increase beyond our expectations if we are required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities to perform clinical trials in addition to those that we currently expect.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of the Nasdaq Stock Market ("Nasdaq"). The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. We must perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our Form 10-K filing each year, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This requires that we incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs within our accounting and finance functions and that we expend significant management efforts. We may identify weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system's objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected. If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC, or other regulatory authorities.

We completed the sale of our prior commercial business in January 2022. Pursuant to the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement entered into in connection with the purchase of that business by Journey Medical Corporation ("Journey"), we are eligible to receive sales milestone payments of up to $450.0 million in the aggregate upon the achievement of specified levels of net sales on a product-by-product basis, beginning with annual net sales exceeding $100.0 million. In addition, we are entitled to receive certain payments from any licensing or sublicensing of the assets by Journey outside of the United States. Under the terms of the agreement, Journey does not have any diligence obligations to achieve any such net sales milestones, and we can provide no assurance that such milestones will ever be met. Furthermore, Journey may decide not to license or sublicense the assets in any territory outside of the United States, in which case we would not receive any additional related payments. If any of the foregoing events occur, we will not realize all of the benefits of the sale. In addition, we are still subject to potential liabilities relating to our historical commercial business operations that were subject to the Asset Purchase Agreement. Under the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement, we retained and are responsible for historical liabilities of the commercial business operations based on events occurring prior to the sale other than those liabilities expressly assumed by Journey. For example, we remain liable for payment of product sales provisions, such as distribution fees and trade discounts and allowances, rebates, chargebacks and other discounts and product returns. See "Part II-Item 8. Financial Statements-Note 2 - Significant Accounting Policies-Revenue Recognition-Product Sales Provisions." We are also obligated to indemnify Journey against certain potential liabilities and for breaches of certain representations, warranties and covenants under the agreement up to certain caps, and those liabilities may be set off against any future payments owed to us by Journey. In addition to direct expenditures for damages, settlement and defense costs, there is the possibility of adverse publicity as a result of any such claims, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and stock price. In addition, we remain subject to potential investigation or inquiry by regulatory authorities with respect to our legacy commercial business operations, which could result in additional distraction to our management and could ultimately result in further liabilities.

We may seek collaboration arrangements with pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies for the development or eventual commercialization of our product candidates in the future. We may enter into arrangements on a selective basis, depending on the merits of retaining certain rights ourselves compared to entering into selective collaboration arrangements with pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies internationally and possibly also in the United States. Any such collaboration arrangements may not be successful. In addition, the success of future collaboration arrangements that we may enter into will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators. Collaborators generally have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations. When entering collaboration arrangements, we are subject to a number of risks, including: - collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding for a clinical trial, stop a clinical trial or abandon products, repeat or conduct new clinical trials, require a new formulation of products for clinical testing, may decide not to pursue development and commercialization of a product or product candidate or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on clinical trial results, changes in their strategic focus due to their acquisition of competitive products or their internal development of competitive products, availability of funding or other external factors, such as a business combination that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;- any safety issues or adverse side effects that result from trials conducted by a collaborator will adversely impact our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates;- any failure by a collaborator to demonstrate efficacy of a product candidate in its clinical trials could decrease the perceived likelihood of success for our clinical trials;- disagreements between parties to a collaboration arrangement regarding clinical development matters may lead to delays in the development process or commercializing the applicable product candidate and, in some cases, termination of the collaboration arrangement;- collaboration arrangements are complex and time-consuming to negotiate, document and implement, and we may not be successful in our efforts to establish and implement collaborations or other alternative arrangements should we so chose to enter into such arrangements;- collaborations with pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies and other third parties often are terminated or allowed to expire by the other party and any such termination or expiration would adversely affect us financially and could harm our business reputation;- collaboration agreements may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in delays or the need for a new collaborator or additional capital to pursue further development of our product candidates in certain markets;- collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates;- terms of any collaborations or other arrangements that we may establish may not be favorable to us;- we could grant exclusive rights to our collaborators that would prevent us from collaborating with others;- we will face, to the extent that we decide to enter into collaboration agreements, significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators;- collaborators may not properly use, manage, maintain or defend our confidential information and intellectual property rights or may use our intellectual property or proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatened litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential liability;- collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering products that results from our collaborating with them, and in such cases, we would not have the exclusive right to develop such intellectual property and they may be able to develop such products without us;- disputes may arise with respect to the ownership of any intellectual property developed pursuant to our collaborations;- adverse regulatory determinations or other legal action may interfere with the ability of a collaborator to conduct clinical trials or other development activity;- one or more collaborators may be subject to regulatory or legal action resulting from the failure to meet healthcare industry compliance requirements in the conduct of clinical trials; and - collaboration arrangements could be adversely impacted by changes in collaborators' key management personnel and other personnel that are administering collaboration agreements.

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. Any new regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of any 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, inter alia, require: - changes to manufacturing methods;- recall, replacement, or discontinuance of products; and - additional recordkeeping. Each of these would likely entail substantial time and cost and could adversely affect our business and our financial results.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, sensitive third-party data, business plans, transactions, and financial information. Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security. In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws. In the past few years, numerous U.S. states-including California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah-have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 ("CPRA"), (collectively, "CCPA") applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for fines of up to $7,500 per intentional violation and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Although the CCPA exempts some data processed in the context of clinical trials, the CCPA increases compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we maintain about California residents. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. While these states, like the CCPA, also exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these developments further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us, and the third parties upon whom we rely. Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards govern data privacy and security. For example, the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation ("EU GDPR"), the United Kingdom's GDPR ("UK GDPR"), Brazil's General Data Protection Law, and China's Personal Information Protection Law ("PIPL") impose strict requirements for processing personal data. For example, under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions; fines of up to 20 million Euros under the EU GDPR, 17.5 million pounds sterling under the UK GDPR or, in each case, 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater; or private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. In the ordinary course of business, we may transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area (EEA) and the United Kingdom (UK) have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the UK's International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. When our employees and personnel use generative artificial intelligence ("AI") technologies to perform their work, the disclosure and use of personal data in generative AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws regulating generative AI. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use generative AI, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages.

There are numerous U.S. federal, state, local and foreign health care fraud and abuse laws pertaining to our business, including anti-kickback, false claims and physician transparency laws. Our business practices and relationships with providers, patients and third-party payors are subject to scrutiny under these laws. These laws may impact, among other things, our potential sales, marketing, patient assistance and education programs. We may also be subject to patient information privacy and security regulation by both the federal government, states and foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include: - the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving, or paying remuneration directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of goods or services for which payment may be made in whole or part by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care programs. Remuneration has been broadly defined to include anything of value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced price items and services. The intent standard under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the ACA to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it, in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA provides 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 FCA. Additionally, many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs as well as private payors. Violations of the federal or state anti-kickback laws can result in exclusion from federal and state health care programs and substantial civil and criminal penalties;- the federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalties laws, including the FCA, prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, false, fictitious or fraudulent claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs, and knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. As a result of a modification made by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, a claim includes "any request or demand" for money or property presented to the federal government. Even where pharmaceutical companies do not submit claims directly to payors, they can be held liable under these laws if they are deemed to "cause" the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers, promoting a product off-label, marketing products of sub-standard quality, or, as noted above, paying a kickback that results in a claim for items or services. In addition, activities relating to the reporting of wholesaler or estimated retail prices for pharmaceutical products, the reporting of prices used to calculate Medicaid rebate information and other information affecting federal, state and third-party reimbursement for such products, and the sale and marketing of such products, are subject to scrutiny under this law. For example, several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have faced enforcement actions under these laws for allegedly inflating drug prices they report to pricing services, which in turn were used by the government to set Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, and for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Private individuals or "whistleblowers" can bring FCA "qui tam" actions on behalf of the government and may share in recovered amounts. The FCA has been used to prosecute persons submitting claims for payment that are inaccurate or fraudulent, that are for services not provided as claimed, or for services that are not medically necessary. Proof of intent to deceive is not required to establish liability under the civil False Claims Act;- HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including any third party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or making false statements relating to healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation;- HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, including the Final Omnibus Rule published on January 25, 2013, which impose, among other things, obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information held by certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses, known as "covered entities," and "business associates." Among other things, HITECH made certain aspects of HIPAA's rules (notably the Security Rule) directly applicable to business associates - independent contractors or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain individually identifiable health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity, and their covered subcontractors. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal court to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney's fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. The Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights ("OCR") has increased its focus on compliance and continues to train state attorneys general for enforcement purposes. The OCR has increased both its efforts to audit HIPAA compliance and its level of enforcement, with one penalty amounting to $16 million. In addition, according to the United States Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers' personal information secure constitutes unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTCA") 15 USC § 45(a). The FTC expects a company's data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business, and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Medical data is considered sensitive data that merits stronger safeguards. The FTC's guidance for appropriately securing consumers' personal information is similar to what is required by the HIPAA Security Rule;- the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act and its implementing regulations, which require certain manufacturers of prescription drugs, devices and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program to annually report to CMS information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as nurse practitioners and physicians assistants) and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. In addition, Section 6004 of the ACA requires annual reporting of information about drug samples that manufacturers and authorized distributors provide to physicians; and - analogous state, local and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, and other states' laws addressing the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries, may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third party payors, including private insurers, and in some cases that may apply regardless of payor, i.e., even if reimbursement is not available; state laws that require drug companies to comply with the industry's voluntary compliance guidelines (the PhRMA Code) and the applicable compliance program guidance promulgated by the federal government (HHS-OIG) or otherwise prohibit or restrict gifts or payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state and local laws that require the licensure of sales representatives; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to drug pricing or payments and other transfers of value to healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information; and state laws related to insurance fraud in the case of claims involving private insurers. These and similar laws may be subject to amendment or reinterpretation, and implementing regulations may be revised or reinterpreted, in ways that may significantly affect our business. State and federal authorities have aggressively targeted pharmaceutical companies for alleged violations of these fraud and abuse laws based on improper research or consulting contracts with doctors, certain marketing arrangements that rely on volume-based pricing, off-label marketing schemes, and other improper promotional practices. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do 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 the health regulatory laws described above or any other laws or regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, debarment from contracting with the U.S. government, injunctions and private qui tam actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government. Companies targeted in such actions have, among other consequences, paid substantial fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars or more, have been forced to implement extensive corrective action plans, and have often become subject to consent decrees or corporate integrity agreements that severely restrict the manner in which they conduct their business, including the requirement of additional reporting and oversight obligations. Due to the breadth of these laws, the narrowness of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, and the range of interpretations to which they are subject, it is possible that some of our current or future practices might be challenged under one or more of these laws. Responding to investigations, enforcement actions and litigation can be time-and resource-consuming and can divert management's attention from the business. Any such investigation, action, litigation or settlement could increase our costs or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business and reputation. Even an unsuccessful challenge or investigation into our practices could cause adverse publicity and be costly to respond to. In addition, the approval and commercialization of any of our product candidates outside the U.S. will also likely subject us to non-U.S. equivalents of the healthcare laws mentioned above, among other non-U.S. laws.

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA"), and similar worldwide anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws, generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from offering, making or authorizing improper payments to government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with accounting provisions requiring the company to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations. Our internal control policies and procedures may not protect us from reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees, future distributors, licensees or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could result in fines, penalties or prosecution and have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and reputation.

Each of our BET inhibitor programs is in the early stages of development, involves a novel therapeutic approach and new chemical entity, requires significant further research and development and regulatory approvals and is subject to the risks of failure inherent in the development of products based on innovative approaches. New chemical entities derived from our InhiBET platform are molecules that have not previously been approved and marketed as therapeutics. As a result, the product candidates from our InhiBET platform may face greater risk of unanticipated safety issues or other side-effects, or may not demonstrate efficacy. For example, systemic BET inhibitors have historically targeted both BD1 and BD2 less selectively, causing gastrointestinal toxicity and bone marrow suppressive effects like thrombocytopenia. While we believe VYN202's high selectivity for BD2 may alleviate the therapeutic limiting toxicities observed by other less BD2-selective BET inhibitors, we may need to spend more time and greater resources verifying any toxicity associated with VYN202. Accordingly, the regulatory pathway for our new chemical entities may be more demanding and take a longer period of time.

SEC regulations limit the amount that companies with a public float of less than $75 million may raise during any 12-month period pursuant to a shelf registration statement on Form S-3, referred to as the baby shelf rules. As of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are subject to such rules. Under these rules, the amount of funds we can raise through primary public offerings of securities in any 12-month period using our registration statement on Form S-3, including our at-the-market equity offering program, will be limited to one-third of the aggregate market value of the shares of our common stock held by our non-affiliates. Therefore, we will be significantly limited in the amount of proceeds we are able to raise by selling shares of our common stock using our Form S-3 until such time as our public float exceeds $75 million. Furthermore, if we are required to file a new registration statement on another form, we may incur additional costs and be subject to delays due to review by the SEC staff.

Even if we receive approval of any regulatory filing for our product candidates, the FDA may grant approval contingent on the performance of additional costly post-approval clinical trials or REMS to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product, which could negatively impact us by reducing revenues or increasing expenses, and cause the product not to be commercially viable. Absence of long-term safety data may further limit the approved uses of products. The FDA may also approve our product candidates for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested, or may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, any such approved product will remain subject to extensive regulatory requirements, including requirements relating to manufacturing, labeling, packaging, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, distribution and recordkeeping. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements of the FDA, or if we discover previously unknown problems with any approved commercial products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes, we could be subject to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions or other setbacks, which could require us to take corrective actions, including to: - suspend or impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements;- refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to applications;- suspend any ongoing clinical trials;- suspend or withdraw marketing approval;- seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;- seize or detain products;- ban or restrict imports and exports;- issue warning letters or untitled letters;- suspend or impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements; or - refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to applications. In addition, various aspects of our operations are subject to federal, state or local laws, rules and regulations, any of which may change from time to time. Costs arising out of any regulatory developments could be time-consuming and expensive and could divert management resources and attention and, consequently, could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance.

We expect the healthcare industry to face increased limitations on reimbursement, rebates and other payments as a result of healthcare reform, which could adversely affect third party coverage of any future products and how much or under what circumstances healthcare providers will prescribe or administer our products, if approved. In both the United States and other countries, sales of our products, if approved, will depend in part upon the coverage and adequate reimbursement from third party payors, which include governmental authorities, managed care organizations and other private health insurers. Third party payors include government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a drug product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the drug product. Third party payors may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drug products for a particular indication. Third party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the cost effectiveness of medical products and services. A payor may not consider a product to be medically necessary or cost-effective. Moreover, a payor's decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved, or that other payors will similarly provide similar coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. Increasing expenditures for healthcare have been the subject of considerable public attention in the United States. Both private and government entities are seeking ways to reduce or contain healthcare costs. Numerous proposals that would effect changes in the U.S. healthcare system have been introduced or proposed in Congress and in some state legislatures, including reducing reimbursement for prescription products and reducing the levels at which consumers and healthcare providers are reimbursed for purchases of pharmaceutical products. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products, which in turn would affect the price we can receive for those products. Any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may also result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors, as private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Significant developments that may adversely affect pricing in the United States include the enactment of federal healthcare reform laws and regulations. Changes in the healthcare system enacted as part of healthcare reform in the United States, as well as the increased purchasing power of entities that negotiate on behalf of Medicare, Medicaid, and private sector beneficiaries, may result in increased pricing pressure by influencing, for instance, the reimbursement policies of third party payors. While healthcare reform legislation may have increased the number of patients who are expected to have insurance coverage for our product candidates, provisions such as the assessment of a branded pharmaceutical manufacturer fee and an increase in the amount of rebates that manufacturers pay for coverage of their drugs by Medicaid programs may have an adverse effect on us. It is uncertain how current and future reforms in these areas will influence the future of our business operations and financial condition. Since its enactment, there have been judicial, Congressional and political challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, while in office, then-President Trump signed two Executive Orders and other directives designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. Concurrently, Congress has considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of the ACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, in December 2017, Congress repealed the tax penalty for an individual's failure to maintain ACA-mandated health insurance, commonly known as the "individual mandate", as part of legislation enacted in 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the "Tax Act"). On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court held that state and individual plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge the individual mandate provision of the ACA; in so holding, the Supreme Court did not consider larger constitutional questions about the validity of this provision or the validity of the ACA in its entirety. In addition, there have been a number of health reform initiatives by the Biden administration that have impacted the ACA. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ("IRA") into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the "donut hole" under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the Affordable Care Act will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges, if any, and other efforts to modify, repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA. Although we cannot predict the form of any such replacement of the ACA may take, if any, or the full effect on our business of the enactment of additional legislation pursuant to healthcare and other legislative reform, we believe that legislation or regulations that would reduce reimbursement for, or restrict coverage of, any future products could adversely affect how much or under what circumstances healthcare providers will prescribe or administer any products we market in the future. This could materially and adversely affect our business by reducing our ability to generate revenues, raise capital, obtain additional licensees, and market our products, if approved. In addition, we believe the increasing emphasis on managed care in the United States has and will continue to put pressure on the price and usage of pharmaceutical products, which may adversely impact product sales. Recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, reduce the cost of certain products under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies. For example, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, "Promoting Competition in the American Economy," with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden's executive order, on September 9, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue to advance these principles. Further, the IRA, among other things (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare and (ii) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. These provisions take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. In response to the Biden administration's October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the CMS Innovation Center which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future. Further, on December 7, 2023, the Biden administration announced an initiative to control the price of prescription drugs through the use of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act. On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published for comment a Draft Interagency Guidance Framework for Considering the Exercise of March-In Rights which for the first time includes the price of a product as one factor an agency can use when deciding to exercise march-in rights. While march-in rights have not previously been exercised, it is uncertain if that will continue under the new framework. At the state level, individual states in the United States are also increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. It is likely that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for a pharmaceutical manufacturer's products or additional pricing pressure.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical government employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, and such delays could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors, CROs, distributors, prescribers, pharmacies and any partners with which we may collaborate may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these persons could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or unauthorized activity that violates: laws or regulations, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities; manufacturing standards; federal, state and foreign healthcare fraud and abuse laws and data privacy; or laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. In particular, sales, marketing and other business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws may restrict or prohibit a wide range of business activities, including research, manufacturing, distribution, pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commissions, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations, and serious harm to our reputation. In addition, federal procurement laws impose substantial penalties for misconduct in connection with government contracts and require certain contractors to maintain a code of business ethics and conduct. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our operating results.