Quoin Pharmaceuticals (QNRX) Risk Factors

We are vulnerable to natural disasters such as earthquakes and wildfires, as well as other events that could disrupt our operations. We do not carry insurance for earthquakes or other natural disasters and we may not carry sufficient business interruption insurance to compensate us for losses that may occur. Any losses or damages we incur could have a material adverse effect on our business operations.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or of our licensors is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Our defense in a lawsuit may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares.

We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct. Misconduct by employees could include intentional or nonintentional failures to comply with the regulations of the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, to provide accurate information to the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, to comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, to report financial information or data accurately or to disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, possible exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid and other government healthcare programs, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, particularly if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, imprisonment, and contractual damages. Even if we are ultimately successful in defending against any such action, we could be required to divert financial and managerial resources in doing so and adverse publicity could result, all of which could harm our business.

We intend to rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials. While we will have agreements governing their activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance. We will control only certain aspects of our CROs' activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials are conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs will not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs will be required to comply with the FDA's or other regulatory agency's GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of IND-enabling studies and clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of clinical trial participants are protected. The FDA and non-U.S. regulatory agencies enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, CROs, principal investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or applicable non-U.S. regulatory agency may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving any marketing applications for the relevant jurisdiction. Upon inspection, the FDA or applicable non-U.S. regulatory agency may determine that our clinical trials did not comply with GCPs. In addition, our clinical trials will require a sufficiently large number of test subjects to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a potential drug product. Accordingly, if our CROs fail to comply with these regulations or fail to recruit a sufficient number of patients, we may be required to repeat such clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Our CROs will not be our employees, and we will not be able to control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our clinical and nonclinical programs. These CROs may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials, or other drug development activities which could harm our competitive position. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements, or for any 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 financial results and the commercial prospects for such products and any product candidates that we develop would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed. We intend to rely on other third parties to package, store and deliver drug products to the clinical trial sites for any clinical trials that we may conduct. Any performance failure on the part of these third parties could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates or commercialization of our products, if approved, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential product revenue.

The United States and some foreign jurisdictions are considering or have enacted a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (the "ACA") was enacted, which made a number of substantial changes in the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. The ACA included a number of provisions that may reduce the profitability of drug products, including revising the rebate methodology for covered outpatient drugs under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extending Medicaid rebates to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans, and requiring drug manufacturers to pay an annual fee based on their market share of prior year total sales of branded programs to certain federal health care programs. Since its passage, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, as well as recent efforts to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA. Former President Trump signed two Executive Orders and other directives designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. Concurrently, Congress has considered legislation that would repeal or replace all or part of the ACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, two bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the ACA have been signed into law. On December 22, 2017, former President Trump signed into law H.R. 1, "An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018," informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which significantly revises the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the "individual mandate." Additionally, on December 23, 2019, former President Trump signed a spending bill that repealed the implementation of certain ACA-mandated fees, including the so-called "Cadillac" tax on certain high cost employer-sponsored insurance plans, the annual fee imposed on certain health insurance providers based on market share, and the medical device excise tax on non-exempt medical devices. On June 17, 2021, the United States Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the "individual mandate" was repealed by Congress. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is uncertain how any such challenges and the healthcare measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation's automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which started in April 2013, and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will remain in effect through 2031 with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, unless additional Congressional action is taken. The Medicare reductions were phased back in starting with a 1% reduction in effect from April 1, 2022 to June 30, 2022 before increasing to the full 2% reduction. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, also reduced Medicare payments to several categories of healthcare providers. Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. Recently, healthcare reform initiatives culminated in the enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act (the "IRA"), in August 2022, which will, among other things, allow U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") to negotiate the selling price of certain drugs and biologics that CMS reimburses under Medicare Part B and Part D, although only high-expenditure single-source drugs that have been approved for at least 7 years (11 years for biologics) can be selected by CMS for negotiation, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. The negotiated prices, which will first become effective in 2026, will be capped at a statutory ceiling price. Beginning in October 2023, the IRA will also penalize drug manufacturers that increase prices of Medicare Part B and Part D drugs at a rate greater than the rate of inflation. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. Manufacturers that fail to comply with the IRA may be subject to various penalties, including civil monetary penalties. The IRA also extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. The IRA also made changes to Medicare Part D, which provides prescription drug benefits for seniors and people with disabilities. Medicare Part D enrollees once had a gap in their coverage (between the initial coverage limit and the point at which catastrophic coverage begins) where Medicare did not cover their prescription drug costs, known as the coverage gap. However, beginning in 2019, Medicare Part D enrollees paid 25% of brand drug costs after they reached the initial coverage limit - the same percentage they were responsible for before they reached that limit - thereby closing the coverage gap from the enrollee's point of view. Most of the cost of closing the coverage gap is being borne by innovator companies and the government through subsidies. Each manufacturer of an approved drug or biologic is required to enter into a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount agreement and provide a 70% discount on those drugs dispensed to Medicare Part D enrollees in the coverage gap, in order for its drugs to be reimbursed by Medicare Part D. Beginning in 2025, the IRA eliminates the coverage gap under Medicare Part D by significantly lowering the enrollee maximum out-of-pocket cost and requiring manufacturers to subsidize, through a newly established manufacturer discount program, 10% of Part D enrollees' prescription costs for brand drugs below the out-of-pocket maximum, and 20% once the out-of-pocket maximum has been reached. Although these discounts represent a lower percentage of enrollees' costs than the current discounts required below the out-of-pocket maximum (that is, in the coverage gap phase of Part D coverage), the new manufacturer contribution required above the out-of-pocket maximum could be considerable for very high-cost patients and the total contributions by manufacturers to a Part D enrollee's drug expenses may exceed those currently provided. We expect that healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement, and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. Further federal, state and foreign legislative and regulatory developments are likely, and we expect ongoing initiatives to increase pressure on drug pricing. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenues from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates.

The use of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. For example, unanticipated adverse effects could result from the use of our future products or product candidates which may result in a potential product liability claim. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in: - impairment of our business reputation;- withdrawal of clinical trial participants;- costs due to related litigation;- distraction of management's attention from our primary business;- substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants;- the inability to commercialize our product candidates; and - decreased demand for our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale. We plan to obtain product liability insurance relating to the use of our therapeutics in clinical trials. However, such insurance coverage may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and in the future we may not be able to obtain or maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our share price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive. We have competitors both in the United States and internationally, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and universities and other research institutions. Our competitors may have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Additional mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, drug products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidate that we may develop. All of our product candidates are in either preclinical or clinical development and targeted toward indications for which there may be other product candidates in clinical development. We may face competition from other drugs currently approved or that may be approved in the future for the same therapeutic indications as our product candidates. Our ability to compete successfully will depend largely on our ability to leverage our experience in drug development to: - develop therapeutics that are superior to other products in the market;- attract qualified scientific, product development and commercial personnel;- obtain patent and/or other proprietary protection for our product candidates;- obtain required regulatory approvals; and - successfully collaborate with pharmaceutical companies in the discovery, development and commercialization of new therapeutics. The availability of our competitors' products could limit the demand, and the price we are able to charge, for any products that we may develop and commercialize. We will not achieve our business plan if the acceptance of any of these products is inhibited by price competition or the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing drug products to our products, or if physicians switch to other new drug products or choose to reserve our future products for use in limited circumstances. The inability to compete with existing or subsequently introduced drug products would have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects. Established pharmaceutical companies may invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make our product candidates less competitive. In addition, any new product that competes with an approved product must demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety in order to overcome price competition and to be commercially successful. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection, receiving FDA approval or discovering, developing and commercializing product candidates before we do, which would have a material adverse impact on our business.

We currently do not have an organization for the sales, marketing and distribution of pharmaceutical products and the cost of establishing and maintaining such an organization may exceed the cost-effectiveness of doing so. In order to market any products that may be approved, we must build our sales, marketing, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. With respect to future programs, we may rely completely on an alliance partner for sales and marketing. In addition, we may enter into strategic alliances with third parties to commercialize other product candidates, if approved, including in markets outside of the United States and Europe or for other large markets that are beyond our resources. Although we intend to establish a sales organization if we are able to obtain approval to market any product candidates in the United States, and Europe we will also consider the option to enter into strategic alliances for future product candidates in the United States and Europe if commercialization requirements exceed our available resources. This will reduce the revenue generated from the sales of these products. Any future strategic alliance partners may not dedicate sufficient resources to the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, or may otherwise fail in their commercialization due to factors beyond our control. If we are unable to establish effective alliances to enable the sale of our product candidates, if approved, to healthcare professionals and in geographical regions, including the United States and Europe, that will not be covered by our own marketing and sales force, or if our potential future strategic alliance partners do not successfully commercialize the product candidates that may be approved, our ability to generate revenues from product sales will be adversely affected. If we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to generate sufficient product revenue and may not become profitable. We will be competing with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.