We are currently investigating the safety and effectiveness of the OCS in multiple investigational device exemption, or IDE, investigations. Specifically, we recently completed enrollment in a pivotal trial under IDEs that investigate the safety and effectiveness of the OCS Liver for the preservation of donor livers that are currently utilized and currently unutilized for transplantation. Further, we received IDE approval for the Continued Access Protocol for this trial. We also received IDE approval for a study of OCS Liver for certain donor livers that are donated after circulatory death that have extended warm ischemia time or older donor age. In addition, we completed an IDE pivotal trial of the OCS Heart for donor hearts that are currently unutilized for transplantation and received IDE approval for the Continued Access Protocol for this trial. We also received IDE approval for a study of OCS Heart for donor hearts that are donated after circulatory death. We intend to use data from the clinical trials we are conducting or have finished conducting under IDEs to support our applications for PMA approvals for the OCS Heart and OCS Liver.
As is typical to the PMA review process, during the course of its initial PMA review and in most cases within 90 calendar days of the company’s PMA filing date, the FDA communicates issues that it has identified and views as deficiencies through a substantive interaction, which in most cases is a letter. That letter is technically referred to as a “major deficiency letter,” and it provides the applicant with an opportunity to address the FDA’s questions. After completing its review of a PMA application, the FDA will take one of the following actions: an approval, an approvable letter, a not approvable letter, or, in rare instances, a denial. We have received a “major deficiency letter” for each PMA application that we have submitted to the FDA and we believe our responses have been thorough and comprehensive. Regarding the OCS Heart PMA currently under review, the FDA has communicated that it will convene an advisory committee of experts from outside the FDA to review and evaluate our OCS Heart PMA application and provide recommendations to the FDA as to the safety, effectiveness, risk and benefit of the device. It is not uncommon for the FDA to seek advice from an outside expert panel when considering an application for a novel technology. The FDA ultimately decides whether to approve or disapprove the PMA application and may or may not follow the advisory committee’s recommendation. Although the FDA had scheduled an advisory committee meeting regarding our OCS Heart PMA application in the second quarter of 2020, due to theCOVID-19 pandemic the advisory committee meeting has been postponed and we currently anticipate that an advisory committee for our OCS Heart PMA application will be convened in the second half of 2020. The panel may provide unfavorable recommendations to the FDA with regard to the PMA application, and the FDA may follow such recommendations. Even if the panel recommendations are favorable, the FDA could determine that the data from our clinical trials does not support PMA approval or claims we wish to make, or the FDA could require us to gather significant additional clinical data or conduct additionalnon-clinical testing.
The approval process involving the OCS for each organ is subject to many of the same risks and uncertainties. If we are not able to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals for the OCS, or approvals or clearances for future products on a timely basis or at all, our financial condition and results of operations would suffer, possibly materially, and our business might fail. Even if the FDA grants PMA approval for the OCS Heart and OCS Liver for preservation of donor hearts and livers for transplantation, respectively, the claims approved by the FDA may be significantly narrower than those we are seeking.
We have CE Marks for each of the OCS Heart, the OCS Lung, and the OCS Liver, which were renewed in September 2017. These CE Marks are valid for five years, so they will expire in September 2022. In order to be able to continue to use the CE Mark in the same manner after May 2021, we will have to meet the conditions set out in the transitional provisions in the Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation 2017/745), or the Medical Devices Regulation. Before expiry of these certificates, we will need to apply for theirre-certification under the new Medical Devices Regulation. We might not be able to continue to use the CE Mark for any current use of the OCS. If:
| • | | we are not able to obtainre-certification of our products for their current use; |
| • | | we are not able to do so in time before the certificates expire; |
| • | | our technical files for our products do not meet the new (and more stringent) requirements under the Medical Devices Regulation; or |
| • | | any variation in the uses for which the CE Mark has been affixed to the OCS requires us to perform further research or to modify the technical documentation required to affix the CE mark, our revenues and operating results could be adversely affected and our reputation could be harmed. |
Healthcare policy changes, including recently enacted or potential future legislation reforming the U.S. healthcare system, could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, the Affordable Care Act, which was enacted in 2010:
| • | | established a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee and identify priorities in comparative clinical effectiveness research in an effort to coordinate and develop such research; |
| • | | implemented payment system reforms, including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models; and |
| • | | expanded the eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs. |
We do not yet know the full impact that the Affordable Care Act, and more recent measures impacting the healthcare system, will have on our business. The taxes imposed by the Affordable Care Act may result in decreased profits to us, lower reimbursement by payors to hospitals and transplant centers, and/or reduced medical procedure volumes, all of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The Trump Administration and the U.S. Congress may take further action regarding the Affordable Care Act, including, but not limited to, repeal or replacement. Most recently, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Acts was enacted which, among other things, removes penalties for not complying with the individual mandate to carry health insurance. Additionally, all or a portion of the Affordable Care Act and related subsequent legislation may be modified, repealed or otherwise invalidated through judicial challenge, which could result in lower numbers of insured individuals, reduced coverage for insured individuals and adversely affect our business.
In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. The Budget Control Act of 2011, for example, reduced Medicare payments to providers by 2% per fiscal year, and will remain in effect through 2030 (except for the period from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020, when no reduction will occur) unless additional Congressional action is taken. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 also reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“MACRA”), repealed the formula by which Medicare made annual payment adjustments to physicians and replaced the former formula with fixed annual updates and a new system of incentive payments that are based on various performance measures and physicians’ participation in alternative payment models such as accountable care organizations, which took effect in 2019. It is unclear what effect new quality and payment programs, such as MACRA, may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We expect additional state and federal healthcare policies and reform measures to be adopted in the future, including following the 2020 presidential election, any of which could limit reimbursement for healthcare products and services or otherwise result in reduced demand for the OCS or additional pricing pressure and have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our customers. Any changes of, or uncertainty with respect to, future reimbursement to hospitals and transplant centers could affect demand for the OCS, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
37