Slides
Page 1
DUAL-ACTION EYE DROP FIRST THERAPEUTIC FOR EVAPORATIVE & INFLAMMATORY DRY EYE DISEASE (DED) BL1332 FIRST NEUROSENSORY AGENT TO ADDRESS OCULAR SURFACE PAIN (OSP)
Page 2
22 Forward-Looking Statements This presentation contains forward-looking information and statements, within the meaning of applicable securities laws (collectively, “forward-looking statements”), including, but not limited to, statements regarding the anticipated success of our pipeline products and R&D programs, our ability to be the best in class or first product to market of its kind, the expectations that our pipeline products will drive revenue growth and margin expansion, anticipated approval and launch dates for our pipeline products, our estimates for potential peak sales for our pipeline products, the expected benefits of our pipeline products, the anticipated results of the development activities for our pipeline products, and the timing of commencement and completion of clinical studies and other development work. Forward-looking statements may generally be identified by the use of the words "anticipates," "expects,“ “predicts,” “projects,” “goals,” "intends," "plans," "should," "could," "would," "may,“ “might” "will,“ “strive,” "believes," "estimates," "potential," "target," “commit,” “forecast,” “outlook,” “guidance,” “tracking,” or "continue" and positive and negative variations or similar expressions, and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results may, could, should or will be achieved, received or taken or will occur or result, and similar such expressions also identify forward-looking information. These forward-looking statements are based upon the current expectations and beliefs of management and are provided for the purpose of providing additional information about such expectations and beliefs, and readers are cautioned that these statements may not be appropriate for other purposes. These forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the risks and uncertainties discussed in Bausch + Lomb’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the Canadian Securities Administrators (the “CSA”) (including the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 (which was filed with the SEC and CSA on February 18, 2026) and its most recent quarterly filings), which factors are incorporated herein by reference. They also include risks relating to the development of our pipeline products, including the risk that our studies may not produce successful or anticipated results or demonstrate safety and efficacy in humans, risks that our clinical trials may be delayed (which, in turn, may delay the launch of these products) and risks that the regulatory approval of our products may be lengthy, costly and, ultimately, not successful. They also include risks relating to the launch and commercialization of our products, including risks relating to the costs, required resources and unpredictability of commercial launches, risks that our products may not achieve the anticipated levels of market acceptance, which can result from a number of factors, many of which are outside of our control, risks that our products may experience negative publicity or reputational harm, competitive risks, such as our competitors beating us to market or developing new or better technologies and risks that we may face supply interruptions with our finished products or components thereof, which, in turn, may impact our ability to successfully launch or commercialize our products. In addition, certain material factors and assumptions have been applied in making these forward-looking statements, including the assumption that the risks and uncertainties outlined above will not cause actual results or events to differ materially from those described in these forward-looking statements. References in this presentation to peak sales refer to the potential peak annual sales of the applicable product, based on management’s estimates, taking into account, among other things, sales of similar products. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any of these forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date hereof. Bausch + Lomb undertakes no obligation to update any of these forward - looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation or to reflect actual outcomes, unless required by law. Disclaimers
Page 3
33 Yehia Hashad, MD Executive Vice President, R&D & Chief Medical Officer Mayssa Attar, Ph.D. Senior Vice President, Pharmaceuticals and Consumer R&D Brent Saunders Chief Executive Officer
Page 4
Dual-action eye drop targeting evaporative and inflammatory dry eye disease moving to Phase 3 BL1332 clinical validation strengthens confidence in first-in- class potential for Ocular Surface Pain Combined potential peak sales exceeding $2 billion2 represent meaningful upside opportunity beyond 2028 1 2 3 4 Advancing Two First-in-Class Eye Health Therapies Based on Trial Results 1. See Slide 2 for further information on forward-looking statements. 2. Represents total projected peak sales of both pipeline products, with anticipated peaks staggered based on launch dates. 1
Page 5
55 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Phase 2 demonstrated superior effect of dual-action drop at Day 15, faster than expected Advancing with greater conviction: strong Day 15 result establishes a clear primary endpoint and focused Phase 3 design Differentiated profile that addresses both inflammation and tear evaporation with rapid effect, lower drug load and simplified dosing 1. See Slide 2 for further information on forward-looking statements. Dual-Action Program Moves To Phase 3 With Clear Design and High Conviction 1
Page 6
66 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Dual-Action Solution for a Multifactorial Disease Rationale for Dual-Action Eye Drop Disease Drivers and Therapeutics Only anti-inflammatory eye drop for chronic use indicated to treat signs and symptoms of dry eye. Inflammation can be both a cause and a consequence of dry eye. Most dry eye is evaporative in nature. Indicated to treat signs and symptoms of dry eye. Unique MOA1. Lifitegrast (active in Xiidra) and perfluorohexyloctane (active in Miebo) act with distinct mechanisms Today, only single action products Faster relief and larger treatment effect may be achieved with first dual-action eye drop to treat dry eye2 Anticipate superior improvement in signs and symptoms with improved tolerability2 Dry eye is a multifactorial, symptomatic disease characterized by a loss of homeostasis of the tear film and/or ocular surface, in which tear film instability and hyperosmolarity, ocular surface inflammation and damage, and neurosensory abnormalities are etiological factors Dry Eye is a Complex Disease Updated TFOS DEWS III Definition 1. Mechanism of action. 2. See Slide 2 for further information on forward-looking statements.
Page 7
77 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop 1. Data on file. Single topical dose rabbit pharmacokinetics comparing Xiidra to lifitegrast in Miebo. Clinical study results reported Aug 2026 • Designed to test dual-action of novel lifitegrast in Miebo formulation and superiority to Xiidra and Miebo in treating dry eye These attributes are designed to achieve: • Dual-action efficacy superior to Xiidra or Miebo • Improved tolerability Unique physiochemical properties of new formulation allows: • Reduced total lifitegrast dose compared to Xiidra • Smaller drop size that delivers efficacious drug levels Ocular Surface Tissue Concentrations Cornea1 Conjunctiva1 Improved formulation designed to achieve superior dual-action efficacy with improved tolerability 0 10000 20000 30000 Dose Normalized AUC0-t (ng•hr/g) Xiidra Lifitegrast in Miebo 0 100000 200000 300000 Dose Normalized AUC0-t (ng•hr/g) Xiidra Lifitegrast in Miebo More tissue penetration when lifitegrast (active in Xiidra) is formulated with the active in Miebo More Efficient Drug Delivery Cleared First Hurdle: More Efficient Drug Delivery
Page 8
88 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop A Third the Dose Volume, Half the Frequency Dual Action Drop LIF/PFHO ~12 µL drop Twice Daily Lifitegrast (LIF) active in Xiidra LIF ~35 µL drop Twice Daily Perfluorohexyloctane (PFHO) active in Miebo PFHO ~12 µL drop Four Times Daily Tested efficacy and tolerability of a novel dual-action drop with reduced dose volume of lifitegrast relative to Xiidra and a reduced dosing frequency relative to Miebo
Page 9
99 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Study Designed To Detect a Faster Effect Primary endpoint: mean change from baseline in total corneal fluorescein staining (tCFS) at Day 29, LIF/PFHO FDC versus lifitegrast 5% Screening Period · 2 weeks Treatment Period · 4 weeks Washout (masked artificial tear) Lifitegrast (LIF)/PFHO FDC in multidose bottle – 2x/day Matched masking control: Lifitegrast Vehicle in multidose bottle – 2x/day PFHO in multidose bottle – 4x/day Matched masking control: Lifitegrast Vehicle in multidose bottle – 4x/day Lifitegrast in SDU container – 2x/day Matched masking control: Lifitegrast Vehicle in SDU container – 2x/day Visit 1 Day -17 to -14 Screening Visit 2 Day 1 Baseline/Randomization Visit 3 Day 8 (±1) Visit 4 Day 15 (±1) Visit 5 Day 29 (±2) Primary Efficacy EoT/EoS(2:2:2:1:1:1)
Page 10
1010 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Registration-Quality Patient Population Baseline Characteristics (ITT Population) LIF/PFHO FDC N=101 LIF N=99 PFHO N=99 Corneal fluorescein staining Total (0-20) 6.61 (2.147) 7.17 (2.321) 6.92 (2.460) Dry Eye Symptoms VAS Burning / stinging 47.8 (26.69) 49.9 (25.31) 49.1 (27.26) Eye itching 50.8 (26.20) 54.4 (26.05) 52.5 (26.99) Light sensitivity 55.0 (26.78) 54.0 (26.95) 57.5 (27.77) Foreign body sensation 48.6 (30.46) 52.3 (28.45) 43.4 (29.41) Eye irritation 60.3 (24.56) 61.4 (23.83) 54.8 (25.08) Blurred vision 55.1 (27.64) 55.8 (25.37) 54.3 (27.71) Baseline characteristics are comparable to values observed in pivotal trials for Xiidra and/or Miebo. Symptom burden was moderate to severe and evenly distributed across arms. Symptom assessments are analyzed at the subject level. VAS scales run 0-100; higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.
Page 11
1111 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Dual-Action: Superior Effect, Faster Than Expected Fastest improvement observed with dual-action drop. Significance narrowed by Day 29 because lifitegrast alone improved. The dual-action drop’s effect was largely unchanged and remained numerically better through Day 29. Change from baseline in total corneal fluorescein staining prespecified on Day 15 and Day 29 for the dual-action eye drop vs lifitegrast alone. Day 15 showed a nominally significant* result p=0.0007. Day 29 while numerically better did not meet its primary endpoint of superiority over lifitegrast alone p=0.196. Total Corneal Fluorescein Staining -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 Day 8 Day 15 Day 29 LIF/PFHO 2X/day LIF 2X/day PFHO 4X/day * p=0.0007 p=0.1960 Change from Baseline
Page 12
1212 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Twice daily treatment with the dual-action drop with a reduced dose volume of lifitegrast and reduced dose frequency relative to PFHO, achieved the greatest proportion of patients with a ≥3-Unit Improvement in tCFS on Day 15 Proportion of Patients with ≥3-Unit Improvement in tCFS on Day 15 41.6% 18.8% 31.6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% LIF/PFHO 2X/day LIF 2X/day PFHO 4X/day * p=0.0006 % Responder * exploratory analysis with nominal p value Corneal Staining: Highest Response, Lowest Drug Burden
Page 13
1313 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Symptoms are measured on a VAS scale from 0 (none or never) – 100 (worst severity possible or all the time) Responders for a particular symptom are defined as patients with complete resolution of that symptom i.e. VAS of 0 Symptom Endpoint LIF/PFHO 2X/day LIF 2X/day PFHO 4X/day Eye Itching 13.9 2.1 10.2 Light Sensitivity 12.9 5.2 7.1 Blurred Vision 6.9 2.1 4.1 Eye Irritation 5 4.2 5.1 Burning/Stinging 8.9 3.1 11.2 Foreign Body Sensation 11.9 10.4 20.4 Dual-action dry eye drop delivers greater symptom relief than Xiidra. While the dual-action generally delivers comparable or numerically better symptom relief compared to Miebo despite the lower dosing frequency. Proportion of Patients (%) with Complete Resolution on Day 15 Exploratory analyses. Symptoms: Ahead of Xiidra, Comparable to Miebo
Page 14
1414 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events by System Organ Class and Preferred Term System Organ Class / Preferred Term LIF/PFHO N=101 n (%) E LIF N=99 n (%) E PFHO N=99 n (%) E Any TEAE 40 (39.6) 80 43 (43.4) 78 18 (18.2) 25 General disorders and administration site conditions 33 (32.7) 53 30 (30.3) 51 14 (14.1) 18 Instillation site reaction 26 (25.7) 28 17 (17.2) 17 10 (10.1) 11 Instillation site irritation 12 (11.9) 13 21 (21.2) 26 2 (2.0) 2 Instillation site foreign body sensation 11 (10.9) 11 0 3 (3.0) 3 Instillation site lacrimation 1 (1.0) 1 3 (3.0) 3 1 (1.0) 1 Instillation site pruritus 0 4 (4.0) 4 0 Nervous system disorders 11 (10.9) 14 16 (16.2) 16 1 (1.0) 1 Dysgeusia 11 (10.9) 12 15 (15.2) 15 1 (1.0) 1 Instillation site irritation was lower with the dual-action drop (11.9%) versus lifitegrast alone (21.2%). Dysgeusia was lower with the dual-action drop (10.9%) versus lifitegrast alone (15.2%). Most frequent TEAE >2% or at least 3 within group are tabulated No New Safety Signals Were Observed
Page 15
1515 Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Dual-Action Eye Drop Advancing to Phase 3 With High Conviction Rapid Healing of Corneal Surface and Resolution of Symptoms with Dual-Action Drop • Phase 2 demonstrated superior effect of dual-action drop at Day 15, faster than expected • Exploratory analyses indicate this rapid effect was accompanied by complete resolution of multiple dry eye symptoms • This effect was achieved with ~65% less lifitegrast volume than Xiidra and half the dosing frequency of Miebo — meaning we have options to further improve this signal through optimizing dose or duration • A clear, fast sign effect — achieved at a fraction of the dose and frequency of two proven monotherapies — gives us high conviction to advance the dual-action program built around a Day 15 primary endpoint and a defined path to demonstrate superiority over both individual therapies • Dual-action drop has the potential to work faster than any approved product in the treatment of signs and symptoms
Page 16
1616 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Breaking new ground in Ocular Pain: first clinical confirmation of pain reduction through TRPV1 blockade Advancing with conviction: positive Phase 1b results validate the mechanism and reinforce confidence in ongoing Phase 2 study Positive clinical validation: Phase 1b met primary endpoint, demonstrating a statistically significant reduction in pain intensity BL1332 Clinical Validation Strengthens Confidence in First-in-Class Potential 1 1 1. See Slide 2 for further information on forward-looking statements.
Page 17
1717 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Cornea has Highest Density of Sensory Nerve Endings Target Rationale Molecules TRPV1 ion channels represent a primary sensor of pain TRPV1 antagonists block the cascade leading to pain BL1312 More potent water-soluble moleculeBL1332 Achieved positive clinical POCTarget TRPV1; transient receptor potential vanilloid subtype 1; nociceptor Function Cell surface receptor ion channel critical for sensing of nociceptive and thermal inflammatory pain1 Ocular Tissue Distribution Cornea, Conjunctiva, peripheral and central terminals of sensory neurons.2 MOA Non-competitive antagonist of TRPV1 1. Premkumar LS, Sikand P. TRPV1: A target for next generation analgesics. Curr Neuropharmacol. 2008;6(2):151–16. 2. InTech-Transient_receptor_potential_trp_channels_in_the_eye.pdf (intechopen.com); ocular figure created with Biorender TRPV1 Antagonism: Blocking Pain at Primary Sensor
Page 18
1818 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 BL1312 Clinical Data Guide Strategy Developing more potent BL1332 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 Concentration (ng/g) Time More potent BL1332 molecule formulated to maximize tissue exposure to block ocular pain signaling Maximize efficacy by increasing drug exposure Capsaicin-Induced Nonclinical Model for Evaluating Analgesic Efficacy Increased potency translates to increased efficacy 1.5% 2X/day2.5% 4X/day + POC Effective pain relief Not effective pain relief 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Vehicle BL1312 BL1332 Eye Wipe Response BL1332 Phase 1 complete and highest dose was safe and well tolerated. BL1332 Phase 2 management of post- operative pain following photorefractive keratectomy surgery results anticipated 2H 2026. Data on file pharmacokinetic human cornea simulation and nonclinical capsaicin model. Simulated Human Cornea BL1312 Concentrations *** BL1332: Greater Potency, Greater Pain Relief
Page 19
1919 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Evaluate the treatment effect of BL1332 0.30% on capsaicin-induced pain perception and duration after administration to the ocular surface in the absence of surgery Numeric pain rating scale (0-10) where 0 is no pain and 10 is worst pain possible Part A- Capsaicin dose identification Part B- Target engagement n=6 capsaicin (Eye 1) 1.5 µM Pain NPRS capsaicin (Eye 2) 2.5 µM Pain NPRS Baseline 1.5 µM Washout ~1 hr 2.5 µM Screening Period 1 Period 2 capsaicin IPBaseline IP Pain NPRS capsaicin Pain NPRS Washout ~ 24 hr BL1332 (Eye 2) (n = 11) BL1332 (Eye 1) (n = 11) Randomization Vehicle (Eye 1) (n = 11) Vehicle (Eye 2) (n = 11) 30 min 30 min (n=22) Study Designed for Maximum Precision
Page 20
2020 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 BL1332 Decisively Met Primary Endpoint BL1332 Significantly Reduced Capsaicin-Induced Ocular PainMean NPRS at 5 seconds post-capsaicin, BL1332 0.30% vs vehicle (mITT, N=22). There was a statistically significant difference favoring BL1332 0.30%: • LS mean difference: -5.5 (95% CI: -6.1, -4.9) • p < 0.0001 NPRS 5 seconds after capsaicin challenge, vs. vehicle 0.6 6.1 0 2 4 6 8 BL1332 0.30% Vehicle Mean NPRS score (0-10 scale) ± SE n = 22, modified intent-to-treat population; *** p < 0.0001 Primary endpoint was met Pain Intensity (NPRS) at 5 Seconds
Page 21
2121 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Proportion of participants with complete resolution of pain (NPRS = 0) at 5 seconds post-capsaicin. There was a statistically significant difference favoring BL1332 0.30%: • BL1332 0.30%: 15/22 (68.2%) vs Vehicle: 0/22 (0%) • p < 0.0001 Exploratory endpoint was met (nominal) 68.2% 0.0% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% BL1332 0.30% Vehicle % of participants Complete Pain Resolution at 5 Seconds Complete Pain Resolution in Two Thirds of Participants
Page 22
2222 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Proportion of participants reporting high pain (NPRS ≥7) at 5 seconds post-capsaicin. There was a statistically significant difference favoring BL1332 0.30%: • BL1332 0.30%: 0/22 (0%) vs Vehicle: 8/22 (36.4%) • p = 0.0078 Exploratory endpoint was met (nominal) 0.0% 36.4% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% BL1332 0.30% Vehicle % of participants High Pain (NPRS ≥ 7) at 5 Seconds No Participant on BL1332 Reported High Pain
Page 23
2323 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Peak NPRS score recorded between 5 and 30 seconds post-capsaicin (mITT, N=22). There was a statistically significant difference favoring BL1332 0.30%: • Mean difference: -5.5 (95% CI: -7.00, -4.00) • p < 0.0001 Exploratory endpoint was met (nominal) 0.6 6.1 0 2 4 6 BL1332 0.30% Vehicle NPRS score Peak NPRS Between 5-30 Seconds Same Magnitude of BL1332 Benefit at Peak Pain
Page 24
2424 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 *** *** *** *** ** * ns -1 1 3 5 7 Pre-cap 5 sec 10 sec 20 sec 30 sec 1 min 2 min 3 min 5 min 10 min NPRS score (mean ± SEM) Time post-capsaicin BL1332 0.30% Vehicle All nominal *** p<0.0001/<0.001, ** p<0.01, * p<0.05, ns = not significant. NPRS Pain Intensity Profile Following Capsaicin Challenge: BL1332 0.30% vs. Vehicle Mean duration of pain following capsaicin challenge, BL1332 0.30% vs vehicle (mITT, N=22). There was a statistically significant difference favoring BL1332 0.30%: • Mean duration: 1.6 vs 37.8 seconds (difference -36.2, 95% CI: -41, -28) • p < 0.0001 Over Half a Minute of Pain, Virtually Eliminated
Page 25
2525 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Treatment-emergent adverse events — Part B Safety Population (N=22 each arm) BL1332 0.30% (N=22) n (%) Vehicle (N=22) n (%) Any TEAE 0 0 Ocular TEAE 0 0 Non-ocular TEAE 0 0 Treatment-related TEAE 0 0 Severe TEAE 0 0 Serious TEAE (SAE) 0 0 TEAE leading to discontinuation 0 0 TEAE leading to death 0 0 No TEAEs were reported in either arm; no SAEs, discontinuations, or deaths. An earlier Phase 1 confirmed the ocular and systemic safety and tolerability of BL1332. The ultralow systemic BL1332 concentrations are not associated with any hyperthermia. No Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events
Page 26
2626 Dual-Action Eye Drop Ocular Surface Pain - BL1332 Franchise Opportunity in Ocular Surface Pain Successful Clinical Proof-of-Mechanism • Capsaicin is an etiology-agnostic pain challenge. This study demonstrates TRPV1 blockade reduces nociceptive pain signaling itself, independent of any single disease or injury process • The primary endpoint was statistically significant and all exploratory endpoints were nominally significant in reducing pain in this study • The clinical profile demonstrated through this proof of mechanism study takes BL1332 beyond the post-surgical population in our ongoing Phase 2 and positions it as the foundation of an ocular pain franchise spanning a full range of conditions 1. See Slide 2 for further information on forward-looking statements. 1
Page 27
2727 Two First-in-Class Assets, >$2B Potential 1. See Slide 2 for further information on forward-looking statements. 2. Represents total projected peak sales of both pipeline products, with anticipated peaks staggered based on launch dates. FIRST THERAPEUTIC FOR EVAPORATIVE & INFLAMMATORY DRY EYE DISEASE Potential Peak Sales: ~$0.7B Dual-Action Eye Drop Next Steps: Phase 3 Study Details in Coming Months Potential Peak Sales: ~$1.4B Next Steps: Phase 2 Topline Readout in Coming Months FIRST NEUROSENSORY AGENT TO ADDRESS OCULAR SURFACE PAIN BL1332 OSP 1,2
Page 28
Patients Investigators Colleagues 28 THANK YOU