Company: PTPI
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form Type: S-1/A
Source: 0001410578-25-000137
Chunk: 51

Company: Petros Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form: S-1/A
Chunk 51
---
 has the potential to bring significant leadership and policy changes in regulatory agencies, including the FDA, which may contribute to the time and resources needed to maintain compliance and ultimately could adversely affect our business.

In the EU, notified bodies must be officially designated to certify products and services in accordance with the MDR, which regulates the development and sale of medical devices in Europe. While several notified bodies have been designated, the COVID-19 pandemic significantly slowed down their designation process and the current designated notified bodies are facing a large amount of requests with the new regulation, as a consequence of which review times have lengthened although a regulation amending the EU MDR was adopted in March 2023, extending existing transitional provisions to December 31, 2028. This situation could significantly impact the ability of notified bodies to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business in the EU and EEA (which consists of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland).

The misuse or off-label use of our platform may harm our reputation in the marketplace, result in injuries that lead to product liability suits or result in costly investigations, fines or sanctions by regulatory bodies, particularly if we are deemed to have engaged in the promotion of these uses, any of which could be costly to our business.

If FDA determines that we have promoted any product without the requisite clearance or approval and/or for an off-label or unapproved use, it could take any number of enforcement actions against us, including (among others), issuing untitled or warning letters and/or pursuing an injunction, seizure, civil fine and/or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action under other regulatory authority, such as laws prohibiting false claims for reimbursement, any of which would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and/or business as a whole.

Additionally, we must have competent and reliable scientific evidence or, where applicable, other adequate substantiation for each reasonable interpretation of every promotional claim we make. In particular, comparative or superiority claims generally require adequate, well controlled, head-to-head clinical studies, comparing the product to the applicable competing products. To the extent we make any claims, or are otherwise held responsible for third-party claims about any product we may market in the United States, without the requisite clinical substantiation, we could be subject to enforcement action by FDA and/or the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), as well as a competitor challenge via the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Better Business