Lantheus Holdings Inc

Item 1A. Risk Factors

There have been no material changes to the risk factors set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, except as set forth below:

Risks Related to Our Portfolio of Commercial Products

Our ability to continue to grow PYLARIFY as a commercial product is dependent on (A) the ability of PMFs to manufacture PYLARIFY to meet product demand, (B) our ability to obtain and maintain adequate coding, coverage and payment for PYLARIFY, (C) our ability to promote PYLARIFY to customers and to maintain PYLARIFY as the leading PSMA PET imaging agent, including after the potential expiration of TPT Status at the end of 2024 and (D) our ability to clinically and commercially differentiate PYLARIFY from other products.

To manufacture PYLARIFY, we assembled and qualified a nationwide network of PMFs with radioisotope-producing cyclotrons that make F 18, which has a 110-minute half-life, so PYLARIFY is manufactured and distributed rapidly to end-users. Because each of the PMFs manufacturing these products is deemed by the FDA to be a separate manufacturing site, each has to be separately approved by the FDA. Although PYLARIFY is broadly available across the U.S., we continue to seek qualification for additional PMFs in 2024 and can give no assurance that the FDA will continue to approve PMFs in accordance with our expansion to meet increasing demand. If FDA approval of manufacturing sites is delayed or withdrawn, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely affected.

Obtaining adequate coding, coverage and payment for PYLARIFY is critical, including not only coverage from Medicare, Medicaid and other government payors, as well as private payors, but also appropriate payment levels to adequately cover our customers costs of using PYLARIFY in PET/CT imaging procedures. The HCPCS code for PYLARIFY, which enables streamlined billing, went into effect as of January 1, 2022. In addition, effective January 1, 2022, CMS granted TPT Status for PYLARIFY, enabling traditional Medicare to provide an incremental payment for PET/CT scans performed with PYLARIFY in the hospital outpatient setting. TPT Status for PYLARIFY is expected to expire on December 31, 2024. After TPT Status expires, under current Medicare rules, PYLARIFY would not be separately reimbursed in the hospital outpatient setting but rather would be bundled into the facility payment a hospital receives for a PET/CT imaging procedure, and the facility payment may not always adequately cover the total cost of the procedure with PYLARIFY. Other competitive PSMA PET imaging agents will continue to have TPT after December 31, 2024 which could result in PYLARIFY customers choosing to prescribe and use a competitors PSMA PET imaging agent instead of PYLARIFY.

In JulyNovember 2024, CMS released the CY final rule for its calendar year 2025 ProposedMedicare Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System, or  (OPPS, rule ), which recognizes the value and need for broad access to diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals by. The rule proposingvides separate payment for those diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals with per day costs greater than $630. IfWhen implemented in the final rule in November, the on January 1, 2025, CMS rule wouldwill maintain separate payment for PYLARIFY after the expiration of TPT statustransitional pass-through for the approximately 20% of patients with traditional Medicare fee-for-service insurance coverage who are treated in the hospital outpatient setting. However, we can give no assurance that CMS will adopt separateThe calendar year 2025 payment for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals in its final CY 2025 OPPS rule, that it will follow the methodology set out rate for PYLARIFY is listed in the Proposed OPPS rule for calculating such separate payment, that any CMS reimbursement in the hospitAddendum B of the final rule and is equal outpatient setting that followsto the expiration of TPT Status (even if reimbursed as a separate pacurrent PYLARIFY payment) will be adequ rate to co. However th, we cost of a PYLARIFY PET/CT imaging procedure,an give no assurance that any such rule will remain in effect if adopted , that such payment will remain the same or that legislative changes removing such a separate payment for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals would not be adopted.

In addition, if other government payors or private payors do not provide adequate reimbursement for the use of PYLARIFY, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely affected. We plan to continue our advocacy efforts with CMS and private insurerpayors so that PYLARIFY customers will have appropriate and adequate reimbursement following the expiration of TPT Status and we are also supporting t. CMS has finalized its proposal for separate payment for diagnostic rade associations in their efforts to lobby Congress to pass legislation thatiopharmaceuticals over a certain per day cost threshold based on mean unit costs, which would allow forcontinued separate payment for certain PYLARIFY. We will continue to work with coalition partners to support using average selling price to calculate payment for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals, including PYLARIFY, future years similar to the way Medicare OPPS currently pays for other drugs, biologics, and therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals instead of under the current TPT structure of a separate payment that is limited to three years, ho. However, we can give no assurances that we will be successful in those efforts or that the availability of TPT Status for other diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals will not impact clinical decision making regarding which product to use, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

The successful growth of PYLARIFY is also dependent on our ability to promote PYLARIFY to customers, to clinically and commercially differentiate PYLARIFY from other products on the market and to maintain PYLARIFY as the leading PSMA PET imaging agent in a competitive environment in which other PSMA PET imaging agents have been approved, for which discounts related to those other agents may be offered to customers and for which TPT Status will extend beyond December 31, 2024. PYLARIFY currently competes with two commercially available Ga-68-based PSMA PET imaging agents from Telix

38

Pharmaceuticals Limited and Novartis AG and an F 18 PSMA PET imaging agent from Blue Earth, as well as other non-PSMA PET imaging agents. Continued growth and revenue contribution from PYLARIFY will also depend on our ability to differentiate

42

PYLARIFY in light of the potential loss of TPT Status, including through flexible and dependable access to PYLARIFY nationally, a best in class customer experience and through long-term strategic contracts. To the extent we are not successful in these efforts and we lose market share to existing or future competitors (including during any period of time in which our TPT Status has expired but TPT Status for a later-approved competitive products still exists), such loss of market share could have an adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our success in growing PYLARIFY also depends, in part, on our successfully establishing the use of PYLARIFY for approved indications and potentially for additional indications, including for patient selection for PSMA-targeted therapeutics, and for new patient populations, such as patients with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer. For example, we believe the approval of PLUVICTO for the treatment of adult patients with PSMA-positive mCRPC who have already been treated with other anticancer treatments (androgen receptor pathway inhibition and taxane-based chemotherapy) created a new addressable market for the use of PSMA PET imaging in patient selection for PSMA-targeted therapy. However, the prescribing information for PLUVICTO specifies that a PSMA-11 based PSMA PET imaging agent be used for patient selection, and PYLARIFY is not a PSMA-11 based imaging agent. While we note that FDA-approved labels for F 18-based and PSMA-11 based PSMA PET imaging agents have generally been treated as a class of drugs, including by the National Comprehensive Cancer Center in its guidelines and the Society for Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging in its appropriate use criteria, we can give no assurances that PLUVICTO prescribing information will be expanded to incorporate F 18-based PSMA PET imaging agents like PYLARIFY, or how current clinical practice may evolve. In addition, we recently enrolled the first patient in are conducting a clinical trial to determine whether PYLARIFY can detect the presence or absence of additional prostate cancer lesions in patients with favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer, as well as how it may change the patients intended management, but cannot predict whether the outcome of this clinical trial will support such a use for PYLARIFY. To the extent we are unsuccessful in establishing the use of PYLARIFY for approved or new indications or in new patient populations, such lack of success could have an adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We depend on some of our PMF partners to generate sales, accept, produce and deliver orders and report and collect payments on our behalf for PYLARIFY.

PYLARIFY is sold in the U.S. to hospitals, independent imaging centers and government facilities and sales are generated through an internal PYLARIFY sales team, as well as a sales team at some of our PMF partners. We generally do not use group purchasing arrangements to sell PYLARIFY and require each customer to enter into a contract directly with us or our PMFs. Our ability to continue to successfully grow PYLARIFY depends, in part, on our ability, and the ability of some of our PMF partners on our behalf, to continue to enter into commercially beneficial arrangements directly with the hospitals, independent imaging centers and government facilities that we serve. Any delay or inability to enter into these arrangements, including our ability to negotiate favorable financial terms in these agreements, could have an adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

In addition to depending in part on some of our PMF partners to generate sales, we also depend on some of our PMF partners to accept, produce and deliver orders, invoice customers and to report and collect payments. To the extent our PMF partners are unsuccessful in generating sales, accepting, producing and delivering orders, invoicing customers or in reporting or collecting payments on our behalf, such an event could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We and our PMF partners also use third-party software to accept orders placed by customers and to record shipping and administrative status of orders. To the extent we are unable to accept orders or access, verify or reconcile ordering, shipping or administrative data, such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We face significant competition in our business and may not be able to compete effectively.

The markets for our products are highly competitive and continually evolving. Our principal competitors for our current commercial products and leading clinical development candidates include large, global companies that are more diversified than we are and that have substantial financial, manufacturing, sales and marketing, distribution and other resources:

For PYLARIFY, our competitors currently include approved imaging agents from Telix Pharmaceuticals Limited, Novartis AG, and Blue Earth, a subsidiary of Bracco.

For DEFINITY, our competitors currently include GE Healthcare and Bracco.

39

For a number of our radiopharmaceutical commercial products, our competitors currently include Curium, GE Healthcare, Bracco and Jubilant Life Sciences, an affiliate of JHS and Jubilant Radiopharma, and potentially BWXT Medical.

43

For PNT2002, our principal competitors may include Novartis AG; Telix Pharmaceuticals Limited; and Curium, each of which has commercialized products or product candidates in advanced clinical stage of development.

For PNT2003, our principal competitors may include Novartis AG; ITM Radiopharma; Curium and RayzeBio (acquired by Bristol Myers Squibb), each of which has commercialized products or product candidates pending FDA approval or in advanced clinical stage of development.

For MK-6240 and NAV-4694, our principal competitors may include Eli Lilly and Company, GE Healthcare, Life Molecular Imaging and Aprinoia Therapeutics, each of which has commercialized products or product candidates in advanced clinical stage of development and other companies that may have product candidates in development.

For LNTH-1363S, our principal competitors may include Sofie Bioscience; GE Healthcare; and Novartis AG, each of which has product candidates in clinical stage of development.

For RM2, our principal competitors may include Novartis AG; Clarity Pharma; and Orano Med, each of which has product candidates in clinical stage of development.

We cannot anticipate the actions of our current or future competitors in the same or competing modalities, such as significant price reductions on products that are competitive with our own, development of new products that are more cost-effective or have superior performance than our current products or potential future products or the introduction of generic versions after our proprietary products lose their patent protection. In addition, distributors of our products could attempt to shift end-users to competing diagnostic modalities and products, or bundle the sale of a portfolio of products, in either case to the detriment of our specific products. Our current or future products could be rendered obsolete or uneconomical as a result of these activities.

Further, the radiopharmaceutical industry continues to evolve strategically, with several market participants recently acquired by larger companies that may have more significant resources than ours. In addition, the supply-demand dynamics of the industry are complex because of large market positions of some participants, legacy businesses, government subsidies (in particular, relating to the manufacture of radioisotopes), and group purchasing arrangements and there are often limited sources available for isotopes and raw materials used in the manufacturing of our product and product candidates. We cannot predict what impact new owners and new operators may have on the strategic decision-making of our competitors, customers and suppliers, and such decision-making could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Risks Related to Reimbursement and Regulation

Many of our customers are highly dependent on payments from third-party payors, including government sponsored programs, particularly Medicare, in the U.S. and other countries in which we operate, and reductions in third party coverage and reimbursement rates for our products (or services provided with our products) could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

A substantial portion of our revenue depends on the extent to which the costs of our products purchased by our customers (or services provided with our products) are reimbursed by third party payors, including Medicare, Medicaid, other U.S. government sponsored programs, non-U.S. governmental payors and private payors. These third-party payors exercise significant control over patient access and increasingly use their enhanced bargaining power to secure discounted rates and impose other requirements that may reduce demand for our products. Our customers ability to obtain adequate reimbursement for products and services from these third-party payors affects the selection of products they purchase and the prices they are willing to pay. If Medicare and other third party payors do not provide adequate reimbursement for the costs of our products (or services provided using our products), deny the coverage of the products (or those services), or reduce current levels of reimbursement, healthcare professionals may not prescribe our products and providers and suppliers may not purchase our products.

In addition, demand for new products may be limited unless we obtain favorable reimbursement (including coding, coverage and payment) from governmental and private third party payors at the time of the products introduction, which will depend, in part, on our ability to demonstrate that a new agent has a positive impact on clinical outcomes. Third-party payors continually review their coverage policies for existing and new products and procedures and can deny coverage for products or procedures that include the use of our products or revise payment policies such that payments do not adequately cover the cost of our products. Even if third-party payors make coverage and reimbursement available, that reimbursement may not be adequate or these payors reimbursement policies may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

40

For example, effective January 1, 2022, the CMS granted TPT Status in the hospital outpatient setting for PYLARIFY, enabling traditional Medicare to provide an incremental payment for PET/CT scans performed with PYLARIFY in that setting. TPT Status for PYLARIFY is expected to expire December 31, 2024. After TPT Status expires, under current Medicare rules, PYLARIFY would not be separately reimbursed in the hospital outpatient setting but rather would be bundled into the facility

44

payment a hospital receives for a PET/CT imaging procedure, and the facility payment may not always cover the total cost of the procedure. Certain competitor PSMA PET products will continue to have TPT Status after PYLARIFYs TPT Status expires and this could impact our customers prescribing habits. In JulyNovember 2024, CMS released the CY final rule for its calendar year 2025 ProposedMedicare Hospital OPPS rule, which recognizes the value and need for broad access to diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals by. The rule proposingvides separate payment for those diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals with per day costs greater than $630. IfWhen implemented in the final rule in Novemberon January 1, 2025, CMS wouldill maintain separate payment for PYLARIFY after the expiration of TPT Statustransitional pass-through for the approximately 20% of patients with traditional Medicare fee-for-service insurance coverage who are treated in the hospital outpatient setting. WThe can give no assurance that CMS will adopt separate lendar year 2025 payment for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals in its final CY 2025 OPPS rule, that it will follow the methodology set out inrate for PYLARIFY is listed in Addendum B of the Proposed OPPSfinal rule for calculating such separate payment,and is equal to that any CMS reimburseme current in the hospital outpatiPYLARIFY payment setting that follows the expiration of TPT Status (even if reimbursed as a separate payment) will be adequate to cover a PYLARIFY PET/CT imaging procedurerate. However, we can give no assurance that such rule will remain in effect, that any such rulepayment will remain in effect if adoptedthe same or that legislative changes removing such a separate payment for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals would not be adopted or that the availability of TPT Status for other diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals will not impact clinical decision making regarding which product to use, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Over the past several years, Medicare has implemented numerous changes to payment policies for imaging procedures in both the hospital setting and non-hospital settings (which include physician offices and freestanding imaging facilities). Some of these changes have had a negative impact on utilization of imaging services. Examples of these changes include:

Reducing payments for certain imaging procedures when performed together with other imaging procedures in the same family of procedures on the same patient on the same day in the physician office and free-standing imaging facility setting;

Making significant revisions to the methodology for determining the practice expense component of the Medicare payment applicable to the physician office and free-standing imaging facility settings which has resulted in reduced payments for certain services;

Revising payment policies and reducing payment amounts for imaging procedures performed in the hospital outpatient settings; and

Reducing prospective payment levels for applicable diagnosis-related groups in the hospital inpatient setting.

In the physician office and free-standing imaging facility setting, services provided using our products are reimbursed under the Medicare physician fee schedule. Payment rates under the Medicare physician fee schedule are regularly subject to updates to effectuate various policy goals of CMS and Congress. For example, in 2022, CMS reduced Medicare fee schedule payments rates in the agencys final rulemaking, while a larger cut was put forth in the proposed rulemaking earlier that year. For 2023, CMS had finalized a reduction in the Medicare fee schedule payments rates, which was revised by Congress, pursuant to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, to a lesser reduction. Additionally, since 2019, fee schedule payments have been adjusted for certain physicians based on their performance under a consolidated measurement system (that measures performance with respect to quality, resource utilization, meaningful use of certified electronic health records technology, and clinical practice improvement activities). From 2019 through payment year 2024, physicians may be eligible for a bonus based on the use of certain alternative payment models designated as advanced by CMS. The ongoing and future impact of these changes cannot be determined at this time.

We believe that Medicare changes to payment policies for imaging procedures applicable to non-hospital settings will continue to result in certain physician practices ceasing to provide these services and a further shifting of where certain medical imaging procedures are performed, from the physician office and free-standing imaging facility settings to the hospital outpatient setting. Changes applicable to Medicare payment in the hospital outpatient setting could also influence the decisions by hospital outpatient physicians to perform procedures that involve our products. Within the hospital outpatient setting, CMS payment policy is such that the use of many of our products are not separately payable by Medicare, although certain new drug products are eligible for separate (incremental) payment for the first three years after approval. Changes to the Medicare hospital outpatient prospective payment system payment rates, including reductions implemented for certain hospital outpatient sites, could influence the decisions by hospital outpatient physicians to perform procedures that involve our products and the risks discussed above with respect to separate payment for diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals in the hospital outpatient setting could also impact clinical decision-making.

41

We also believe that all of these changes and their resulting pressures may incrementally reduce the overall number of diagnostic medical imaging procedures performed. These changes overall could slow the acceptance and introduction of next-generation imaging equipment into the marketplace, which, in turn, could adversely impact the future market adoption of certain of our imaging agents already in the market or currently in development. We expect that there will continue to be proposals to reduce or limit Medicare and Medicaid payment for diagnostic services, which could impact our current or potential future diagnostic and other types of products and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

45

We also expect increased regulation and oversight of advanced diagnostic testing in which our products are used, although the timing of such regulation is uncertain after a recent pause by CMS. Under section 218(b) of the Protecting Access to Medicare Act, beginning January 1, 2020, a professional who is ordering advanced diagnostic imaging services (which include MRI, CT, nuclear medicine (including PET) and other advanced diagnostic imaging services that the Secretary of HHS may specify, but not currently including echocardiography) must consult a qualified clinical decision support mechanism, as identified by HHS, to determine whether the ordered service adheres to specified appropriate use criteria (AUC) developed or endorsed by CMS-qualified provider led entities. Medicare claims for such services must include information indicating whether services ordered would adhere to specified applicable AUC. Denial of claims for failure to include AUC consultation information on the claim form was set to begin on January 1, 2022, but was not implemented by CMS. In the CY 2024 Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule, CMS determined that it was not feasible to fully operationalize the AUC program consistent with the statute within the required time frame. Accordingly, the agency finalized an indefinite pause to the AUC program and the rescission of the regulations promulgated thus far to implement the AUC program. While it is unclear when CMS will resume implementation of the AUC program, to the extent that these types of changes have the effect of reducing the aggregate number of diagnostic medical imaging procedures performed in the U.S., our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely affected.

Medicare coverage of PET radiopharmaceuticals has been the subject of a large number of National Coverage Determinations (NCDs) by CMS since 2000. Specific indications for PET imaging were covered, some through Coverage with Evidence Development. CMSs longtime policy, however, was that a particular use of PET scans is not covered unless an NCD specifically provided that such use was covered. Effective March 7, 2013, CMS revised its policy through an NCD to allow local Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) to determine coverage within their respective jurisdictions for PET using radiopharmaceuticals for their FDA-approved labeled indications for oncologic imaging. Effective January 1, 2022, non-coverage in the absence of an NCD has also been removed for non-oncologic indications of PET radiopharmaceuticals, allowing MACs to determine coverage for these indications within their respective jurisdictions. To the extent that CMS or the MACs impose more restrictive coverage, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Financial Results

We may not be able to hire or retain the number of qualified personnel, particularly scientific, medical and sales personnel, required for our business, which would harm the expansion of our internal research and development capabilities, sales of our products and approval timelines for and commercialization of our product candidates and limit our ability to grow.

Competition in our industry for highly skilled scientific, healthcare and sales personnel is intense and we may compete with larger pharmaceutical companies that likely will have access to greater financial resources than we do. As we expand our product candidate pipeline and develop and expand our internal research and development capabilities, we will need to continue to hire additional scientific, medical and regulatory personnel. In addition, similar to our approach with the launch and continued growth of PYLARIFY, as we commercialize additional products, we will need to hire additional employees to assist us with such commercialization, including in sales, marketing, reimbursement, quality and medical affairs. Although we have not had any material difficulty in the past in hiring or retaining qualified personnel, if we are unable to retain our existing personnel, or attract and train additional qualified personnel, either because of competition in our industry for these personnel or due to insufficient financial resources, then timelines for the approval and commercialization of our product candidates could be impacted, our growth could be limited and it could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We, or our business partners, may be subject to claims that we, or our partners, have infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated the patent or other intellectual property rights of a third party. The outcome of any of these claims is uncertain and any unfavorable result could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We, or our business partners, may be subject to claims by third parties that we, or our partners, have infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated third-party intellectual property rights. We are aware of intellectual property rights held by third parties that relate to products or technologies we are developing. For example, we are aware of other groups investigating PSMA or related compounds and monoclonal antibodies directed at PSMA, and PSMA-targeted imaging agents and therapeutics, and of patents held, and patent applications filed, by these groups in those areas. While the validity of these issued patents, the patentability of pending patent applications and the applicability of any of them to our products and programs are uncertain, if

42

asserted against us or our partners, any related patent or other intellectual property rights could adversely affect our ability to commercialize our products.

We may be subject to litigation over infringement claims regarding the products we manufacture or distribute or intend to manufacture or distribute. For example, on January 26, 2024, we were sued in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware by Advanced Accelerator Applications USA, Inc. and Advanced Accelerator Applications SA, each a Novartis entity, for patent infringement in response to the filing of our ANDA for PNT2003 and Paragraph IV certification, consistent with the process established by the Hatch-Waxman Act. This type of litigation can be costly and time consuming and could divert managements

46

attention and resources, generate significant expenses, damage payments (potentially including treble damages) or restrictions or prohibitions on our use of our technology, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. In addition, if we are found to be infringing on proprietary rights of others, we may be required to develop non-infringing technology, obtain a license (which may not be available on reasonable terms, or at all), make substantial one-time or ongoing royalty payments, or cease making, using and/or selling the infringing products, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Similarly, in June of 2024, Endocycte, Inc., Novartis and Purdue Research Foundation sued POINT and Eli Lilly and Co alleging that POINTs manufacturing and sale of PNT2002 infringes an Endocyte patent that discloses PSMA-binding conjugates useful for delivery targeted therapeutic, diagnostic and imaging agents, including radiopharmaceuticals. While we have not been named as a party to the lawsuit, if POINT is found to be infringing on proprietary rights of Endocyte, it could prevent or result in a delay in our development and commercialization of PNT2002 or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We may not, or may take longer to, realize the expected benefits and opportunities related to, investments we have made to develop diagnostic product candidates to be used in diagnosing, staging and monitoring Alzheimers disease.

On July 15, 2024, we announced that we acquired Meilleur Technologies, Inc, , which holds the rights under a license agreement to develop and commercialize NAV-4694, an investigational next-generation F 18-labeled PET imaging agent that targets Beta Amyloid in Alzheimers disease. NAV-4694 is currently in Phase 3 development and is also being used in academic and industry investigational therapeutic trialsponsored studies.

Previously, we acquired MK-6240, which is an investigational next-generation F 18-labeled PET imaging agent that targets Tau tangles. Recently, we held a pre-NDA meeting with the FDA and we expect to submit an NDA for MK-6240 in 2025, but we can provide no assurance that we will meet that expected timeline, that our NDA will be accepted by the FDA, that MK-6240 will be approved by the FDA based on the data submitted or, if approved, that we will be successful in commercializing MK-6240.

While we believe that both MK-6240, as a Tau imaging agent, and NAV-4694, as a Beta Amyloid imaging agent, have the potential to play an important role in diagnosing, staging and monitoring Alzheimers disease, we can give no assurance that we will be successful with continued development, regulatory approval and commercialization of these product candidates or that disagreements with the counterparties to our license agreements for MK-6240 and NAV-4694 or the former stockholders of the companies we acquired who could receive future milestone and royalty-based payments will not arise over proprietary rights, contract interpretation or the preferred course of product research, development or marketing that might cause delays or termination of the license agreements, or might result in litigation or arbitration, which could be time-consuming and expensive.

Risks Related to Our Capital Structure

The conditional conversion feature of the 2.625% Convertible Senior Notes due 2027, if triggered, may adversely affect our financial condition and operating results.

On December 8, 2022, we issued $575.0 million in aggregate principal amount of 2.625% Convertible Senior Notes due 2027 (the Notes), which included $75.0 million in aggregate principal amount of Notes sold pursuant to the full exercise of the initial purchasers option to purchase additional Notes. The Notes were issued under an indenture, dated as of December 8, 2022 (the Indenture), among Lantheus Holdings, LMI, and U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association (U.S. Bank), as Trustee. Prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding September 15, 2027, the Notes may be converted at the option of the holders upon occurrence of specified events and during certain periods, and thereafter until the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date, the Notes may be converted at any time. For example, holders could elect to convert their Notes during a calendar quarter if the trading price of our common stock was greater than or equal to 130% of the conversion price of the Notes (initially $79.81 per share) for at least 20 trading days (whether or not consecutive) during the period of 30 consecutive trading days ending on, and including, the last trading day of the immediately preceding calendar quarter. During the third quarter of 2024, the closing price of the Companys common stock exceeded 130% of the conversion price of the Notes for more than 20 trading days of the last 30 consecutive trading days of the quarter. As a result, the Notes are convertible at the option of the holders of the Notes during the fourth quarter of 2024, the quarter immediately following the quarter when the conditions are met, as stated in the terms of the Notes. If one or more holders elect to convert their Notes, unless we elect to satisfy our conversion obligation by arranging for one or more financial institutions to take the Notes from converting holders and pay such holders in accordance with the Indenture, we would

43

be required to settle any converted principal amount of such Notes through the payment of cash and by paying or delivering, at our election, cash, shares of our common stock, or a combination of cash and shares, with respect to the remainder of our conversion obligation in excess of the aggregate principal amount of the Notes being converted, which could adversely affect our liquidity. Even if holders do not elect to convert their Notes, we could be required under applicable accounting rules to reclassify all or a portion ofreclassified the outstandcarrying principalvalue of the Notes as a current rather than long-term liability, which would  in accordance with accounting guidance.

47

This has resulted in a material reduction of our net working capital, woul and requires us to maintain total liquidity in excess of the principal balance of the Notes and any contingent liabilities due within twelve months and could require us to seek to increase the amount of our 2022 Revolving Credit Facility or seek alternative financing arrangements. In addition, our issuance of additional shares of common stock, if we elect to settle our conversion obligation in excess of the aggregate principal amount of the Notes being converted in shares of common stock (whether in whole or in part), will dilute the ownership interests of our existing common stockholders, including any holders of the Notes who have previously received shares of our common stock upon conversion of their Notes.

448