NASDAQ: TLPH

Product/Product

Candidate

Description

Target Use

Status

Niyad

Lyophilized vial containing nafamostat for infusion

Regional anticoagulant for infusion into the extracorporeal circuit

Received an investigational device exemption, or IDE, and Breakthrough Device Designation from the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and registrational trial is ongoing with completion expected in 2026.

LTX-608

Lyophilized vial containing nafamostat for infusion

IV infusion for disseminated intravascular coagulation, or DIC, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or ARDS, acute pancreatitis, or as an anti-viral treatment

IND will be evaluated for submission following toxicology evaluation to enable Phase 2 study.

Niyad

We are developing Niyad to become the first and only FDA-approved regional anticoagulant for use in adult patients undergoing CRRT. Niyad is infused into the extracorporeal circuit, such as the dialysis circuit during CRRT for acute kidney injury, or AKI, patients in the hospital. In the future, Niyad may have benefit for use in chronic kidney disease patients undergoing intermittent hemodialysis, or IHD, in dialysis centers. Our initial priority is for use during CRRT, which is the focus of the current registrational study. Niyad is being studied under an Investigational Device Exemption, or IDE, and has received Breakthrough Device Designation from the FDA and an ICD-10 procedural code from the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. While not approved for commercial use in the United States, the active drug component of Niyad, nafamostat, has been approved and used in Japan and South Korea for over 30 years as a regional anticoagulant for the dialysis circuit, disseminated intravascular coagulation and acute pancreatitis. Niyad has the potential for six years of data exclusivity upon FDA approval of the device. In addition, we have filed an international patent application pursuant to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) for its use as an anticoagulant as described. Niyad is a lyophilized formulation of nafamostat, a broad-spectrum, synthetic serine protease inhibitor, which has a half-life of 8 minutes, with anticoagulant, anti-inflammatory and potential anti-viral activities.

7

The Niyad NEPHRO CRRT Study, which has received both IDE approval from the FDA and central Institutional Review Board, or IRB, approval, is designed as a prospective, double-blinded trial to be conducted at up to 14 U.S. hospital intensive care units. NEPHRO CRRT stands for Nafamostat Efficacy in Phase 3 Registrational Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Study. We have initiated the NEPHRO CRRT study and we plan to submit an application for Premarket Approval, or PMA, to the FDA upon completion of the trial. The study will enroll and evaluate 70 adult patients undergoing renal replacement therapy, who cannot tolerate heparin or are at risk for bleeding. The primary endpoint of the study is mean post-filter activated clotting time using Niyad versus placebo over the first 24 hours. Key secondary endpoints include filter lifespan, number of filter changes over 72 hours, number of transfusions over 72 hours and dialysis efficacy (based on urea concentration) over the first 24 hours. We believe that decades of commercial use and post-marketing safety data available for nafamostat in Japan and South Korea can help guide and support our Niyad development efforts in the United States.

LTX-608

LTX-608 is our nafamostat formulation for direct IV infusion being explored as an investigational product for one or more of the following indications: antiviral treatment, or treatment of ARDS, DIC or acute pancreatitis. For example, third-party studies have been conducted outside the U.S. in COVID patients where initial results demonstrated that nafamostat shortens time to clinical improvement, increasing the recovery rate and lowering the mortality rate when combined with standard of care, or SOC, compared to SOC alone, in the category of the sickest COVID patients. We are currently evaluating the initial indication on which we will target and focus our resources. Nafamostat is already approved for DIC and acute pancreatitis in Japan and South Korea, which may favor focusing on one of those indications first. Nafamostat has the potential for five years of data exclusivity as a new chemical entity, or NCE, upon the first FDA approval of a new drug application that is independent from any exclusivity arising from issuance of our pending patent applications.

The Market Opportunity for Niyad

The current market landscape for anticoagulants used during CRRT includes heparin, a systemic anticoagulant that anticoagulates both the patient and the extracorporeal circuit, and citrate, a regional anticoagulant used for anticoagulation of the circuit only and is being used off-label by physicians. No anticoagulant is used during CRRT in 29% of cases, the default decision when physicians are concerned with the safety of heparin or citrate. According to our market research, when an anticoagulant is not used for CRRT, frequent filter clogging is the most commonly encountered unintended result, with 20-25% of research respondents stating that due to such clogging issues increased blood transfusions were needed. Since the citrate anticoagulant alternative does not have FDA approval for anticoagulation of the extracorporeal circuit, we believe that nafamostat, if approved for use during CRRT, may be beneficial in certain patient populations where current products may be contraindicated. Our market research indicated physicians chose not to use current anticoagulation products because of a number of concerns, including hypocalcemia, citrate lock, calcium shortages, and nursing time required to administer and monitor citrate, among other concerns.

We believe that nafamostat, which has a short half-life, may provide regional anticoagulation with potential benefits over existing products. For example, in a 1991 clinical study undertaken to elucidate the relationship between various anticoagulants and the incidence of bleeding complications during continuous hemofiltration, or CHF, and continuous hemodiafiltration, or CHDF, the incidence of bleeding during CHF and/or CDHF with heparin was 66.7% as compared to 4.3% with nafamostat.

We believe Niyad’s peak sales potential may exceed $200 million annually in the United States if it is approved for use during CRRT and IHD, based on an estimated addressable population of 500,000 patients undergoing CRRT of $575 million, and an estimated addressable population of 350,000 patients undergoing IHD of $3.5 billion. Exposure of blood to the dialysis filter causes clotting, which is a major limitation to care during CRRT, as it leads to inefficient dialysis, causes blood loss and depletes limited resources. Circuit clotting is the most frequent cause of therapy interruption in circuit dialysis procedures.

We also believe that nafamostat has the potential for use in other indications. LTX-608 is the name for our potential second nafamostat product candidate. We are evaluating the first targeted indication for LTX-608; however, since nafamostat is approved in Japan and South Korea for DIC and acute pancreatitis, one of these may be the first targeted indication for LTX-608. Our estimate of the number of DIC patients annually in the United States is over 250,000.

8

Competition for Nafamostat Products

Niyad is the first nafamostat product candidate we are developing to be used as a regional anticoagulant for the extracorporeal circuit. There are currently no products approved by the FDA for use as a regional anticoagulant in the extracorporeal circuit. If approved, Niyad would be the first and only product approved for this indication. As discussed above, the current standards of care being used today are heparin and citrate (used off-label). Heparin is a systemic anticoagulant and cannot be used in patients who are at risk of bleeding. Citrate is complex to administer and requires significant human resource time and attention given the nature of the product, and cannot be used in patients with liver failure, which is approximately 43% of acute kidney injury patients. Based on our research of the CRRT market, heparin is used approximately 43% of the time, while citrate is used approximately 28% of the time. The remaining 29% of the time there is no anticoagulant used which is partly driven by the safety concerns with heparin or citrate. We believe the primary opportunity for Niyad is within the 57% of the market that uses either citrate or no anticoagulant.

We are evaluating the second targeted indication for our nafamostat product development candidate, LTX-608. Since nafamostat is approved in Japan and South Korea for the treatment of DIC and acute pancreatitis, we may focus on of these indications for development of our first LTX-608 product candidate.

Pre-filled Syringe (PFS) Product Candidates

FedsyraTM and Phenylephrine

Our PFS product candidates are ready-to-use formulations of active ingredients that are currently approved in the United States in concentrated formulations that must be diluted prior to administration to patients, and more recently in ready-to-use vials, and in the case of ephedrine, ready-to-use pre-filled syringe formulations. Hospitals currently purchase ready-to-use, pre-filled syringe presentations of these active ingredients mainly from compounding facilities that have not obtained FDA approval for the products, or manually dilute the products in-house. There are at least two FDA-approved pre-filled ephedrine syringe products available on the market, which may impact our decision on submitting an NDA and further pursuing an approval of Fedsyra. We are currently evaluating whether to discontinue our agreement with Aguettant given the other FDA approved pre-filled syringe products on the market and the principal focus of our resources on our nafamostat product candidates. For additional information regarding the PFS product candidates, see Note 5, “In-License Agreement” to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our Strategy

Our strategy is focused on developing, obtaining approval, and commercializing Niyad. We intend to expand our portfolio to include additional acute care therapies for use in medically supervised settings.

Sales and Marketing

Our sales and marketing resources are focused on pre-launch activities for Niyad. We are currently evaluating the strategy for a potential launch of Niyad with either internal resources, or with a potential commercial partner.

Pharmaceutical and Device Manufacturing and Supply

For Niyad, we rely on contract manufacturers to produce our development batches, and if approved by the FDA, we will rely on contract manufacturers for commercial supply of Niyad. We currently have a single contract manufacturer that is producing the nafamostat active ingredient for Niyad, and a separate contract manufacturer producing the finished product used for development, both of which can support eventual commercial needs. We are in discussions with a back-up manufacturer of Niyad to ensure there is not a single source of supply.

If we pursue the pre-filled syringe product candidates, Aguettant will be our sole sourced manufacturer of our commercial supply of pre-filled syringe products. Aguettant currently has their own manufacturing facilities, where they produce pre-filled syringes for the European market. We will purchase the pre-filled syringes from Aguettant under our existing supply agreement if and when the FDA approves the pre-filled syringe products for marketing.

9

DSUVIA Divestment

We divested DSUVIA to Alora Pharmaceuticals, LLC, or Alora, in April 2023, who agreed to continue to commercialize the product and pay us royalties, sales-based milestone and other payments, as defined in the DSUVIA Agreement (see Note 3, “Discontinued Operations” to our consolidated financial statements to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information regarding the DSUVIA Agreement). Under the DSUVIA Agreement, we continue to be responsible for marketing DSUVIA to the Department of Defense, or DoD. We have no plans to further develop or commercialize any of our other sufentanil sublingual products that were previously our product candidates.

In January 2024, we entered into an agreement with XOMA (US) LLC, or XOMA, whereby we sold our rights to all payments for services performed to support sales of DSUVIA to the DoD by Alora under the Marketing Agreement, and sales milestones we are entitled to under the DSUVIA Agreement with Alora, until XOMA receives a certain specified return on its investment, after which we will share equally in the payments earned on sales to the Department of Defense, milestones and other payments from Alora. Please see Note 6, “Sale of Future Payments” to our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information. This transaction was consummated to provide further funding for the development of our lead product candidate, Niyad. In October 2024, Alora notified us that they are discontinuing their DSUVIA sales efforts to non-DoD customers. We were also notified in 2025 that Alora submitted a letter to the FDA to request the withdrawal of the DSUVIA NDA. While we have continued our efforts to facilitate sales of the remaining DSUVIA inventory held by Alora to the DoD, we have not obtained any orders from the DoD to purchase the remaining product available. If there are no orders for DSUVIA purchases from the DoD we expect that Alora will destroy the remaining DSUVIA inventory. We attempted to facilitate a longer-term supply arrangement for DSUVIA but were unsuccessful and do not believe there are any prospective parties currently interested in producing DSUVIA for commercial or DoD use.

Intellectual Property

We seek patent protection in the United States and internationally for our product candidates. Our policy is to pursue, maintain and defend patent rights developed internally or acquired externally and to protect the technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business. We cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our technology. We also rely on trade secrets to protect our commercial products and product candidates. Our commercial success also depends in part on our non-infringement of the patents or proprietary rights of third parties. For a more comprehensive discussion of the risks related to our intellectual property, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our success will depend significantly on our ability to:

•

obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our product candidates;

•

defend our patents;

•

preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; and

•

operate our business without infringing or misappropriating patents and other third-party proprietary rights.

We have established and continue to build proprietary positions for our product candidates in the United States and abroad. We continue to seek to obtain and expand our patent protection directed to both compositions of matter and delivery devices, as well as methods of treatment related to our lead product candidate, Niyad.

We have recently filed for additional patent coverage in the United States and Europe. If issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, we expect that these patents will extend into 2045, excluding any additional term for potential patent term adjustments or patent term extensions in the United States. We note that the patent laws of foreign countries differ from those in United States, and the degree of protection afforded by foreign patents may be different from the protection offered by U.S. patents. The patent applications that we have filed and have not yet been granted may fail to result in issued patents in the United States or in foreign countries. Even if the patents successfully issue, third parties may challenge the patents.

Pursuant to the DSUVIA Agreement, Alora acquired all patents and trademarks related to DSUVIA and DZUVEO. In addition, we and Alora entered into an intellectual property agreement pursuant to which Alora granted fully-paid, royalty-free and perpetual licenses to us under certain specified intellectual property rights acquired by Alora under the DSUVIA Agreement for, among other things, the development, manufacture, commercialization and exploitation of certain products, including Zalviso.

Further, we seek trademark protection in the United States and internationally where available and when appropriate.

10

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing, export and import of pharmaceutical and medical device products, which must be approved by the FDA before they may legally be marketed in the United States.

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and its implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and complying with applicable laws and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply at any time during the product development and approval process, or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, Warning Letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties.

The process required by the FDA before a drug product may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

•

completion of non-clinical laboratory tests, animal trials and formulation studies according to Good Laboratory and Manufacturing Practices regulations;

•

submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug, or IND, application which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;

•

performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials according to Good Clinical Practices, or GCP, to establish the clinical safety and efficacy of the proposed drug product for its intended use;

•

submission to the FDA of an NDA for a new drug product;

•

satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the drug product and the drug substance(s) are produced to assess compliance with cGMP;

•

payment of application, annual program fees; and

•

FDA review and approval of the NDA.

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources and we cannot be certain that approval for our product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

•

Phase 1. The product is initially introduced into healthy human subjects and tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and excretion. In the case of some products for severe or life-threatening diseases, especially when the product may be too inherently toxic to ethically administer to healthy volunteers, the initial human testing is often conducted in patients.

•

Phase 2. Involves trials in a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific targeted conditions and to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage and schedule.

•

Phase 3. Clinical trials are undertaken to further evaluate dosage, clinical safety and efficacy in an expanded patient population at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the product and provide an adequate basis for product labeling.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an Institutional Review Board, or IRB, can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug or biological product has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

11

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal trials and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP and QSR for medical device requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

The results of product development, preclinical trials and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on our drug products, proposed labeling and other relevant information, will be submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA for a new drug product, requesting approval to market the product in the United States. The submission of an NDA is subject to the payment of a substantial user fee; a waiver of such fee may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. During its review of an NDA, the FDA may inspect our manufacturers for GMP and QSR compliance, and our pivotal clinical trial sites for GCP compliance.

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, an NDA or supplement to an NDA must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may grant deferrals for submission of data or full or partial waivers.

The approval process is lengthy and difficult, and the FDA may refuse to approve an NDA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical data or other data and information. Even if such data and information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data. The FDA issues a Complete Response Letter at the conclusion of its review if the NDA is not yet deemed ready for approval. A Complete Response Letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing or information for the FDA to reconsider the application. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included.

If a product candidate does receive regulatory approval, the approval may be limited to specific conditions and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. A REMS, which can include a medication guide, patient package insert, a communication plan, elements to assure safe use and implementation system, must include a timetable for assessment of the REMS. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized. In addition, the FDA may require post-approval testing which involves clinical trials designed to further assess a drug product’s safety and effectiveness after the NDA.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any drug products for which we receive FDA approval are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated clinical safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements. Phase 4 clinical trials are conducted after approval to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication or when otherwise requested by the FDA in the form of post marketing requirements or commitments. Failure to promptly conduct any required Phase 4 clinical trials could result in withdrawal of NDA approval. The FDA strictly regulates labeling, advertising, promotion and other types of information on products that are placed on the market. Drug products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. Further, manufacturers of drug products must continue to comply with cGMP requirements, which are extensive and require considerable time, resources and ongoing investment to ensure compliance. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented and other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

Drug product manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacturing and distribution of approved drug products are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. The cGMP requirements apply to all stages of the manufacturing process, including the production, processing, packaging, labeling, storage and shipment of the drug product. Manufacturers must establish validated systems to ensure that products meet specifications and regulatory standards, and test each product batch or lot prior to its release.

12

The FDA may withdraw a product approval if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market. Further, the failure to maintain compliance with regulatory requirements may result in administrative or judicial actions, such as fines, Warning Letters, holds on clinical trials, product recalls or seizures, product detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products, refusal to approve pending applications or supplements, restrictions on marketing or manufacturing, injunctions or civil or criminal penalties.

Medical Devices

Niyad, our nafamostat lead product candidate in development for use as a regional anticoagulant for infusion into the extracorporeal circuit, is regulated by the FDA as a medical device since it achieves its primary intended purposes outside the body. Niyad is being studied under an Investigational Device Exemption, or IDE, and has received Breakthrough Device Designation from the FDA. Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes—Class I, Class II or Class III—depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of control needed to provide reasonable assurances with respect to safety and effectiveness. Niyad is a Class III device as it is novel and not eligible to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device under the 510(k) process. Class III devices are subject to the PMA application process, which is generally more costly and time consuming than the 510(k) process. Through the PMA application process, the applicant must submit data and information demonstrating reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use to the FDA’s satisfaction. Accordingly, a PMA application typically includes, but is not limited to, extensive technical information regarding device design and development, nonclinical study and clinical trial data, manufacturing information and labeling. The PMA application must provide valid scientific evidence that demonstrates to the FDA’s satisfaction a reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use.

In the United States, a device that presents a “significant risk” to human health, as defined by the FDA, must be the subject of an IDE application to the FDA that has to be approved by the FDA prior to the commencement of human clinical trials. The IDE application must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and laboratory testing results, showing that it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. All clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s IDE regulations that govern investigational device labeling, prohibition of promotion, recordkeeping, and reporting and monitoring responsibilities of study sponsors and study investigators. Clinical trials must further comply with the FDA’s good clinical practice regulations for IRB approval and for informed consent and other human subject protections. Required records and reports are subject to inspection by the FDA. The commencement or completion of any clinical trial may be delayed or halted, by the FDA or an IRB.

Following receipt of a PMA application, the FDA conducts an administrative review to determine whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If it is not, the agency will refuse to file the PMA. The FDA, by statute and by regulation, has 180 days to review a filed PMA application, although the review of an application more often occurs over a significantly longer period of time. During this review period, the FDA may request additional information or clarification of information already provided, and the FDA may issue a major deficiency letter to the applicant, requesting the applicant’s response to deficiencies communicated by the FDA. Before approving or denying a PMA, an FDA advisory committee may review the PMA at a public meeting and provide the FDA with the committee’s recommendation on whether the FDA should approve the submission, approve it with specific conditions, or not approve it. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Prior to approval of a PMA, the FDA may conduct inspections of the clinical trial data and clinical trial sites, as well as inspections of the manufacturing facility and processes. Overall, the FDA’s review of a PMA application generally takes between one and three years but may take significantly longer. The FDA can delay, limit or deny approval of a PMA application for many reasons.

If the FDA evaluation of a PMA is favorable, the FDA will issue either an approval letter, or an approvable letter, the latter of which usually contains a number of conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the PMA. When and if those conditions have been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the FDA, the agency will issue a PMA approval letter authorizing commercial marketing of the device, subject to the conditions of approval and the limitations established in the approval letter. If the FDA’s evaluation of a PMA application or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. The FDA also may determine that additional tests or clinical trials are necessary, in which case the PMA approval may be delayed for several months or years while the trials are conducted and data is submitted in an amendment to the PMA, or the PMA is withdrawn and resubmitted when the data are available.

13

In approving a PMA application, as a condition of approval, the FDA may also require some form of post-approval study or post-market surveillance, whereby the applicant conducts a follow-up study or follows certain patient groups for a number of years and makes periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional or longer-term safety and effectiveness data for the device. The FDA may also approve a PMA application with other post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, such as, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale, distribution and use.

The Breakthrough Devices Program is a voluntary program intended to expedite the review, development, assessment and review of certain medical devices that provide for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating human diseases or conditions for which no approved or cleared treatment exists or that offer significant advantages over existing approved or cleared alternatives. All submissions for devices designated as breakthrough devices will receive priority review, meaning that the review of the submission is placed at the top of the appropriate review queue and receives additional review resources, as needed. Although breakthrough designation or access to any other expedited program may expedite the development or approval process, it does not change the standards for approval. Breakthrough designation may also be withdrawn by the FDA if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Additionally, breakthrough designation does not ensure that we will ultimately obtain FDA approval.

Pervasive and Continuing Regulation

After a device is placed on the market, numerous regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

•

the FDA’s QSMR, which requires manufacturers, including their suppliers, to follow stringent design, testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance procedures during all aspects of the manufacturing process;

•

labeling regulations and FDA prohibitions against the promotion of products for uncleared, unapproved or off-label uses;

•

medical device reporting regulations, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA if their device may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur;

•

medical device recalls, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA any recall of a medical device, provided the recall was initiated to either reduce a risk to health posed by the device, or to remedy a violation of the FDCA caused by the device that may present a risk to health; and

•

post-market surveillance regulations, which apply when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device.

Foreign Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of our products to the extent we choose to sell any products outside of the United States.

Controlled Substances Regulations

Fedsyra is an ephedrine pre-filled syringe for injection. Ephedrine is a scheduled listed chemical product under the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005. Under this law, DEA applies strict controls and quotas on importation of ephedrine containing drug products.

The Drug Supply Chain Security Act of 2013, or DSCSA, imposes obligations on manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, among others, related to product tracking and tracing. Among the requirements are that manufacturers must provide certain information regarding the drug product to individuals and entities to which product ownership is transferred, label drug product with a product identifier, and keep certain records regarding the drug product. Further, manufacturers have drug product investigation, quarantine, disposition, and notification responsibilities related to counterfeit, diverted, stolen, and intentionally adulterated products, as well as products that are the subject of fraudulent transactions or which are otherwise unfit for distribution such that they would be reasonably likely to result in serious health consequences or death.

Unforeseen delays to the drug substance and drug product manufacture and supply chain may occur due to delays, errors or other unforeseen problems with the permitting and quota process. Also, any one of our suppliers, contract manufacturers, laboratories, packagers and/or distributors could be the subject of DEA violations and enforcement could lead to delays or even loss of DEA license by the contractors.

14

We are currently evaluating whether to discontinue the agreement with Aguettant given the other FDA-approved pre-filled syringe products on the market and the principal focus of our resources on our nafamostat product candidates.

Federal and State Fraud and Abuse and Data Privacy and Security and Transparency Laws and Regulations

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical and medical device products, federal and state healthcare laws restrict certain business practices in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. These laws include, but are not limited to, anti-kickback, false claims, data privacy and security, and transparency statutes and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for, purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchasing, leasing or ordering of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare program. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value, including for example, gifts, discounts, the furnishing of supplies or equipment, credit arrangements, payments of cash, waivers of payment, ownership interests and providing anything at less than its fair market value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers and/or formulary managers on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices involving remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce purchasing, leasing or ordering may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. The failure to satisfy all of the requirements of an applicable exception or safe harbor do not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances.

Additionally, the intent standard under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively, the Affordable Care Act to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Rather, if “one purpose” of the remuneration is to induce referrals, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute is violated. In addition, the Affordable Care Act codified case law that a claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute also constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act (discussed below).

The federal civil False Claims Act and related laws prohibit, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval to the federal government or knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. Pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for, among other things, allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Companies also have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses.

Further, the Civil Monetary Penalties Law imposes civil penalties against any person or entity who, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to, among others, a federal healthcare program that the person knows or should know is for a medical or other item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other actions, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third party payers, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

15

In addition, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their implementing regulations, impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information primarily on covered entities, business associates and their covered subcontractors. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates that are independent contractors or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. International laws, such as the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, (EU 2016/679) and Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection, regulate the processing of personal data within the European Union and between countries in the European Union and countries outside of the European Union, including the United States. Failure to provide adequate privacy protections and maintain compliance with safe harbor mechanisms could jeopardize business transactions across borders and result in significant penalties.

Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act within the Affordable Care Act and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals and medical supplies, for which federal healthcare program payment is available, report information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians, (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of such providers and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members.

Also, many states have similar healthcare statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer. FDA and some states require the posting of information relating to clinical studies. In addition, certain states such as California require pharmaceutical companies to implement a comprehensive compliance program that includes a limit on expenditures for, or payments to, individual medical or health professionals. Moreover, several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to, among other things, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales and marketing activities, report information related to drug pricing, require the registration of sales representatives, and prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the health regulatory laws described above or any other laws that apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including potentially significant criminal, civil and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion of products from reimbursement under government programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. To the extent that any of our products will be sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws and implementation of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or transfers of value to healthcare professionals.

16

Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

In both domestic and foreign markets, sales of any of our product candidates, if approved, will depend in part on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payers. Third-party payers include government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Sales of our product candidates, if approved, will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of such products will be paid by third-party payers. These third-party payers are increasingly focused on containing healthcare costs by challenging the price and examining the cost-effectiveness of medical products and services. In addition, significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. Such payers may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Third-party payers and hospitals may refuse to include a particular branded drug in their formularies or otherwise restrict patient access to a branded drug when a less costly generic equivalent or other alternative is available. For products administered under the supervision of a physician, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such products. Additionally, separate reimbursement for the product itself or the treatment or procedure in which the product is used may not be available, which may impact utilization. Because each third-party payer individually approves coverage and reimbursement levels, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement is a time-consuming, costly and sometimes unpredictable process. We or our providers may be required to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of any product to each third-party payer and hospital separately with no assurance that approval would be obtained, and we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of products for which we receive regulatory approval. This process could delay the market acceptance of any such product and could have a negative effect on our future revenues and operating results. We cannot be certain that any of our product candidates, if approved, will be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. Because coverage and reimbursement determinations are made on a payer-by-payer basis, obtaining acceptable coverage and reimbursement from one payer does not guarantee that we will obtain similar acceptable coverage or reimbursement from another payer. If we or our partners are unable to obtain and maintain coverage of, and adequate reimbursement and payment levels for, the products from third-party payers, physicians may limit how much or under what circumstances they will prescribe or administer them. This in turn could affect our or our partners’ ability to successfully commercialize products and impact our profitability, results of operations, financial condition and future success. Third-party payers, government healthcare programs, wholesalers, group purchasing organizations, and hospitals frequently require that companies negotiate agreements that provide discounts or rebates from list prices. We expect increasing pressure to offer larger discounts or discounts to a greater number of these organizations to maintain acceptable reimbursement levels for and access to products for which we receive regulatory approval. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by these mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs, private payers, wholesalers, group purchasing organizations, hospitals, and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies. In addition, if competitors reduce the prices of their products, or otherwise demonstrate that they are better or more cost effective than products for which we receive regulatory approval, this may result in a greater level of reimbursement for their products relative to our products, which would reduce sales of our products and harm our results of operations.

There have been, and there will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to commercialize products profitably. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least seven (7) years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. We anticipate that the federal and state legislatures and the private sector will continue to consider and may adopt and implement healthcare policies, such as the Affordable Care Act, intended to curb rising healthcare costs. These cost containment measures may include: controls on government-funded reimbursement for drugs; new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates to government health care programs; controls on healthcare providers; challenges to or limits on the pricing of drugs, including pricing controls, or limits or prohibitions on reimbursement for specific products through other means; requirements to try less expensive products or generics before a more expensive branded product; and public funding for cost effectiveness research, which may be used by government and private third-party payers to make coverage and payment decisions. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

In addition, in many foreign countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to government control. In some non-U.S. jurisdictions, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the EU provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. We may face competition for our products from lower-priced products in foreign countries that have placed price controls on pharmaceutical products. In addition, there may be importation of foreign products that compete with our own products, which could negatively impact our profitability.

Healthcare Reform

In the United States and foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state level that seek to reduce healthcare costs. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for our products for which we receive marketing approval. However, any negotiated prices for our future products will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain from non-governmental payers. Moreover, private payers often follow federal healthcare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates.

17

Furthermore, political, economic and regulatory influences are subjecting the healthcare industry in the United States to fundamental change. Initiatives to reduce the federal deficit and to reform healthcare delivery are increasing cost-containment efforts. We anticipate that Congress, state legislatures and the private sector will continue to review and assess alternative benefits, controls on healthcare spending through limitations on the growth of private health insurance premiums and Medicare and Medicaid spending, the creation of large insurance purchasing groups, price controls on pharmaceuticals and other fundamental changes to the healthcare delivery system. Any proposed or actual changes could limit or eliminate our spending on development projects and affect our ultimate profitability.

In the United States, the Affordable Care Act was enacted in an effort to, among other things, broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. There have been amendments to, and judicial, executive branch and Congressional challenges to, certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or the OBBBA, was signed into law, which narrowed access to Affordable Care Act marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired Affordable Care Act subsidies. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and further restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical and medical device products. We are not sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes will be, if any, on products for which we receive regulatory approval.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our products may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct-to-consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare Plan," to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM, payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

18

Further, there may continue to be additional proposals relating to the reform of the U.S. healthcare system, some of which could further limit the prices we are able to charge for products for which we receive marketing approval, or the amounts of reimbursement available for our products once approved. If future legislation were to impose direct governmental price controls and access restrictions, it could have a significant adverse impact on our business. Managed care organizations, as well as Medicaid and other government agencies, continue to seek price discounts. Some states have implemented, and other states are considering, price controls or patient access constraints under the Medicaid program, and some states are considering price-control regimes that would apply to broader segments of their populations that are not Medicaid-eligible. Due to the volatility in the current economic and market dynamics, we are unable to predict the impact of any unforeseen or unknown legislative, regulatory, payer or policy actions, which may include cost containment and other healthcare reform measures. Such policy actions could have a material adverse impact on our profitability.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2025, we employed 12 full-time employees, most of whom work out of our corporate offices in San Mateo, CA. Talphera is committed to pay equity, regardless of gender or race/ethnicity, and conducts pay equity analyses on an annual basis.

We invest in our workforce by offering competitive salaries, wages, and benefits. We endeavor to foster a strong sense of ownership by offering all employees stock options and restricted stock units under our broad-based stock incentive program. We also offer comprehensive and locally relevant benefits for all eligible employees. We recognize and support the growth and development of our employees.

None of our employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Corporate Information

We were originally incorporated as SuRx, Inc. in Delaware on July 13, 2005. We subsequently changed our name to AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and in January 2024, to Talphera, Inc. We file electronically with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. We make available on our website at www.talphera.com, free of charge, copies of these reports as soon as reasonably practicable after filing these reports with, or furnishing them to, the SEC.

19