NPCE — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of NPCE's newest periodic SEC filing (10-K/10-Q) against the prior same-form filing: paragraphs added and removed per section, with verbatim excerpts. Purely a deterministic text diff — no similarity scores, no directional read, not investment advice.
Comparing 10-Q · 2026-05-12 vs the prior 10-Q · 2025-11-04
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +31 | −42 | ~19 | 33 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~1 | 1 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~2 | 1 |
| Legal proceedings | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Risk factors | Text added/removed | +74 | −71 | ~59 | 367 |
| Other information | Text added/removed | 0 | −2 | ~1 | 0 |
Counts are paragraphs; added/removed means text added or removed vs the prior filing — no direction or judgement implied.
Representative excerpts
Up to 5 excerpts of about 300 characters per section, quoted verbatim from the two SEC filings.
MD&A
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-12
We are conducting studies to expand our indication for use in patients with drug-resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy and patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy under the age of 18. In March 2025, the last patient in our NAUTILUS study for drug-resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy com…
In 2025, in an effort to further support the pediatric focal epilepsy label expansion efforts that we began with the RESPONSE study, we began a collaboration with the National Evaluation System for health Technology, or NEST, and the FDA to pursue the use of real-world data to support expanded label…
Our commercial efforts have historically been focused on growing adoption and utilization across Level 4 comprehensive epilepsy centers, or CECs, in the United States that facilitate appropriate care for drug-resistant epilepsy patients. In 2023, we received FDA approval of a PMA-S which updated the…
Since our inception, we have generated significant losses. We have financed our operations primarily through sales of our products, issuance of equity securities, and debt financing. As of March 31, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $559.1 million, cash, cash equivalents and short-term investme…
We have invested heavily and expect to continue to invest in research and development and commercial activities. Our research and development activities include clinical studies to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of our RNS System, including in expanded indications, and to obtain, as well a…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2025-11-04
We are conducting studies to expand our indication for use in patients with drug-resistant generalized epilepsy and patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy under the age of 18. In March 2025, the last patient in our NAUTILUS study for generalized epilepsy completed one year of follow up. In May …
To support our RESPONSE study for label expansion in focal epilepsy patients under the age of 18, we are collaborating with the National Evaluation System for health Technology, or NEST, and the FDA to pursue the use of real-world data.
Our commercial efforts have historically been focused on growing adoption and utilization across Level 4 comprehensive epilepsy centers, or CECs, in the United States that facilitate appropriate care for drug-resistant
epilepsy patients. In 2023, we received FDA approval of a Premarket Approval Supplement, or PMA-S, which updated the qualification criteria for centers and clinicians that may prescribe and implant the RNS System. We initiated a pilot program to begin our outreach to these centers and clinicians in …
Since our inception, we have generated significant losses. We have financed our operations primarily through sales of our products, issuance of equity securities, and debt financing. As of September 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $549.7 million, cash, cash equivalents and short-term inve…
Risk factors
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-12
•If we fail to comply with U.S. federal and state laws and regulations, including fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, such as those relating to kickbacks and false claims for reimbursement, we could face substantial penalties and our business, financial condition and results o…
Our business currently depends primarily on our ability to successfully market our RNS System, which includes increasing the number of patients treated at CECs, increasing adoption of our RNS System across CECs and in the community setting, as well as driving utilization by clinicians within CECs an…
Our commercial success will depend in large part on continued referrals of appropriate patients from treating primary care physicians, neurologists, and other healthcare providers to epileptologists, neurosurgeons, and other clinicians, primarily at Level 4 CECs. We cannot predict how quickly, if at…
at the Level 4 CECs and in the community setting to build a pipeline through our sales and marketing efforts and whether primary care physicians, neurologists, and other healthcare providers, as well as whether caregivers will support use of our RNS System in the community setting or patient referra…
Primary care physicians, neurologists, and other healthcare providers may continue to prefer traditional treatments, such as additional attempts to treat with new therapeutic drugs that become available from time to time, including for fear of losing management of the patient’s care. If we are unabl…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2025-11-04
Our business currently depends primarily on our ability to successfully market our RNS System, which includes increasing the number of patients treated at CECs, increasing adoption of our RNS System across CECs and in the community setting, as well as driving utilization by clinicians within CECs an…
our RNS System can only be marketed for use in adults with drug-resistant focal epilepsy in the United States. Historically our RNS System was primarily recommended and implanted at Level 4 CECs, which provide advanced diagnosis and management of epilepsy. We recently began expanding our commercial …
Our commercial success will depend in large part on continued referrals of appropriate patients from treating primary care physicians, neurologists, and other healthcare providers to epileptologists, neurosurgeons, and other clinicians, primarily at Level 4 CECs. We cannot predict how quickly, if at…
Primary care physicians, neurologists, and other healthcare providers may continue to prefer traditional treatments, such as additional attempts to treat with new therapeutic drugs that become available from time to time, including for fear of losing management of the patient’s care. If we are unabl…
or that patients that are considered drug-resistant because they failed to achieve sustained seizure freedom after trying two antiseizure medications be referred to a tertiary epilepsy center to evaluate potential interventions, or if we are unable to convince them as to the merits of our RNS System…
Other information
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2025-11-04
(1) Contract, instruction or written plan intended to satisfy the affirmative defense conditions of Rule 10b5-1(c) under the Exchange Act.
(2) Including the exercise and sale of up to 34,219 shares of the Company’s common stock subject to stock options.
How to read Risk Factors (Item 1A) in a 10-Q
A 10-Q risk-factor section usually takes one of three forms; this page classifies it as one of:
- Pointer — the filer states there have been no material changes and points back to the annual 10-K risk factors; there is no own risk text to compare this quarter.
- Partial update — the filer carves out specific updated risks ("except as set forth below"); the excerpts show exactly what is new this quarter.
- Restated in full — the quarter carries the complete risk-factor text. When the prior quarter was only a pointer there is no prior full text to diff against, so the page flags the section as restated instead.
This describes the filing structure only — it is never a judgement on whether risk went up or down.
Source: text-level diff of the two SEC EDGAR filings · deterministic (no AI-generated content) · for reference only · not investment advice