Aldeyra Therapeutics, Inc. (ALDX) Business

Verbatim Item 1 Business section from Aldeyra Therapeutics, Inc.'s latest 10-K. Filing date: 2026-02-27. Accession: 0001193125-26-083012.

This page reproduces the company's own Item 1 Business text from the linked SEC filing. It is filer text, not grepcent analysis, scoring, or investment advice.

Informational only - not investment advice. See Disclaimer.

Extracted from Item 1 Business to the first Item 1A/1B/1C/2 boundary after HTML sanitization. Confidence: high. Source form: 10-K. Character span: 24935-135611.

Back to ALDX company profile

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

Aldeyra Therapeutics is a biotechnology company devoted to discovering innovative therapies designed to treat immune-mediated diseases. Our approach is to develop pharmaceuticals that modulate protein systems, instead of directly inhibiting or activating single protein targets, with the goal of optimizing multiple pathways at once while minimizing toxicity. Our product candidates include RASP (reactive aldehyde species) modulators ADX-248, ADX-246, and chemically related molecules for the potential treatment of systemic and retinal immune-mediated diseases. Our late-stage product candidates are reproxalap, a RASP modulator for the potential treatment of dry eye disease and allergic conjunctivitis, and ADX-2191, a novel formulation of intravitreal methotrexate for the potential treatment of primary vitreoretinal lymphoma and retinitis pigmentosa.

Our development pipeline, as of the date of filing of this annual report on Form 10-K is illustrated below.

Product Candidate Development Pipeline

On October 31, 2023 (the AbbVie Option Agreement Effective Date), we entered into an exclusive option agreement (the AbbVie Option Agreement) with AbbVie Inc. (AbbVie), pursuant to which we granted AbbVie an exclusive option (the AbbVie Option) to obtain (a) a co-exclusive license in the United States to facilitate a collaboration with us to develop, manufacture and commercialize reproxalap in the United States, (b) an exclusive license to develop, manufacture, and commercialize reproxalap outside the United States, (c) a right of first negotiation for compounds that are owned or otherwise controlled by us in the field of ophthalmology relating to treating conditions of the ocular surface, and (d) a right to review data for any other compounds that are owned or otherwise controlled by us in the fields of ophthalmology and immunology before such data is shared with any other third party (the Collaboration Agreement). AbbVie has paid us a non-refundable payment of $1.0 million in consideration of the AbbVie Option (the AbbVie Option Payment).

On December 21, 2023, pursuant to the AbbVie Option Agreement, AbbVie extended the period during which it may exercise the AbbVie Option by paying us a non-refundable payment of $5.0 million (the AbbVie Option Extension Fee). If the Collaboration Agreement is entered into, the AbbVie Option Payment and the AbbVie Option Extension Fee will be credited against the upfront cash payment payable by AbbVie.

On November 15, 2024, we entered into the Expansion Side Letter (the Expansion Letter) with AbbVie. The Expansion Letter makes certain changes to the AbbVie Option Agreement, among other things, providing that we will conduct certain launch activities, which costs shall not exceed mid-single-digit millions of dollars without AbbVie’s approval, and which costs will be considered allowable expenses pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement upon the delivery of AbbVie’s written notice of exercising the AbbVie Option and entry into the Collaboration Agreement, such that 60% of our allowable expenses will be reimbursed by AbbVie in the event of exercise. If AbbVie does not deliver a written notice of exercising the AbbVie Option and we do not execute the Collaboration Agreement, we will remain solely responsible for such costs. AbbVie has also independently initiated pre-commercialization planning activities. In addition, the Exercise Period (as defined in the AbbVie Option Agreement) was restricted to ten (10) business days following the date, if any, that we receive approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of the NDA for reproxalap in dry eye disease (the FDA Decision), provided that AbbVie shall provide us notice in case AbbVie determines that it will not exercise the AbbVie Option.

Upon AbbVie’s delivery of the agreement execution notice and the parties entering into the Collaboration Agreement, AbbVie would pay us a $100.0 million upfront cash payment, less the AbbVie Option Payment and the AbbVie Option Extension Fee. In addition, we would be eligible to receive up to approximately $300.0 million in regulatory and commercial milestone payments, inclusive of a $100.0 million milestone payment payable if the FDA Decision is received prior to or after the execution of the Collaboration Agreement. In the United States, we would share profits and losses with AbbVie from the commercialization of reproxalap according to a split of 60% for AbbVie and 40% for us. Outside of the United States, we would be eligible to receive tiered royalties on net sales of reproxalap. As of February 27, 2026, AbbVie has not exercised the AbbVie Option.

All of our development plans and timelines are subject to adjustment depending on recruitment rate, regulatory review, preclinical and clinical results, funding, and other factors that could delay the initiation, completion, or reporting of clinical trials. Regulatory review timelines are flexible and subject to change based on the regulator’s workload and other potential review issues. The timing of ongoing clinical trials depends, in part, on the availability of clinical research facilities and staffing, and the ability to recruit patients.

As we continue to execute on our strategy of expanding our product candidate pipeline, we may license or acquire new immune-modulating approaches with novel therapeutic potential.

We have no products approved for sale in the United States or elsewhere. We will not receive any revenue from sales of our product candidates that we develop until we obtain regulatory approval. We intend to commercialize our products, if approved for sale, directly or through collaborations. Although we may receive commercial and license revenue in the future, we have to date primarily funded our operations through the sale of our common stock, convertible preferred stock, convertible promissory notes, warrants, and borrowings under debt facilities. We will need to raise additional capital in the form of debt or equity or through partnerships to fund additional development of our product candidates, and we may in-license, acquire, or invest in complementary businesses or products. In addition, contingent on capital resources, we may augment, diminish, or otherwise modify the clinical development plan described herein.

Since our incorporation, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates. If we do obtain marketing approval for reproxalap or any other product candidate that we develop, we intend to partner with other companies for commercialization, though there can be no guarantee that such partnership will be available. Our ability to generate revenues, if any, largely depends upon our ability, alone or with others, to complete development of and obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates, and to successfully manufacture, market, and sell our products. The results of our operations will vary significantly from year-to-year and quarter-to-quarter, and depend on a number of factors, including risks related to our business and industry, risks relating to intellectual property and other legal matters, risks related to our common stock, and other risks that are detailed in the section of this annual report on Form 10-K entitled “Risk Factors”.

The Science Supporting Our Product Candidates

RASP: Mediators of Disease

In response to infection, injury, endogenous and exogenous chemical triggers, heat, and other stimuli, RASP (reactive aldehyde species) are generated through a variety of metabolic processes, including alcohol oxidation, enzymatic and non-enzymatic lipid oxidation, and polyamine and sphingosine metabolism. RASP appear to effect inflammation signaling via covalent binding to thiol (sulfur-containing) and amine (nitrogen-containing) residues on proteins, including receptors and enzymes. RASP-protein adducts directly influence the function of proteins, leading to activation of intracellular inflammatory factors, including NF‑κB, an important mediator in the inflammatory response, and inflammasomes. In addition, RASP adducts bind to Scavenger Receptor A, which also initiates pro-inflammatory signaling and leads to the formation of antibodies against the adducted protein, at least in part explaining the presence of host-directed antibodies in autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis. Levels of RASP are generally observed to be elevated in ocular and systemic inflammatory disease, including the diseases represented in our RASP modulator pipeline, and thus represent therapeutic targets for immune modulation. RASP are also associated with metabolic and neurodegenerative diseases, and, in addition to upregulating inflammation, lead to DNA damage, accumulation of metabolic aggregates, and other pathologic manifestations.

Because of the inherent toxicity of RASP, most, if not all, living organisms contain enzymes, such as aldehyde reductases and aldehyde dehydrogenases, that convert RASP into non-toxic molecules. Genetic mutations in the RASP-metabolizing enzymes cause disease. In Sjögren-Larsson Syndrome, for example, mutations in fatty aldehyde dehydrogenase are responsible for skin, neurological, and retinal disease.

Aside from the potentiation of inflammation, there is no generally accepted biological role of high levels of RASP. Some physiologic molecules have RASP forms, including retinaldehyde (a form of Vitamin A) and pyridoxal and pyridoxal phosphate (forms of Vitamin B6), but the activity of physiological RASP is highly restricted by chaperone and other proteins that prevent reaction with other molecules, including our RASP modulators. Thus, pharmacotherapeutic RASP modulation is expected not to adversely affect normal physiologic processes. Consistent with the lack of accessibility of physiologic RASP, our most advanced RASP modulator, reproxalap, which has been administered as an ophthalmic solution to approximately 2,700 patients across a number of completed clinical trials for up to 12 months, has been observed to be generally well tolerated and has not been associated with any serious adverse events; mild and transient instillation site irritation is the most commonly reported adverse event in clinical trials. Similarly, an orally administered RASP modulator, ADX‑629, which has been administered to more than 180 patients across a number of Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials for up to 90 days, has been observed to be generally well tolerated and has not been associated with any serious adverse events.

The RASP Modulator Platform

Because RASP affect many proteins simultaneously, the RASP modulator platform represents a unique and novel pharmacologic approach that, unlike almost all drugs in use today, is not designed to directly inhibit or activate a particular protein but instead targets a family of small molecules that in turn affect the activity and structure of many proteins at once. RASP modulation, therefore, has the potential to down-regulate pro-inflammatory systems or groups of proteins, and may lead to multiple beneficial clinical effects while avoiding toxicity associated with single-target inhibition or activation.

We are currently developing ADX‑248, ADX‑246, and other novel RASP modulators for the treatment of a number of diseases associated with RASP. RASP modulators are novel small molecules designed specifically to bind, and thereby allow for the degradation and depletion of, RASP. The validity of the RASP platform is supported by reproxalap, our first-in-class product candidate in development for the treatment of dry eye disease and allergic conjunctivitis, which has demonstrated broad-based, rapid-onset activity and consistent safety across a number of Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials. In in vitro and animal studies, reproxalap does not appear to affect most cellular components, including most receptors, enzymes, ion channels, or other proteins. Reproxalap has been shown to outcompete cellular constituents to covalently bind and trap RASP. Reproxalap-RASP adducts appear to be rapidly degraded in cellular environments, after which neither reproxalap nor RASP are detectable. Outside of biological systems, reproxalap-RASP adducts have shown to be remarkably non-reactive and stable, suggesting that reproxalap-RASP binding may be effectively irreversible. By forming covalent drug-RASP adducts that are then degraded, reproxalap and other RASP modulators have the potential to substantially lower RASP levels.

We believe that we are the first biotechnology company to demonstrate the beneficial effects of RASP modulation in a variety of animal models relating to immune-mediated disease, suggesting that RASP modulators may have potent anti-inflammatory effects that persist hours after administration at a variety of different doses relevant to clinical testing:

•
In mice injected with a pro-inflammatory agent known as endotoxin, intraperitoneally administered reproxalap statistically reduced a variety of inflammatory cytokines (protein inflammatory mediators), including IL‑5, IL‑1ß, IL‑17, and TNFα, while up-regulating the primary anti-inflammatory cytokine IL‑10. (Data presented at The American Academy of Asthma Allergy & Immunology 2015 Annual Meeting)

•
In two different mouse models of inflammatory pain, intraperitoneally administered reproxalap dose-dependently reduced nociceptive behavior, suggesting that reproxalap down-regulates pain signaling in inflammation. (Data presented at The 2016 International Conference on Pain Research and Management)

•
In a mouse model of macular degenerative disease, intravitreal injections of the RASP modulator ADX-246 reduced the levels of a toxic metabolite implicated in hte dry form of age-related macular degeneration.

•
In a mouse model of atopic dermatitis, relative to vehicle (placebo) treatment, treatment with the RASP modulator ADX‑248 resulted in decreased ear thickness, spleen weight, epidermal thickness, epidermal erosion/ulceration, and histopathology scores.

Thus, we believe that the mechanism of action of RASP modulation is potentially multifactorial and may ameliorate inflammatory and other diseases and deter disease progression in different ways simultaneously, consistent with a systems-based pharmacologic approach.

In addition to the development of ADX‑248 and ADX‑246, we intend to continue the discovery and development of other novel RASP modulators, and we intend to continue to develop intellectual property around the molecules derived from our RASP modulator platform.

The Potential of ADX‑2191 to Treat Primary Vitreoretinal Lymphoma and Retinitis Pigmentosa

ADX‑2191 is a novel intravitreal formulation of methotrexate, a dihydrofolate reductase inhibitor that has been administered intravitreally for decades to treat cancer and inflammatory diseases. Though not approved by the FDA for the treatment of retinal disease, intraocular injection of intravenous methotrexate formulations is the de facto standard of care for primary vitreoretinal lymphoma, a cancer that affects the back of the eye and can metastasize to the brain, potentially leading to death.

Retinitis pigmentosa is a group of rare genetic eye diseases characterized by retinal cell death and loss of vision, for which there is no treatment. In vivo preclinical research has identified the activity of methotrexate in inducing misfolded rhodopsin (a visual cycle protein) clearance, suggesting the potential of ADX‑2191 to treat genetic forms of retinitis pigmentosa that are characterized by misfolded rhodopsin.

Clinical Trial Results and Development Plans

Prior to applying for marketing approval, our product candidates must satisfy regulatory authority requirements for safety and efficacy, including pivotal Phase 3 clinical assessment. Our material clinical results have been previously disclosed elsewhere in detail, and we encourage review of all of our clinical trial disclosures in addition to this annual report on Form 10-K. All of our development plans and timelines are subject to adjustment depending on recruitment rate, regulatory review, preclinical and clinical results, funding, and other factors that could delay the initiation, completion, or reporting of clinical trials.

Systemic RASP Modulation for the Treatment of Immune-Mediated Diseases

To assess the potential of systemic RASP modulation to treat immune-mediated disease, we initiated a number of proof-of-concept clinical trials with the orally administered signal-finding RASP modulator ADX-629, a molecule chemically related to reproxalap, in patients with conditions characterized primarily by pathologic inflammation. In a Phase 1 clinical trial of ADX‑629, no treatment-related adverse events were observed at any dose tested, and target engagement was evidenced by statistically lower levels of the RASP malondialdehyde in drug-treated subjects relative to controls. Additionally, following ingestion of a controlled high-fat meal, free fatty acids were statistically lower and HDL statistically higher in drug-treated subjects relative to placebo-treated subjects. The lipid results in the Phase 1 clinical trial suggested that ADX‑629 diminished the inflammatory and pathologic metabolic response that typically occurs following ingestion of a high-fat meal.

Figure 1: Phase 1 Clinical Trial of ADX‑629

MDA = malondialdehyde; SEM = standard error of the mean; HDL= high-density lipoprotein; LDL = low-density lipoprotein;

FFA = free fatty acids; AUC = area under the curve

In 2022, we announced results from Phase 2 clinical trials of ADX‑629 in patients with psoriasis, atopic asthma, COVID-19, or alcohol intoxication, all of which suggested preliminary pharmacodynamic activity of ADX‑629. The Phase 2 trials were performed as part of a systematic strategy to assess activity in different types of immunological diseases, including autoimmune disease, allergic inflammation, infectious disease, and alcohol intoxication. Across all Phase 2 clinical trials, in patients treated with ADX‑629, no safety concerns were evident from adverse events and there were no treatment-related serious adverse events observed.

Figure 2: Phase 2 Clinical Trials of ADX‑629 Psoriasis, Asthma, and COVID‑19

SEM = standard error of the mean; NIAID = National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases;

LOCF = last observation carried forward

Psoriasis

Following treatment of 10 moderate psoriasis patients with ADX‑629 for 12 weeks, psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) scores were statistically significantly decreased (P=0.0008 vs. baseline at Week 12), and peak PASI 50% and PASI 75% responder percentages were 57% (P=0.001) and 25% (P=0.051), respectively. Investigator global assessment scores decreased over the duration of treatment (P=0.01 vs. baseline at Week 12). Lesional pan-gene expression analysis suggested a trend toward normalization of global gene expression patterns; by Week 12 no gene expression pathways in lesional tissue were dysregulated compared to non-lesional skin. Plasma levels of the commonly described pro-inflammatory RASP malondialdehyde were reduced relative to baseline as soon as four weeks after initiation of treatment (P=0.02).

Asthma

In a placebo-controlled crossover trial of eight mild asthma patients treated for seven days, asthma symptom scores and sputum eosinophil cell counts were numerically reduced following treatment with ADX‑629 relative to treatment with placebo. Compared to placebo treatment, treatment with ADX‑629 led to statistically significant reductions in plasma levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL‑5 (P=0.02) and TNFα (P0.0001), and numerical reductions in symptoms and in plasma levels of malondialdehyde.

COVID-19

Following treatment of 11 mild to moderate COVID-19 patients with ADX‑629 or placebo for four weeks, change from baseline in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Score (1=death, 8=no activity limitation) was numerically higher in ADX‑629-treated patients (n=7) than in placebo-treated patients (n=4) over all days assessed. Consistent with the clinical findings, relative to placebo-treated patients, reductions in plasma levels of the cytokines CXCL9 (P=0.0008), IFNγ (P=0.02), and TNFα (P=0.07) were observed in patients treated with ADX‑629.

Alcohol Intoxication

In a crossover trial of 23 healthy volunteers, where each subject received ADX‑629 or placebo prior to ethanol ingestion, ADX‑629 was statistically superior to placebo in improving Romberg test balance time (P=0.02); reducing facial flushing (P=0.0007); and lowering levels of the RASP acetaldehyde (P=0.03), total cholesterol (P=0.02), and LDL (P=0.047).

In 2023, as an extension of the strategy to assess activity in different types of diseases, we announced results from Phase 2 clinical trials of ADX‑629 in patients with chronic cough and atopic dermatitis, both of which are persistently disturbing diseases thought to be related, at least in part, to inflammation.

Chronic Cough

Fifty-one patients with refractory or unexplained chronic cough, which is often defined as a cough that persists for more than eight weeks and is unresponsive to treatment, were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period Phase 2 crossover trial. Patients were randomized to receive ADX‑629 or placebo twice daily for 14 days, followed by a 14-day washout period prior to crossing over to 14 days of treatment with ADX‑629 or placebo, whichever was not received in the first period. All patients completed both treatment periods. Relative to placebo, statistical significance was achieved for the key secondary endpoint of reduction in awake cough frequency (P=0.01), the secondary endpoint of 24-hour cough frequency (P=0.001), and the related post-hoc analyses of awake cough count (P=0.001) and 24-hour cough count (P=0.001).

Figure 3: Phase 2 Clinical Trial of ADX‑629 in Chronic Cough

Atopic Dermatitis

Eight mild to moderate atopic dermatitis patients were treated in an open-label, single-center Phase 2 clinical trial of ADX‑629. Relative to baseline, over three months of treatment, improvement was observed in all patients. Statistical significance was achieved for improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI, p=0.0006). EASI thresholds for 50% improvement (EASI‑50), 75% improvement (EASI‑75), and 90% improvement (EASI‑90) were met in four patients (50%), three patients (38%), and one patient (13%), respectively. Statistical significance was achieved for improvement in affected body surface area (p0.0001); one patient (13%) achieved complete clearance of affected body surface area. Statistical significance was achieved for improvement in Investigator Global Assessment (IGA, p0.0001). The IGA threshold score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) was met in one (13%) patient. Statistical significance was achieved for improvement in patient-reported itching (p=0.0002); the clinically relevant threshold of improvement by four or more points was met in three patients (38%), and two patients (25%) reported elimination of itching. Statistical significance was achieved for improvement in patient-reported eczema severity (p0.0001); the clinically relevant threshold of improvement by four or more points was met in six patients (75%). Statistical significance was achieved for improvement in depression the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (p=0.02) and numerical improvement was observed for improvement in the Beck Anxiety Inventory (p=0.1).

Figure 4: Phase 2 Clinical Trial of ADX‑629 in Atopic Dermatitis

We have completed proof-of-concept testing with ADX‑629, which is no longer in development, aside from potential investigator-sponsored trials in Sjögren-Larsson Syndrome. Clinical trials of next-generation RASP modulators ADX‑248 (oral administration) and ADX‑246 (intravitreal injection) in atopic dermatitis and the dry form of age-related macular degeneration (dry AMD, a condition characterized by loss of sight caused in part by inflammation) are expected to be initiated in 2026 and 2027, respectively. Relative to ADX‑629, ADX‑248 and ADX‑246 are more potent RASP modulators. Further, in contrast to the twice-daily oral administration of ADX‑629, the pharmacokinetics of ADX‑248 have been optimized with the intent of supporting once-daily oral administration. A Phase 1 clinical trial of ADX‑248 is ongoing.

Dry Eye Disease

Reproxalap is a first-in-class, topically administered RASP modulator for the treatment of anterior segment ocular inflammation, and is currently in late-stage development for the treatment of dry eye disease and allergic conjunctivitis. In 2022, Aldeyra submitted to the FDA an NDA for reproxalap for the treatment of dry eye disease. The NDA included clinical results from five pivotal trials across eight statistically significant and multiplicity-controlled primary endpoints assessing tear volume, ocular redness, and patient-reported symptoms. On November 27, 2023, Aldeyra announced that the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter (CRL) regarding the NDA submission. Although no safety or manufacturing issues with reproxalap were identified, the FDA stated in the letter that the NDA did not demonstrate “efficacy in treating ocular symptoms associated with dry eyes” and that “at least one additional adequate and well-controlled study to demonstrate a positive effect on the treatment of ocular symptoms of dry eye” should be conducted.

On November 16, 2023, Aldeyra submitted to the FDA a Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) for a proposed Phase 3 clinical trial to assess ocular discomfort in a dry eye chamber, which is designed to simulate dry eye exacerbations or flares, potentially the most bothersome aspect of the disease for most dry eye patients. In response to the SPA, the FDA issued a SPA - No Agreement letter which provided feedback to Aldeyra on the proposed chamber trial. Based on the feedback, Aldeyra amended the design and protocol of the chamber trial and, per FDA SPA Guidance, Aldeyra and the FDA held a Type A meeting, during which we believe that the FDA concurred with the principal aspects of the trial design. Subsequent to the SPA Type A meeting, two chamber trials were initiated, in addition to one field trial, in which patients administered reproxalap or vehicle (placebo) over six weeks and reported ocular discomfort weekly.

As announced on August 8, 2024, the first chamber trial achieved the primary endpoint (P=0.004) of reducing patient-reported ocular discomfort relative to vehicle. On October 3, 2024, Aldeyra announced resubmission of the NDA, which included results from the first chamber trial and a draft label describing chronic and acute symptomatic benefit, in addition to acute reduction of ocular redness. On April 3 2025, based primarily on a baseline imbalance in symptom scores across treatment arms and other statistical comments, Aldeyra announced that the FDA issued a CRL regarding the NDA resubmission, stating that the NDA did not demonstrate “efficacy in adequate and well controlled studies in treating ocular symptoms associated with dry eyes” and that “at least one additional adequate and well-controlled study to demonstrate a positive effect on the treatment of ocular symptoms of dry eye” should be conducted. No safety or manufacturing issues with reproxalap were identified.

On May 5, 2025, we announced that the second chamber trial also achieved the primary endpoint (P=0.002) of reducing patient-reported ocular discomfort relative to vehicle (and that there was no notable baseline imbalance), and that the field trial did not reach statistical significance but was supportive of the activity of reproxalap. During a meeting with the FDA, we informed the FDA of the results of the second chamber and field trials and subsequently received written confirmation from the FDA that, for NDA resubmission, only the second chamber trial need be included in the NDA. On June 17, 2025, we announced the second resubmission of the NDA. In early December 2025, a draft label was received from the FDA. On December 15, 2025, the day before the target action PDUFA date for the second NDA resubmission, we announced that the FDA requested that the field trial be submitted to the NDA, triggering a three-month extension of the PDUFA target action date to March 16, 2026.

Figure 5: The Second Phase 3 Dry Eye Chamber Trial of Reproxalap in Dry Eye Disease

Allergic Conjunctivitis

In a number of Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials in allergic conjunctivitis, reproxalap demonstrated consistent statistically significant and clinically relevant activity in improving ocular itching and redness. In 2021, we announced that the randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled allergen chamber Phase 3 INVIGORATE Trial of topically administered reproxalap in patients with allergic conjunctivitis achieved the primary endpoint (patient-reported ocular itching score after the second dose of test article) and all secondary endpoints (investigator-assessed ocular redness score and patient-reported ocular tearing score). In June 2023, we announced that INVIGORATE-2, a confirmatory clinical trial substantially similar to INVIGORATE, achieved the primary endpoint (patient-reported ocular itching score after the second dose of test article) and all secondary endpoints (investigator-assessed ocular redness score and patient-reported ocular tearing score).

Figure 6: Phase 3 INVIGORATE Trial Results for Reproxalap in Allergic Conjunctivitis

Aldeyra plans to discuss remaining regulatory requirements with the FDA for reproxalap for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis in light of the positive results from INVIGORATE and INVIGORATE-2. Across all clinical indications, topical ocular reproxalap has been studied in more than 2,500 patients with no observed clinically significant safety concerns; mild and transient instillation site irritation is the most commonly reported adverse event in clinical trials.

Primary Vitreoretinal Lymphoma

In June 2025, we announced receipt of a SPA Agreement Letter from the FDA for ADX-2191 for the treatment of primary vitreoretinal lymphoma. The randomized, double-masked, multicenter clinical trial proposed in

the SPA will compare cancer cell clearance in approximately 20 patients following 1:1 randomization to receive either a single intraocular injection or eight intraocular injections of ADX-2191. The frequency of methotrexate injections has been linked to cancer cell clearance in patients with primary vitreoretinal lymphoma, and approximately five injections are required on average to achieve cancer cell clearance. In addition to the SPA agreement, the FDA has also agreed that, if positive, the trial, in addition to literature references, will be sufficient to support NDA resubmission. Top-line results from the clinical trial are expected in 2026.

Retinitis Pigmentosa

In June 2023, we announced top-line results from a Phase 2 clinical trial of intravitreal ADX‑2191 in eight patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Four patients were dosed monthly, and four patients were dosed twice monthly. Relative to baseline, across all patients, statistical significance was achieved for improvement in best corrected visual acuity (P0.0001), low-light visual acuity (P=0.0001), time to electroretinographic response to light (P=0.02), macular sensitivity to light (P0.0001), and dark-adapted peripheral sensitivity to light (P0.0001). All enrolled patients completed the trial per protocol. ADX‑2191 was well tolerated, and no safety concerns were identified. No treatment-related adverse events associated with retinal morphology were observed. No serious adverse events were reported, and no patients discontinued due to adverse events.

Based on feedback from the FDA, we plan to initiate a Phase 2/3 clinical trial of ADX‑2191 in retinitis pigmentosa in the first half of 2026. Over 12 months of therapy administered every 30 days, the randomized, double-masked, multicenter clinical trial is designed to compare peripheral vision sensitivity to green (rod-mediated) light across a high and a low dose of ADX‑2191 and sham injections in approximately 45 retinitis pigmentosa patients (15 patients per arm).

Figure 7: Phase 2 Clinical Trial Results for ADX‑2191 in Retinitis Pigmentosa

The Markets for Our Product Candidates

Immune-Mediated Systemic Diseases

Immune-mediated systemic diseases, such as autoimmune disease and diseases characterized by inflammation, are generally chronic conditions that impair quality of life and lead to significant healthcare expenditures. In aggregate, immune-mediated diseases afflict in excess of millions of individuals worldwide. Given the complex pathophysiology of systemic immune-mediated disorders, therapy often requires combinations of drugs with distinct mechanisms of action. As such, we believe novel product candidates for immune-mediated diseases are in high demand.

Our RASP modulator platform represents a potential novel therapeutic approach for a variety of common diseases. We are not aware of any other company actively developing therapeutics that target RASP. Because RASP appear to be involved in the generation and potentiation of inflammation in general, we believe the potential therapeutic applicability of RASP modulators is broad. In 2022 and 2023, we announced proof-of-concept results from Phase 2a clinical trials of ADX‑629, a first-in-class, signal-finding, orally administered RASP modulator, in

patients with COVID-19, atopic asthma, psoriasis, alcohol intoxication, chronic cough, and atopic dermatitis, all of which were supportive of the potential of systemic RASP modulation to treat immune-mediated diseases.

Dry Eye Disease and Allergic Conjunctivitis

The validity of the RASP platform is supported by reproxalap, our first-in-class product candidate for the treatment of dry eye disease, which has demonstrated broad-based, rapid-onset activity and consistent safety across a number of Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials. Dry eye disease is an immune-mediated disease, the symptoms of which - ocular pain, dryness, burning, and stinging - are chronic and persistently disturbing, impacting quality of life and leading to loss of work and substantial economic burden. Dry eye disease is one of the most common diseases treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists, and healthcare providers and patients regard therapy as inadequate in a substantial number of cases.

Dry eye disease is estimated to afflict 39 million or more adults in the United States. Five classes of prescription topical ocular drugs are approved for dry eye disease treatment: cyclosporine (a generic immune modulator), lifitegrast (an immune modulator), loteprednol (a generic corticosteroid), perfluorohexyloctane (a water-free solution), and acoltremon (a TRPM8 agonist). The activity of cyclosporine and lifitegrast has been observed to be minimal or lacking in the majority of patients, and weeks or months of treatment may be required to achieve even modest clinical benefit; over 60% of patients discontinue treatment within 12 months of initiation. Loteprednol, a generically available corticosteroid, is indicated only for short-term treatment (up to two weeks) due to corticosteroid-associated toxicity, which includes increases in intraocular pressure that may lead to glaucoma, the development of cataracts, ocular infection, and other ocular morbidities. Perfluorohexyloctane is available over-the-counter in certain countries outside the United States as a lubricating eyedrop. Acoltremon administration causes ocular pain in 50% of patients. No approved dry eye disease drug has demonstrated activity within minutes or hours of administration as a primary endpoint in clinical trials. Thus, there is considerable demand for a novel, safe and efficacious topical ocular drug that can be used chronically but that acts quickly.

By modulating RASP, which are elevated in a variety of inflammatory diseases, reproxalap represents a novel mechanism for diminishing ocular inflammation. In a number of Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials in dry eye disease, reproxalap demonstrated consistent statistically significant and clinically relevant activity across a variety of symptoms and signs, occurring as early as within minutes of dosing. Given the broad activity and rapid onset of action observed in clinical trials, including improvement in ocular symptoms and redness, we believe that reproxalap may have a commercially differentiated product profile versus currently approved drugs for dry eye disease.

Many patients with dry eye disease also manifest symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis, another common ocular inflammatory disease that affects more than 1 billion people worldwide, including more than 66 million in the United States. Allergic conjunctivitis is characterized by ocular itching and redness. Distinguishing between dry eye disease and allergic conjunctivitis can be challenging for healthcare providers. Approximately half of dry eye patients complain of itching, which is generally considered the result of allergy, and approximately half of allergic conjunctivitis patients complain of dryness, which is generally considered the result of dry eye disease. There are currently no FDA-approved products that are indicated for the chronic treatment of both dry eye disease and allergic conjunctivitis. Further, antihistamines, which are commonly used in allergic conjunctivitis, are known to exacerbate ocular dryness. In a number of Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials in allergic conjunctivitis, reproxalap demonstrated consistent statistically significant and clinically relevant activity in improving ocular itching and redness. Thus, we believe reproxalap could offer differentiated efficacy relative to existing dry eye disease medications with regard to the potential treatment of the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis.

Primary Vitreoretinal Lymphoma

Primary vitreoretinal lymphoma is a rare, aggressive, and potentially fatal retinal cancer that is diagnosed in approximately 200 to 600 patients in the United States and 100 to 200 patients in the European Union per year. The median survival for newly diagnosed patients is less than five years. No approved treatments are currently available, though intravitreal injection of compounded methotrexate represents the current standard of care. ADX-2191 has received FDA Orphan Drug Designation for the treatment of primary vitreoretinal lymphoma, and EMA Orphan Designation for the treatment of primary large B-cell lymphomas of immune-privileged sites, including primary vitreoretinal lymphoma.

Retinitis Pigmentosa

Retinitis pigmentosa is a group of rare genetic eye diseases characterized by retinal cell death and loss of vision, for which there is no treatment. The prevalence of retinitis pigmentosa is more than one million people worldwide, and mutations leading to rhodopsin misfolding account for approximately 10% of cases. ADX‑2191 has received Orphan Drug Designation and Fast Track Designation from the FDA for the treatment of retinitis pigmentosa, and EMA Orphan Designation for the treatment of inherited retinal dystrophies of the rod-dominant phenotype, including retinitis pigmentosa.

The Competitive Landscape of Our Product Candidates

The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Our potential competitors include large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies, and research institutions. We believe that the key competitive factors that will affect the development and potential commercial success of our product candidates are efficacy, safety, tolerability, and the ability to reduce the dependence on, or the dose of, other drug products.

Many of our potential competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of products, and the commercialization of those products. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than we may be in obtaining regulatory approval for products and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ products may be more effective, or more effectively marketed and sold, than any product that we may commercialize, and may render our product candidates obsolete or non-competitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing any of our product candidates. Further, competitors with numerous approved products may be able to negotiate pricing and reimbursement that is more favorable than that which we may be able to achieve. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new products enter the market and advanced technologies become available. In addition, the development of new treatment methods for the diseases we are targeting could render our products non-competitive or obsolete.

While our product candidates may manifest efficacy, tolerability, or safety advantages, many marketed therapies are generic or may be priced considerably lower than the pricing we anticipate for our product candidates. Pricing, in addition to healthcare plan coverage, prior authorization requirements, step edits, co-pay amounts, and related factors, may discourage the initial or prolonged use of our product candidates. Further, the recent growth of Pharmacy Benefit Managers and similar entities has diminished the profitability of drug commercialization for smaller companies, and may hamper our ability to support our operations or compete effectively in the marketplace following regulatory approval, if any.

RASP Modulator Platform

A number of academic groups have published on the concept of reducing RASP levels, primarily by using compounds with amines (certain nitrogen-containing molecules) that react with RASP through a chemical process known as the Schiff base reaction. Various RASP-binding amines have been described, particularly carnosine (a naturally occurring dipeptide), which has other potential mechanisms of action unrelated to RASP. At least one group has published on the use of certain nitrogen-containing marketed products to temporarily bind the RASP retinaldehyde as a potential therapy for retinal disease. Schiff base reactions have also been mentioned as possible explanations for a portion of the activity of aminoguanidine, pyridoxamine, and possibly other non-proprietary amine-containing compounds that have been tested in clinical trials for diabetic nephropathy. However, the Schiff base reaction is reversible, and generally the substrates (precursors) and products of the reaction exist in equilibrium such that, at any point in time, the RASP substrate may be bound or unbound. In this way, Schiff base reactions alone represent temporary RASP binding, and likely lead to the relocation of RASP rather than the elimination or long-term modulation of RASP. We believe that our RASP modulator product candidates that we have discovered are differentiated from the above approaches in that the chemical structures of our product candidates are novel, and

the reaction with RASP has been observed to be essentially irreversible in vivo, which, we believe, may result in a more effective means of modulating RASP levels.

Other Immune-Modulating Pharmacotherapies

A myriad of new treatments have been or are being developed to treat inflammatory diseases, and have been used, or in theory could be used, for the treatment of the diseases that our product candidates are intended to target. Immune-modulating products include cytokine inhibitors, immune cell receptor inhibitors, immune cell depletion agents, complement inhibitors, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and Janus kinase inhibitors. Companies that currently market such therapies include AbbVie Inc., Johnson & Johnson, UCB Inc. and UCB S.A., Amgen, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis AG, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Pfizer, Inc. Currently marketed products may manifest efficacy and safety advantages over our product candidates, and may be used to treat the diseases for which we are developing our product candidates.

Methotrexate, the active drug substance of ADX‑2191, is generically available and has been used as a chemotherapeutic and immune modulating agent, and other formulations or application methods of methotrexate could be developed for the treatment of retinal diseases. Though not approved by the FDA for the treatment of retinal disease, intraocular injection of intravenous methotrexate formulations is the de facto standard of care for primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (a cancer that affects the back of the eye), and off‑label methotrexate is now commonly administered for the treatment of proliferative vitreoretinopathy, posterior uveitis, and other retinal diseases. The off‑label intraocular injection of intravenous methotrexate for retinal diseases is an example of a practice known as compounding. The disadvantages of compounding are significant, and include a risk of microbial contamination that can lead to severe ocular infection resulting in vision loss or surgical removal of the eye. Unlike compounded intravenous formulations, ADX‑2191 is specifically formulated for intraocular injection such that pH, viscosity, and tonicity have been designed to be compatible with the vitreous humor, the fluid in the back of the eye. Further, ADX‑2191 is a concentrated formulation of methotrexate that requires a small injection volume, thereby reducing injection site reflux and ensuing corneal toxicity relative to off‑label ocular injections of methotrexate. Unlike off‑label ocular injections of methotrexate, ADX‑2191 is denser than the vitreous, the fluid in the back of the eye, allowing for the concentration of methotrexate in the vicinity of retina.

Competitive Pharmaceuticals by Indication

We believe the primary competitors by indication with respect to our current programs in late-stage clinical testing are as follows:

Competitive Pharmaceuticals for Reproxalap

Indication	Competitive Products
Dry Eye Disease	Topical immunomodulators, such as cyclosporine (0.05% as Restasis®, 0.09% as Cequa®, and 0.1% as Vevye®) and lifitegrast (Xiidra®); loteprednol (a corticosteroid as Eysuvis®); an intranasal spray (varenicline as Tyrvaya®), a lubricating eyedrop (perfluorohexyloctane as MieboTM); a TRPM8 receptor agonist (acoltremon as Tryptyr®); and other generic steroids; and artificial tear solutions
Allergic Conjunctivitis	Over-the-counter and prescription topical ocular and oral antihistamines, and prescription mast cell stabilizers and corticosteroids

We believe that there is significant unmet medical need for the diseases that we intend to target. If proven to be safe and effective, we believe that our product candidates could be used in place of, or in addition to, current therapies. Currently available therapies for the chronic treatment of dry eye disease are often considered by physicians and patients to be inadequate, may require weeks or months of treatment to achieve even moderate clinical benefit, and have not demonstrated clinical activity in allergic conjunctivitis, a common comorbidity.

Many drugs are in development for dry eye disease or related indications. In addition, generic versions of Restasis® became available in the United States in 2022. The competitive products for allergic conjunctivitis, which may be generic or sold over-the-counter, include topical antihistamines and corticosteroids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and mast cell stabilizers. For the diseases we intend to study, there may be other developmental therapies of which we are not aware.

Our ability to compete successfully will depend in part on our ability to utilize our drug development expertise to identify, develop, secure rights to, and obtain regulatory approvals for promising pharmaceutical products before others are able to develop competitive products. Our ability to compete successfully will also depend on our ability to attract and retain skilled and experienced personnel. Additionally, our ability to compete may be diminished by insurers and other third-party payors, which often encourage the use of less expensive, non-innovative, or generic products.

Intellectual Property and Proprietary Rights

Overview

In the United States and abroad, we are building an intellectual property portfolio for reproxalap and other RASP modulators and for therapeutic methods of use of methotrexate for the treatment of retinal disease. We currently seek, and intend to continue to seek, patent protection in the United States and internationally for our product candidates, methods of use, and processes for manufacture, and for other technologies, where appropriate. Our current policy is to actively seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other things, filing patent applications in the United States and abroad relating to proprietary technologies that are important to the development of our business. We also rely on, and will continue to rely on, trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position. 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 that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our technology.

Our success will depend significantly on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for the technologies that we consider important to our business, our ability to defend our patents, and our ability to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets and operate our business without infringing the patents and proprietary rights of third parties.

Patent Portfolio

Our patent portfolio currently includes patents and patent applications covering the composition, formulation, and uses of reproxalap, ADX‑246, ADX‑248, ADX-2191 , and other novel compounds. As of December 31, 2025, we owned thirty-four United States patents and ten pending United States non-provisional patent applications, and two pending United States provisional patent applications, as well as numerous foreign counterparts to these patents and patent applications relating to reproxalap and other RASP modulators. Additionally, we both own and retain an exclusive license to certain patents and applications covering the formulation of ADX‑2191 and uses thereof in preventing and treating retinal indications, including retinitis pigmentosa, primary vitreoretinal lymphoma, and proliferative vitreoretinal disease. As of December 31, 2025, there are three granted United States Patents, two pending U.S. non-provisional patent applications, and approximately three pending and one issued foreign counterparts to the patent applications relating to ADX‑2191.

We expect the issued reproxalap composition of matter patent in the United States, if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2028. It is possible that the term of the composition of matter patent in the United States may be extended up to five additional years under the provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act. We expect the foreign reproxalap composition of matter patents, if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2026. Reproxalap composition of matter patents have been issued in Australia, Canada, China, Europe (validated in approximately 14

member countries), Hong Kong, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia and South Korea. Reproxalap composition of matter patent claims are pending in Brazil.

Licenses and Agreements

AbbVie Option Agreement

MEEI Agreement

We previously developed ADX‑2191 for the treatment of proliferative vitreoretinopathy pursuant to an Exclusive License Agreement with Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI) originally entered into in July 2016 between MEEI and Helio Vision, Inc.(Helio), as amended, (MEEI Agreement). We assumed the MEEI Agreement in connection with our 2019 acquisition of Helio.

Pursuant to the MEEI Agreement, we obtained an exclusive, worldwide license from MEEI to develop and commercialize ADX‑2191 under certain patents and patent applications, in addition to other licenses to intellectual property (the MEEI Patent Rights). We have agreed to use our commercially reasonable efforts to develop ADX‑2191 and to meet certain specified effort and achievement benchmarks by certain dates.

In consideration for the rights licensed under the MEEI Agreement, Helio issued MEEI a number of shares of preferred stock and Helio agreed, during the term of the MEEI Agreement, to pay non-creditable non-refundable license maintenance fees to MEEI of $15,000 on each of the second and third anniversary of the MEEI Agreement,

$25,000 on each of the fourth and fifth anniversary of the MEEI Agreement and $35,000 on the sixth and each subsequent anniversary of the MEEI Agreement. In addition, Helio was obligated to make future sales-dependent milestone payments to MEEI of up to low seven figures in the aggregate, as well as royalty payments to MEEI at a rate which, as a percentage of net sales, is in the low single digits for products that incorporate or use the MEEI Patent Rights. Helio is also obligated under the MEEI Agreement to pay MEEI a percentage of certain sublicense revenue at a percentage rate that descends from low-double digits to mid-single digits based on the date of the sublicense. Following our acquisition of Helio, we became obligated to make any future payments previously owed by Helio under the MEEI Agreement. There is no additional equity consideration issuable under the MEEI Agreement.

The MEEI Agreement will remain in effect until the expiration date of the last to expire patent licensed under the MEEI Agreement. We may terminate the MEEI Agreement with timely written notice to MEEI. MEEI has the right to terminate the MEEI Agreement, subject to certain specified cure periods, in the event of our insolvency or bankruptcy or if we cease all business operations with respect to licensed products, fail to pay amounts due under the MEEI Agreement, fail to comply with certain due diligence obligations, do not maintain specific levels of insurance, one of our officers is convicted of a felony relating to the manufacture, use, sale or importation of licensed products, or we materially breach any provisions of the MEEI Agreement or in the event of our insolvency or bankruptcy.

In the event of an early termination of the MEEI Agreement, all rights licensed and developed by us under the MEEI Agreement will revert to MEEI. We have agreed to indemnify MEEI for certain claims that may arise under the MEEI Agreement.

Other Intellectual Property Rights

Our marks ALDEYRA THERAPEUTICS and our logo are registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Confidential Information and Inventions Assignment Agreements

We currently require and will continue to require each of our employees and consultants to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment, consulting, or collaborative relationships with us. The agreements provide that all confidential information developed or made known during the course of the relationship with us be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. In the case of employees, the agreements provide that all inventions resulting from work performed for us, utilizing our property or relating to our business and conceived or completed by the individual during employment shall be our exclusive property to the extent permitted by applicable law. Our consulting agreements also provide for assignment to us of any intellectual property resulting from services performed by a consultant for us.

Sales and Marketing

We have retained worldwide commercial rights for our product candidates, provided, however, that on October 31, 2023, we entered into the AbbVie Option Agreement, pursuant to which we granted AbbVie an exclusive option (the AbbVie Option) to obtain (a) a co-exclusive license in the United States to facilitate a collaboration with us to develop, manufacture and commercialize reproxalap in the United States, (b) an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize reproxalap outside the United States, (c) a right of first negotiation for compounds that are owned or otherwise controlled by us in the field of ophthalmology relating to treating conditions of the ocular surface, and (d) a right to review data for any other compounds that are owned or otherwise controlled by us in the fields of ophthalmology and immunology before such data is shared with any other third party, in each case for clauses (a) to (d), on the terms and conditions set forth in the form of Co-Development, Co-Commercialization and License Agreement filed as an exhibit hereto (the Collaboration Agreement). As of February 27, 2026, AbbVie has not exercised the AbbVie Option. If we obtain marketing approval for reproxalap or any other product candidate that we develop, we intend to partner with other companies, including AbbVie, for commercialization, though there can be no guarantee that such partnership will be available.

Manufacturing

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities for the production of our product candidates, nor do we have plans to develop our own manufacturing operations in the foreseeable future. We currently depend on third-party contract manufacturers for all of our required raw materials, drug substance and finished drug product for our preclinical research and clinical trials. We have no immediate plans to purchase, erect, or otherwise create any manufacturing facilities to be owned by us for any of these purposes, and intend to continue to depend on third-party contract manufacturers for the foreseeable future. Other than for the purposes of regulatory approval and pursuant to the Expansion Letter, we do not have any current contractual relationships for the manufacture of commercial supplies of our product candidates. If our product candidates are approved by any regulatory agency, we intend to enter into agreements with third-party contract manufacturers for commercial production at such time. We may utilize third-party consultants to manage our manufacturing contractors. We believe that the active pharmaceutical ingredient and other materials needed for the formulation of our product candidates are relatively easy to manufacture, and that multiple suppliers and formulators could be employed for this purpose. Further, we believe the raw materials needed for manufacture of our product candidates, as well as other components of our formulations, are generally readily available currently from multiple sources.

Employees

As of December 31, 2025, we had 8 full-time employees and had engaged a number of consultants. We expect that a number of consultants previously engaged in development of our product candidates will participate in ongoing clinical and manufacturing activities. None of our employees is represented by a labor union. We have not experienced any work stoppages, and we consider our relations with our employees to be good.

Human Capital

We recognize that attracting, motivating, and retaining talent at all levels is vital to our continued success. Our employees are a significant asset and we aim to create an equitable, inclusive, and empowering environment in which our employees can grow and advance their careers, with the overall goal of developing, expanding and retaining our workforce to support our current pipeline and future business goals. By focusing on employee retention and engagement, we also improve our ability to successfully commercialize our products following approval, if any; support our clinical trials, pipeline, platform technologies, business, and operations; and protect the long-term interests of our stockholders. Our success also depends on our ability to attract, engage, and retain a group of employees with diverse backgrounds. Our efforts to recruit and retain a passionate workforce include, among other things, providing competitive compensation and benefits packages.

We value innovation, passion, data-driven decision making, persistence and honesty, and are building a diverse environment where we believe that our employees thrive and are inspired to contribute to the development of novel therapies. We recognize and appreciate the importance of creating an environment where all team members feel valued, included, and empowered. We recognize that unique experiences, perspectives, and viewpoints add value to our ability to develop and deliver innovative therapeutic products that may meaningfully improve patient care. We aim to foster and maintain a work culture that facilitates fair and respectful treatment of all employees, promotes inclusivity, and provides equal opportunities for professional growth and advancement based on merit. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, age, disability, veteran status, or other characteristics protected by law.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, motivating, and integrating our existing and future employees. The principal purpose of our incentive plans is to increase shareholder value by attracting, retaining, and motivating employees, consultants, and directors through grants of stock-based compensation awards and payments of cash-based performance bonus awards. We are committed to providing a competitive and comprehensive benefits package to our employees. Our benefits package is designed to meet the individual health and wellness needs of our employees. We plan to continue to refine our efforts related to optimizing our use of human capital as we grow, including improvements in the way we hire, develop, motivate, and retain employees.

Government Regulation

FDA Approval Process

In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable FDA or other requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, a clinical hold, warning letters, recall or seizure of products, partial or total suspension of production, withdrawal of the product from the market, injunctions, fines, civil penalties, or criminal prosecution.

FDA approval is required before any new drug, new dosage form, new therapeutic use, or new route of administration of a previously approved product can be marketed in the United States. The process required by the FDA before a new drug product may be marketed in the United States generally involves:

•
completion of preclinical laboratory and animal testing and formulation studies in compliance with the FDA’s good laboratory practice (GLP) regulation;

•
submission to the FDA of an IND for human clinical testing which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin in the United States;

•
approval by an independent institutional review board (IRB) at each site where a clinical trial will be performed before the trial may be initiated at that site;

•
performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with current good clinical practices (cGCP) to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed product candidate for each intended use;

•
submission to the FDA of an NDA which must be accepted for filing by the FDA;

•
satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection(s) of our office and the facility or facilities at which the product is manufactured to assess compliance with the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) regulations;

•
satisfactory completion of an FDA advisory committee review, if applicable;

•
payment of user fees, if applicable;

•
FDA may also inspect sponsor facilities to determine if nonclinical and clinical studies were conducted in compliance with applicable regulations and guidelines; and

•
FDA review and approval of the NDA.

The preclinical and clinical testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort, and financial resources. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation, manufacturing and control procedures, and stability, as well as animal studies to assess the toxicity and other safety characteristics of the product. The results of preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, and a proposed clinical trial protocol and other information, are submitted as part of an IND to the FDA. Preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. The IND becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions and places the clinical trial on a partial or complete clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, our submission of an IND may not result in FDA authorization to commence a clinical trial. A separate submission to an existing IND must also be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development. Even if the IND becomes effective and the trial proceeds without initial FDA objection, the FDA may stop the trial at a later time if, among other reasons, the potential for unacceptable safety risks arises.

Further, an independent IRB, covering each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and informed consent information for subjects before the trial commences at that site and it must monitor the study until completed. The FDA, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or for failure to comply with the FDA’s or IRB’s requirements. Other conditions may also be imposed.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCP requirements, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide informed consent in writing for participation in the clinical trial. Sponsors of clinical trials generally must register and report, at the NIH-maintained website ClinicalTrials.gov, key parameters and results of certain clinical trials. For purposes of an NDA submission and approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in the following sequential phases, which may overlap or be combined:

•
Phase 1: The investigational drug product is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients and tested for safety, dose tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, and excretion.

•
Phase 2: The investigational drug product is administered to a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific targeted indications, and to determine dose tolerance and optimal dosage. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted by the sponsor to obtain information prior to beginning larger and more extensive clinical trials.

•
Phase 3: When Phase 2 evaluations suggest that certain dosing regimens may be efficacious and may have an acceptable safety profile, Phase 3 trials may be undertaken in larger patient populations to further evaluate dosage and to obtain evidence of potential clinical efficacy and safety. Phase 3 trials may include multiple, geographically-dispersed clinical trial sites. Data generated from these studies may be used to establish the overall risk-benefit profile of the investigational drug product and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the product, if approved.

•
Phase 4: In some cases, the FDA may condition approval of an NDA for a product candidate on the sponsor’s commitment to conduct additional clinical trials to further assess the product’s safety and/or effectiveness after NDA approval. Such post-approval trials are typically referred to as Phase 4 trials.

The results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA. NDAs must also contain extensive information relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and proposed labeling, among other things.

A sponsor may be able to request a SPA the purpose of which is to reach concurrence with the FDA on the adequacy and acceptability of specific critical elements of overall protocol design (e.g., entry criteria, dose selection, endpoints, and planned analyses) for a trial intended to support a future marketing application. If such an agreement is reached, it will be documented and made part of the administrative record, and will be binding on the FDA unless the sponsor fails to follow the agreed-upon protocol or makes substantive changes to the protocol without agreement with the FDA, data supporting the request are found to be false or incomplete, or the FDA determines that a substantial scientific issue essential to determining the safety or effectiveness of the drug was identified after the testing began. Even if an SPA is agreed to, approval of the NDA is not guaranteed because a final determination that an agreed-upon protocol satisfies a specific objective, such as the demonstration of efficacy, or supports an approval decision will be based on a complete review of all the data in the NDA.

For some products, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) which could include measures imposed by the FDA such as prescribing restrictions, requirements for post-marketing studies, and reporting or certain restrictions on distribution and use. Under federal law, the submission of most NDAs is additionally subject to a substantial application user fee, and the manufacturer and/or sponsor under an approved NDA are also subject to prescription drug program fees. In accordance with the FDAs guidance, the agency has 60 days from receipt of an NDA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing to permit substantive review. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information and is subject to payment of additional user fees. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing.

The FDA has various programs, including fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, accelerated approval, and priority review, which are intended to expedite or simplify the process for the development and FDA review of drugs that are intended for the treatment of serious or life threatening diseases or conditions and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs. The purpose of these programs is to provide important new drugs to patients earlier than under standard FDA review procedures.

Under the fast track program, the sponsor of a new product candidate may request that the FDA designate the product candidate for a specific indication as a fast track drug concurrent with, or after, the filing of the IND for the product candidate. To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of a sponsor, that a product is intended to treat patients with a serious or life threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need. The FDA will determine that a product will fill an unmet medical need if it will provide a therapy where none exists or provide a therapy that may be potentially superior to existing therapy based on efficacy or safety factors. Fast track designation provides additional opportunities for interaction with the FDA’s review team and may allow for rolling review of NDA components before the completed application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA. However, the FDA’s time period goal for reviewing an application does not begin until the last section of the NDA is submitted. The FDA may decide to rescind the fast track designation if it determines that the qualifying criteria no longer apply.

In addition, a sponsor can request breakthrough therapy designation for a drug if it is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat patients with 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. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies are eligible for intensive guidance from the FDA on an efficient drug development program, organizational commitment to the development and review of the product including involvement of senior managers, and, like fast track products, are also eligible for rolling review of the NDA. Both fast track and breakthrough product candidates may be eligible for accelerated approval and/or priority review, if relevant criteria are met.

Once the submission has been accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. Under the PDUFA, the FDA agrees to specific performance goals for NDA review time through a two-tiered classification system, Standard Review and Priority Review. Standard Review NDAs have a goal of being completed within a ten-month timeframe after acceptance of filing. A Priority Review designation is given to products that offer major advances in treatment or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. The goal for completing a Priority Review is six months after acceptance of filing.

It is likely that our product candidates will be granted a Standard Review. The review process may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain information or obtain clarification regarding information already provided in the submission. The FDA may refer applications for novel products or products which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee for review, evaluation, and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. In addition, for combination products, the FDA’s review may include the participation of both the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, and the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. The participation of multiple distinct groups within the FDA has the potential to complicate or prolong review of the application. If the product is deemed a combination product, additional supporting studies may be required, and may delay an NDA submission.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA may inspect our offices and the facility or facilities where the drug substance or drug product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP. FDA may also inspect sponsor facilities to determine if nonclinical and clinical studies were conducted in compliance with applicable regulations and guidelines.

After the FDA evaluates the NDA and, in some cases, the related manufacturing facilities, it may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter (CRL) to indicate that the review cycle for an application is complete and that the application is not ready for approval. CRLs generally outline the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing or information in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when the deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA may issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications.

Once issued, the FDA may withdraw product approval if ongoing regulatory requirements are not met or if potential adverse safety findings are identified after the product reaches the market. In addition, the FDA may require post-approval testing, including Phase 4 studies, and surveillance programs to monitor the effect of approved products which have been commercialized, and the FDA has the power to prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing programs.

Products may be promoted only for the approved labeled indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label, and, even if the FDA approves a product, the FDA may limit the approved indications for use for the product or impose other conditions, including labeling or distribution restrictions or other risk-management mechanisms, such as a Black Box Warning, which highlights a specific warning. Further, if there are any modifications to the product, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, a company may be required to submit and obtain FDA approval of a new or supplemental NDA, which may require the company to develop additional data or conduct additional preclinical studies and clinical trials.

Post-Approval Requirements

Once an NDA is approved, a product will be subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to product/facility listing, recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion, and reporting of adverse experiences with the product.

In addition, drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations may also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and may impose reporting and documentation requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated seriousness, severity, or frequency; with manufacturing processes; or with failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

•
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

•
fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;

•
refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;

•
product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; or

•
injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. The FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine. Physicians may prescribe for off‑label uses; manufacturers may only promote for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off‑label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off‑label uses may be subject to significant liability, both at the federal and state levels.

The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 gave the FDA the authority to require a REMS from manufacturers to ensure that the benefits of a drug or biological product outweigh its risks. In determining whether a REMS is necessary, FDA must consider the size of the population likely to use the drug, the seriousness of the disease or condition to be treated, the expected benefit of the drug, the duration of treatment, the seriousness of known or potential adverse events, and whether the drug is a new molecular entity. If the FDA determines a REMS is necessary, the drug sponsor must agree to the REMS plan at the time of approval. A REMS may be required to include various elements, such as a medication guide or patient package insert, a communication plan to educate health care providers of the drug’s risks, limitations on who may prescribe or dispense the drug, or other measures that the FDA deems necessary to assure the safe use of the drug. In addition, the REMS must include a timetable to assess the strategy at 18 months, three years, and seven years after the approval of the strategy. The FDA may also impose a REMS requirement on a drug already on the market if the FDA determines, based on new safety information, that a REMS is necessary to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks of the drug.

Healthcare Reform

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 biopharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by federal and state legislative initiatives, including those designed to limit the pricing, coverage, and reimbursement of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical products, especially under government-funded health care programs, and increased governmental control of drug pricing. For example, in March 2010, the Affordable Care Act, or the ACA, was signed into law, which among other things, expanded coverage for the uninsured while at the same time containing overall healthcare costs, expanded and increased industry rebates for drugs covered under Medicaid programs, and made changes to the coverage requirements under the Medicare prescription drug benefit.

There have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges and amendments to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on June 17, 2021 the U.S. 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.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or the IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. Accordingly, we continue to evaluate the effect that the ACA has on our business. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011 led to automatic reductions of Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken.

The heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics, also has resulted in executive orders, 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. For example, the IRA, among other things, (i) directed the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, or HHS, to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law, and (ii) imposed rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits the HHS to implement many of the provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. The provisions began to take effect progressively in fiscal year 2023. On August 15, 2024, HHS announced the agreed-upon reimbursement prices list of the first ten drugs that were subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges.

Subsequently in 2025, the HHS has announced additional drugs selected for the Medicare drug price negotiation program. Each year thereafter more Part B and Part D products will become subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. For that and other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated but it is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or 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, on September 30, 2025, the current administration has announced agreements with pharmaceutical companies that requires 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) directives 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 recent Strategy Report, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. 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 eliminated judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase 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 created under the IRA.

In the coming years, additional legislative and regulatory changes could be made to governmental health programs that could significantly impact pharmaceutical companies and the success of our product candidates. At the state level, individual states in the United States have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Some third-party payors also require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers that use such therapies.

We expect that current and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, as well as the trend toward managed healthcare and increasing influence of managed care organizations, 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. The implementation of current and future cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may adversely affect our operations and prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product candidate.

Orphan Drug Designation

The FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is defined as a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or more than 200,000 individuals where there is no reasonable expectation that the product development cost will be recovered from product sales in the United States. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA and does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review or approval process. ADX‑2191 has received orphan designation for the treatment of retinitis pigmentosa and primary vitreoretinal lymphoma.

If an orphan drug-designated product subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease specified in the orphan drug designation, the sponsor will be entitled to seven years of product marketing exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in very limited and rare circumstances, for seven years. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of Orphan Drug Designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the NDA application fee. If a competitor obtains approval of the same drug, as defined by the Orphan

Drug Act, before we do or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease, the competitor’s exclusivity could block the approval of our product candidate in the designated orphan indication for seven years, unless superior safety or efficacy of our drug is demonstrated.

A designated orphan drug may lose orphan drug exclusivity if subsequently approved for a use that is broader than the indication received for orphan designation. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

Depending upon the timing, duration, and specifics of FDA approval of the use of our drug candidates, some of our United States patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Act. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND, and the submission date of an NDA, plus the time between the submission date of an NDA and the approval of that application. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug is eligible for the extension and the application for extension must be made prior to expiration of the patent. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we intend to apply for restorations of patent term for some of our currently owned or licensed patents to add patent life beyond the current expiration date, depending on the expected length of clinical trials and other factors involved in the submission of the relevant NDA.

Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to gain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for a 505(b)(1) NDA, 505(b)(2) NDA, or supplement to an approved NDA if new clinical investigations other than bioavailability studies (e.g., investigations that support new indications, dosages, or strengths of an existing drug) were conducted or sponsored by the applicant and are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application. The three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions associated with the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the original active agent. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full 505(b)(1) NDA.

Manufacturing Requirements

We and our third-party manufacturers must comply with applicable FDA regulations relating to cGMP regulations and, if applicable, quality system regulation requirements for medical devices. The cGMP regulations include requirements relating to, among other things, organization of personnel, buildings and facilities, equipment, control of components and drug product containers and closures, production and process controls, packaging and labeling controls, holding and distribution, laboratory controls, records and reports, and returned or salvaged products. The manufacturing of the drug product requires multiple starting raw materials and excipients of a specified purity level to obtain the required product quality. Failure of any of the raw materials or excipients to meet specification could impact product quality and may impact regulatory review by the FDA. The manufacturing facilities for our products must meet cGMP requirements to the satisfaction of the FDA and may be subject to a pre-approval inspection before we can use them to manufacture our products. We and our third-party manufacturers are also subject to periodic unannounced inspections of facilities by the FDA and other authorities, including procedures and operations used in the testing and manufacture of our products to assess our compliance with applicable regulations. Failure to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements subjects a manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory action, including, among other things, warning letters, voluntary corrective action, the seizure of products, injunctions, consent decrees placing significant restrictions on or suspending manufacturing operations and civil and criminal penalties.

Other Regulatory Requirements

We are also subject to various laws and regulations regarding laboratory practices, the experimental use of animals, and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances in connection with our research. In each of these areas, as above, the FDA has broad regulatory and enforcement powers, including, among other things, the ability to levy fines and civil penalties, suspend or delay issuance of approvals, seize or recall products, and withdraw approvals, any one or more of which could have an adverse effect on our ability to operate our business and generate revenues. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our research, development, and production efforts, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. There are evolving legal requirements and other statutory and regulatory regimes that will continue to affect our business.

Research and Development Expenses

Substantially all of our research and development expenses incurred to date have been related to the development of reproxalap and ADX‑2191, as well as proof of concept trials with ADX‑629, which was a signal-finding molecule no longer under development. Our research and development expenses totaled $25.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2025 and $48.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2024.

We anticipate that we will incur additional research and development expenses for the foreseeable future as we advance ADX‑248, ADX‑246, and other compounds through preclinical and clinical development.

We recognize research and development expenses as incurred. Our research and development expenses consist primarily of:

•
salaries and related expenses for personnel;

•
fees paid to consultants and contract research organizations in conjunction with independently monitoring clinical trials and acquiring and evaluating data in conjunction with clinical trials, including all related fees such as investigator grants, patient screening, laboratory work, data compilation, and statistical analysis;

•
costs incurred with third parties related to the establishment of a commercially viable manufacturing process for our product candidates;

•
costs related to production of clinical materials, including fees paid to contract manufacturers;

•
costs related to upfront and milestone payments under in-licensing agreements as well as costs for unapproved inventory for which there is no future alternative use;

•
costs related to compliance with FDA regulatory requirements;

•
consulting fees paid to third-parties involved in research and development activities; and

•
costs related to stock options or other stock-based compensation granted to personnel in development functions.

We expect that a large percentage of our research and development expenses in the future will be incurred in support of our current and future non-clinical, preclinical and clinical development programs. Expenditures are subject to numerous uncertainties in terms of timing and cost to completion. We expect to continue to develop stable formulations of our product candidates; test such formulations in preclinical studies for toxicology, safety and efficacy and conduct clinical trials for each product candidate. We anticipate funding clinical trials for our product candidates ourselves, but we may engage collaboration partners at certain stages of clinical development. As we obtain results from clinical trials, we may elect to discontinue or delay clinical trials for certain product candidates or programs in order to focus our resources on more promising product candidates or programs. Completion of clinical trials by us or our future collaborators may take several years or more, the length of time generally varying with the type, complexity, novelty and intended use of a product candidate. The costs of clinical trials may vary significantly over the life of a project owing to but not limited to the following:

•
the number of sites included in the trials;

•
the length of time required to enroll eligible patients;

•
the number of patients that participate in the trials;

•
the number of doses that patients receive;

•
the drop-out or discontinuation rates of patients;

•
the duration of patient follow-up;

•
the phase of development the product candidate is in; and

•
the efficacy and safety profile of the product candidate.

Our expenses related to clinical trials are based on estimates of the services received and efforts expended pursuant to contracts with multiple research institutions and contract research organizations that conduct and manage clinical trials on our behalf. The financial terms of agreements are subject to negotiation and vary from contract to contract and may result in uneven payment flows. Generally, agreements set forth the scope of work to be performed at a fixed fee or unit price. Payments under the contracts depend on factors such as the successful enrollment of patients or the completion of clinical trial milestones. Expenses related to clinical trials generally are accrued based on contracted amounts applied to the level of patient enrollment and activity according to the protocol. If timelines or contracts are modified based upon changes in the clinical trial protocol or scope of work to be performed, we modify our estimates of accrued expenses accordingly on a prospective basis.

None of our product candidates have received FDA or foreign regulatory marketing approval. In order to grant marketing approval, a health authority such as the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies must conclude that clinical and preclinical data establish the safety and efficacy of our product candidates with an appropriate benefit to risk profile relevant to a particular indication, and that the product can be manufactured under cGMP in a reproducible manner to deliver intended performance in terms of stability, quality, purity and potency. Until a health authority has completed review of our submission, there is no way to predict the outcome of the review. Even if the clinical studies meet predetermined primary endpoints, and a registration dossier is accepted for filing, a health authority could still determine that an appropriate benefit to risk relationship does not exist for the indication that we are seeking.

We cannot forecast with any degree of certainty which of our product candidates will be subject to future collaborations or how such arrangements would affect our development plan or capital requirements.

As a result of the uncertainties discussed above, we are unable to determine the duration and completion costs of our development projects or when and to what extent we will receive cash inflows from the commercialization and sale of an approved product candidate.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated in the state of Delaware on August 13, 2004 as Neuron Systems, Inc. On December 20, 2012, we changed our name to Aldexa Therapeutics, Inc. and on March 17, 2014, we changed our name to Aldeyra Therapeutics, Inc. Our principal executive offices are located at 131 Hartwell Avenue, Suite 320, Lexington, Massachusetts 02421. Our telephone number is (781) 761-4904. Our website address is www.aldeyra.com. Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K, and you should not consider information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K or in deciding whether to purchase shares of our common stock. Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8‑K, and amendments to reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are available free of charge on the Investors portion of our website at http://ir.aldeyra.com/ as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC.