The amendment sounds to me, on the surface, as being driven by Eversana since they now get more and we get less.  It completely changes the "pro-bono" aspect of the original agreement where we weren't burdened with expenses of their services until a successful commercialization.  That is super important to a cash-strapped and clearly pre-revenue company, especially one where the CEO has lost his credibility as a fund raiser.

So we now have to start paying back without a penny coming through our front door for years to come yet.  In addition, Eversana appears to have been gratuitously given royalties on two additional mega-blockbuster indications, CVD and PAH.  

I think you are right.  We need to have access to the contract.  This is clearly material and I even have to question whether a legal mistake was made when they decided not to news release this amendment.

JMHO