UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

OR

Commission File Number : 001-14895

Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (617) 274-4000

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES ☒ NO ☐

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act.  YES ☐ NO ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  YES ☒ NO ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit such files).  YES ☒ NO ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  YES ☐ NO ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on The Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2020, was approximately $12,575,826,324.

The number of shares of Registrant’s Common Stock outstanding as of February 19, 2021 was 79,420,643.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The registrant has incorporated by reference into Part II and Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K portions of its definitive Proxy Statement for the 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed no later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.

FORM 10-K INDEX

-i-

Forward-Looking Information

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” section in Item 7, and other materials accompanying this Annual Report on Form 10-K contain forward-looking statements or incorporate by reference forward-looking statements. Statements that are not purely historical are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are often identified by words such as “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “will,” “may,” “estimate,” “could,” “continue,” “ongoing,” “predict,” “potential,” “likely,” “seek” and other similar expressions, as well as variations or negatives of these words. These statements address expectations, projections of future results of operations or financial condition, or other “forward-looking” information. These statements relate to our future plans, objectives, expectations, intentions and financial performance and the assumptions that underlie these statements. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to:

-2-

We undertake no obligation to update any of the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K after the date of this report, except as required by law or the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). We caution readers not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and other written and oral forward-looking statements made by us from time to time, are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements, including the risks, uncertainties and assumptions identified under the heading “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

-3-

Risk Factors Summary

Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including those described in Item 1A “Risk Factors”. These risks include, but are not limited to the following:

-4-

-5-

PART I

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on helping patients through the discovery and development of unique RNA-targeted therapeutics, gene therapy and other genetic therapeutic modalities for the treatment of rare diseases. Applying our proprietary, highly-differentiated and innovative technologies, and through collaborations with our strategic partners, we are developing potential therapeutic candidates for a broad range of diseases and disorders, including Duchenne muscular dystrophy (“DMD”), Limb-girdle muscular dystrophies (“LGMDs”) and other neuromuscular and central nervous system (“CNS”) related disorders.  

Our first commercial product, EXONDYS 51 (eteplirsen) Injection (“EXONDYS 51”), was granted accelerated approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) on September 19, 2016. EXONDYS 51 is indicated for the treatment of DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 51 skipping. EXONDYS 51 uses our phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomer (“PMO”) chemistry and exon-skipping technology to skip exon 51 of the dystrophin gene.

Our second commercial product, VYONDYS 53 (golodirsen) Injection (“VYONDYS 53”), was granted accelerated approval by the FDA on December 12, 2019. VYONDYS 53 is indicated for the treatment of DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 53 skipping. VYONDYS 53 uses our PMO chemistry and exon-skipping technology to skip exon 53 of the dystrophin gene.

Our third commercial product, AMONDYS 45 (casimersen) Injection (“AMONDYS 45”), was granted accelerated approval by the FDA on February 25, 2021. AMONDYS 45 is indicated for the treatment of DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 45 skipping. AMONDYS 45 uses our PMO chemistry and exon-skipping technology to skip exon 45 of the dystrophin gene.

Exon skipping is intended to promote the production of an internally truncated but functional dystrophin protein. The original PMO structure and variations of this structure that are so-called PMO-based (collectively “PMO-based”) are central to our proprietary chemistry platform. PMO technologies can be used to selectively up-regulate or down-regulate the production of a target protein through pre-mRNA splice alteration. PMO-based compounds have the potential to be designed to create more, less, or none of certain proteins, or produce analogues of endogenous proteins. This technology can be used to correct disease-causing genetic errors by inducing the targeted expression of novel proteins.

The PMO chemistry platform is highly adaptable, and we have developed next-generation PMO-based chemistries for advancing RNA-targeted therapeutics. These next-generation chemistries are specifically designed to enhance tissue targeting, intracellular delivery, target selectivity and drug potency. One of these novel technologies is based on cell-penetrating peptide-conjugated PMO (“PPMO”). The PPMO features covalent attachment of a cell-penetrating peptide to a PMO with the goal of enhanced delivery into the cell. Our most advanced PPMO product candidate is SRP-5051, which is designed to treat DMD in patients with genetic mutations amenable to exon 51 skipping.

As part of our multifaceted approach to DMD, we are also developing gene therapy technologies to treat DMD. We are clinically developing a product candidate, SRP-9001, that aims to express a smaller but still functional version of dystrophin (“micro-dystrophin”). We use a unique adeno-associated virus (“AAV”) vector called AAVrh.74 to transport the transgene – the genetic material that will make the protein of interest – to the target cells. Micro-dystrophin is used because naturally-occurring dystrophin is too large to fit in an AAV.

We are also developing gene therapy programs for various forms of LGMDs. Our most advanced LGMD product candidate, SRP-9003, is designed to transfer a gene that codes for and restores beta-sarcoglycan protein with the goal of restoring the dystrophin associated protein complex. SRP-9003 utilizes the AAVrh.74 vector, the same vector used in SRP-9001.

Our pipeline includes more than 40 programs at various stages of discovery, pre-clinical and clinical development, reflecting our aspiration to apply our multifaceted approach and expertise in precision genetic medicine to make a profound difference in the lives of patients suffering from rare diseases.

-6-

Objectives and Business Strategy

We believe that our proprietary technology platforms and collaborations can be used to develop novel pharmaceutical products to treat a broad range of diseases and address key currently-unmet medical needs. We intend to leverage our technology platforms, organizational capabilities, collaborations and resources to lead the field of precision genetic medicines, including the treatment of rare, neuromuscular and other diseases, with a diversified portfolio of product candidates. In pursuit of this objective, we intend to focus on the following activities:

Core Therapeutic Areas

DMD: We primarily focus on rapidly advancing the development of our potentially disease-modifying pipeline of exon-skipping, gene therapy and gene editing product candidates targeting DMD. DMD is a rare X-linked recessive genetic disorder affecting children (primarily males) that is characterized by progressive muscle deterioration and weakness. It is the most common type of muscular dystrophy. DMD is caused by an absence of dystrophin, a protein that protects muscle cells. The absence of dystrophin in muscle cells leads to significant cell damage and ultimately causes muscle cell death and fibrotic replacement. In the absence of dystrophin protein, affected individuals generally experience the following symptoms, although disease severity and life expectancy vary:

LGMDs are autosomal recessive, monogenic, rare neuromuscular diseases caused by missense and deletion mutations. These diseases affect males and females equally. Some types of LGMDs affect skeletal muscle and cardiac muscle. More severe forms of LGMDs mimic DMD. LGMDs as a class affect an estimated range of approximately 1 in every 14,500 to 1 in every 123,000 individuals. Currently, there are no available treatment options for LGMDs.

Charcot-Marie-tooth Disease, or CMT is a group of hereditary, degenerative nerve diseases that are caused by mutations in genes that produce proteins involved in the structure and function of either the peripheral nerve axon or the myelin sheath. CMT can cause degeneration of motor skills, resulting in muscle weakness, and limiting patients’ ability to walk or use their hands, and in some cases, can cause degeneration of sensory nerves, resulting in a reduced ability to feel heat, cold, and pain. CMT affects approximately 1 in every 2,500 individuals, while CMT type 1A, which is most often caused by an extra copy of the PMP22 gene, affects approximately 50,000 patients in the U.S. Most patients are diagnosed at infancy, while other patients develop symptoms at adolescence. Currently, there are no available treatment options.

-7-

Our Commercial Products

EXONDYS 51, our first commercial product, approved by the FDA on September 19, 2016, is indicated for the treatment of DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 51 skipping. EXONDYS 51 uses our PMO chemistry and exon-skipping technology to skip exon 51 of the dystrophin gene. PMO-based compounds are synthetic compounds that bind to complementary sequences of RNA by standard Watson-Crick nucleobase pairing. The two key structural differences between PMO-based compounds and naturally occurring RNA are that the PMO nucleobases are bound to synthetic morpholino rings instead of ribose rings, and the morpholino rings are linked by phosphorodiamidate groups instead of phosphodiester groups. Replacement of the negatively charged phosphodiester in RNA with the uncharged phosphorodiamidate group in PMO eliminates linkage ionization at physiological pH. Due to these modifications, PMO-based compounds are resistant to degradation by plasma and intracellular enzymes. Unlike the RNA-targeted technologies such as siRNAs and DNA gapmers, PMO-based compounds operate by steric blockade rather than by cellular enzymatic degradation to achieve their biological effects. Thus, PMOs use a fundamentally different mechanism from other RNA-targeted technologies.

EXONDYS 51 targets the most frequent series of mutations that cause DMD. Approximately 13% of DMD patients are amenable to exon 51 skipping.  

We are in the process of conducting various EXONDYS 51 clinical trials, including studies that are required to comply with our post-marketing FDA requirements/commitments to verify and describe the clinical benefit of EXONDYS 51.

VYONDYS 53, our second commercial product, approved by the FDA on December 12, 2019, is indicated for the treatment of DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 53 skipping. VYONDYS 53 uses our PMO chemistry and exon-skipping technology to skip exon 53 of the dystrophin gene. VYONDYS 53 has the potential to offer treatment to up to 8% of DMD patients who are amenable to exon 53 skipping.

We are in the process of conducting various VYONDYS 53 clinical trials, including studies that are required to comply with our post-marketing FDA requirements/commitments to verify and describe the clinical benefit of VYONDYS 53.

AMONDYS 45, our third commercial product, approved by the FDA on February 25, 2021, is indicated for the treatment of DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 45 skipping. AMONDYS 45 uses our PMO chemistry and exon-skipping technology to skip exon 45 of the dystrophin gene. AMONDYS 45 has the potential to offer treatment to up to 8% of DMD patients who are amenable to exon 45 skipping.

We are in the process of conducting various AMONDYS 45 clinical trials, including studies that are required to comply with our post-marketing FDA requirements/commitments to verify and describe the clinical benefit of AMONDYS 45.

For the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, the Company recorded net revenue of $455.9 million, $380.8 million, and $301.0 million, respectively, related to the sale of our products.

Our Pipeline – Key Programs     

SRP-5051 uses our next-generation chemistry platform, PPMO, and our exon-skipping technology to skip exon 51 of the dystrophin gene. The PPMO technology features covalent attachment of a cell-penetrating peptide to a PMO with the goal of enhanced delivery into the cell. In pre-clinical research, our proprietary class of PPMO compounds demonstrated an increase in dystrophin production and a more durable response compared to PMO. In addition, PPMO treatment in non-human primates results in high levels of exon-skipping in skeletal, cardiac and smooth muscle tissues. Pre-clinical trials also indicate that PPMOs may require less frequent dosing than PMOs, and that PPMOs could potentially be tailored to reach other organs beyond muscle.

In the fourth quarter of 2017, we commenced a first-in-human, single ascending dose, trial for the treatment of DMD using SRP-5051 in patients who are amenable to exon 51 skipping. In 2019, we commenced a multiple ascending dose study for the treatment of DMD with SRP-5051 in patients who are amenable to exon 51 skipping (“Study 5051-201”). In December 2020, we announced an interim analysis on clinical results from the 10 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg dose cohorts of Part A of Study 5051-201. We expect to announce results from the next cohort of Part A of Study 5051-201 at 30 mg/kg in the second quarter of 2021.

SRP-9001 (DMD, micro-dystrophin gene therapy program), aims to express micro-dystrophin – a smaller but still functional version of dystrophin.  A unique, engineered micro-dystrophin is used because naturally-occurring dystrophin is too large to fit in an AAV vector. SRP-9001 employs the AAVrh.74 vector, which is designed to be systemically and robustly delivered to skeletal, diaphragm and cardiac muscle without promiscuously crossing the blood brain barrier, which we believe makes it a strong candidate to treat peripheral neuromuscular diseases. An MHCK7 promoter was chosen for its ability to robustly express in the heart, which is critically important for patients with DMD, who typically die from pulmonary or cardiac complications. Lastly, the transgene was designed to maintain spectrin-like repeats 2 and 3, which has been reported to be critical to maintaining muscle force.

-8-

In the fourth quarter of 2017, an investigational new drug (“IND”) application for the micro-dystrophin gene therapy program was cleared by the FDA, and a Phase 1/2a clinical trial in individuals with DMD was initiated (Study 101). In October 2018, Nationwide Children’s Hospital (“Nationwide”) presented updated results from Study 101 in four individuals with DMD enrolled in the trial. In March 2019, we presented nine-month functional and CK data from baseline from these four individuals, and twelve-month CK data from baseline from one of these individuals. In the fourth quarter of 2018, we commenced a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of SRP-9001 with the goal to establish the functional benefits of micro-dystrophin expressions (Study 102). We dosed all 41 participants in that trial and have begun dosing participants in the crossover phase of the study. In January 2021, we released top-line results for Part 1 of Study 102 (the 48-week assessment of the 41 participants) and interim expression results from Part 2 of Study 102 (the crossover phase).  We expect additional results from Part 2 of Study 102 in the first quarter of 2022.

We commenced dosing in Study 103, an open-label study evaluating the safety and expression of commercially representative material for SRP-9001, and expect to report biomarker and safety results from Study 103 in the second quarter of 2021.

SRP-9003 (LGMD, gene therapy program). We are developing gene therapy programs for various types of LGMDs. Our LGMD programs use the AAVrh.74 vector, the same vector used in the micro-dystrophin gene therapy program, to transfect a restorative gene. The most advanced of our LGMD product candidates, SRP-9003, aims to treat LGMD2E, also known as beta-sarcoglycanopathy, a severe and debilitating form of LGMD characterized by progressive muscle fiber loss, inflammation and muscle fiber replacement with fat and fibrotic tissue. SRP-9003 is designed to transfect a gene that codes for and restores beta-sarcoglycan protein with the goal of restoring the dystrophin associated protein complex.  SRP-9003 has generated positive pre-clinical safety and efficacy data utilizing the AAVrh.74 vector.  

A Phase 1/2a trial of SRP-9003 was commenced in the fourth quarter of 2018. In February 2019, we announced two-month biopsy data from the first three-patient cohort dosed in the SRP-9003 trial, and in October 2019, we announced nine-month functional data from these three patients. In June 2020, we announced safety and expression results from three clinical trial participants in the high-dose cohort measured at 60 days, and one-year functional data from three clinical trial participants in the high-dose cohort, and eighteen-month functional data from three clinical trial participants in the low-dose cohort. We expect to complete GMP runs for SRP-9003 in 2021.  We also expect to seek FDA confirmation to initiate our pivotal trial in 2021.

-9-

The chart below summarizes the status of our programs, including those with our strategic partners:

-10-

Manufacturing, Supply and Distribution

We have developed proprietary state-of-the-art Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (“CMC”) and manufacturing capabilities that allow synthesis and purification of our products and product candidates to support both clinical development as well as commercialization. Our current main focus in manufacturing is to continue scaling up production of our PMO-based therapies and optimizing manufacturing for PPMO and gene therapy-based product candidates. We have entered into certain manufacturing and supply arrangements with third-party suppliers which will in part utilize these capabilities to support production of certain of our product candidates and their components. In 2017, we opened a facility in Andover, Massachusetts, which significantly enhanced our research and development manufacturing capabilities. However, we currently do not have internal large-scale Good Manufacturing Practices (“GMP”) manufacturing capabilities to produce our products and product candidates for commercial and/or clinical use. For our current and future manufacturing needs, we have entered into supply agreements with specialized contract manufacturing organizations (each a “CMO”) to produce custom raw materials, the active pharmaceutical ingredients (“APIs”), drug product and finished goods for our products and product candidates for both commercial and clinical use. All of our CMO partners have extensive technical expertise, GMP experience and experience manufacturing our specific technology.

For our commercial DMD program, we have worked with our existing manufacturers to increase product capacity from mid-scale to large-scale. While there are a limited number of companies that can produce raw materials and APIs in the quantities and with the quality and purity that we require for our commercial products, based on our diligence to date, we believe our current network of manufacturing partners are able to fulfill these requirements, and are capable of expanding capacity as needed. Additionally, we have, and will continue to evaluate further relationships with additional suppliers to increase overall capacity as well as further reduce risks associated with reliance on a limited number of suppliers for manufacturing.  

Our commercial products are distributed in the U.S. through a limited network of home infusion specialty pharmacy providers that deliver the medication to patients and a specialty distributor that distributes our products to hospitals and hospital outpatient clinics. With respect to the pre-commercial distribution of our products to patients outside of the U.S., we have contracted with third party distributors and service providers to distribute our products in certain countries through our EAPs. We plan to continue building out our network for commercial distribution in jurisdictions in which our products are approved.

Our gene therapy manufacturing capabilities have been greatly enhanced through partnerships with Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (“Thermo”), Catalent, Inc. (“Catalent”) and Aldevron LLC (“Aldevron”). We have adopted a hybrid development and manufacturing strategy in which we are building internal manufacturing expertise relative to all aspects of AAV-based manufacturing, including gene therapy and gene editing supply, while closely partnering with first-in-class manufacturing partners to expedite development and commercialization of our gene therapy programs. We expect that our partnerships with Thermo and Catalent will support our clinical and commercial manufacturing capacity for our micro-dystrophin DMD gene therapy programs and LGMD programs, while also acting as a manufacturing platform for potential future gene therapy programs. The collaboration integrates process development, clinical production and testing, and commercial manufacturing. Aldevron is expected to provide GMP-grade plasmid for our SRP-9001 micro-dystrophin DMD gene therapy program and LGMD programs, as well as plasmid source material for future gene therapy programs, such as CMT and other neuromuscular and CNS related disorders.

Manufacturers and suppliers of our commercial products and product candidates are subject to the FDA’s current GMP (“cGMP”) requirements and other rules and regulations prescribed by foreign regulatory authorities. We depend on our third-party partners for continued compliance with cGMP requirements and applicable foreign standards.

Material Agreements

We believe that our RNA-targeted and gene therapy technologies could be broadly applicable for the potential development of pharmaceutical products in many therapeutic areas. To further exploit our core technologies, we have and may continue to enter into research, development or commercialization alliances with universities, hospitals, independent research centers, non-profit organizations, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and other entities for specific molecular targets or selected disease indications. We may also selectively pursue opportunities to access certain intellectual property rights that complement our internal portfolio through license agreements or other arrangements.

Roche

License, Collaboration, and Option Agreement

On December 21, 2019, we entered into a License, Collaboration, and Option Agreement (the “Collaboration Agreement”) with F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd (“Roche”) pursuant to which we granted Roche an exclusive license under certain of our intellectual property rights to develop, manufacture, and commercialize SRP-9001 in all countries outside of the U.S. We retained all rights to SRP-9001 in the U.S. The transaction closed on February 14, 2020.

-11-

Also, under the terms of the Collaboration Agreement, Roche granted us a license to use certain of its intellectual property rights to perform development activities worldwide under a joint global development plan, commercialize SRP-9001 in the U.S., and perform certain manufacturing and medical affairs activities worldwide. Such license is non-exclusive under Roche’s background intellectual property rights, exclusive in the U.S. under intellectual property rights developed by Roche under the Collaboration Agreement, and non-exclusive outside the U.S. under intellectual property rights developed by Roche under the Collaboration Agreement.

We intend to manufacture and supply all clinical and, upon approval in the relevant market, commercial supply of SRP-9001.

Roche Options and Negotiation Rights

Pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement, we granted Roche an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize the following products outside of the U.S.: (i) certain exon-skipping products that target the dystrophin gene to induce exon skipping, including eteplirsen, golodirsen, casimersen and SRP-5051; (ii) certain gene therapy products other than SRP-9001 that encode and directly express dystrophin or a derivative thereof; and (iii) certain gene-editing products that modify, repair, or activate an endogenous dysfunctional dystrophin gene. The products subject to Roche’s options are collectively referred to as the “Option Products.” Upon option exercise, the Option Product that is the subject of the option exercise will be included under the Collaboration Agreement as a product licensed to Roche subject to similar obligations, including with respect to development, manufacturing, commercialization, and cost-sharing as those that apply to SRP-9001.

Pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement, Roche has a right of first negotiation if we seek to grant a third-party license to (a) commercialize SRP-9001 in the U.S. or (b) commercialize any of our LGMDs products.

Exclusivity

Other than under the Collaboration Agreement, Roche may not perform any clinical trials for, or commercialize, any gene therapy product, gene-editing product, or antisense oligonucleotide for DMD for a period of five years following the execution of the Collaboration Agreement. The exclusivity period for one or more types of products may be extended if Roche exercises its option with respect to one or more exon-skipping products, gene therapy products, or gene-editing products, in each case, for a period of five years from the time of option exercise.

Development

The parties will use commercially reasonable efforts to conduct development activities with respect to SRP-9001 under the Collaboration Agreement pursuant to agreed-upon development plans. We will perform all development activities directed to obtaining and maintaining regulatory approvals for SRP-9001 in the U.S. and the European Union (“EU”), as set forth in a joint global development plan. Subject to certain exceptions, the parties will share the costs of the development activities under such joint global development plan. Roche will have sole responsibility to perform all development activities set forth in a territory-specific development plan for SRP-9001, including additional activities not set forth in the joint global development plan that are specifically directed to obtaining and maintaining regulatory approvals for SRP-9001 outside of the U.S. Roche will be solely responsible for costs arising from the territory-specific development plan for SRP-9001.

Governance

Governing committees will facilitate collaboration between the parties with respect to development, manufacturing, medical affairs, intellectual property protection, and commercialization of SRP-9001 and any other licensed products.

Financial Terms

In consideration for the rights that we granted and for prepaid funding for development activities, in February 2020, Roche and Roche Finance Ltd, an affiliate of Roche (“Roche Finance”), together paid us an up-front payment of approximately $1.2 billion, comprised of $750.0 million in cash from Roche and approximately $400.0 million from Roche Finance in exchange for 2,522,227 shares of our common stock, priced at $158.59 per share under the Stock Purchase Agreement described below. Additionally, we are eligible to receive up to $1.7 billion in regulatory and sales milestone payments with respect to SRP-9001.

In addition, the Collaboration Agreement provides that Roche will pay us royalties on net sales of SRP-9001, anticipated to be in the mid-teens.

In the event that Roche chooses to exercise its option with respect to one or more Option Products, we will be paid an option exercise fee upon each such exercise and the Option Products that are the subject of the option exercise will be subject to separate milestone payments and royalties on sales of such Option Product.

-12-

Term; Termination

Unless earlier terminated as described below, the Collaboration Agreement will continue with respect to SRP-9001 or any Option Product for which Roche has exercised its option, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, until the end of the royalty term for such product in such country. The royalty term expires on the later of (a) twelve years after first commercial sale in such country, (b) loss of regulatory exclusivity in such country and (c) expiration of all valid claims of specific licensed patents in such country.

Either party may terminate the Collaboration Agreement for the other party’s material breach if such breach is not cured within a specified cure period.

If Roche breaches its development or commercialization diligence obligations with respect to a licensed product or fails to develop or commercialize a particular licensed product in a particular region for a specified period of time, then we may terminate the Collaboration Agreement with respect to such licensed products in such regions.

Roche may terminate the Collaboration Agreement if we fail to supply SRP-9001 to Roche in accordance with the terms of the Collaboration Agreement and the supply agreements to be entered into between the parties. Roche may also terminate the Collaboration Agreement for convenience with extended advance notice, in its entirety or on a licensed product-by-licensed product and region-by-region basis.

The foregoing description of the terms of the Collaboration Agreement is not complete and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the text of the Collaboration Agreement, a copy of which is filed as an exhibit to this Annual Report.

Stock Purchase Agreement

On December 21, 2019, pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement, we entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with Roche Finance (the “Stock Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which, in February 2020, we issued and sold 2,522,227 shares (the “Shares”) of common stock to Roche Finance in a private placement for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $400.0 million, or $158.59 per share, with a fair value of $316.3 million.

The Stock Purchase Agreement contains other customary terms and conditions, including mutual representations, warranties, and covenants.

Myonexus

On May 3, 2018, we purchased from Myonexus, a privately-held Delaware corporation, a warrant to purchase common stock of Myonexus (the “Warrant”), which, in combination with amendments to the Myonexus certificate of incorporation, provided us with an exclusive option (the “Option”) to acquire Myonexus. In consideration for the Warrant, we made an up-front payment of $60.0 million to Myonexus. On February 27, 2019, we announced that we exercised the exclusive option to acquire Myonexus and, on April 4, 2019, we paid the Myonexus shareholders approximately $173.8 million and completed the acquisition of Myonexus.  We are required to make contingent payments to the former shareholders of Myonexus upon achievement of a threshold amount of net sales of Myonexus products and the receipt and subsequent sale of a Priority Review Voucher with respect to a Myonexus product.

BioMarin

License Agreement

On July 17, 2017, we executed a License Agreement (as amended on April 14, 2019, the “License Agreement”) with BioMarin Leiden Holding BV, BioMarin Nederlands BV and BioMarin Technologies BV (collectively, “BioMarin”), pursuant to which BioMarin granted us a royalty-bearing, worldwide license under patent rights (“Licensed Patents”) and know-how (“Licensed Know-How”) controlled by BioMarin with respect to BioMarin’s DMD program, which are potentially necessary or useful for the treatment of DMD, to practice and exploit the Licensed Patents and Licensed Know-How in all fields of use and for all purposes, including to develop and commercialize antisense oligonucleotide products that target one or more exons of the dystrophin gene to induce exon skipping, including eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen (collectively, the “Products”).

The license granted by BioMarin is exclusive, even as to BioMarin, with respect to the Licensed Patents, and is non-exclusive with respect to Licensed Know-How. Under the License Agreement, BioMarin has the option to convert the exclusive license under the Licensed Patents into a co-exclusive license (co-exclusive with BioMarin) (“BioMarin Co-Exclusive Option”).

-13-

Under the terms of the License Agreement, we were required to pay BioMarin an up-front payment of $15.0 million, and BioMarin is eligible to receive up to $20.0 million from us per dystrophin gene exon (other than exon 51) targeted by one or more Products in specified regulatory milestones, as well as an additional $10.0 million milestone, payable following the regulatory approval of eteplirsen by the EMA. BioMarin is also eligible to receive $15.0 million from us upon the achievement of $650.0 million in sales of Products, as well as royalties segmented by specified geographic markets, in some jurisdictions dependent on the existence of a patent, ranging from four (4) to eight (8) percentages of net sales on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis.

Milestones and royalties are payable with respect to eteplirsen (an exon 51 skipping Product), golodirsen (an exon 53 skipping Product), casimersen (an exon 45 skipping Product) and potentially other Products. For eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen, the royalty term will expire upon March 31, 2024 in the U.S., upon December 31, 2024 in the EU and no later than December 31, 2024 in other countries provided certain conditions are met. For Products other than exon 51 skipping Products, exon 53 skipping Products and exon 45 skipping Products, the royalty term will end on a country-by country basis upon expiration of granted Licensed Patents covering the applicable Product. The royalties for all Products are subject to reduction upon BioMarin’s exercise of the BioMarin Co-Exclusive Option. All royalties are subject to further potential reductions, including for generic competition and, under specified conditions, for a specified portion of payments that we may become required to pay under third-party license agreements, subject to a maximum royalty reduction.

Unless earlier terminated, the License Agreement will expire upon the expiration of the last-to-expire royalty term. Either party may terminate the License Agreement in the event of the other party’s uncured material breach. BioMarin may also terminate the License Agreement on a Licensed Patent-by-Licensed Patent basis under specified circumstances relating to patent challenges by us.

Settlement Agreement

On July 17, 2017, Sarepta and The University of Western Australia (“UWA”) on the one hand, and the BioMarin Parties and Academisch Ziekenhuis Leiden (“AZL”) on the other hand (collectively, the “Settlement Parties”), executed a Settlement Agreement pursuant to which all legal actions in the U.S. and certain legal actions in Europe (the “Actions”) would be stopped or withdrawn as between the Settlement Parties. Specifically, the terms of the Settlement Agreement required that existing efforts pursuing ongoing litigation and opposition proceedings would be stopped as between the Settlement Parties, and the Settlement Parties would cooperate to withdraw the Actions before the European Patent Office (except for actions involving third parties), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, except for the cross-appeal of the Interlocutory Decision of the Opposition Division dated April 15, 2013 of the European Patent Office of EP 1619249B1 (“EP ‘249 Appeal”) in which Sarepta agreed to withdraw its appeal and BioMarin/AZL agreed to continue with its appeal with Sarepta having oversight of the continued appeal by BioMarin/AZL.

Additionally, under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Settlement Parties agreed to release each other and the customers, end-users, agents, suppliers, distributors, resellers, contractors, consultants, services and partners of Sarepta or BioMarin (as applicable) from claims and damages related to (i) the patent rights controlled by the releasing party that are involved in the Actions, (ii) with respect to Sarepta and UWA, its patent rights related to the patent rights involved in the Actions, and (iii) with respect to BioMarin and AZL, all of the Licensed Patents and Licensed Know-How.

Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Sarepta made an up-front payment of $20.0 million to BioMarin.

University of Western Australia

In April 2013, we entered into an agreement with UWA under which an existing exclusive license agreement between the two parties was amended and restated and, in June 2016, we entered into the first amendment to the license agreement (the “UWA License Agreement”). The UWA License Agreement grants us specific rights to compounds for the treatment of DMD by inducing exon skipping. EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 fall under the scope of the license agreement. Under the UWA License Agreement, we are required to make payments of up to $6.0 million in the aggregate to UWA based on the successful achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones relating to EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53, AMONDYS 45 and up to three additional product candidates. As of December 31, 2020, $3.7 million of the $6.0 million development and regulatory milestone payments had been made. We are also obligated to make payments to UWA of up to $20.0 million upon the achievement of certain sales milestones. Additionally, we are required to pay a low-single-digit percentage royalty on net sales of products covered by issued patents licensed from UWA during the term of the UWA License Agreement.

Currently, the latest date on which an issued patent covered by the UWA License Agreement expires is November 2030 (excluding any patent term extension, supplemental protection certificate or pediatric extensions that may be available); however, patents granted from pending patent applications could result in a later expiration date.

-14-

Key Strategic Alliances

In connection with our multi-front battle against DMD and other rare neuromuscular diseases, we have entered into multiple partnering opportunities, including the ones described below. We believe that these collaborations, taken along with our own programs, represent a comprehensive approach to treating these rare neuromuscular diseases.  

Nationwide Children’s Hospital

In December 2015, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with Nationwide to acquire exclusive rights to its GALGT2 gene therapy program for neuromuscular related disorders.

In addition, in December 2016, we entered into an exclusive option agreement with Nationwide to acquire exclusive rights to their micro-dystrophin gene therapy program as well as a sponsored research agreement to conduct pre-IND research and conduct the first clinical trial with the lead micro-dystrophin gene therapy. In October 2018, we exercised our exclusive license option and an option under the sponsored research agreement and entered into an exclusive license agreement with Nationwide to acquire exclusive rights to its micro-dystrophin gene therapy program, which provides us with exclusive rights to commercialize SRP-9001.

Furthermore, in October 2018, we entered into an exclusive option agreement with Nationwide with respect to exclusive rights to its NT-3 gene therapy program for the treatment of certain CMT neuropathy subtypes, including CMT Type 1A.  The option agreement contains pre-determined economic terms for the exclusive license to be entered into upon us exercising our option.  

In addition, in March 2019, we entered into an exclusive option agreement with Nationwide with respect to exclusive rights to its calpain-3 gene therapy program for the treatment of LGMD Type 2A.   The option agreement contains pre-determined economic terms for the exclusive license to be entered into upon us exercising our option.

Duke University

In October 2017, we entered into a sponsored research and exclusive option agreement with Duke University, granting us an exclusive option to an exclusive license to intellectual property and technology related to certain CRISPR/Cas9 technology developed in the laboratory of Charles A. Gersbach, Ph.D. The underlying premise of Dr. Gersbach’s approach is to restore dystrophin expression by removing or “excising” exons from the dystrophin gene. This includes a strategy to excise exons potentially enabling treatment for a majority of the DMD patient population.

Genethon

In May 2017, we entered into a sponsored research agreement with Genethon, under which we have been collaborating with Genethon on the pre-clinical development of its micro-dystrophin gene therapy products for the treatment of DMD. In November 2019, we entered into a license and collaboration agreement with Genethon, under which we will collaborate and share costs with Genethon on the clinical development of such products for the treatment of DMD. Under such agreement, we received the exclusive right to commercialize such products in the majority of the world (primarily excluding the EU).  For the rights we received under such agreement, we made an up-front payment of $28.0 million; may be required to pay up to $236.3 million in development, regulatory and sales milestones; and upon commercialization, will be required to make tiered royalty payments based on net sales of licensed products.

StrideBio

On November 13, 2019, we entered into a collaboration and license agreement with StrideBio, Inc. (“StrideBio”), a leading developer of novel AAV capsids, to develop in vivo AAV-based therapies for up to eight CNS and neuromuscular targets. Pursuant to the agreement, we were granted an exclusive license on selected targets to leverage StrideBio’s capsid technology intended to enhance specific tropism to tissues of interest and evade neutralizing antibodies. StrideBio will conduct all IND enabling research, development and manufacturing for the first four CNS targets, which are MECP2 (Rett syndrome), SCN1A (Dravet syndrome), UBE3A (Angelman syndrome), and NPC1 (Niemann-Pick). Additionally, we have an exclusive option for up to four additional targets based on StrideBio’s capsid technology.

-15-

Under the terms of the agreement, StrideBio will be responsible for AAV capsid development, non-clinical development and manufacturing of preclinical candidates to be selected for advancement into clinical studies. The parties will also share early clinical development activities for certain selected targets, with Sarepta responsible for late stage development and commercialization of all targets. StrideBio received up-front consideration of $46.9 million, of which $29.4 million was in the form of Sarepta common stock and the balance in cash. In addition, StrideBio will receive significant future development, regulatory and commercial milestones upon the achievement of specified milestone events for each of the four programs. StrideBio will also receive royalties on worldwide net sales of any commercial products developed through the collaboration. Sarepta has also obtained an exclusive option to expand the collaboration to include up to an additional four targets with an up-front option payment of up to $42.5 million along with future downstream milestone and royalty payments, while StrideBio has an option to obtain co-development and co-commercial rights in the U.S. to one of the collaboration targets. In addition, Sarepta has made a commitment to invest in StrideBio’s next financing round that meets certain conditions.

Patents and Proprietary Rights

Our success depends in part upon our ability to obtain and maintain exclusivity for our products, product candidates and platform technologies.  We typically rely on a combination of patent protection and regulatory exclusivity to maintain exclusivity for our products and product candidates, whereas exclusivity for our platform technologies is generally based on patent protection and trade secret protection.  In addition to patent protection, regulatory exclusivity, and trade secret protection, we also protect our products, product candidates and platform technologies with copyrights, trademarks, and contractual protections.

We actively seek patent protection for our product candidates and certain of our proprietary technologies by filing patent applications in the U.S. and other countries as appropriate. These patent applications are directed to various inventions, including, but not limited to, active ingredients, pharmaceutical formulations, methods of use, and manufacturing methods.  In addition, we actively acquire exclusive rights to third party patents and patent applications to protect our in-licensed product candidates and corresponding platform technologies.

We do not have patents or patent applications in every jurisdiction where there is a potential commercial market for our product candidates. For each of our programs, our decision to seek patent protection in specific foreign markets, in addition to the U.S., is based on many factors, including:

We continually evaluate our patent portfolio and patent strategy and believe our owned and licensed patents and patent applications provide us with a competitive advantage; however, if markets where we do not have patents or patent applications become commercially important, our business may be adversely affected. A discussion of certain risks and uncertainties that may affect our patent position, regulatory exclusivities and other proprietary rights is set forth in Item 1A. Risk Factors included in this report, and a discussion of legal proceedings related to the key patents protecting our products and product candidates are set forth below in the footnotes to the tables in this section.

Certain of our product candidates are in therapeutic areas that have been the subject of many years of extensive research and development by academic organizations and third parties who may control patents or other intellectual property that they might assert against us, should one or more of our product candidates in these therapeutic areas succeed in obtaining regulatory approval and thereafter be commercialized. We continually evaluate the intellectual property rights of others in these areas in order to determine whether a claim of infringement may be made by others against us.  Should we determine that a third party has intellectual property rights that could impact our ability to freely market a compound, we consider a number of factors in determining how best to prepare for the commercialization of any such product candidate.  In making this determination we consider, among other things, the stage of development of our product candidate, the anticipated date of first regulatory approval, whether we believe the intellectual property rights of others are valid, whether we believe we infringe the intellectual property rights of others, whether a license is available upon commercially reasonable terms, whether we will seek to challenge the intellectual property rights of others, the term of the rights, and the likelihood of and liability resulting from an adverse outcome should we be found to infringe the intellectual property rights of others.

-16-

Currently, U.S. patents, as well as most foreign patents, are generally effective for 20 years from the date the earliest regular application was filed.  In some countries, the patent term may be extended to recapture a portion of the term lost during regulatory review of the claimed therapeutic.  For example, in the U.S., under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, a patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may be eligible for patent term extension (for up to 5 years, but not beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval) as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process.  In the U.S., only one patent may be extended for any product based on FDA delay.  In addition to patent term extension, patents in the U.S. may be granted additional term due to delays at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) during prosecution of a patent application.  We actively strive to maximize the potential for patent protection for our products and product candidates in accordance with the law.

Key Patents & Regulatory Exclusivities

Our products, product candidates and our technologies are primarily protected by composition of matter and methods of use patents and patent applications. A summary of granted composition of matter and/or methods of use patents that we own or control in the U.S. and Europe, which cover our products and late-stage clinical product candidates, is provided below. To the extent the product or product candidate indicated above the tables that immediately follow the name of such product is covered by a patent that is licensed to Sarepta, we may owe milestones and/or royalties to the indicated licensor in connection with the development and/or commercial sale of the product or product candidate.

Eteplirsen

-17-

The various types of regulatory exclusivity for which our products have been granted and our product candidates are anticipated to be eligible to receive are generally discussed below, under ‘Government Regulation’ – ‘Data and Market Exclusivities’ and ‘Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity’.  In connection with its FDA approval on September 19, 2016, the FDA granted EXONDYS 51 (eteplirsen) New Chemical Entity (“NCE”) exclusivity until September 19, 2021, and Orphan Drug Exclusivity until September 19, 2023.

Golodirsen

The various types of regulatory exclusivity for which our products have been granted and our product candidates are anticipated to be eligible to receive are generally discussed below, under ‘Government Regulation’ – ‘Data and Market Exclusivities’ and ‘Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity’.  In connection with its FDA approval on December 12, 2019, the FDA granted VYONDYS 53 (golodirsen) NCE exclusivity until December 12, 2024, and Orphan Drug Exclusivity until December 12, 2026.

Casimersen

-18-

The various types of regulatory exclusivity for which our products have been granted and our product candidates are anticipated to be eligible to receive are generally discussed below, under ‘Government Regulation’ – ‘Data and Market Exclusivities’ and ‘Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity’. In connection with its FDA approval on February 25, 2021, the FDA granted AMONDYS 45 (casimersen) NCE exclusivity until February 25, 2026, and Orphan Drug Exclusivity until February 25, 2028.

In addition to the foregoing composition of matter and method of use patents that protect eteplirsen, casimersen and golodirsen, we either solely own or exclusively license from UWA, BioMarin or AZL patents and patent applications in the U.S. and in major foreign markets that provide additional protection for eteplirsen, casimersen, and golodirsen, which cover the composition of matter, preparation and/or uses of the products and product candidates. These patents, and patent applications, if granted, would expire through at least 2038, such expiration dates not accounting for any patent term extension, patent term adjustment, supplemental protection certificate or pediatric extensions that may be available.

Platform Technologies

We separately own patents and patent applications in the U.S. and in major foreign markets that cover our proprietary PMO-based platform technologies (e.g., PPMO, PMOplus, PMO-X). These patents, and patent applications, if granted, expire through at least 2038, such expiration dates not accounting for any patent term extension, supplemental protection certificate or pediatric extensions that may be available.

Trademarks

Our trademarks are important to us and are generally filed to protect our corporate brand, our products and platform technologies.  We typically file trademark applications and pursue their registration in the U.S., Europe and other markets in which we anticipate using such trademarks.  We are the owner of multiple federal trademark registrations in the U.S. including, but not limited to, Sarepta, Sarepta Therapeutics, the double-helix logo, EXONDYS, EXONDYS 51, the EXONDYS 51 Logo, VYONDYS, VYONDYS 53, and the VYONDYS 53 Logo.   In addition, we have multiple pending trademark applications in the U.S. and in major foreign markets, including, but not limited to, AMONDYS, AMONDYS 45, and the AMONDYS 45 Logo.  Trademark protection varies in accordance with local law, and continues in some countries as long as the trademark is used and in other countries as long as the trademark is registered. Trademark registrations generally are for fixed but renewable terms.

Government Regulation

The testing, manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, exportation and marketing of our products are subject to extensive regulation by governmental authorities in the U.S. and in other countries. In the U.S., the FDA, under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and its implementing regulations, regulates pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject us to administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending marketing applications, withdrawal of approval of approved products, warning letters, untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, civil penalties and/or criminal prosecution.

-19-

U.S. Drug Approval Process

To obtain FDA approval of a product candidate, we must, among other things, submit clinical data providing substantial evidence of safety and efficacy of the product for its intended use, as well as detailed information on product composition, its manufacture and controls and proposed labeling. The testing and collection of data and the preparation of necessary applications are expensive and time-consuming. The FDA may not act quickly or favorably in reviewing these applications, and we may encounter significant difficulties or costs in our efforts to obtain FDA approvals that could delay or preclude us from marketing our products.

The steps required before a drug may be approved for marketing in the U.S. generally include the following:

Pre-clinical trials may include laboratory evaluations of the product chemistry, pharmacology, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the pharmacokinetics, metabolism, bio-distribution, elimination and toxicity of the product candidate. The conduct of the pre-clinical tests and formulation of the compounds for testing must comply with federal regulations and requirements. The results of the pre-clinical trials, manufacturing information, analytical data and a proposed first in human clinical trial protocol are submitted to the FDA as part of the IND, which must become effective before clinical trials may be initiated. The IND will become effective approximately 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA raises concerns or questions about the supportive data, or the study design, particularly regarding potential safety issues with conducting the clinical trial as described in the protocol. In this situation, the trials are placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor must resolve any outstanding FDA concerns before clinical trials can proceed.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the product candidate to healthy volunteers or patient participants under the supervision of a qualified principal investigator. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing the objectives of the study, the administration of the investigational product, study procedures, parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA as a submission to the IND. Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”) requirements and federal and state laws and regulations protecting study subjects. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) at or servicing each institution in which the clinical trial will be conducted. The IRB will consider, among other things, rationale for conducting the trial, clinical trial design, participant informed consent, ethical factors, the safety and rights of human subjects and the possible liability of the institution. The FDA can temporarily or permanently halt a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial subjects. The IRB may also require the clinical trial at a particular site be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with GCP or the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions.

-20-

Clinical trials typically are conducted in three sequential drug development phases (Phases 1, 2 and 3) prior to approval, and a portion of these phases may overlap. A fourth post-approval phase (Phase 4) may include additional clinical trials. A general description of clinical trials conducted in each phase of development is provided below. However, the number of study subjects involved in each phase of drug development for rare diseases can be significantly less than typically expected for more common diseases with larger patient populations:

A company seeking marketing approval for a new drug in the U.S. must submit the results of the pre-clinical and clinical trials to the FDA in the form of a marketing application, together with, among other things, detailed information on the manufacture and composition of the product candidate and proposed labeling, including payment of a user fee for FDA review of the application. The user fee is waived for an application for a product intended to treat an Orphan Indication. The FDA assesses all submitted marketing applications for completeness before it accepts them for filing. In some cases, the FDA may request additional information before accepting a marketing application for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the marketing application. Applications receive either standard or priority review. Under the current goals mandated under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (the “PDUFA”), the FDA has ten months in which to complete its initial review of a standard marketing application and respond to the applicant, and six months for a priority marketing application. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard or priority marketing applications. The review process and the PDUFA goal date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the marketing application sponsor otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission within the last three months before the PDUFA goal date. The FDA may refer an application to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. Though the FDA is not bound by such recommendations, it considers them carefully when making decisions. If the FDA’s evaluations of the marketing application and the clinical and manufacturing procedures and facilities are favorable, the FDA may issue an approval letter. If the FDA finds deficiencies in the marketing application, it may issue a complete response letter, which defines the conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the marketing application. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will issue an approval letter, authorizing commercial marketing of the drug. Sponsors that receive a complete response letter may submit to the FDA information that represents a complete response to the issues identified by the FDA. Resubmissions by the marketing application sponsor in response to a complete response letter trigger new review periods of varying length (typically two to six months) based on the content of the resubmission. If the FDA’s evaluation of the marketing application and the commercial manufacturing procedures and facilities is not favorable, the FDA may not approve the marketing application.

-21-

A sponsor may also seek designation of its drug candidates under programs designed to accelerate the FDA’s review and potential approval of marketing applications. For instance, a sponsor may seek FDA designation of a drug candidate as a “fast track product.” Fast track products are those products intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and which demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. If fast track designation is obtained, the FDA may initiate early and frequent communication and begin reviewing sections of a marketing application before the application is complete. This “rolling review” is available if the applicant provides, and the FDA approves, a schedule for the remaining information. Eteplirsen was granted fast track status in 2007.

The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (“FDASIA”) enacted and signed into law in 2012 amended the criteria for the fast track and accelerated approval pathways and, as a result, the pathways now share many common eligibility criteria. FDASIA provides both the sponsor companies and the FDA with greater flexibility and expedited regulatory mechanisms. The statute clarifies that a fast track product may be approved pursuant to an accelerated approval (Subpart – H) or under the traditional approval process. In addition, FDASIA codified the accelerated approval pathway as separate and apart from the fast track pathway, meaning that for drugs to be eligible for accelerated approval, they do not need to be designated under the fast track pathway. FDASIA reinforces the FDA’s authority to grant accelerated approval of a drug that treats a serious condition and generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality (“IMM”) that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit (i.e., an intermediate clinical endpoint). Approvals of this kind typically include requirements for appropriate post-approval Phase 4 clinical trials to confirm clinical benefit. FDASIA retains this requirement and further requires those studies to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit.

Additionally, FDASIA established a new, expedited regulatory mechanism referred to as breakthrough therapy designation. Breakthrough therapy designation, fast track, and accelerated approval are not mutually exclusive and are meant to serve different purposes. The breakthrough therapy designation is focused on expediting the development and review process and by itself does not create an alternate ground for product approval. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of a drug candidate as a breakthrough therapy if the drug is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The FDA issued guidance entitled “Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions––Drugs and Biologics” in May 2014.

Finally, if a drug candidate demonstrates a significant benefit over existing therapy, it may be eligible for priority review, which means it will be reviewed within a six-month timeframe from the date a complete marketing application is accepted for filing. A Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (“RMAT”) designation is also designed to accelerate approval for regenerative advanced therapies such as our gene therapy product candidates, but the exact mechanisms have not yet been announced by FDA.

We cannot be sure that any of our drug candidates will qualify for any of these expedited development, review and approval programs, or that, if a drug does qualify, that the product candidates will be approved, will be accepted as part of any such program or that the review time will be shorter than a standard review.

Holders of an approved marketing application are required to:

The FDA periodically inspects the sponsor’s records related to safety reporting and/or manufacturing; this latter effort includes assessment of compliance with cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved marketing application, including withdrawal of the product from the market.

-22-

Foreign Regulatory Requirements

We are pursuing regulatory approval of eteplirsen in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. In November 2016, we submitted a marketing authorization application (“MAA”) for eteplirsen to the EMA and the application was validated in December 2016. As we announced on June 1, 2018, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) within the EMA adopted a negative opinion for eteplirsen. In September 2018, the CHMP confirmed its negative opinion for eteplirsen, and the European Commission adopted the CHMP opinion in December 2018. During 2019, we sought follow-up EMA scientific advice for eteplirsen. Once data from our ongoing studies is available, we plan to evaluate future engagement with the EMA on potential next steps.

We have initiated key activities in support of the potential launch of our products in the EU, such as building out commercial infrastructure and scaling-up manufacturing. As of the date of this Annual Report, EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 have only been approved for sale and marketing in the U.S. by the FDA, and EXONDYS 51 has been approved in addition for sale and marketing in Israel by the Israeli Ministry of Health.

Thus, in addition to regulations in the U.S., our business is subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of our products.  Irrespective of whether it concerns an FDA approved or investigational drug, the commencement of clinical trials and the subsequent marketing of a drug product in foreign countries are subject to preliminary approvals from the corresponding regulatory authorities of such countries. For example, the conduct of clinical trials in the EU is currently still governed by the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and Directive 2005/28/EC laying down the requirements for the conduct of clinical trials in the EU and the principles and guidelines on GCP. Both Directives provide a system for the approval of clinical trials, which has been implemented through national legislation in the member states of the EU (“EU Member States”). Under this system, a sponsor must obtain approval from the competent national authority of an EU Member State in which the clinical trial is to be conducted, or in multiple EU Member States if the clinical trial is to be conducted in a number of countries. Furthermore, the sponsor may only start a clinical trial at a specific study site after the competent ethics committee has issued a favorable opinion. The Clinical Trials Application (“CTA”) must include the supporting information prescribed by Directive 2001/20/EC and Directive 2005/28/EC, corresponding national laws of the EU Member States, and as further detailed in the applicable guidance documents.

In April 2014, the EU adopted a new Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 to replace the current Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC. Although the new Clinical Trials Regulation has been adopted and has entered into force in 2014, it will only come into application in the EU Member States six months after the European Commission has confirmed the functionality of the new Clinical Trials Information System (“CTIS”), which is the centralized EU portal and database for clinical trials introduced by the Regulation. The Regulation is currently expected to enter into application mid-2021. When the Regulation enters into application, it will repeal the currently applicable Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and its national implementation legislations. It will also apply to clinical trials that were authorized under the previous legislation if they are still ongoing three years after the Regulation has come into operation. No legislation needs to be adopted to implement the new Regulation into national EU Member State law. The new Regulation provides an overhaul of the system, in order to harmonize the assessment of the submission and assessment of clinical trials conducted in EU Member States and to ensure greater consistency with the highest standards of patient safety in the EU. Specifically, the new legislation seeks to simplify and streamline approval of the clinical trials. Under the new coordinated procedure, the sponsor of a clinical trial is required to submit a single application to a reporting EU Member State. The reporting EU Member State will consult and coordinate with all other EU Member States in which the clinical trial is planned to be conducted. If the application is rejected, it can be amended and resubmitted through CTIS, the central EU portal. If an approval is issued, the sponsor can start the clinical trial in all EU Member States concerned. However, a EU Member State can in certain cases declare an “opt-out” from the approval. In such a case, the clinical trial cannot be conducted in such EU Member State(s). The Clinical Trials Regulation also aims to streamline and simplify the rules on safety reporting for clinical trials.

In order to obtain marketing authorization for a medicinal product in the EU, applicants are required to submit a MAA to either (a) the national competent authorities (through the decentralized, mutual recognition, or national procedures) or (b) the EMA (through the centralized authorization procedure). Applicants are required to demonstrate the quality, safety and efficacy of the medicinal product in the application for marketing authorization, which implies the requirement to conduct human clinical trials to generate the necessary clinical data. Furthermore, all applications for marketing authorization for new medicines have to include the results of studies as described in an agreed pediatric investigation plan (“PIP”) aimed at ensuring that the necessary data are obtained through studies in children, unless the medicine is exempt because of a deferral or waiver. Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council lays down the rules applicable to the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicinal products. The centralized procedure allows pharmaceutical companies to submit a single application to the EMA, which is followed by a single evaluation and which results in a single approval to market the medicinal product throughout the European Economic Area (the “EEA”), on the basis of a single market authorization. Approval via the centralized procedure is a two-step process whereby the CHMP first evaluates the MAA and issues an opinion on whether the medicinal product may be authorized or not (step 1). The CHMP opinion is subsequently sent to the European Commission (“EC”), which takes a legally binding decision to grant a marketing authorization (step 2). The marketing authorization is valid throughout the EU and is automatically recognized in three of the four European Free Trade Association states (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway). This allows the marketing authorization holder to market the medicine and make it available throughout the EEA. The timeframe for the first step of the centralized procedure (evaluation by the CHMP) opinion is 210 days from receipt of a valid application. However, the actual time needed to complete this first step is generally longer than the 210 days, since procedural clock stops are required in order for the applicant to respond to additional requests for information by the CHMP. Following a positive CHMP opinion, the EC has 67 days to issue its decision to grant the marketing authorization or not.

-23-

Accelerated evaluation of the MAA is possible in exceptional cases, following a justified request from the applicant, when a medicinal product is of a major public health interest, particularly from the point of view of therapeutic innovation. The CHMP determines what constitutes a major public interest on a case-by-case basis. Justifications must include the major benefits expected and present the arguments to support the claim that the medicinal product introduces new methods of therapy or improves on existing methods, thereby addressing, to a significant extent, the greater unmet needs for maintaining and improving public health. In case of an accelerated assessment, the timeframe for review of a MAA by the EMA’s CHMP is reduced to 150 days. The timeframe for the EC to issue its decision remains unaltered.

Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 defines in which cases the centralized application procedure must (mandatory scope) or may (optional scope) be followed. The centralized procedure is mandatory for medicinal products derived from biotechnological and other high-tech processes, orphan medicinal products, advanced therapy medicinal products and products indicated for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions, viral diseases and neurodegenerative diseases. For medicinal products that do not fall under any of the aforementioned categories, a submission via the centralized procedure is possible, provided that it concerns (i) a new active substance or (ii) product that can demonstrate a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation and for which approval would be in the interest of public health. Given the foregoing, our portfolio of innovative orphan products for neurodegenerative diseases is subject to the mandatory centralized procedure.

Innovative medicinal products which have been authorized in accordance with the centralized procedure, benefit from an eight-year period of data protection/exclusivity and a ten-year period of marketing protection/exclusivity. During the data exclusivity period, applicants for approval of generics of these innovative products cannot reference or rely upon data contained in the marketing authorization dossier submitted for the innovative medicinal product. Furthermore, the marketing protection entails that even if the generic product is approved, it cannot be placed on the market until the full ten-year period of market protection has elapsed from the initial authorization of the reference medicinal product. The marketing protection period can be extended to a maximum of eleven years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder for the innovative product obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies.

Similar to the U.S., marketing authorization holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA and/or the national competent authorities of the EU Member States. This oversight applies both before and after the granting of manufacturing and marketing authorizations. It includes compliance with EU GMP and GDP rules in relation to such activities as distribution, importing and exporting of medicinal products, rules governing conduct of pharmacovigilance (including good pharmacovigilance practices (“GVP”)) and requirements governing advertising, promotion and sale of medicinal products.

Failure to comply with the EU Member State laws implementing the EU Community Code on medicinal products, and EU rules governing the promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices, with the EU Member State laws that apply to the promotion of medicinal products, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or with other applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the relevant EU Member State authorities. This may include any of the following sanctions: fines, imprisonment, orders forfeiting products or prohibiting or suspending their supply to the market, orders to suspend, vary, or withdraw the marketing authorization or requiring the manufacturer to issue public warnings, or to conduct a product recall.

The approval process in other countries outside the U.S. and the EU varies from country to country, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for the FDA approval. In addition, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement for market access vary greatly from country to country. In all cases, clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Data and Market Exclusivities

In addition to patent exclusivities, the FDA and certain other foreign health authorities may grant data or market exclusivity for a newly approved chemical entity or biologic, which runs in parallel to any patent protection. Regulatory data protection or exclusivity prevents a potential generic competitor from relying on clinical trial data generated by the sponsor when establishing the safety and efficacy of its competing product. Market exclusivity prohibits any marketing of the same drug for the same indication.

-24-

In the U.S., the FDA will generally grant an NCE that is the subject of an NDA with five years of regulatory data exclusivity, during which time a competitor generally may not submit an application to the FDA based on a sponsor’s clinical data.  A competitor, however, may file an Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) seeking approval of a generic drug four years from the date of approval of the innovative product if it is accompanied by a so-called Paragraph IV certification. For a newly approved biologic that is the subject of a Biologics License Application (“BLA”), the FDA will generally grant 12 years of market exclusivity, during which time a competitor may not market the same drug for the same indication.  

In addition, the FDA may provide six months of pediatric exclusivity to a sponsor of a marketing application if the sponsor conducted a pediatric study or studies of a product. This process is applied to products developed for adult use and is initiated by the FDA as a written request for pediatric studies that applies to a sponsor’s product. If the sponsor conducts qualifying studies and the studies are accepted by the FDA, then an additional six months of pediatric exclusivity will be added to previously granted exclusivity, such as orphan drug exclusivity and NCE exclusivity, as well as certain patent-based exclusivities.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

In the U.S., the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or more than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the U.S. a drug for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that drug. An orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an application for marketing approval. An orphan drug designation does not shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process. The approval of an orphan designation request does not alter the regulatory requirements and process for obtaining marketing approval. Safety and efficacy of a compound must be established through adequate and well-controlled studies. If a chemical or biological product which has an orphan drug designation subsequently receives FDA approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is generally entitled to an orphan drug exclusivity period of seven years, which means the FDA may not grant approval to any other application to market the same chemical or biological product for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as where an alternative product demonstrates clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity. In addition, holders of exclusivity for orphan drugs are expected to assure the availability of sufficient quantities of their orphan drugs to meet the needs of patients. Failure to do so could result in the withdrawal of orphan exclusivity for the drug. Competitors may receive approval of different drugs or biologics for the indications for which a prior approved orphan drug has exclusivity.

Pharmaceutical companies can apply for the designation as an orphan medicine. In the EU, applications for orphan designation are evaluated by the EMA in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 141/2000. In order to qualify as an orphan medicine, the medicinal product must be intended to diagnose, prevent or treat a condition that is life-threatening or chronically debilitating, with a prevalence of no more than 5 in 10,000 people in the EU or for which it is unlikely that its sale would generate sufficient returns to justify the investment needed for its development. In addition, the sponsor is required to demonstrate that no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition has been be authorized in the EU or, if such method exists, the medicinal product is of significant benefit to those affected by the condition as compared to approved methods. The benefits of being granted orphan designation are significant, including up to ten years of market exclusivity. During this ten-year period, the EMA may not accept a new marketing application for a similar medicinal product for the same therapeutic indication as the approved orphan medicinal product. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) 1901/2006 on medicinal products for pediatric use, the ten-year orphan market exclusivity can be extended to a maximum period of twelve years upon the satisfactory completion of all the key elements of the agreed PIP. We have been granted orphan drug designation for eteplirsen in the EU.

Expanded / Early Access

In certain countries, drug products approved in the U.S. or the EU can be accessed by patients before the drug has obtained marketing approval in such country. There are various forms of this access including, but not limited to, the actual purchase of product by the purchaser, which is often times the government for patients, on a named patient basis, and providing the product free of charge on a named patient basis for compassionate use. Each country has its own laws and regulations that apply to these forms of access and the extent and nature of such laws and regulations vary by country. For example, in 2018, the so-called Right to Try Act became law in the U.S. The law, among other things, allows eligible patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase I clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a pharmaceutical manufacturer to make its drug products available to such eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.

We established a global EAP for eteplirsen and golodirsen in some countries where eteplirsen and golodirsen currently have not been approved. The EAP provides a mechanism through which physicians can prescribe our products, within their professional responsibility, to patients who meet pre-specified medical and other criteria and can secure funding.

-25-

Other Regulatory Requirements

In addition to regulations enforced by the FDA and foreign authorities relating to the clinical development and marketing of products, we are or may become subject to regulation under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and other present and potential future foreign, federal, state and local laws and regulations. Although we believe that we are in material compliance with applicable environmental laws that apply to us, we cannot predict whether new regulatory restrictions will be imposed by state or federal regulators and agencies or whether existing laws and regulations will adversely affect us in the future.

Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Laws

We are subject to various federal, state and local laws targeting fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry, including anti-kickback and false claims laws. Violations of fraud and abuse laws may be punishable by crime or civil sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, and/or exclusion from federal health care programs (including Medicare and Medicaid). Federal and state authorities are paying increased attention to enforcement of these laws within the pharmaceutical industry, and private individuals have been active in alleging violations of the laws and bringing suits on behalf of the government under the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”). Violations of international fraud and abuse laws could result in similar penalties, including exclusion from participation in health programs outside the U.S. Given the broad scope of these laws, our activities could be subject to scrutiny under the laws. If we were subject to allegations concerning, or were convicted of violating, these laws, our business could be harmed.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute generally prohibits, among other things, a pharmaceutical manufacturer from directly or indirectly soliciting, offering, receiving, or paying any remuneration in cash or in kind where one purpose is either to induce the referral of an individual for, or the purchase or prescription of, a particular drug that is payable by a federal health care program, including Medicare or Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or a specific intent to violate the statute. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute can result in exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental programs as well as civil and criminal fines and penalties of up to $104,330 per violation and three times the amount of the unlawful remuneration. A claim arising from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute also constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA. A new federal anti-kickback statute enacted in 2018 prohibits certain payments related to referrals of patients to certain providers (such as clinical laboratories) and applies to services reimbursed by private health plans as well as government health care programs.

Federal and state false claims laws generally prohibit anyone from knowingly and willfully, among other activities, presenting, or causing to be presented for payment to third party payors (including Medicare and Medicaid) claims for drugs or services that are false or fraudulent (which may include claims for services not provided as claimed or claims for medically unnecessary services). False or fraudulent claims for purposes of the FCA carry fines and civil penalties for violations ranging from $11,665 to $23,331 for each false claim, plus up to three times the amount of damages sustained by the federal government and, may provide the basis for exclusion from federally funded healthcare programs. There is also a criminal FCA statute by which individuals or entities that submit false claims can face criminal penalties. In addition, under the federal Civil Monetary Penalty Law, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General has the authority to exclude from participation in federal health care programs or to impose civil penalties against any person who, among other things, knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, certain false or otherwise improper claims. A federal healthcare fraud statute prohibits the knowing and willful execution, or attempt to execute, a scheme to defraud a health care benefit program, including private health plans, or obtain, through false or fraudulent pretenses, money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, such a health care benefit program.

The majority of states also have anti-kickback, false claims, and similar fraud and abuse laws and although the specific provisions of these laws vary, their scope is generally broad, and there may not be regulations, guidance or court decisions that apply the laws to particular industry practices.

Laws and regulations have also been enacted by the federal government and various states to regulate the sales and marketing practices of pharmaceutical manufacturers. The laws and regulations generally limit financial interactions between manufacturers and health care providers; require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government; and/or require disclosure to the government and/or public of financial interactions (so-called “sunshine laws”). State laws may also require disclosure of pharmaceutical pricing information and marketing expenditures. Manufacturers must also submit information to the FDA on the identity and quantity of drug samples requested and distributed by a manufacturer during each year. Many of these laws and regulations contain ambiguous requirements or require administrative guidance for implementation. Given the lack of clarity in laws and their implementation, our activities could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent federal and state laws and regulations.

-26-

Data Privacy and Security

We may be subject to privacy and security laws in the various jurisdictions in which we operate, obtain or store personally identifiable information.  The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect our business. Our ongoing efforts to comply with evolving laws and regulations may be costly and require ongoing modifications to our policies, procedures and systems. Failure to comply with laws regarding data protection would expose us to risk of enforcement actions and penalties under such laws. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

Within the U.S., there are numerous federal and state laws and regulations related to the privacy and security of personal information. For example, at the federal level, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended, and its implementing regulations establish privacy and security standards that limit the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information, or protected health information, and require the implementation of administrative, physical and technological safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information. While we have determined that we are neither a “covered entity” nor a “business associate” directly subject to HIPAA, many of the U.S. health care providers with which we interact are subject to HIPAA, and we may have assumed obligations related to protecting the privacy of personal information. States are increasingly regulating the privacy and security of personal information. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, which took effect on January 1, 2020, gives California consumers (defined to include all California residents) certain rights, including the right to ask covered companies to disclose the types of personal information collected, the categories of sources from which such information was collected, the business purpose for collecting or selling the consumer’s personal information, the categories of third parties with whom a covered company shares personal information, and specific pieces of information collected by a covered company.  The CCPA imposes several obligations on covered companies to provide notice to California consumers regarding their data processing activities. The CCPA also gives California consumers the right to ask covered companies to delete a consumer’s personal information and it places limitations on a covered company’s ability to sell personal information, including providing consumers a right to opt out of sales of their personal information.

In addition, we may be subject to privacy and security laws in the various jurisdictions in which we operate, obtain or store personally identifiable information. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect our business.  For example, the processing of personal data in the European Economic Area (“EEA”), is subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”), which took effect in May 2018. The GDPR increases obligations with respect to clinical trials conducted in the EEA, such as in relation to the provision of fair processing notices, responding to data subjects who exercise their rights and reporting certain data breaches to regulators and affected individuals. The GDPR also requires us to enter certain contractual arrangements with third parties that process GDPR-covered personal data on our behalf. The GDPR also increases the scrutiny applied to transfers of personal data from the EEA (including from clinical trial sites in the EEA) to countries that are considered by the European Commission to lack an adequate level of data protection, such as the United States.   The July 2020 invalidation by the Court of Justice of the European Union of the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield framework, one of the mechanisms used to legitimize the transfer of personal data from the EEA to the U.S., has led to increased scrutiny on data transfers from the EEA to the U.S. generally and may increase our costs of compliance with data privacy legislation. If our or our partners’ or service providers’ privacy or data security measures fail to comply with the GDPR requirements, we may be subject to litigation, regulatory investigations, enforcement notices requiring us to change the way we use personal data and/or fines of up to 20 million Euros or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, as well as claims by affected individuals, negative publicity, reputational harm and a potential loss of business and goodwill

Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement

We have an ongoing dialogue with payors globally with the goal of obtaining broad coverage for our products. To date, payors’ policies on coverage for our products have varied widely, including policies that allow broad coverage per the respective product’s prescribing information, policies that provide limited coverage and policies that have denied coverage. The majority of payors have policies that provide for case-by-case coverage or restricted coverage. Our revenue depends, in part, upon the extent to which payors provide coverage for our products and the amount that payors, including government authorities or programs, private health insurers and other organizations, reimburse patients and healthcare providers for the cost of our products.

Third Party Reimbursement and Pricing in the U.S.

Commercial Insurance. Coverage and reimbursement of our products vary from commercial payor to commercial payor. Many commercial payors, such as managed care plans, manage access to FDA approved products, and may use drug formularies and medical policies (which may include specific coverage requirements such as prior authorization, re-authorization and achieving performance metrics under value-based contracts) to control utilization. Exclusion from or restriction in coverage can reduce product usage.

-27-

Medicaid. Our products are eligible to be reimbursed by Medicaid. Medicaid is a joint federal and state program that is administered by the states for low income and disabled beneficiaries. Under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, participating manufacturers are required to pay a rebate for each unit of product reimbursed under the state Medicaid programs. The amount of the rebate for each product is set by law and depends in part on the prices at which our products are sold to certain other purchasers and may be subject to an additional discount if certain pricing increases more than inflation. State Medicaid programs and Medicaid managed care plans can seek additional “supplemental” rebates from manufacturers in connection with favorable positioning on formularies.

Medicare. Medicare is a federal program that is administered by the federal government that covers individuals age 65 and over, disabled individuals and individuals with certain conditions. Our products are eligible for reimbursement under Medicare Part B. Medicare Part B generally covers drugs that are usually administered by physicians or other clinicians. Medicare Part B pays for such drugs under a payment methodology based on the average sales price (“ASP”) of the drugs. Reimbursement levels and reimbursement methodologies have come under scrutiny and may be subject to change. See “Government Regulation – Healthcare and Other Reform.” The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) are also increasingly bundling drug reimbursement into procedure costs, which can severely decrease the reimbursement rates for some manufacturers’ drugs.

Federal Purchasers. Drug products are subject to discounted pricing when purchased by federal agencies via the Federal Supply Schedule (“FSS”). FSS participation is required for a drug product to be covered and reimbursed by certain federal agencies and for coverage under Medicaid, Medicare Part B and the Public Health Service (“PHS”) 340B drug pricing program. FSS pricing is negotiated periodically with the Department of Veterans Affairs. FSS pricing is intended not to exceed the price that a manufacturer charges its most-favored non-federal customer for its product. In addition, prices for drugs purchased by the Veterans Administration, Department of Defense (including drugs purchased by military personnel and dependents through the TRICARE retail pharmacy program), Coast Guard, and PHS are subject to a cap on pricing (known as the “federal ceiling price”) and may be subject to an additional discount if pricing increases more than the rate of inflation.

PHS 340B Drug Pricing Program. To maintain coverage of drugs under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and Medicare Part B, manufacturers are required to extend discounts to certain purchasers under the PHS 340B drug pricing program. Purchasers eligible for discounts include hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of financially needy patients, community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants from the PHS.

Healthcare and Other Reform. In the U.S., federal and state governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reform delivery of, or payment for, health care, which include initiatives to reduce the cost of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the U.S. Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (the “Healthcare Reform Act”), which expanded health care coverage through Medicaid expansion, implemented the “individual mandate” for health insurance coverage (by imposing a tax penalty on individuals who did not obtain insurance) and changed the coverage and reimbursement of drug products under government healthcare programs. Under the Trump administration, there have been ongoing efforts to modify or repeal all or certain provisions of the Healthcare Reform Act.  Tax reform legislation was enacted at the end of 2017 that includes provisions that will affect healthcare insurance coverage and payment, such as the elimination of the tax penalty for individuals who do not maintain sufficient health insurance coverage. The Healthcare Reform Act has also been subject to judicial challenge. In December 2018, a federal district court judge, in a challenge brought by a number of state attorneys general, found the Healthcare Reform Act unconstitutional in its entirety because once Congress repealed the “individual mandate” provision, there was no longer a basis to rely on Congressional taxing authority to support enactment of the law. The court reasoned that the “individual mandate” was not severable from the rest of the Healthcare Reform Act and found the entire Healthcare Reform Act was an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional authority. The case Texas v. Azar, which challenges the constitutionality of the Healthcare Reform Act, including provisions that are unrelated to healthcare reform but were enacted as part of the Healthcare Reform Act, was argued before the Supreme Court in November 2020. Pending resolution of the litigation, all of the Healthcare Reform Act but the individual mandate to buy health insurance remains in effect.

Beyond the Healthcare Reform Act, there have been ongoing health care reform efforts, including a number of recent actions. In 2020 and early 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has issued various rules that affect pricing or payment for drug products. For example, effective January 2022, revisions to the federal anti-kickback statute would remove protection for traditional Medicare Part D discounts offered by pharmaceutical manufacturers to PBMs and health plans. Additional healthcare reform efforts have sought to address certain issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including an expansion of telehealth coverage under Medicare and accelerated or advanced Medicare payments to healthcare providers. Some of these changes have been and may continue to be subject to legal challenge. For example, courts have temporarily enjoined a new “most favored nation” payment model for select drugs covered under Medicare Part B that was to take effect on January 1, 2021 and would limit payment based on international drug price. The nature and scope of health care reform in the wake of the transition from the Trump administration to the Biden administration remains uncertain, although President Biden supported reforms to lower drug prices during his campaign for the presidency. Adoption of new healthcare reform legislation at the federal or state level could affect demand for, or pricing of, our products or product candidates if approved for sale. We cannot predict, however, the ultimate content, timing or effect of any healthcare reform legislation or action, or its impact on us, and healthcare reform could increase compliance costs and may adversely affect our future business and financial results.

-28-

There have also been efforts by government officials or legislators to implement measures to regulate prices or payment for pharmaceutical products, including legislation on drug importation. Recently, there has been considerable public and government scrutiny of pharmaceutical pricing and proposals to address the perceived high cost of pharmaceuticals.  There have also been recent state legislative efforts to address drug costs, which generally have focused on increasing transparency around drug costs or limiting drug prices. Certain state legislation has been subject to legal challenges. Adoption of new legislation regulating drug pricing at the federal or state level could further affect demand for, or pricing of, our products.

General legislative cost control measures may also affect reimbursement for our products. The Budget Control Act of 2011, as amended, resulted in the imposition of 2% reductions in Medicare (but not Medicaid) payments to providers in 2013 and remains in effect through 2030 (except May 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021) unless additional Congressional action is taken. Any significant spending reductions affecting Medicare, Medicaid or other publicly funded or subsidized health programs that may be implemented and/or any significant taxes or fees that may be imposed on us could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

Third Party Reimbursement and Pricing outside the U.S.

We currently have no products approved for marketing outside the U.S., other than a marketing authorization for EXONDYS 51 in Israel. We may need to conduct long-term pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of our products. In the EU and certain other territories, price controls and Health Technology Assessments for new, highly priced medicines are expected. Uncertainty exists about the pricing and reimbursement status of newly approved products in the EU. Criteria such as cost-effectiveness, cost per quality-adjusted life year, budget impact, or others, in addition to the clinical benefit, are often required to demonstrate added value or benefit of a drug and vary by country. Third party reimbursement limits may reduce the demand for our products. The pace of the application process in some countries could also delay commercial product launches. Gaining acceptance of our product pipeline and an economically viable reimbursement terms in the EU and other markets will require strong education and awareness efforts around DMD as well as strong data supporting its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are intensely competitive, and any product candidate developed by us would likely compete with existing drugs and therapies. There are many pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, public and private universities, government agencies and research organizations that compete with us in developing various approaches to the treatment of rare, neuromuscular and other diseases. Many of these organizations have substantially greater financial, technical, manufacturing and marketing resources than we have. Several of them have developed or are developing therapies that could be used for treatment of the same diseases that we are targeting. In addition, some of these competitors have significantly greater commercial infrastructures than we have. Our ability to compete successfully will depend largely on:

EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 were the first three disease modifying therapeutics approved by FDA for the treatment of DMD for patients with a confirmed mutation that is amenable to exon 51 skipping, exon 53 skipping or exon 45 skipping, respectively.  However, in the field of DMD alone, these products and those in our pipeline face a variety of competitors who either have FDA approval or are being clinically developed for the treatment of DMD.  In addition, there are many companies who have announced plans to transition pre-clinical candidates to clinical development for the treatment of DMD.  While we are uniquely positioned to be pursuing disease-modifying therapies for DMD based on our RNA, gene therapy and gene editing platforms, our competitors may also pursue therapies based on any or all of the platforms or modalities that are competitive with ours. The following paragraphs summarize some of these competitors of interest that have disease-modifying therapeutics commercially available or in clinical development.

-29-

Nippon Shinyaku Co. Ltd. (“Nippon”) has an exon 53 skipping candidate, VILTEPSO (viltolarsen) (codenamed: NS-065/NCNP-01), that is a morpholino based oligonucleotide.  On March 25, 2020, Nippon announced that the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (“MHLW”) has approved Viltepso Intravenous Infusion 250 mg (viltolarsen) for the treatment of patients with DMD who are amendable to exon 53 skipping therapy making it the first regulatory approval for viltolarsen in the world and the first non-steroidal treatment for DMD approved in Japan. Nippon further announced on August 13, 2020 that the FDA approved VILTEPSO (viltolarsen) injection for patients with DMD who are amenable to exon 53 skipping therapy.  Nippon has announced plans to pursue global registration for viltolarsen.  

Wave Life Sciences (“Wave”) is developing oligonucleotides for the treatment of DMD.  It was developing an exon 51 skipping product candidate for DMD, suvodirsen (WVE-210201) until on December 16, 2019, Wave announced the discontinuation of suvodirsen development for DMD (exon 51 amenable patients). Wave more recently reported its intent to develop an exon 53 skipping product candidate, WVE-N531, with plans to submit a CTA in 2021.  

Daiichi Sankyo (“Daiichi”) has reported a phase 1/2 clinical trial conducted in Japan for its exon 45 skipping oligonucleotide candidate, DS-5141b. In April 2018, Daiichi announced top-line results of the Phase 1/2 clinical trial of DS-5141 and that Daiichi will continue to develop DS-5141b.  Daiichi is sponsoring a Phase 2 clinical trial of DS-5141b.  

Solid Biosciences, LLC (“Solid”) has reported that its micro-dystrophin gene transfer product candidate for DMD, SGT-001 began a Phase 2 clinical study (“IGNITE DMD”) in December 2017.  SGT-001 was granted fast track designation by the FDA in October 2018, orphan drug designation in August 2016, and rare pediatric disease designation in 2017. In Europe, orphan designation was granted in September 2016. In February 2019, Solid reported micro-dystrophin expression data for the first three patients in its clinical trial and announced plans to continue the study at a higher dose pending FDA and IRB approval.  Solid announced on January 9, 2020 that in response to the FDA placing the SGT-001 IGNITE DMD trial on clinical hold, previously announced in November 2019, it is conducting its analyses of SGT-001 to determine how to address the clinical hold and resume dosing.  Solid recently announced that it has been cleared to resume dosing in its IGNITE DMD clinical trial.

Pfizer Inc. (“Pfizer”), following its acquisition of Bamboo Therapeutics, Inc., initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial in January 2018 to test the safety and tolerability of its AAV-9 / mini-dystrophin gene transfer product candidate for DMD, PF-06939926/BMB-D001. The related orphan designation was granted in Europe in August 2016, and in the U.S. in May 2017. Rare pediatric disease designation was granted by the FDA in April 2018.  In June 2019, Pfizer presented initial Phase 1b clinical data on PF-06939926.  In January 2021, Pfizer announced the first dose of its Phase 3 CIFFREO study that will evaluate the efficacy and safety of PF-06939926 in boys with DMD.

There are several companies in addition to those mentioned above that are pursuing disease modifying programs for DMD that are at the pre-clinical stage.  These companies are pursuing oligonucleotides, gene transfer therapy or gene editing.  Some of these pre-clinical approaches have been announced by BioMarin, Ultragenyx, Dyne Therapeutics, Avidity, Regenxbio, Astellas and Exonics (Vertex).  Other companies continue to pursue development and approval of products for the treatment of DMD and their products may or may not prove to be safer and/or more efficacious than the products and product candidates in our DMD pipeline.  Regarding any of these competitors, it is unknown if clinical development of these or other compounds is planned or would be continued.

Additionally, companies such as Santhera, PTC Therapeutics, Fibrogen, ReveraGen, Capricor Therapeutics, BioPhytis, Mallinckrodt, and Antisense Therapeutics have product candidates with mechanisms of action distinct from ours in different stages of development or approval in DMD which we believe could be seen as complementary to exon skipping and not a direct replacement of our products or product candidates at this time.

In addition, several companies and institutions have recently entered into collaborations or other agreements for the development of product candidates, including mRNA, gene (CRISPR, AAV, etc.) or small molecule therapies that are potential competitors to therapies being developed by us in the muscular dystrophy, neuromuscular, CNS and rare disease space, including but not limited to Audentes (now Astella), Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, 4D Molecular Therapeutics, Biogen Inc., Ionis, Synthena AG, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Takeda, Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Moderna Therapeutics, Inc., Akashi, Oxford University, Exonics Therapeutics (acquired by Vertex Pharmaceuticals), CRISPR Therapeutics and Editas Medicine.

Platform Technology Competition. We believe that other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies share a focus on RNA-targeted drug discovery and development. Competitors with respect to our RNA-targeted technologies include, but are not limited to, Alnylam, Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corp., Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Ionis, BioMarin, Sanofi, Synthena AG, Roche Innovation Center Copenhagen (formerly Santaris Pharma A/S), Shire plc (now Takeda), Nippon, Daiichi Sankyo, Moderna Therapeutics, Avidity, Dyne Therapeutics, Stoke Therapeutics and Wave.

-30-

Human Capital Resources

Our urgent mission – to engineer precision genetic medicine for rare diseases that devastate lives and cut futures short – is dependent on our ability to attract, develop and retain the industry’s best and brightest talent across all dimensions of diversity. This understanding informs our approach to managing our human capital resources.

General Information. As of December 31, 2020, we had 866 employees globally, 461 of whom hold advanced degrees. Of these employees, 494 are engaged directly in research and development activities and 372 are in selling and general and administration. None of our employees in the United States are covered by collective bargaining agreements and we consider relations with our employees to be good.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion. We strive to promote diversity, inclusion and equal opportunity across the organization. In the area of gender diversity, representation of women has increased over the past several years: in 2017 and 2018, women made up 51% of our workforce, and in 2019, this percentage increased to 54%. As of December 31, 2020, women made up 55% of our workforce. The number of women in leadership positions has also consistently increased. In 2017, women represented 35% of the leadership positions at the Director level and above. This percentage increased to 36% in 2018, 44% in 2019 and 47% as of December 31, 2020. As of December 31, 2020, women held 28.6% of the seats of our Board of Directors, including the Chair of the Board.

Racial and ethnic diversity has also increased in the past few years, from 23% of our workforce being racially/ethnically diverse in 2017 and 2018, to 26% in 2019 and 29% as of December 31, 2020. As of December 31, 2020, 44% of our Executive Committee, which represents the most senior leadership positions in the Company, is diverse based on gender and ethnicity.

Compensation, Benefits and Ongoing Professional Development. We are committed to rewarding, supporting, and developing the employees who make it possible to deliver on our strategy. To that end, we offer a comprehensive total rewards package that includes market-competitive pay, broad-based equity grants and bonuses, healthcare benefits, pension and retirement savings plans, paid time off and family leave, caregiving support, fitness subsidies, tuition reimbursement and an Employee Assistance Program.  We offer robust onsite learning opportunities for employees at every stage in their career, and in 2020 we launched ELEVATE – our leadership development program, the participants of which reflect ethnic, racial and gender diversity. In recognition of the new challenges the COVID-19 pandemic brought, we took various steps to support our employees, including by transitioning to remote work and by offering flexible schedule, childcare assistance and sessions focused on resilience and happiness in uncertain times. At the same time, we protected our facility-dependent employees, including those needed to maintain manufacturing and clinical research, by instituting strict protocols designed to ensure they remain healthy.  

General Corporate Information

We were originally incorporated in the State of Oregon on July 22, 1980, and on June 6, 2013, we reincorporated in the State of Delaware. Our principal executive offices are located at 215 First Street, Suite 415, Cambridge, MA 02142 and our telephone number is (617) 274-4000. Our common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “SRPT”.

While we achieve revenue from our products in the U.S. and through distribution of eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen through our EAP outside the U.S., we are likely to continue to incur operating losses in the near term associated with our ongoing operations, research and development activities and potential business development activities. For more information about our revenues and operating losses, see Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

As of December 31, 2020, we had approximately $1,947.8 million of cash, cash equivalents and investments, consisting of $1,502.6 million of cash and cash equivalents, $435.9 million of short-term investments and $9.3 million of long-term restricted cash investments. We believe that our balance of cash, cash equivalents and investments is sufficient to fund our current operational plan for at least the next twelve months. In addition to pursuing additional cash resources through public or private financings, we may also seek to enter into contracts, including collaborations or licensing agreements with respect to our technologies, with third parties, including government entities.

-31-

Where You Can Find Additional Information

We make available free of charge through our corporate website, www.sarepta.com, our annual reports, quarterly reports, current reports, proxy statements and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed or furnished with the SEC. These reports may also be obtained without charge by submitting a written request via mail to Investor Relations, Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc., 215 First Street, Suite 415, Cambridge, MA 02142 or by e-mail to investorrelations@sarepta.com. Our internet website and the information contained therein or incorporated therein are not intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding reports that we file or furnish electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov.

We have adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and written charters for our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.  Each of the foregoing is available on our website at www.sarepta.com under “For Investors—Corporate Governance.”  In accordance with SEC rules, we intend to disclose any amendment (other than any technical, administrative, or other non-substantive amendment) to the above code, or any waiver of any provision thereof with respect to any of our executive officers, on our website within four business days following such amendment or waiver.  In addition, we may use our website as a means of disclosing material non-public information and for complying with our disclosure obligations under Regulation Fair Disclosure promulgated by the SEC. These disclosures will be included on our website under the “For Investors” section.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Set forth below and elsewhere in this report and in other documents we file with the SEC are descriptions of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements contained in this report. Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting our operating results, past financial performance should not be considered a reliable indicator of future performance and investors should not use historical trends to anticipate results or trends in future periods. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. Other events that we do not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial also affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Business

We are highly dependent on the commercial success of our products in the U.S. We may not be able to meet expectations with respect to sales of our products or attain profitability and positive cash-flow from operations.

The FDA granted accelerated approval for EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45, respectively, as therapeutic treatments for DMD in patients who have a confirmed mutation in the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 51, exon 53 and exon 45 skipping, respectively. EXONDYS 51 is currently commercially available in the U.S. and Israel only, and VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 are currently commercially available in the U.S. only, although they are available in additional countries through our EAP. The commercial success of our products continues to depend on a number of factors attributable to one of our products or the products of our competitors, including, but not limited to:

-32-

In addition, the response to COVID-19 by healthcare providers has made it difficult for some patients to receive infusions or initiate treatment with our commercial products.  For this and other reasons, such as delays in processing reauthorizations and modifications to program benefits by insurers, we expect that COVID-19 will reduce our revenue from commercial product sales.

We experience significant fluctuations in sales of our products from period to period and, ultimately, we may never generate sufficient revenues from our products to reach or maintain profitability or sustain our anticipated levels of operations.

Even though EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 have received accelerated approval by the FDA, they face future post-approval development and regulatory requirements, which will present additional challenges we will need to successfully navigate.

The accelerated approvals for EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 granted by the FDA were based on an increase in the surrogate biomarker of dystrophin in skeletal muscles observed in some patients treated with these products. These products will be subject to ongoing FDA requirements governing labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping, and we are required to submit additional safety, efficacy and other post-marketing information to the FDA.

Under the accelerated approval pathway, continued approval may be contingent upon verification of a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. These post-approval requirements and commitments may not be feasible and/or could impose significant burdens and costs on us; could negatively impact our development, manufacturing and supply of our products; and could negatively impact our financial results. Failure to meet post-approval commitments and requirements, including completion of enrollment and in particular, any failure to obtain positive safety and efficacy data from our ongoing and planned studies of our products, would lead to negative regulatory action from the FDA and/or withdrawal of regulatory approval of EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 or AMONDYS 45.

-33-

Manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations. Drug product manufacturers are required to continuously monitor and report adverse events from clinical trials and commercial use of the product. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown adverse events or events of unanticipated severity or frequency, a regulatory agency may require labeling changes, implementation of risk evaluation and mitigation strategy program, or additional post-marketing studies or clinical trials.  If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as problems with a facility where the API or drug product is manufactured or tested, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product and/or the manufacturer, including removal of specific product lots from the market, withdrawal of the product from the market, suspension of manufacturing or suspension of clinical trials using the same manufacturing materials. Sponsors of drugs approved under FDA accelerated approval provisions also are required to submit to the FDA, at least 30 days before initial use, all promotional materials intended for use after the first 120 days following marketing approval. If we or the manufacturing facilities for our products fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

We are subject to uncertainty relating to reimbursement policies which, if not favorable, could hinder or prevent the commercial success of our products and/or product candidates.

Our ability to successfully maintain and/or increase sales of our products in the U.S. depends in part on the coverage and reimbursement levels set by governmental authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payors. Third party payors are increasingly challenging the effectiveness of and prices charged for medical products and services. We may not be able to obtain or maintain adequate third-party coverage or reimbursement for our products, and/or we may be required to provide discounts or rebates on our products in order to obtain or maintain adequate coverage.

We expect that private insurers will continue to consider the efficacy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of our products, including any new data and analyses that we are able to collect and make available in a compliant manner, in determining whether to approve reimbursement for our products and at what levels. If there are considerable delays in the generation of new evidence or if any new data and information we collect is not favorable, third party insurers may make coverage decisions that negatively impact sales of our products. We continue to have discussions with payors, some of which may eventually deny coverage. We may not receive approval for reimbursement of our products from additional insurers on a satisfactory rate or basis, in which case our business would be materially adversely affected. In addition, obtaining these approvals can be a time consuming and expensive process. Our business would be materially adversely affected if we are not able to maintain favorable coverage decisions and/or fail to receive additional favorable coverage decisions from third party insurers, in particular during re-authorization processes for patients that have already initiated therapy. Our business could also be adversely affected if government health programs, private health insurers, including managed care organizations, or other reimbursement bodies or payors limit the indications for which our products will be reimbursed or fail to recognize accelerated approval and surrogate endpoints as clinically meaningful.

In addition, the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in delays in processing reauthorizations and modifications to program benefits by insurers, making it difficult for patients to obtain or maintain favorable coverage decisions for our products. Furthermore, we cannot predict to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic, depending on its scale and duration, may disrupt global healthcare systems and access to our products or result in a widespread loss of individual health insurance coverage due to unemployment, a shift from commercial payor coverage to government payor coverage, or an increase in demand for patient assistance and/or free drug programs, any of which would adversely affect access to our products and our net sales.

-34-

In some foreign countries, particularly Canada and the countries of Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to strict governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take 12 to 24 months or longer after the receipt of regulatory approval and product launch. In order to obtain favorable reimbursement for the indications sought or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to collect additional data, including conducting additional studies. Furthermore, several European countries have implemented government measures to either freeze or reduce pricing of pharmaceutical products. If reimbursement for our products is unavailable in any country in which reimbursement is sought, limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be materially harmed. In addition, many foreign countries are referencing to other countries’ official public list price, hence an unsatisfactory price level in one country could consequently impinge negatively upon overall revenue.

We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our current and future products due to a number of factors, including current and future healthcare reforms and initiatives by government health programs and private insurers (including managed care plans) to reduce healthcare costs, the scrutiny of pharmaceutical pricing, the ongoing debates on reducing government spending and additional legislative proposals. These healthcare reform efforts or any future legislation or regulatory actions aimed at controlling and reducing healthcare costs, including through measures designed to limit reimbursement, restrict access or impose unfavorable pricing modifications on pharmaceutical products, could impact our and our partners’ ability to obtain or maintain reimbursement for our products at satisfactory levels, or at all, which could materially harm our business and financial results.

Additionally, our gene therapy product candidates represent novel approaches to treatment that will call for new levels of innovation in both pricing, reimbursement, payment and drug access strategies. Current reimbursement models may not accommodate the unique factors of our gene therapy product candidates, including high up-front costs, lack of long-term efficacy and safety data and fees associated with complex administration, dosing and patient monitoring requirements. Hence, it may be necessary to restructure approaches to payment, pricing strategies and traditional payment models to support these therapies.

The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. If we are unable to obtain adequate levels of reimbursement, our ability to successfully market and sell our products and product candidates will be harmed. The manner and level at which reimbursement is provided for services related to our products and product candidates (e.g., for administration of our products to patients) is also important. Inadequate reimbursement for such services may lead to physician resistance and limit our ability to market or sell our products.

Healthcare reform and other governmental and private payor initiatives may have an adverse effect upon, and could prevent commercial success of our products and product candidates.

The U.S. government and individual states have aggressively pursued healthcare reform, as evidenced by the passing of the Healthcare Reform Act and the ongoing efforts to modify or repeal that legislation. The Healthcare Reform Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers and contains a number of provisions that affect coverage and reimbursement of drug products and/or that could potentially reduce the demand for pharmaceutical products such as increasing drug rebates under state Medicaid programs for brand name prescription drugs and extending those rebates to Medicaid managed care and assessing a fee on manufacturers and importers of brand name prescription drugs reimbursed under certain government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. Other aspects of healthcare reform, such as expanded government enforcement authority and heightened standards that could increase compliance-related costs, could also affect our business. Under the Trump Administration, a number of actions were taken to modify or repeal prior health reform and to implement additional health reform.  There are, and may continue to be, judicial challenges to those efforts. In addition, although President Biden supported reforms to lower drug prices during his campaign for presidency, the nature and scope of health reform action that may be taken under his administration remains uncertain. We cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or effect of any changes to the Healthcare Reform Act or other federal and state reform efforts. There is no assurance that federal or state health care reform will not adversely affect our future business and financial results, and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative, judicial or administrative changes relating to healthcare reform will affect our business.

The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, waiver from Medicaid drug rebate law requirements, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs and the introduction of international reference pricing in the U.S.  We anticipate that the U.S. Congress, state legislatures and the private sector will continue to consider and may adopt healthcare policies intended to curb rising healthcare costs. These cost containment measures may include implementation or modification of:

-35-

We are unable to predict what additional legislation, regulations or policies, if any, relating to the healthcare industry or third party coverage and reimbursement may be enacted in the future or what effect such legislation, regulations or policies would have on our business. Any cost containment measures, including those listed above, or other healthcare system reforms that are adopted, could significantly decrease the available coverage and the price we might establish for our products and product candidates, which would have an adverse effect on our net revenues and operating results.

Our products may not be widely adopted by patients, payors or healthcare providers, which would adversely impact our potential profitability and future business prospects.

The commercial success of our products, particularly in the near term in the U.S., depends upon the level of market adoption by patients, payors and healthcare providers. If our products do not achieve an adequate level of market adoption for any reason, or if market adoption does not persist, our potential profitability and our future business prospects will be severely adversely impacted. The degree of market acceptance of our products depends on a number of factors, including:

We may not be able to expand the global footprint of our products outside of the U.S.

Even though EXONDYS 51 was approved for marketing in the U.S. and in Israel, and VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 were approved for marketing in the U.S., we may not receive approval to commercialize these products in additional countries. In November 2016, we submitted a MAA for eteplirsen to the EMA and the application was validated in December 2016. As we announced on June 1, 2018, the CHMP of the EMA adopted a negative opinion for eteplirsen. In September 2018, the CHMP of the EMA confirmed its negative opinion for eteplirsen, and the European Commission adopted the CHMP opinion in December 2018. During 2019, we sought follow-up EMA scientific advice for eteplirsen. Once data from our ongoing studies are available, we plan to evaluate future engagement with the EMA on potential next steps.

In order to market any product in a country outside of the U.S., we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements for approval in those countries regarding demonstration of evidence of the product’s safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, labeling, distribution, advertising, and promotion, as well as pricing and reimbursement of the product. Obtaining marketing approval in a country outside of the U.S. is an extensive, lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and the regulatory authority may reject an application or delay, limit or deny approval of any of our products for many reasons, including:

-36-

Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries might differ significantly from that required to obtain approval in the U.S. In particular, in many foreign countries, it is required that a product receives pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be distributed commercially. Many foreign countries undertake cost-containment measures that could affect pricing or reimbursement of our products. This can result in substantial delays, and the price that is ultimately approved in some countries may be lower than the price for which we expect to offer our products.

Marketing approval in one country does not ensure marketing approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one country may have a negative effect on the approval process in others. Failure to obtain marketing approval in other countries or any delay or setback in obtaining such approval would impair our ability to develop foreign markets for our products and could adversely affect our business and financial condition. In addition, failure to obtain approval in one country or area may affect sales under the EAP in other countries or areas. Even if we are successful in obtaining regulatory approval of our products in additional countries, our revenue earning capacity will depend on commercial and medical infrastructure, pricing and reimbursement negotiations and decisions with third party payors, including government payors.

In addition, we have granted Roche an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive license to commercialize certain products, including eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen, outside of the U.S.  If this option is exercised, Roche will have sole control over and decision-making authority with respect to the commercialization of such products outside the U.S.

We cannot predict whether historical revenues from eteplirsen and golodirsen through our EAP outside the U.S. will continue or whether we will be able to continue to distribute eteplirsen and golodirsen through our EAP.

We established a global EAP for eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen in countries where these products currently have not been approved. While we generate revenue from the distribution of these products through our EAP, we cannot predict whether historical revenues from this program will continue, whether we will be able to continue to distribute our products through our EAP, or whether revenues will exceed revenues historically generated from sales through our EAP. Reimbursement through national EAPs may cease to be available if authorization for an EAP expires or is terminated. For example, healthcare providers in EAP jurisdictions may not be convinced that their patients benefit sufficiently from our products or alternatively, may prefer to wait until such time as our products are approved by a regulatory authority in their country before prescribing any of our products. Even if a healthcare provider is interested in obtaining access to our products for its patient through the EAP, the patient will not be able to obtain access to our products if funding for the drug is not secured.

Any failure to maintain revenues from sales of eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen through our EAP and/or to generate revenues from commercial sales of these products exceeding historical sales through our EAP could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

If we are unable to successfully maintain and further develop internal commercialization capabilities, sales of our products may be negatively impacted.

We have hired and trained a commercial team and put in the organizational infrastructure we believe we need to support the commercial success of our products in the U.S. Factors that may inhibit our efforts to maintain and further develop commercial capabilities include:

-37-

If we are not successful in maintaining an effective commercial, sales and marketing infrastructure, we will encounter difficulty in achieving, maintaining or increasing projected sales of our products in the U.S., which would adversely affect our business and financial condition.

If we are unable to execute effectively our sales and marketing activities outside the U.S., we may be unable to generate sufficient product revenue.

EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 are our first, second and third commercial products, respectively. As a result, our sales, marketing, managerial and other non-technical capabilities are relatively new in the U.S. The establishment and development of our commercial infrastructure outside of the U.S. will continue to be expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to successfully develop this capability in a timely manner or at all. If we are unable to establish adequate manufacturing, sales, marketing, supply and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to generate product revenue and may not become profitable outside of the U.S. Furthermore, we have granted Roche an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive license to commercialize certain products, including eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen, outside of the U.S. If this option is exercised, Roche will have sole control over and decision-making authority with respect to the commercialization of such products outside the U.S.

If we fail to obtain or maintain regulatory exclusivity for our products, then we may not be able to protect our products from competition and our business may be adversely impacted.  If a competitor obtains an authorization to market the same or substantially same product before a product of ours is authorized in a given country and is granted regulatory exclusivity, then our product may not be authorized for sale as a result of the competitor’s regulatory exclusivity and as a result, our investment in the development of that product may not be returned.

In addition to any patent protection, we rely on various forms of regulatory exclusivity to protect our products. During the development of our products, we anticipate any one of regulatory exclusivities becoming available upon approval of our products. Implementation and enforcement of regulatory exclusivity, which may consist of regulatory data protection and market protection, varies widely from country to country. Failure to qualify for regulatory exclusivity, or failure to obtain or maintain the extent or duration of such protections that we expect in each of the markets for our products due to challenges, changes or interpretations in the law or otherwise, could affect our revenues for our products or our decision on whether to market our products in a particular country or countries or could otherwise have an adverse impact on our results of operations.  We are not guaranteed to receive or maintain regulatory exclusivity for our current or future products, and if our products that are granted orphan status were to lose their status as orphan drugs or the data or marketing exclusivity provided for orphan drugs, our business and operations could be adversely affected.

Due to the nature of our products and product candidate pipeline, in addition to new chemical entity exclusivity and new biologic exclusivity, orphan drug exclusivity is especially important for our products that are eligible for orphan drug designation. For eligible products, we plan to rely on orphan drug exclusivity to maintain a competitive position.  If we do not have adequate patent protection for our products, then the relative importance of obtaining regulatory exclusivity is even greater.  While orphan status for any of our products, if granted or maintained, would provide market exclusivity for the time periods specified above upon approval, we would not be able to exclude other companies from obtaining regulatory approval of products using the same or similar active ingredient for the same indication during or beyond the exclusivity period applicable to our product on the basis of orphan drug status (e.g., seven years in the U.S.).  Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug, nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

-38-

In addition, we may face risks with maintaining regulatory exclusivities for our products, and our protection may be circumvented, even if maintained.  For instance, orphan drug exclusivity in the U.S. may be rescinded if (i) an alternative, competing product demonstrates clinical superiority to our product with orphan exclusivity; or (ii) we are unable to assure the availability of sufficient quantities of our orphan products to meet the needs of patients.  Moreover, competitors may receive approval of different drugs or biologics for indications for which our prior approved orphan products have exclusivity.  Orphan drug exclusivity in Europe may be modified for several reasons, including a significant change to the orphan medicinal product designations or status criteria after-market authorization of the orphan product (e.g., product profitability exceeds the criteria for orphan drug designation), problems with the production or supply of the orphan drug, or a competitor drug, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior than the initial orphan drug.  Thus, other companies may have received, or could receive, approval to market a product candidate that is granted orphan drug exclusivity for the same drug or similar drug and same orphan indication as any of our product candidates for which we plan to file an NDA, BLA or MAA.   If that were to happen, our prior approved orphan products may face competition and any pending NDA, BLA or MAA for our product candidate for that indication may not be approved until the competing company’s period of exclusivity has expired in the U.S. or the EU, as applicable. For example, in January 2020, the FDA issued a draft guidance to clarify its position on when gene therapy products would be considered the “same” or “different” for purposes of orphan drug exclusivity. The draft guidance notes that if two gene therapy products differ in the genes expressed by the products (“transgenes”) and the vectors used to deliver the transgenes are different, then the two gene therapy products are different and could both be approved for the same indication.  However, there is considerable uncertainty as to the interpretation of these guidelines, if adopted to become final.  If there are other, lesser differences in the products, FDA would make a case-by-case determination as how to apply orphan exclusivity to the competing product, and it is unclear how such case-by-case determinations would be made. As illustrated by this draft guidance, orphan drug exclusivity as applied to gene therapy products is an evolving area subject to change and interpretation by the FDA and therefore we cannot be certain as to how the FDA will apply those rules to our products.

The patient population suffering from DMD, LGMDs, and CMT 1A is small and has not been established with precision. If the actual number of patients is smaller than we estimate, our revenue and ability to achieve profitability may be adversely affected.

DMD, LGMD, and CMT 1A are rare, fatal genetic disorders. DMD affects an estimated one in approximately every 3,500 to 5,000 males born worldwide, of which up to 13% are estimated to be amenable to exon 51 skipping, up to 8% are estimated to be amenable to exon 53 skipping and up to 8% are estimated to be amenable to exon 45 skipping. LGMDs as a class affect an estimated range of approximately one in every 14,500 to one in every 123,000 individuals. CMT is a group of peripheral nerve disorders affecting approximately one in every 2,500 individuals. CMT type 1A affects approximately 50,000 patients in the U.S. Our estimates of the size of these patient populations are based on limited number of published studies as well as internal analyses. Various factors may decrease the market size of our products and product candidates, including the severity of the disease, patient demographics and the response of patients’ immune systems to our products and product candidates. If the results of these studies or our analysis of them do not accurately reflect the relevant patient population, our assessment of the market may be inaccurate, making it difficult or impossible for us to meet our revenue goals, or to obtain and maintain profitability.

We face intense competition and rapid technological change, which may result in other companies discovering, developing or commercializing competitive products.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are highly competitive and subject to significant and rapid technological change. We are aware of many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are actively engaged in research and development in areas in which our products and product candidates are aimed. Some of these competitors are developing or testing product candidates that now, or may in the future, compete directly with our products or product candidates. For example, we face competition in the field of DMD by third parties who are developing or who had once developed: (i) exon skipping product candidates, such as Wave Life Sciences (notably for exons 51 and 53), Nippon Shinyaku (notably for exon 44 and exon 53, for which it has received FDA approval for its product Viltepso (viltolarsen)), Daiichi Sankyo (notably for exon 45), Dyne Therapeutics pursuing antibody-oligonucleotide conjugates for exons 44, 45, 51, and 53, Audentes Therapeutics, Inc. (acquired by Astellas Pharma) (notably for exons 2, 51 and 53), and BioMarin (BMN-351); (ii) gene therapies that express micro-dystrophin or mini-dystrophin, such as Pfizer and Solid Biosciences (in partnership with Ultragenyx); (iii) CRISPR/Cas 9 approaches, such as Exonics Therapeutics (acquired by Vertex Pharmaceuticals), CRISPR Therapeutics and Editas Medicine; (iv) other disease modifying approaches, such as PTC Therapeutics, which has a small molecule candidate, ataluren, that targets nonsense mutations; and (v) other approaches that may be palliative in nature or potentially complementary with our products and product candidates and that are or were once being developed by Santhera, Catabasis, Fibrogen, ReveraGen, Capricor Therapeutics, BioPhytis, Mallinckrodt, and Antisense Therapeutics.  Although BioMarin announced on May 31, 2016 its intent to discontinue clinical and regulatory development of drisapersen as well as its other clinical stage candidates, BMN 044, BMN 045 and BMN 053, then-currently in Phase 2 studies for distinct forms of DMD, it further announced its intent to continue to explore the development of next generation oligonucleotides for the treatment of DMD.  Indeed, BioMarin recently announced it is pursuing IND enabling studies for BMN-351, an oligonucleotide therapy.  In addition, while Wave announced its intention to discontinue development of suvodirsen and suspend development of WVE-N531, it recently announced that it intends to file a CTA for its exon 53 oligonucleotide, WVE-N531.

-39-

In addition, we are aware of many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are actively engaged in research and development using platform technologies that may be viewed as competing with ours beyond and including those companies mentioned immediately above, such as Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corp., Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche Innovation Center Copenhagen (formerly Santaris Pharma A/S), Shire plc (now Takeda), Biogen, Moderna Therapeutics, Avidity, Dyne Therapeutics, Stoke Therapeutics, Fulcrum Therapeutics, Ultragenyx and Sanofi. Additionally, several companies and institutions have entered into collaborations or other agreements for the development of product candidates, including mRNA, gene therapy and gene editing (CRIPSR and AAV, among others) and small molecule therapies that are potential competitors for therapies being developed in the muscular dystrophy, neuromuscular and rare disease space, including, but not limited to, Astellas Pharma, Biogen Inc., Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Ionis, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Shire (now Takeda), Eli Lilly, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Moderna Therapeutics, Inc., Akashi, Catabasis, Capricor Therapeutics, Oxford University, Exonics Therapeutics (acquired by Vertex Pharmaceuticals), and Editas Medicine.

If any of our competitors are successful in obtaining regulatory approval for any of their product candidates, it may limit our ability to enter into the market, gain market share or maintain market share in the DMD space or other diseases targeted by our platform technologies, products and product candidate pipeline.

It is possible that our competitors will succeed in developing technologies that limit the market size for our products or product candidates, impact the regulatory approval and post-marketing process for our products and product candidates, are more effective than our products or product candidates or would render our technologies obsolete or noncompetitive. Our competitors may, among other things:

Our revenue could face competitive pressures for any of the above reasons.  Moreover, if competing products are marketed in a territory in which we also have the authority to market our products, our sales may diminish or our business could be otherwise materially adversely affected.

We have entered into multiple collaborations, including our collaboration with Roche, and may seek or engage in future collaborations, strategic alliances, acquisitions or licensing agreements that complement or expand our business. We may not be able to complete such transactions, and such transactions, if executed, may increase our capital requirements, dilute our stockholders, cause us to incur debt or assume contingent liabilities and subject us to other risks.

In order to achieve our long-term business objectives, we actively evaluate various strategic transactions on an ongoing basis, including licensing or acquiring products, technologies or businesses. We may face competition from other companies in pursuing acquisitions and similar transactions in the biotechnology industry. This competition is most intense for approved drugs and late-stage drug candidates, which have the lowest risk and would have the most immediate effect on our financial performance. Our ability to complete transactions may also be limited by applicable antitrust and trade regulation laws and regulations in the U.S. and foreign jurisdictions in which we or the operations or assets we seek to acquire carry on business.

We have entered into multiple collaborations, including with Roche, Nationwide, Duke University, Genethon, StrideBio, University of Florida, Codiak BioSciences, Hansa Biopharma and Selecta Biosciences. We may not realize the anticipated benefits of such collaborations, and the anticipated benefits of any future collaborations or acquisitions, each of which involves numerous risks, including:

-40-

For example, we will have limited influence and control over the development and commercialization activities of Roche in the territories in which it leads development and commercialization of SRP-9001, and if the exclusive option is exercised, in the territories in which it leads commercialization of certain other products or product candidates. Roche’s development and commercialization activities in the territories where it is the lead party may adversely impact our own efforts in the U.S. Failure by Roche to meet its obligations under the collaboration agreement, to apply sufficient efforts at developing and commercializing collaboration products, or to comply with applicable legal or regulatory requirements, may materially adversely affect our business and our results of operations. In addition, to the extent we rely on Roche to commercialize any products for which we obtain regulatory approval, we may receive less revenues than if we commercialized these products ourselves, which could materially harm our prospects.

-41-

Even if we achieve the long-term benefits associated with strategic transactions, our expenses and short-term costs may increase materially and adversely affect our liquidity and short-term net income (loss). Future licenses or acquisitions could result in potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities, the incurrence of debt, the creation of contingent liabilities, impairment or expenses related to goodwill, and impairment or amortization expenses related to other intangible assets, which could harm our financial condition. For example, in February 2020, we issued and sold 2,522,227 shares of common stock to Roche Finance in connection with the entry into the collaboration agreement with Roche.

Risks Related to the Development of our Product Candidates

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials, which could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends on the speed at which we can recruit eligible patients to participate in testing our product candidates. We have experienced delays in some of our clinical trials, and we may experience similar delays in the future. These delays could result in increased costs, delays in advancing our product development, delays in testing the effectiveness of our technology or termination of the clinical trials altogether.

We may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients, or those with required or desired characteristics to achieve diversity in a study, to complete our clinical trials within the expected timeframe. Patient enrollment can be impacted by factors including, but not limited to:

In particular, each of the conditions for which we plan to evaluate our product candidates are rare genetic diseases with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. Further, because newborn screening for these diseases is not widely adopted, and it can be difficult to diagnose these diseases in the absence of a genetic screen, we may have difficulty finding patients who are eligible to participate in our studies. The eligibility criteria of our clinical trials will further limit the pool of available study participants. Additionally, the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. The treating physicians in our clinical trials may also use their medical discretion in advising patients enrolled in our clinical trials to withdraw from our studies to try alternative therapies. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic may impact patient ability and willingness to travel to clinical trial sites as a result of quarantines and other restrictions, which may negatively impact enrollment in our clinical trials.

-42-

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials if we cannot enroll the required eligible patients per protocol to participate in the clinical trials required by the FDA or the EMA or other regulatory agencies. Our ability to successfully initiate, enroll and complete a clinical trial in any foreign country is subject to numerous risks unique to conducting business in foreign countries, including:

If we have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients to conduct our clinical trials as planned, we may need to delay, limit or terminate ongoing or planned clinical trials, any of which would have an adverse effect on our business.

Failures or delays in the commencement or completion of ongoing and planned clinical trials of our product candidates negatively impact commercialization efforts; result in increased costs; and delay, prevent or limit our ability to gain regulatory approval of product candidates and to generate revenues and continue our business.

Successful completion of clinical trials at each applicable stage of development is a prerequisite to submitting a marketing application to the regulatory agencies and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any of our product candidates for the indications in which we develop them. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin or be completed, and results announced, as planned or expected, if at all, as the commencement and completion of clinical trials and announcement of results is often delayed or prevented for a number of reasons, including, among others:

-43-

In addition, the impact of COVID-19 has caused disruptions and may cause delays in some of our clinical trials.  The recent responses to COVID-19 by healthcare providers and regulatory agencies could delay the commencement of clinical trials, site initiation, protocol compliance, the completion of clinical trials, including the completion of post-marketing requirements and commitments, slow down enrollment, and make the ongoing collection of data for patients enrolled in studies more difficult or intermittent.  In addition, the pandemic may impact patient ability and willingness to travel to clinical trial sites as a result of fear, physician recommendation, quarantines and other restrictions, which may negatively impact the execution of clinical trials.

Any inability to complete successfully pre-clinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenues from product sales, regulatory and commercialization milestones and royalties. In addition, manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates often require additional studies to demonstrate comparability of the modified product candidates to earlier versions. Clinical study delays also shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which impairs our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and harms our business and results of operations.

Results from pre-clinical and early‑stage clinical trials may not be indicative of safety or efficacy in late‑stage clinical trials, and pre-clinical and clinical trials may fail to demonstrate acceptable levels of safety, efficacy, and quality of our product candidates, which could prevent or significantly delay their regulatory approval.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate, through extensive pre-clinical and clinical trials, that the product candidate is safe and effective in humans. Ongoing and future pre-clinical and clinical trials of our product candidates may not show sufficient safety, efficacy or adequate quality to obtain or maintain regulatory approvals. For example, although we believe the data for SRP-9001, SRP-9003 and SRP-5051 collected to date are positive, the additional data we collect may not be consistent with the pre-clinical and/or early clinical data or show a safe benefit that warrants further development or pursuit of a regulatory approval for these product candidates.

Furthermore, success in pre-clinical and early clinical trials does not ensure that the subsequent trials will be successful, nor does it predict final results of a confirmatory trial. Some of our clinical trials were conducted with small patient populations and were not blinded or placebo-controlled, making it difficult to predict whether the favorable results that we observed in such trials will be repeated in larger and more advanced clinical trials. For example, in October 2018, Nationwide presented results from a Phase 1/2a micro-dystrophin gene therapy clinical trial in four individuals with DMD enrolled in the trial (Study 101) and, in March 2019, we presented nine-month functional and CK data from baseline from these four individuals, and twelve-month CK data from baseline from one of these individuals. In June 2020, we announced that functional, safety and tolerability data at twelve-months from baseline from these four individuals had been published in JAMA Neurology. In September 2020, we presented functional, safety and tolerability data at 24 months from these four individuals. In January 2021, we released top-line results for Part 1 of Study 102 and interim expression results from Part 2 of Study 102. In addition, in February 2019, we announced expression and biomarker data from the first three-patient low-dose cohort dosed in the SRP-9003 gene therapy trial to treat LGMD type 2E, or beta-sarcoglycanopathy and, in October 2019, we announced nine-month functional data from these three patients.  In June 2020, we announced safety and expression results from three clinical trial participants in the high-dose cohort measured at 60 days, and one-year functional data from three clinical trial participants in the low-dose cohort. In September 2020, we announced six-month functional data from three clinical trial participants in the high-dose cohort, and eighteen-month functional data from three clinical trial participants in the low-dose cohort. These data are based on small patient samples, and, given the heterogeneity of DMD and LGMD patients and potential lot-to-lot variability, the data may not be predictive of future results. In addition, we cannot assure that the results of additional data or data from any future trial will yield results that are consistent with the data presented, that we will be able to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of these product candidates, that later trial results will support further development, or even if such later results are favorable, that we will be able to successfully complete the development of, obtain accelerated, conditional or standard regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize any of such product candidates. Similarly, we cannot provide assurances that data from our ongoing and planned studies with respect to our commercially approved products and product candidates will be positive and consistent or that the interpretation by regulators, such as the FDA or EMA, of the data we collect for our products or product candidates will be consistent with our interpretations.

-44-

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of product candidates, limit the commercial potential or result in significant negative consequences following any potential marketing approval.

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects. In addition to side effects caused by our product candidates, the administration process or related procedures also can cause adverse side effects. If any such adverse events occur in our trials, we may decide, or the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authorities could order us, to halt, delay or amend pre-clinical development or clinical development of our product candidates or we may be unable to receive regulatory approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Even if we are able to demonstrate that all future serious adverse events are not product-related, such occurrences could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial. Moreover, if we elect, or are required, to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial of any of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of such product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates may be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our ability to develop other product candidates and may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Our gene therapy product candidates may be perceived as unsafe or may result in unforeseen adverse events. Failure of other gene therapy programs, negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of gene therapy may damage public perception of the safety of our gene therapy product candidates and harm our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for our gene therapy product candidates.

Gene therapy remains a newly applied technology, with only a few gene therapy products approved to date in the U.S., the EU or elsewhere. Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy is unsafe, and gene therapy may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. In particular, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of genetic diseases targeted by our product candidates, prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available.

In addition, ethical, social and legal concerns about gene therapy, genetic testing and genetic research could result in additional regulations or prohibiting the processes we may use. Federal and state agencies, congressional committees and foreign governments have expressed their intentions to further regulate biotechnology. More restrictive regulations or claims that our product candidates are unsafe or pose a hazard could prevent us from commercializing any products. New government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, regulations, policies or guidance changed, or interpretations by agencies or courts changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be.

More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our gene therapy product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. For example, earlier gene therapy trials led to several well-publicized adverse events, including death. Lack of efficacy and/or serious adverse events related to clinical trials we, our strategic partners or other companies conduct, even if such adverse events are not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates or products, and/or failed commercialization of gene therapy products may result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates.

If there are significant delays in obtaining or we are unable to obtain or maintain required regulatory approvals, we will not be able to commercialize our product candidates in a timely manner or at all, which could impair our ability to generate sufficient revenue and have a successful business.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, commercialization, marketing, selling and distribution of drug products are subject to extensive regulation by applicable local, regional and national regulatory authorities and regulations may differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In the U.S., approvals and oversight from federal (e.g., FDA), state and other regulatory authorities are required for these activities. Sale and marketing of our product candidates in the U.S. or other countries is not permitted until we obtain the required approvals from the applicable regulatory authorities. Of the large number of drugs in development in the biopharmaceutical industry, only a small percentage result in the submission of a marketing application to the FDA or an MAA to the EMA and even fewer are approved for commercialization.

-45-

Our ability to obtain the government or regulatory approvals required to commercialize any of our product candidates in any jurisdiction, including in the U.S. or the EU, cannot be assured, may be significantly delayed or may never be achieved for various reasons including the following:

Any failure on our part to respond to these requirements in a timely and satisfactory manner could significantly delay or negatively impact confirmatory study timelines and/or the development plans we have for PMO, PPMO, gene therapy-based product candidates or other product candidates. Responding to requests from regulators and meeting requirements for clinical trials, submissions and approvals may require substantial personnel, financial or other resources, which, as a small biopharmaceutical company, we may not be able to obtain in a timely manner or at all. In addition, our ability to respond to requests from regulatory authorities that involve our agents, third party vendors and associates may be complicated by our own limitations and those of the parties we work with. It may be difficult or impossible for us to conform to regulatory guidance or successfully execute our product development plans in response to regulatory guidance, including guidance related to clinical trial design with respect to any NDA, BLA or MAA submissions.

Even if our product candidates demonstrate safety and efficacy in clinical studies, the regulatory agencies may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee or other regulatory advisory group or authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency policy during the period of product development, clinical studies and the review process. Regulatory agencies also may approve a treatment candidate for fewer or more limited indications than requested or may grant approval subject to the performance of post-marketing studies. Furthermore, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our treatment candidates. Finally, some of our product candidates may require diagnostic tests to ensure we appropriately select patients suitable for treatment. If we are unable to successfully develop diagnostic tests for these product candidates, experience significant delays in doing so, or are unable to obtain required regulatory clearances or approvals for any diagnostic tests, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed or prevented. Even if we receive the required regulatory clearance or approvals for certain diagnostic tests, the commercial success of any of our product candidates that require such tests will be dependent upon the continued availability of such tests.

-46-

Even after approval and commercialization of a product candidate, we remain subject to ongoing regulatory compliance and oversight to maintain our approval. Conducting our confirmatory studies could take years to complete, could yield negative or uninterpretable results or could result in an FDA determination that the studies do not provide the safety and efficacy requirements to maintain regulatory approval. If we or any of our strategic partners are unable to develop, or obtain regulatory approval for, or, if approved, maintain regulatory compliance and successfully commercialize, our product candidates, our business will be materially harmed.

We are investing significant resources in the development of novel gene therapy product candidates. Only a few gene therapy products have been approved in the U.S. and EU. If we are unable to show the safety and efficacy of these product candidates, experience delays in doing so or are unable to successfully commercialize at least one of these drugs, our business would be materially harmed.

We are investing significant resources in the development of our gene therapy product candidates. We believe that a significant portion of the long-term value attributed to our company by investors is based on the commercial potential of these product candidates. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future related to our gene therapy programs will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be solved. Development problems and delays in one program may delay the development of other programs. Early results from ongoing clinical trials may differ materially from final results from such clinical trials. The results from pre-clinical and early clinical studies do not always accurately predict results in later, large-scale clinical trials. We may also experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and commercial-scale manufacturing process or transferring that process to commercial partners, which may prevent us from completing our clinical trials or commercializing our products on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.

In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the EMA, and other regulatory agencies and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or more extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. Currently, only a few gene therapy products have been approved in the Western world. Given the few precedents of approved gene therapy products, it is difficult to determine how long it will take or how much it will cost to obtain regulatory approvals for our gene therapy product candidates in the U.S., the EU or other jurisdictions. Approvals by the EMA and the European Commission may not be indicative of what the FDA may require for approval.

Regulatory requirements governing gene therapy products have evolved and may continue to change in the future. Within the FDA, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (“CBER”) regulates gene therapy products.  Within the CBER, the review of gene therapy and related products is consolidated in the Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies, and the FDA has established the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise CBER on its reviews. The CBER works closely with the National Institutes of Health (the “NIH”). The FDA and the NIH have published guidance documents with respect to the development and submission of gene therapy protocols. For example, on January 28, 2020, the FDA issued final guidance documents that updated draft guidance documents that were originally released in July 2018 to reflect recent advances in the field, and to set forth the framework for the development, review and approval of gene therapies. These final guidance documents pertain to the development of gene therapies for the treatment of specific disease categories, including rare diseases, and to manufacturing and long-term follow up issues relevant to gene therapy, among other topics. At the same time the FDA issued a new draft guidance document describing the FDA’s approach for determining whether two gene therapy products were the same or different for the purpose of assessing orphan drug exclusivity. In addition, the FDA can put an IND on clinical hold if the information in an IND is not sufficient to assess the risks in pediatric patients.

These regulatory review agencies, committees and advisory groups and the new requirements and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional or larger studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of these treatment candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable requirements and guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of our product candidates.

If the anticipated or actual timing of marketing approvals for our gene therapy product candidates, or the market acceptance of these product candidates, if approved, including treatment reimbursement levels agreed to by third-party payors, do not meet the expectations of investors or public market analysts, the market price of our common stock would likely decline.

-47-

Because we are developing product candidates for the treatment of certain diseases in which there is little clinical experience and we are using new endpoints or methodologies, there is increased risk that the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authorities may not consider the endpoints of our clinical trials to provide clinically meaningful results and that these results may be difficult to analyze.

During the FDA review process, we will need to identify success criteria and endpoints such that the FDA will be able to determine the clinical efficacy and safety profile of our product candidates. As we are developing novel treatments for diseases in which there is little clinical experience with new endpoints and methodologies, such as gene therapy, there is heightened risk that the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory bodies may not consider the clinical trial endpoints to provide clinically meaningful results (reflecting a tangible benefit to patients). In addition, the resulting clinical data and results may be difficult to analyze. Even if the FDA does find our success criteria to be sufficiently validated and clinically meaningful, we may not achieve the pre-specified endpoints to a degree of statistical significance. Achieving appropriate statistical power may be challenging for some of the ultra-rare genetically defined diseases we are targeting in our programs, especially if the acceptance of descriptive data is not yet established. In addition, different methodologies, assumptions and applications we utilize to assess particular safety or efficacy parameters may yield different statistical results. Even if we believe the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, these data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. Pre-clinical and clinical data can be interpreted in different ways. Accordingly, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities could interpret these data in different ways from us or our partners, which could delay, limit or prevent full or accelerated regulatory approval.

If our study data do not consistently or sufficiently demonstrate the safety or efficacy of any of our product candidates, the regulatory approvals for such product candidates could be significantly delayed as we work to meet approval requirements, or, if we are not able to meet these requirements, such approvals could be withheld or withdrawn. 

Fast track product, breakthrough therapy, priority review, or Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (“RMAT”) designation by the FDA, or access to the PRIME scheme by the EMA, for our product candidates may not lead to faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may seek fast track, breakthrough therapy designation, RMAT designation, PRIME scheme access or priority review designation for our product candidates if supported by the results of clinical trials. A fast track product designation is designed to facilitate the clinical development and expedite the review of drugs intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition which demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, where preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. A RMAT designation is designed to accelerate approval for regenerative advanced therapies such as our gene therapy product candidates. Priority review designation is intended to speed the FDA marketing application review timeframe for drugs that treat a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. PRIME is a scheme provided by the EMA to enhance support for the development of medicines that target an unmet medical need.

For drugs and biologics that have been designated as fast track products or breakthrough therapies, or granted access to the PRIME scheme, interaction and communication between the regulatory agency and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development. Sponsors of drugs with fast track products or breakthrough therapies may also be able to submit marketing applications on a rolling basis, meaning that the FDA may review portions of a marketing application before the sponsor submits the complete application to the FDA, if the sponsor pays the user fee upon submission of the first portion of the marketing application. For products that receive a priority review designation, the FDA's marketing application review goal is shortened to six months, as opposed to ten months under standard review. This review goal is based on the date the FDA accepts the marketing application for review, this application validation period typically adds approximately two months to the timeline for review and decision from the date of submission. RMAT designations will accelerate approval but the exact mechanisms have not yet been announced by FDA.

Designation as a fast track product, breakthrough therapy, RMAT, PRIME, or priority review product is within the discretion of the regulatory agency. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a fast track product, breakthrough therapy, RMAT, PRIME, or priority review product, the agency may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of such a designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional regulatory procedures and does not assure ultimate marketing approval by the agency. In addition, regarding fast track products and breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that the products no longer meet the conditions for qualification as either a fast track product, RMAT, or a breakthrough therapy or, for priority review products, decide that period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

-48-

We may not be able to advance all of our programs, and we may use our financial and human resources to pursue particular programs and fail to capitalize on programs that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Our pipeline includes more than 40 programs in various stages of development for a broad range of diseases and disorders. We plan to expand our pipeline through internal research and development and through strategic transactions. Because we have limited resources, we may not be able to advance all of our programs. We may also forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with certain programs or for indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs for product candidates may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through strategic collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate, or we may allocate internal resources to a product candidate in a therapeutic area in which it would have been more advantageous to enter into a partnering arrangement.

Risks Related to Third Parties

If we are unable to maintain our agreements with third parties to distribute our products to patients, our results of operations and business could be adversely affected.

We rely on third parties to commercially distribute our products to patients in the U.S. We have contracted with a third-party logistics company to warehouse our products and with distributors and specialty pharmacies to sell and distribute our products to patients. A specialty pharmacy is a pharmacy that specializes in the dispensing of medications for complex or chronic conditions that require a high level of patient education and ongoing management.  

This distribution network requires significant coordination with our sales and marketing and finance organizations. In addition, failure to coordinate financial systems could negatively impact our ability to accurately report product revenue from our products. If we are unable to effectively manage the distribution process, the sales of our products, as well as any future products we may commercialize, could be delayed or severely compromised and our results of operations may be harmed.

In addition, the use of third parties involves certain risks, including, but not limited to, risks that these organizations will:

Any such events may result in decreased product sales, lower product revenue, loss of revenue, and/or reputational damage, which would harm our results of operations and business.

With respect to the pre-commercial distribution of our products to patients outside of the U.S., we have contracted with third party distributors and service providers to distribute our products in certain countries through our EAP. We will need to continue building out our network for commercial distribution in jurisdictions in which our products are approved, which will also require third party contracts. The use of distributors and service providers involves certain risks, including, but not limited to, risks that these organizations will not comply with applicable laws and regulations, or not provide us with accurate or timely information regarding serious adverse events and/or product complaints regarding our products. Any such events may result in regulatory actions that may include suspension or termination of the distribution and sale of our products in a certain country, loss of revenue, and/or reputational damage, which could harm our results of operations and business.

Furthermore, a significant outbreak of COVID-19 at one of our third-party logistics, distribution, or specialty pharmacy sites could lead to a delay in the commercial or pre-commercial shipments of our products to patients and hospitals.

-49-

We rely on third parties to conduct some aspects of our early stage research and pre-clinical and clinical development. The inadequate performance by or loss of any of these third parties could affect the development and commercialization of our product candidate development.

We have relied upon, and plan to continue to rely upon, third parties to conduct some aspects of our early stage research and pre-clinical and clinical development with respect to certain of our product candidates, including our follow-on exon-skipping product candidates, PPMO, gene therapy and gene editing product candidates. Our third-party collaborators may not commit sufficient resources or adequately develop our programs for these candidates. If our third-party collaborators fail to commit sufficient resources to any of our product candidates or to carry out their contractual duties or obligations, our programs related to any particular product candidate could be delayed, terminated, or unsuccessful. Furthermore, if we fail to make required payments to these third-party collaborators, including up-front, milestone, reimbursement or royalty payments, or to observe other obligations in our agreements with them, these third parties may not be required to perform their obligations under our respective agreements with them and may have the right to terminate such agreements. In addition, if our strategic partners experience regulatory delays for the development of their clinical product candidates, including clinical holds, our opportunities to commercialize products may be delayed.

We also have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party CROs to monitor and manage data completeness for our ongoing pre-clinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our pre-clinical and clinical trials, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on collaborators and CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

The individuals at our third-party collaborators and CROs who conduct work on our behalf, including their sub-contractors, are not always our employees, and although we participate in the planning of our early stage research and pre-clinical and clinical programs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources or exercise appropriate oversight of these programs, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties. If our collaborators and CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our pre-clinical and clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our proprietary information, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our proprietary information will be misappropriated or inadvertently disclosed.

Our reliance on third-party collaborators requires us to disclose our proprietary information to these parties, which could increase the risk that a competitor will discover this information or that this information will be misappropriated or disclosed without our intent to do so.  If any of these events were to occur, then our ability to obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights could be irrevocably jeopardized, and costly, distracting litigation could ensue. Furthermore, if these third parties cease to continue operations and we are not able to quickly find a replacement provider or we lose information or items associated with our products or product candidates, our development programs may be delayed. Although we carefully manage our relationships with our third-party collaborators and CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

Risks Related to Manufacturing

We currently rely on third parties to manufacture our products and to produce our product candidates; our dependence on these parties, including failure on our part to accurately anticipate product demand and timely secure manufacturing capacity to meet commercial, EAP, clinical and pre-clinical product demand may impair the availability of product to successfully support various programs, including research and development and the potential commercialization of our product candidates.

We currently do not have the internal ability to undertake the manufacturing process for our products or product candidates in the quantities needed to meet commercial, clinical or EAPs demand for our products, or to conduct our research and development programs and conduct clinical trials. Therefore, we rely on, and expect to continue relying on for the foreseeable future, a limited number of third parties to manufacture and supply materials (including raw materials and subunits), API and drug product, as well as to perform additional steps in the manufacturing process, such as labeling and packaging of vials and storage of our products and product candidates. The limited number of third parties with facilities and capabilities suited for the manufacturing process of our products and product candidates creates a heightened risk that we may not be able to obtain materials and APIs in the quantity and purity that we require.

-50-

In addition, the process for adding new manufacturing capacity is lengthy and often causes delays in development efforts. Any interruption of the development or operation of those facilities due to, among other reasons, events such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, order delays for equipment or materials, equipment malfunctions, quality control and quality assurance issues, regulatory delays and possible negative effects of such delays on supply chains and expected timelines for product availability, production yield issues, shortages of qualified personnel, discontinuation of a facility or business or failure or damage to a facility by natural disasters, such as earthquakes or fires, could result in the cancellation of shipments, loss of product in the manufacturing process or a shortfall in supply of our products, product candidates or materials.

If these third parties cease providing quality manufacturing and related services to us, and we are not able to engage appropriate replacements in a timely manner, our ability to manufacture our products or product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity required for our planned commercial, pre-clinical and clinical or EAPs, our various product research, development and commercialization efforts would be adversely affected.

Furthermore, any problems in our manufacturing process or the facilities with which we contract make us a less attractive collaborator for potential partners, including larger pharmaceutical companies and academic research institutions, which could limit our access to additional attractive development programs. Problems in third-party manufacturing processes or facilities also restrict our ability to meet market demand.

We, through our third-party manufacturers, seek to produce or produce supply of our products and product candidates. In light of the limited number of third parties with the expertise to produce our products and product candidates, the lead time needed to manufacture them, and the availability of underlying materials, we may not be able to, in a timely manner or at all, establish or maintain sufficient commercial and other manufacturing arrangements on the commercially reasonable terms necessary to provide adequate supply of our products and product candidates. Furthermore, we may not be able to obtain the significant financial capital that may be required in connection with such arrangements. Even after successfully engaging third parties to execute the manufacturing process for our products and product candidates, such parties may not comply with the terms and timelines they have agreed to for various reasons, some of which may be out of their or our control, which impacts our ability to execute our business plans on expected or required timelines in connection with the commercialization of our products and the continued development of our product candidates. When we enter into long-term manufacturing agreements that contain exclusivity provisions and /or substantial termination penalties, we constrain our operational flexibility.

A significant outbreak of COVID-19 at one of our partner sites could lead to delays in the manufacturing of our products and product candidates.  In addition, the need to prioritize rated orders issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency pursuant to the U.S. Defense Production Act could impact the manufacturing, supply chain and distribution of our products and product candidates.

The third parties we use in the manufacturing process for our products and product candidates may fail to comply with cGMP regulations.

Our contract manufacturers are required to produce our materials, APIs and drug products under cGMP. We and our contract manufacturers are subject to periodic inspections by the FDA, EMA and corresponding state and foreign authorities to ensure strict compliance with cGMP and other applicable government regulations. In addition, before we can begin to commercially manufacture our product candidates in third-party or our own facilities, we must obtain regulatory approval from the FDA, which includes a review of the manufacturing process and facility. A manufacturing authorization also must be obtained from the appropriate EU regulatory authorities and may be required by other foreign regulatory authorities. The timeframe required to obtain such approval or authorization is uncertain. In order to obtain approval, we need to demonstrate that all of our processes, methods and equipment are compliant with cGMP, and perform extensive audits of vendors, contract laboratories and suppliers. In complying with cGMP, we are obligated to expend time, money and effort in production, record keeping and quality control to seek to assure that the product meets applicable specifications and other requirements.

We do not have direct operational control over a third-party manufacturer’s compliance with regulations and requirements. In addition, changes in cGMP could negatively impact the ability of our contract manufacturers to complete the manufacturing process of our products and product candidates in a compliant manner on the schedule we require for commercial and clinical trial use, respectively. Failure to achieve and maintain compliance with cGMP and other applicable government regulations, including failure to detect or control anticipated or unanticipated manufacturing errors, results in product recalls, clinical holds, delayed or withheld approvals, patient injury or death.

This risk is particularly heightened as we optimize manufacturing for our product candidates. For example, we were notified by the Research Institute at Nationwide that they received a letter from the FDA on July 24, 2018, stating that their Phase 1/2a DMD micro-dystrophin gene therapy trial had been placed on clinical hold due to the presence of a trace amount of DNA fragment in research-grade third-party supplied plasmid (the “Clinical Hold”). The Research Institute, working with us, developed an action plan with immediate plans to submit for review by the FDA, which included the use of cGMP plasmid for the program. On September 24, 2018, we announced that the FDA had lifted the Clinical Hold.

-51-

Failure by our contract manufacturers to adhere to applicable cGMP and other applicable government regulations, or our contract manufacturers experiencing manufacturing problems, may result in significant negative consequences, including product seizures or recalls, postponement or cancellation of clinical trials, loss or delay of product approval, fines and sanctions, loss of revenue, termination of the development of a product candidate, reputational damage, shipment delays, inventory shortages, inventory write-offs and other product-related charges and increased manufacturing costs. If we experience any of these consequences, the success of our commercialization of our products and/or our development efforts for our product candidates could be significantly delayed, fail or otherwise be negatively impacted.

We may not be able to successfully scale up manufacturing of our products or product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity or within targeted timelines, or be able to secure ownership of intellectual property rights developed in this process, which could negatively impact the commercial success of our products and/or the development of our product candidates.

We are working to increase manufacturing capacity and scale up production of some of the components of our drug products. Our focus remains on (i) achieving larger-scale manufacturing capacity for our products and product candidates throughout the manufacturing supply chain, (ii) continuing to increase material and API production capacity to provide the anticipated amounts of drug product needed for our planned studies for our product candidates and (iii) optimizing manufacturing for our follow-on exon skipping product candidates and other programs, including PPMO and gene therapy. We may not be able to successfully increase manufacturing capacity or scale up the production of materials, APIs and drug products, whether in collaboration with third party manufacturers or on our own, in a manner that is safe, compliant with cGMP conditions or other applicable legal or regulatory requirements, in a cost-effective manner, in a time frame required to meet our timeline for commercialization, clinical trials and other business plans, or at all.

Challenges complying with cGMP requirements and other quality issues arise during efforts to increase manufacturing capacity and scale up production. We experience such issues in connection with manufacturing, packaging and storage of our products and product candidates, and during shipping and storage of the APIs or finished drug product. In addition, in order to release our products for commercial use and demonstrate stability of product candidates for use in clinical trials (and any subsequent drug products for commercial use), our manufacturing processes and analytical methods must be validated in accordance with regulatory guidelines. Failure to successfully validate, or maintain validation of, our manufacturing processes and analytical methods or demonstrate adequate purity, stability or comparability of our products or product candidates in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all, may undermine our commercial efforts. Failure to successfully validate our manufacturing processes and analytical methods or to demonstrate adequate purity, stability or comparability, will negatively impact the commercial availability of our products and the continued development and/or regulatory approval of our product candidates, which could significantly harm our business.

During our work with our third-party manufacturers to increase and optimize manufacturing capacity and scale up production, they may make proprietary improvements in the manufacturing and scale-up processes for our products or product candidates. We may not own or be able to secure ownership of such improvements or may have to share the intellectual property rights to those improvements. Additionally, we may need additional processes, technologies and validation studies, which could be costly and which we may not be able to develop or acquire from third parties. Failure to secure the intellectual property rights required for the manufacturing process needed for large-scale clinical trials or commercialization of our products or the continued development of our product candidates could cause significant delays in our business plans or otherwise negatively impact the commercialization of our products or the continued development of our product candidates.

Products intended for use in gene therapies are novel, complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience production problems that result in delays in our development or commercialization of gene therapy programs, limit the supply of our products or otherwise harm our business.

We currently have development, manufacturing and testing agreements with third parties to manufacture supplies of our gene therapy product candidates. Several factors could cause production interruptions, including equipment malfunctions, facility contamination, raw material shortages or contamination, natural disasters, disruption in utility services, human error or disruptions in the operations of suppliers.

The physical and chemical properties of biologics such as ours generally cannot be fully characterized. As a result, assays of the finished product may not be sufficient to ensure that the product will perform in the intended manner. Accordingly, we employ multiple steps to control our manufacturing process to assure that the process works and the product candidate is made strictly and consistently in compliance with the process. Problems with the manufacturing process, even minor deviations from the normal process, could result in product defects or manufacturing failures that result in lot failures, product recalls, product liability claims or insufficient inventory. We may encounter problems achieving adequate quantities and quality of clinical and/or commercial-grade materials that meet FDA, EMA or other applicable foreign standards or specifications with consistent and acceptable production yields and costs.

-52-

In addition, the FDA, the EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities may require us to submit samples of any lot of any approved product together with the protocols showing the results of applicable tests at any time. Under some circumstances, the FDA, the EMA or other foreign regulatory authorities may require that we not distribute a lot until the competent authority authorizes its release. Slight deviations in the manufacturing process, including those affecting quality attributes and stability and deviations among different sites, may result in unacceptable changes in the product that could result in lot failures or product recalls. Lot failures or product recalls could cause us to delay clinical trials or product launches which could be costly to us and otherwise harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

As our product candidates advance to later stage clinical trials, it is customary that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing, formulation and other processes, and methods of administration, may be altered to optimize the candidates and processes for scale-up necessary for later stage clinical trials and potential approval and commercialization. These changes may not produce the intended optimization, including production of drug substance and drug product of a quality and in a quantity sufficient for Phase 3 clinical stage development or for commercialization, which may cause delays in the initiation or completion of clinical trials and greater costs. We may also need to conduct additional studies to demonstrate comparability between newly manufactured drug substance and/or drug product for commercialization relative to previously manufactured drug substance and/or drug product for clinical trials. Demonstrating comparability may require us to incur additional costs or delay initiation or completion of clinical trials and, if unsuccessful, could require us to complete additional preclinical studies or clinical trials.

We also may encounter problems hiring and retaining the experienced scientific, quality control and manufacturing personnel needed to operate our manufacturing process which could result in delays in our production or difficulties in maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.

Furthermore, no manufacturer currently has the capacity and scalability to produce our vectors or gene therapy product candidates at commercial levels. Even if we timely develop a manufacturing process and successfully transfer it to the third-party vector and product manufacturers or successfully and timely develop our internal capacity, if we or such third-party manufacturers are unable to produce the necessary quantities of viral vectors and our product candidates, or in compliance with GMP or other pertinent regulatory requirements, and within our planned time frame and cost parameters, it may result in delays in our development plans or increased capital expenditures, and the development and sales of our products, if approved, may be materially harmed.

Risks Related to our Intellectual Property

Our success, competitive position and future revenue depend in part on our ability and the abilities of our licensors and other collaborators to obtain, maintain and defend the patent protection for our products, product candidates, and platform technologies, to preserve our trade secrets, and to prevent third parties from infringing on our proprietary rights.

We currently directly hold various issued patents and patent applications, or have exclusive license or option rights to issued patents and patent applications, in each case in the U.S. as well as other countries that protect our products, product candidates and platform technologies. We anticipate filing additional patent applications both in the U.S. and in other countries. Our success will depend, in significant part, on our ability to obtain, maintain and defend our U.S. and foreign patents covering our products, product candidates and platform technologies as well as preserving our trade secrets for these assets. The patent process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and we can provide no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining, maintaining, or defending our patents. Even when our patent claims are allowed, the claims may not issue, or in the event of issuance, may not be sufficient to protect our products, product candidates or platform technologies.  

The patent positions of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved.  This uncertainty is heightened for our PMO-based products and product candidates and gene therapy-based product candidates for which there has been little patent litigation involving such technologies. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in biotechnology patents has emerged to date in the U.S. and tests used for determining the patentability of patent claims in all technologies are in flux. The USPTO and patent offices in other jurisdictions have often required that patent applications concerning pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology-related inventions be limited or narrowed substantially to cover only the specific innovations exemplified in the patent application, thereby limiting the scope of protection against competitive challenges. Accordingly, even if we or our licensors are able to obtain patents, the patents might be substantially narrower than anticipated.  Thus, there is no assurance as to the degree and range of protections any of our patents, if issued, may afford us or whether patents will be issued. Patents which may be issued to us may be subjected to further governmental review that may ultimately result in the reduction of their scope of protection, and pending patent applications may have their requested breadth of protection significantly limited before being issued, if issued at all. The pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences patent situation outside the U.S. can be even more uncertain.  

-53-

As a matter of public policy, there might be significant pressure on governmental bodies to limit the scope of patent protection or impose compulsory licenses for disease treatments that prove successful, particularly as a tactic to impose a price control.  Additionally, competitors may leverage such pressure to enhance their ability to exploit these laws to create, develop and market competing products.

We may be able to assert that certain activities engaged in by our competitors infringe on our current or future patent rights. To the extent that we enforce our patents, an alleged infringer may deny infringement and/or counter-claim that our patents are not valid, and if successful, could negatively impact our patent estate. We may not be able to successfully defend patents necessary to prevent competitors from commercializing competing product candidates. To the extent we assert infringement of a patent that covers a competing product as well as our own patent, or such a patent is otherwise challenged without our initiation, the patent protection for our own product could be materially adversely affected should an infringing competitor be successful challenging the validity of our patent.  Our patent rights might be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or otherwise not provide any competitive advantage. Defending our patent positions may require significant financial resources and could negatively impact other Company objectives. Even if we successfully enforce our patent rights against a competitor, we may not be able to recover adequate damages or obtain other desired relief.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, one or more motivated third parties may file an ANDA, seeking approval of a generic copy of an innovator product approved under the NDA pathway such as our PMO products, or a NDA under Section 505(b)(2), which may be for a new or improved version of the original innovator products. In certain circumstances, motivated third parties may file such an ANDA or NDA under Section 505(b)(2) as early as the so-called “NCE-1” date that is one year before the expiry of the five-year period of New Chemical Entity exclusivity or more generally four years after NDA approval. The third parties are allowed to rely on the safety and efficacy data of the innovator’s product, may not need to conduct clinical trials and can market a competing version of a product after the expiration or loss of patent exclusivity or the expiration or loss of regulatory exclusivity and often charge significantly lower prices. Upon the expiration or loss of patent protection or the expiration or loss of regulatory exclusivity for a product, the major portion of revenues for that product may be dramatically reduced in a very short period of time. If we are not successful in defending our patents and regulatory exclusivities, we will not derive the expected benefit from them.  As such, a third party could be positioned to market an ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) product that competes with one of our products prior to the expiry of our patents if the third party successfully challenged the validity of our patents protecting the product.  

The patent landscape is continually evolving, and we may be able to assert that certain activities engaged in by third parties infringe our current or future patent rights. There has been, and we believe that there will continue to be, significant litigation in the biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. As such, the patents and patent applications that we own, license, have optioned, and rely on for exclusivity for our product candidates may be challenged.

Uncertainty over intellectual property in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry has been the source of litigation and other disputes, which is inherently costly and unpredictable.

Litigation, interferences, oppositions, inter partes reviews, administrative challenges or other similar types of proceedings are, have been and may in the future be necessary in some instances to determine the validity and scope of certain of our proprietary rights, and in other instances to determine the validity, scope or non-infringement of certain patent rights claimed by third parties to be pertinent to the manufacture, use or sale of our products. We may also face challenges to our patent and regulatory exclusivities covering our products by third parties, including manufacturers of generics and biosimilars that may choose to launch or attempt to launch their products before the expiration of our patent or regulatory exclusivity. Litigation, interferences, oppositions, inter partes reviews, administrative challenges or other similar types of proceedings are unpredictable and may be protracted, expensive and distracting to management. The outcomes of such proceedings could adversely affect the validity and scope of our patents or other proprietary rights, hinder our ability to manufacture and market our products, require us to seek a license for the infringed products or technology or result in the assessment of significant monetary damages against us that may exceed amounts, if any, accrued in our financial statements. An adverse determination in a judicial or administrative proceeding or a failure to obtain necessary licenses could prevent us from manufacturing or selling our products. Furthermore, payments under any licenses that we are able to obtain would reduce our profits derived from our products. Any of these circumstances could result in financial, business or reputational harm to us or could cause a decline or volatility in our stock price.

On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted, and may also affect patent litigation. The USPTO has issued regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act.  In view of the long timelines for interpreting legal provisions in the court system and the evolving nature of our laws, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. For instance, a third party may petition the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) seeking to challenge the validity of some or all of the claims in any of our patents through an inter partes review or other post-grant proceeding. Should the PTAB institute an inter partes review or other proceeding and decide that some or all of the claims in the challenged patent are invalid, such a decision, if upheld on appeal, could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

-54-

Our business prospects will be impaired if third parties successfully assert that our products, product candidates, or platform technologies infringe proprietary rights of such third parties.

Similar to us, competitors continually seek intellectual property protection for their technology. Several of our development programs, particularly gene therapy programs, focus on therapeutic areas that have been the subject of extensive research and development by third parties for many years and have been protected with third party patent rights.  Due to the amount of intellectual property in our various fields of technology, we cannot be certain that we do not infringe intellectual property rights of competitors or other third parties or that we will not infringe intellectual property rights of competitors or other third parties granted or created in the future.  Our competitors or other third parties might have obtained, or could obtain in the future, patents that threaten, limit, interfere with or eliminate our ability to make, use and sell our products, product candidates or platform technologies in important commercial markets.  

Due to the nature of our various partnerships, collaborators, licensors, CROs, CMOs and the like, we may be subjected to claims of infringement arising from activities conducted by these third parties in connection with our product candidates, whether or not such activities are authorized by us.  As a result, we may be subject to substantial unforeseen costs, distraction, and financial liability if a third party making such a claim was successful in obtaining a final judgment of infringement and validity.

In order to maintain or obtain freedom to operate for our products and product candidates, we may incur significant expenses, including those associated with entering into agreements with third parties that require milestone and royalty payments.  Additionally, if we were to challenge the patent rights of our competitors or otherwise defend against allegations of infringement, misappropriation or related claims, we could incur substantial costs and ultimately might not be successful.