Submit regulatory filing for BEAM-301
Not delivered by the deadline
AI-confirmed · human review in progress Independent AI checks agreed on primary SEC or regulator evidence. Records are now being reviewed by hand, starting with those our customers order.
- Announced
- 9 Jan 2023
- Due
- 31 Mar 2024
- Checked
- 2 Oct 2026
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“Regulatory filing for BEAM-301 by late 2023 / early 2024”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
The company pushed its expectation for submitting the IND application for BEAM-301 from early 2024 to the first half of 2024, and no filing was confirmed by the original deadline.
-
A Beam Therapeutics Inc. 8-K filed 2024-05-07
“Beam expects to submit an investigational new drug (IND) application in the U.S. for BEAM-301 for the potential treatment of glycogen storage disease type 1a (GSD1a) in the first half of 2024.” ✓ confirmed on the page
Market reaction: the shares moved -1.8% against the S&P 500 over the three sessions around the disclosure (6 May 2024 to 9 May 2024). What this measures
Checked 2 Oct 2026.
Commitment lineage
Every time the company restated this commitment. The original is never changed, and the outcome is always measured against version 1.
- Deadline drift +91 days
- 2 versions
-
Version 1 · original · stated 9 Jan 2023
Deadline 31 Mar 2024 (“early 2024”)
-
Version 2 · stated 19 Oct 2023
Deadline 30 Jun 2024 (“in 1H 2024”)
“Regulatory filing for BEAM-301 in 1H 2024”
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Regulatory filing
- Indicative materiality
- Medium rules
- Action
- Submit
- Deliverable
- BEAM-301 regulatory filing
- In the company’s control
- Medium
- Specificity
- Medium
- Depends on
- Regulatory
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: agreesA different AI model, Claude (Anthropic), re-read the evidence without being told the outcome and reached the same answer.
- Third check on a negative finding: agreesBecause a negative finding could harm a company if wrong, a stronger model re-read the evidence fully blind and reached the same answer.
Confirmed. This outcome counts towards the company's Kept Score. How verification works
Are you Beam Therapeutics Inc.? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2023-BEAM-003224 · Corrections policy