AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. - Quarter Report: 2018 June (Form 10-Q)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2018

OR

For the transition period from                  to                 .

Commission file number 001-34655

AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

One Broadway, 14th Floor, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142

(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)

(617) 588-1960

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Number of shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, $0.001 par value, outstanding on August 3, 2018: 119,030,147

AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

FORM 10-Q

FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(In thousands, except par value amounts)

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

3

AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

(In thousands, except per share amounts)

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

4

AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)

(In thousands)

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

5

AVEO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(In thousands)

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

6

AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

June 30, 2018

(1) Organization

AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) is a biopharmaceutical company dedicated to advancing a broad portfolio of targeted medicines for oncology and other areas of unmet medical need. The Company’s strategy is to retain North American rights to its oncology portfolio while securing partners in development and commercialization outside of North America. The Company is working to develop and commercialize its lead candidate tivozanib in North America as a treatment for renal cell carcinoma (“RCC”). The Company has outlicensed tivozanib (FOTIVDA^®) for oncological indications in Europe and other territories outside of North America, and it is approved in the European Union, as well as Norway and Iceland, for the first-line treatment of adult patients with advanced RCC (“aRCC”) and for adult patients who are vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (“VEGFR”) and mTOR pathway inhibitor-naïve following disease progression after one prior treatment with cytokine therapy for aRCC. The Company has entered into partnerships to fund the development and commercialization of AV-203 and ficlatuzumab, both clinical stage assets in oncology. The Company is currently seeking a partner to develop the AV-353 platform, a preclinical asset, worldwide for the potential treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (“PAH”). The Company previously partnered with Novartis International Pharmaceutical Ltd. (“Novartis”) to develop the AV-380 program in cachexia and other indications. Effective August 28, 2018 the Company expects to regain the rights to AV-380 and is considering a variety of options to continue the program’s development. Refer to Note 4 “Collaborations and License Agreements – Novartis” for further details.    

As used throughout these condensed consolidated financial statements, the terms “AVEO,” and the “Company” refer to the business of AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its two wholly-owned subsidiaries, AVEO Pharma Limited and AVEO Securities Corporation.

Liquidity and Going Concern

The Company has financed its operations to date primarily through private placements and public offerings of its common stock and preferred stock, license fees, milestone payments and research and development funding from strategic partners, and loan proceeds. The Company has devoted substantially all of its resources to its drug development efforts, comprising research and development, manufacturing, conducting clinical trials for its product candidates, protecting its intellectual property and general and administrative functions relating to these operations. The future success of the Company is dependent on its ability to develop its product candidates and ultimately upon its ability to attain profitable operations. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities totaling approximately $18.1 million, working capital of $2.8 million and an accumulated deficit of $594.7 million.

The Company is subject to a number of risks, including the need for substantial additional capital for clinical research and product development. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had approximately $18.1 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. Based on these available cash resources, the Company does not have sufficient cash on hand to support current operations for at least the next twelve months from the date of filing this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. This condition raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

The Company’s plans to address this condition include pursuing one or more of the following options to secure additional funding, none of which can be guaranteed or are entirely within the Company’s control:

7

Pursuant to the EUSA Agreement, the Company is entitled to receive up to an additional $8.0 million in milestone payments of $2.0 million per country upon reimbursement approval for RCC, if any, in each of France, Germany, Italy and Spain, and an additional $2.0 million milestone payment for the grant of marketing approval, if any, in three of the licensed countries outside of the European Union, as mutually agreed by the parties. These milestone payments are subject to the 30% sublicense fee payable to Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd. (formerly Kirin Brewery Co., Ltd.) (“KHK”) pursuant to the Company’s license agreement with KHK (the “KHK Agreement”). The Company is also eligible to receive an additional research and development reimbursement payment from EUSA of 50% of the total costs for the Company’s TIVO-3 phase 3 study in third-line RCC, up to $20.0 million, if EUSA elects to opt-in to that study. This research and development reimbursement payment would not be subject to the 30% sublicense fee payable to KHK, subject to certain limitations. Refer to Note 4 “Collaborations and License Agreements - KHK” for further details.

In addition, CANbridge Life Sciences Ltd. (“CANbridge”) filed an initial new drug (“IND”) application with the China Food and Drug Administration in December 2017 for a clinical study of AV-203 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Pursuant to the Company’s collaboration and license agreement with CANbridge (the “CANbridge Agreement”), the Company is entitled to receive a $2.0 million development and regulatory milestone payment upon the receipt of the regulatory approval of this IND application.

There can be no assurance, however, that the Company will receive cash proceeds from any of these potential resources or to the extent cash proceeds are received such proceeds would be sufficient to support the Company’s current operating plan for at least the next twelve months from the date of filing this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

Pursuant to the requirements of Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 205-40, Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern (“ASC 205-40”) management must evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued. This evaluation initially does not take into consideration the potential mitigating effect of management’s plans that have not been fully implemented as of the date the financial statements are issued. When substantial doubt exists under this methodology, management evaluates whether the mitigating effect of its plans sufficiently alleviates substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The mitigating effect of management’s plans, however, is only considered if both (1) it is probable that the plans will be effectively implemented within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued, and (2) it is probable that the plans, when implemented, will mitigate the relevant conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued. 

Under ASC 205-40, the future receipt of potential funding from the Company’s collaborators and other resources cannot be considered probable at this time because none of the Company’s current plans have been finalized at the time of filing this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and the implementation of any such plan is not probable of being effectively implemented as none of the plans are entirely within the Company’s control. Accordingly, substantial doubt is deemed to exist about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date these financial statements are issued.

The Company believes that its approximate $18.1 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities at June 30, 2018 would allow it to fund its planned operations into the first quarter of 2019. This estimate assumes no receipt of additional milestone payments from its partners, no funding from new partnership agreements, no equity financings, no debt financings, no sales of equity under its Leerink Sales Agreement and no additional sales of equity through the exercise of the outstanding PIPE Warrants or the Settlement Warrants (Refer to Note 7, Common Stock – Settlement Warrants and Private Placement / PIPE Warrants regarding specific details.). Accordingly, the timing and nature of activities contemplated for the remainder of 2018 and thereafter will be conducted subject to the availability of sufficient financial resources.  

If the Company is unable to obtain sufficient capital to continue to advance its programs, the Company would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate its research and development programs and any future commercialization efforts.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the ordinary course of business. The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or the amounts and classification of liabilities that might result from the outcome of the uncertainties described above.

8

(2) Basis of Presentation

These condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, AVEO Pharma Limited and AVEO Securities Corporation. The Company has eliminated all significant intercompany accounts and transactions in consolidation.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals and revisions of estimates, considered necessary for a fair presentation of the condensed consolidated financial statements have been included. Interim results for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018 or any other future period.

The information presented in the condensed consolidated financial statements and related footnotes at June 30, 2018, and for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, is unaudited, and the condensed consolidated balance sheet amounts and related footnotes as of December 31, 2017 have been derived from the Company’s audited financial statements. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and accompanying footnotes included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, which was filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on March 13, 2018.

(3) Significant Accounting Policies

Revenue Recognition

The Company’s revenues are generated primarily through collaborative research, development and commercialization agreements. The terms of these agreements generally contain multiple promised goods and services, which may include (i) licenses, or options to obtain licenses, to the Company’s technology, (ii) research and development activities to be performed on behalf of the collaborative partner, and (iii) in certain cases, services in connection with the manufacturing of preclinical and clinical material. Payments to the Company under these arrangements typically include one or more of the following: non-refundable, upfront license fees; option exercise fees; funding of research and/or development efforts; milestone payments; and royalties on future product sales.

Collaboration Arrangements Within the Scope of ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements

The Company analyzes its collaboration arrangements to assess whether such arrangements involve joint operating activities performed by parties that are both active participants in the activities and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of such activities and are therefore within the scope of ASC Topic 808, Collaborative Arrangements (“ASC 808”). This assessment is performed throughout the life of the arrangement based on changes in the responsibilities of all parties in the arrangement.  For collaboration arrangements that are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808, the Company first determines which elements of the collaboration are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 and those that are more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the scope of ASC 606. The Company’s policy is generally to recognize amounts received from collaborators in connection with joint operating activities that are within the scope of ASC 808 as a reduction in research and development expense.

Arrangements Within the Scope of ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers

Effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASC 606”), using the modified retrospective transition method. Under this method, the Company has recognized the cumulative effect of the adoption as an adjustment to the opening balance of accumulated deficit in the current period condensed consolidated balance sheet. Financial results for reporting periods beginning after January 1, 2018, are presented under ASC 606, while prior period amounts are not adjusted and continue to be reported in accordance with the Company’s historical accounting under ASC 605, Revenue Recognition. ASC 606 applies to all contracts with customers, except for contracts that are within the scope of other standards, such as collaboration arrangements and leases.

Under ASC 606, the Company recognizes revenue when its customers obtain control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration which the Company determines it expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that the Company determines are within the scope of ASC 606, the Company performs the following five steps: (i) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (ii) identify the performance obligation(s) in the contract; (iii) determine the transaction price; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligation(s) in the contract; and

9

(v) recognize revenue when (or as) the Company satisfies its performance obligation(s). As part of the accounting for these arrangements, the Company must make significant judgments, including identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each performance obligation.

Once a contract is determined to be within the scope of ASC 606, the Company assesses the goods or services promised within the contract and determines those that are performance obligations. Arrangements that include rights to additional goods or services that are exercisable at a customer’s discretion are generally considered options. The Company assesses if these options provide a material right to the customer and if so, they are considered performance obligations. The exercise of a material right is accounted for as a contract modification for accounting purposes.

The Company assesses whether each promised good or service is distinct for the purpose of identifying the performance obligations in the contract. This assessment involves subjective determinations and requires management to make judgments about the individual promised goods or services and whether such are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship. Promised goods and services are considered distinct provided that: (i) the customer can benefit from the good or service either on its own or together with other resources that are readily available to the customer (that is, the good or service is capable of being distinct) and (ii) the entity’s promise to transfer the good or service to the customer is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract (that is, the promise to transfer the good or service is distinct within the context of the contract). In assessing whether a promised good or service is distinct, the Company considers factors such as the research, manufacturing and commercialization capabilities of the collaboration partner and the availability of the associated expertise in the general marketplace. The Company also considers the intended benefit of the contract in assessing whether a promised good or service is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract. If a promised good or service is not distinct, an entity is required to combine that good or service with other promised goods or services until it identifies a bundle of goods or services that is distinct.

The transaction price is then determined and allocated to the identified performance obligations in proportion to their standalone selling prices (“SSP”) on a relative SSP basis. SSP is determined at contract inception and is not updated to reflect changes between contract inception and when the performance obligations are satisfied. Determining the SSP for performance obligations requires significant judgment. In developing the SSP for a performance obligation, the Company considers applicable market conditions and relevant entity-specific factors, including factors that were contemplated in negotiating the agreement with the customer and estimated costs. The Company validates the SSP for performance obligations by evaluating whether changes in the key assumptions used to determine the SSP will have a significant effect on the allocation of arrangement consideration between multiple performance obligations.

If the consideration promised in a contract includes a variable amount, the Company estimates the amount of consideration to which it will be entitled in exchange for transferring the promised goods or services to a customer. The Company determines the amount of variable consideration by using the expected value method or the most likely amount method. The Company includes the unconstrained amount of estimated variable consideration in the transaction price. The amount included in the transaction price is constrained to the amount for which it is probable that a significant reversal of cumulative revenue recognized will not occur. At the end of each subsequent reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the estimated variable consideration included in the transaction price and any related constraint, and if necessary, adjusts its estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis in the period of adjustment.

In determining the transaction price, the Company adjusts consideration for the effects of the time value of money if the timing of payments provides the Company with a significant benefit of financing. The Company does not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component if the expectation at contract inception is such that the period between payment by the licensees and the transfer of the promised goods or services to the licensees will be one year or less. The Company assessed each of its revenue generating arrangements in order to determine whether a significant financing component exists and concluded that a significant financing component does not exist in any of its arrangements.

The Company then recognizes as revenue the amount of the transaction price that is allocated to the respective performance obligation when (or as) each performance obligation is satisfied at a point in time or over time, and if over time based on the use of an output or input method.

Licenses of intellectual property: The terms of the Company’s license agreements include the license of functional intellectual property, given the functionality of the intellectual property is not expected to change substantially as a result of the Company’s ongoing activities. If the license to the Company’s intellectual property is determined to be distinct from the other performance obligations identified in the arrangement, the Company recognizes revenues from the portion of the transaction price allocated to the license when the license is transferred to the licensee and the licensee is able to use and benefit from the license. For

10

licenses that are bundled with other promises (that is, for licenses that are not distinct from other promised goods and services in an arrangement), the Company utilizes judgment to assess the nature of the combined performance obligation to determine whether the combined performance obligation is satisfied over time or at a point in time and, if over time, the appropriate method of measuring progress for purposes of recognizing revenue. The Company evaluates the measure of progress each reporting period and, if necessary, adjusts the measure of performance and related revenue recognition.

Research and development funding: Arrangements that include payment for research and development services are generally considered to have variable consideration. If and when the Company assesses the payment for these services is no longer subject to the constraint on variable consideration, the related revenue is included in the transaction price.

Milestone payments:  At the inception of each arrangement that includes non-refundable payments for contingent milestones, including preclinical research and development, clinical development and regulatory, the Company evaluates whether the milestones are considered probable of being achieved and estimates the amount to be included in the transaction price using the most likely amount method. If it is probable that a significant revenue reversal would not occur, the associated milestone value is included in the transaction price. Milestone payments that are not within the control of the Company or the licensee, such as regulatory approvals, are not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received. At the end of each reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the probability of the achievement of contingent milestones and the likelihood of a significant reversal of such milestone revenue, and if necessary, adjusts its estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis, which would affect collaboration and licensing revenue in the period of adjustment. This quarterly assessment may result in the recognition of revenue related to a contingent milestone payment before the milestone event has been achieved.  

Royalties:  For arrangements that include sales-based royalties, including milestone payments based on the level of sales, and the license is deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate, the Company recognizes revenue at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which some or all of the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied (or partially satisfied).  

The following table summarizes the total revenues earned in the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively, by partner (in thousands). Refer to Note 4 Collaborations and License Agreements regarding specific details.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses are charged to expense as incurred. Research and development expenses consist of costs incurred in performing research and development activities, including internal costs for salaries, bonuses, benefits, stock-based compensation, facilities, and research-related overhead, and external costs for clinical trials, drug manufacturing and distribution, license fees, consultants and other contracted services.

Warrants Issued in Connection with Private Placement

In May 2016, the Company issued warrants to purchase an aggregate of 17,642,482 shares of common stock in connection with a private placement financing and recorded the warrants as a liability (the “PIPE Warrants”). The Company accounts for warrant instruments that either conditionally or unconditionally obligate the issuer to transfer assets as liabilities regardless of the timing of the redemption feature or price, even though the underlying shares may be classified as permanent or temporary equity.  As of June 30, 2018, PIPE Warrants exercisable for 777,201 shares of common stock had been exercised, for approximately $0.8 million in cash proceeds, and PIPE Warrants exercisable for 16,865,281 shares of common stock were outstanding. In July 2017, Hercules Capital Inc. exercised its PIPE Warrants with respect to all 259,067 shares of common stock underlying such PIPE Warrants, and the Company issued Hercules Capital Inc. 259,067 shares of its common stock and received approximately $0.3 million in cash proceeds. In January 2018, PIPE Warrants with respect to 518,134 shares of common stock underlying such PIPE Warrants were exercised, and the Company issued 518,134 shares of its common stock and received approximately $0.5 million in cash proceeds. Refer to Note 7, “Common Stock—Private Placement / PIPE Warrants” for further discussion of the private placement financing.

11

The PIPE Warrants contain a provision giving the warrant holder the option to receive cash, equal to the fair value of the remaining unexercised portion of the warrant, as cash settlement in the event that there is a fundamental transaction (contractually defined to include various merger, acquisition or stock transfer activities). Due to this provision, ASC 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity requires that these warrants be classified as a liability and not as equity. Accordingly, the Company recorded a warrant liability in the amount of approximately $9.3 million upon issuance of the PIPE Warrants. The fair value of these warrants has been determined using the Black-Scholes pricing model. These warrants are subject to revaluation at each balance sheet date and any changes in fair value are recorded as a non-cash gain or (loss) in the Statement of Operations as a component of other income (expense), net until the earlier of their exercise or expiration or upon the completion of a liquidation event. Upon exercise, the PIPE Warrants are subject to revaluation just prior to the date of the warrant exercise and any changes in fair value are recorded as a non-cash gain or (loss) in the Statement of Operations as a component of other income (expense), net and the corresponding reduction in the PIPE Warrant liability is recorded as additional paid-in capital in the Balance Sheet as a component of stockholder’s equity.

The Company recorded non-cash gains of approximately $11.1 million and $9.7 million in the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018, respectively, and non-cash losses of approximately $23.9 million and $24.4 million in the three months and six months ended June 30, 2017, respectively, in its Statement of Operations attributable to the increases and decreases in the fair value of the PIPE Warrant liability that resulted from a lower stock price as of June 30, 2018 and a higher stock price as of June 30, 2017 relative to prior periods. In the six months ended June 30, 2018, the Company recorded a reduction in the PIPE Warrant liability, with a corresponding increase to additional paid-in capital, of approximately $1.1 million attributable to PIPE Warrant exercises in the first quarter of 2018.

The following table rolls forward the fair value of the Company’s PIPE Warrant liability, the fair value of which is determined by Level 3 inputs for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 (in thousands):

The key assumptions used to value the PIPE Warrants were as follows:

Class Action Settlement and Settlement Warrants

In December 2017, the Company entered into a binding memorandum of understanding (the “MOU”) with class representatives Bob Levine and William Windham (the “Plaintiffs”), regarding the settlement of a securities class action lawsuit (the “Class Action”) that had been filed in 2013 and was pending in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (the “District Court”) against the Company and certain of the Company’s former officers (Tuan Ha-Ngoc, David Johnston, and William Slichenmyer, together, the “Individual Defendants”),  In re AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Securities Litigation et al. , No. 1:13-cv-11157-DJC. As previously disclosed, the Class Action was purportedly brought on behalf of stockholders who purchased the Company’s common stock between May 16, 2012 and May 1, 2013 (the “Class”).

In December 2017, upon entering into the MOU, the Company’s liability related to this settlement became estimable and probable. Accordingly, the Company recorded an estimated $17.1 million contingent liability, including $15.0 million for the cash portion of the settlement with a corresponding insurance recovery for the 100% portion to be paid directly by certain of the Company’s insurance carriers, and an approximate $2.1 million estimate for the fair value on December 31, 2017 of 2.0 million warrants to purchase shares of its common stock that the Company agreed to issue the Class (the “Settlement Warrants”), with a corresponding non-cash charge to the Statement of Operations as a component of operating expense. The Settlement Warrants are exercisable for a one-year period from their date of issue at an exercise price equal to the closing price on December 22, 2017, the trading day prior to the execution of the MOU, which was $3.00 per share.

12

.  

The settlement was subject to the execution of a definitive settlement agreement, notice to the Class, and final approval of the District Court and became effective on the date (the “Effective Date”) on which all of the following conditions occurred: (a) a final judgment containing the requisite release of claims had been entered by the District Court; (b) no appeal was pending with respect to the final judgment; (c) the final judgment had not been reversed, modified, vacated or amended; (d) the time to file any appeal from the final judgment had expired without the filing of an appeal or an order dismissing the appeal or affirming the final judgment had been entered, and any time to file a further appeal (including a writ of certiorari or for reconsideration of the appeal) had expired; and (e) the MOU and any settlement agreement with respect to the claims released in the final judgment had not expired or been terminated.

In January 2018, the Company entered into a definitive stipulation of settlement agreement (the “Stipulation”).  In February 2018, the District Court preliminarily approved the Stipulation, following which the insurance carriers funded the settlement escrow account related to the $15.0 million cash portion of the settlement.  On May 30, 2018, the District Court approved the Stipulation in its order of final approval and final judgment (the “Final Judgment”). Upon the conclusion of a 30-day appeal period, the Effective Date was deemed to be June 29, 2018. Pursuant to the Final Judgment, all claims against the Company were released upon the Effective Date. In addition, pursuant to the Stipulation, the Company has no interest in the settlement escrow account subsequent to the Effective Date. Accordingly, the $15.0 million contingent liability associated with the cash portion of the settlement and the corresponding insurance recovery were eliminated on the Effective Date. The Company had agreed to use its best efforts to issue and deliver the Settlement Warrants within ten business days following the Effective Date.  On July 16, 2018, the Company issued and delivered the Settlement Warrants in accordance with the Stipulation. Refer to Note 9, “Legal Proceedings” for further discussion of the Class Action settlement.

The estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes pricing model. The estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants was subject to revaluation at each balance sheet date and any changes in fair value were recorded as a non-cash gain or (loss) in the Statement of Operations as a component of operating expenses until the Settlement Warrants were issued. In addition, the fair value of the Settlement Warrants on June 30, 2018 was determined based on the estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants at the time of issuance. The Company recorded non-cash gains of approximately $0.7 million in each of the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018, respectively, in its Statement of Operations attributable to the decrease in the fair value of the Settlement Warrants that principally resulted from a lower volatility rate relative to prior periods.

The key assumptions used to estimate the fair value the Settlement Warrants were as follows:

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less at the date of purchase and an investment in a U.S. government money market fund to be cash equivalents. Changes in the balance of cash and cash equivalents may be affected by changes in investment portfolio maturities, as well as actual cash disbursements to fund operations.

The Company’s cash is deposited in highly-rated financial institutions in the United States. The Company invests in U.S. government money market funds, high-grade, short-term commercial paper, corporate bonds and other U.S. government agency securities, which management believes are subject to minimal credit and market risk. The carrying values of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents approximate fair value due to their short-term maturities.

The Company does not have any restricted cash balances.

Marketable Securities

Marketable securities consist primarily of investments which have expected average maturity dates in excess of three months, but not longer than 24 months. The Company invests in high-grade corporate obligations, including commercial paper, and  

13

U. S. government and government agency obligations that are classified as available-for-sale. Since these securities are available to fund current operations they are classified as current assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

Marketable securities are stated at fair value, including accrued interest, with their unrealized gains and losses included as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income or loss, which is a separate component of stockholders’ equity. The fair value of these securities is based on quoted prices and observable inputs on a recurring basis. The cost of marketable securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity, with such amortization and accretion recorded as a component of interest expense, net. Realized gains and losses are determined on the specific identification method. Unrealized gains and losses are included in other comprehensive loss until realized, at which point they would be recorded as a component of interest expense, net.

Below is a summary of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities at June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017 (in thousands):

Concentrations of Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to credit risk primarily consist of cash and cash equivalents, marketable securities and accounts receivable. The Company maintains deposits in highly-rated, federally-insured financial institutions in excess of federally insured limits. The Company’s investment strategy is focused on capital preservation. The Company invests in instruments that meet the high credit quality standards outlined in the Company’s investment policy. This policy also limits the amount of credit exposure to any one issue or type of instrument.

The Company’s accounts receivable primarily consists of amounts due to the Company from licensees and collaborators. The Company has not experienced any material losses related to accounts receivable from individual licensees or collaborators.

Fair Value Measurements

The fair value of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities reflects the Company’s estimate of amounts that it would have received in connection with the sale of the assets or paid in connection with the transfer of the liabilities in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In connection with measuring the fair value of its assets and liabilities, the Company seeks to maximize the use of observable inputs (market data obtained from sources independent from the Company) and to minimize the use of unobservable inputs (the Company’s assumptions about how market participants would price assets and liabilities). The following fair value hierarchy is used to classify assets and liabilities based on the observable inputs and unobservable inputs used in order to value the assets and liabilities:

14

Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company measures the fair value of its marketable securities by taking into consideration valuations obtained from third-party pricing sources. The pricing services utilize industry standard valuation models, including both income and market-based approaches, for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly, to estimate fair value. These inputs include reported trades of and broker-dealer quotes on the same or similar securities, issuer credit spreads, benchmark securities and other observable inputs.

As of June 30, 2018, the Company’s financial assets valued based on Level 1 inputs consisted of cash and cash equivalents in a U.S. government money market fund and its financial assets valued based on Level 2 inputs consisted of high-grade corporate debt securities, including commercial paper. During the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018, the Company did not have any transfers of financial assets between Levels 1 and 2.

As of June 30, 2018, the Company’s financial liabilities that were recorded at fair value consisted of warrant liabilities, including the PIPE Warrant liability and estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants.

The fair value of the Company’s loans payable at June 30, 2018 approximates its carrying value, computed pursuant to a discounted cash flow technique using a market interest rate and is considered a Level 3 fair value measurement. The effective interest rate, which reflects the current market rate, considers the fair value of the warrants issued in connection with the loan, loan issuance costs and the deferred financing charge.

The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017 (in thousands):

15

Basic and Diluted Net Income (Loss) per Common Share

Basic net income (loss) per share attributable to AVEO common stockholders is based on the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income (loss) per share attributable to AVEO common stockholders is based on the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period plus additional weighted-average common equivalent shares outstanding during the period when the effect is dilutive. Common equivalent shares include the incremental common shares issuable upon the exercise of the PIPE Warrants, as determined using the treasury stock method, and exclude the incremental common shares issuable upon the exercise of the Settlement Warrants as these warrants were not outstanding as of June 30, 2018. For the three months and six months ended June 30, 2017 diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net loss per share as the inclusion of common stock issuable upon the exercise of the PIPE Warrants and other common equivalent shares, such as stock options, would be anti-dilutive.

The following table summarizes the computation of basic and diluted net income (loss) per share for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively (in thousands except per share amounts):

The following table summarizes outstanding securities not included in the computation of diluted net loss per common share as the effect would have been anti-dilutive for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively (in thousands):

Stock-Based Compensation

Under the Company’s stock-based compensation programs, the Company periodically grants stock options and restricted stock to employees, directors and nonemployee consultants. The Company also issues shares under an employee stock purchase plan. The fair value of all awards is recognized in the Company’s statements of operations over the requisite service period for each award.

Awards that vest as the recipient provides service are expensed on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period. Other awards, such as performance-based awards that vest upon the achievement of specified goals, are expensed using the accelerated attribution method if achievement of the specified goals is considered probable. The Company has also granted awards that vest upon the achievement of market conditions. Per ASC 718 Share-Based Payments, market conditions must be considered in determining the estimated grant-date fair value of share-based payments and the market conditions must be considered in determining

16

the requisite service period over which compensation cost is recognized. The Company estimates the fair value of the awards with market conditions using a Monte Carlo simulation, which utilizes several assumptions including the risk-free interest rate, the volatility of the Company’s stock and the exercise behavior of award recipients. The grant-date fair value of the awards is then recognized over the requisite service period, which represents the derived service period for the awards as determined by the Monte Carlo simulation.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value its stock option awards without market conditions, which require the Company to make certain assumptions regarding the expected volatility of its common stock price, the expected term of the option grants, the risk-free interest rate and the dividend yield with respect to its common stock. The Company calculates volatility using its historical stock price data. Due to the lack of the Company’s own historical data, the Company elected to use the “simplified” method for “plain vanilla” options to estimate the expected term of the Company’s stock option grants. Under this approach, the weighted-average expected life is presumed to be the average of the vesting term and the contractual term of the option. The risk-free interest rate used for each grant is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant for instruments with a similar expected life. The Company utilizes a dividend yield of zero based on the fact that the Company has never paid cash dividends and has no present intention to pay cash dividends.

The fair value of equity-classified awards to employees and directors are measured at fair value on the date the awards are granted. Awards to nonemployee consultants are recorded at their fair values and are re-measured as of each balance sheet date until the recipient’s services are complete. During the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, the Company recorded the following stock-based compensation expense (in thousands):

Stock-based compensation expense is allocated to research and development and general and administrative expense based upon the department of the employee to whom each award was granted. No related tax benefits of the stock-based compensation expense have been recognized.

Income Taxes

The Company provides for income taxes using the asset-liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on differences between financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. The Company calculates its provision for income taxes on ordinary income based on its projected annual tax rate for the year. Uncertain tax positions are recognized if the position is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon examination by a tax authority. Unrecognized tax benefits represent tax positions for which reserves have been established. As of June 30, 2018, the Company is forecasting a net loss for the year ended December 31, 2018 and an effective tax rate of 0%. The Company maintains a full valuation allowance on all deferred tax assets.

On December 22, 2017, the SEC staff issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118, Income Tax Accounting Implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“SAB 118”), which allows the recording of provisional amounts during a measurement period not to extend beyond one year of the enactment date.  In accordance with SAB 118, the Company determined a provisional amount for the impact on its prior year deferred tax assets and valuation allowance in its prior year financial statements. The Company has not updated the provisional amounts and expects to complete the final assessment of the impact within the measurement period.

Segment and Geographic Information

Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise engaging in business activities for which discrete financial information is available and regularly reviewed by the chief operating decision maker in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. The Company views its operations and manages its business in one operating segment principally in the United States. As of June 30, 2018, the Company has no net assets located outside of the United States.

17

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Significant items subject to such estimates and assumptions include revenue recognition, contract research accruals, measurement of the PIPE Warrant liability, estimated settlement liabilities and measurement of stock-based compensation. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. Material changes in these estimates could occur in the future. Changes in estimates are recorded in the period in which they become known. Actual results could differ from those estimates if past experience or other assumptions do not turn out to be substantially accurate.

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2014-09, which amends the guidance for accounting for revenue from contracts with customers. This ASU supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in ASC 605 and creates ASC 606. In 2015 and 2016, the FASB issued additional ASUs related to ASC 606 that delayed the effective date of the guidance for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and clarified various aspects of the new revenue guidance. ASC Topic 606 also impacts certain other areas, such as the accounting for costs to obtain or fulfill a contract, and requires disclosure of the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers.

On January 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASC 606 using the modified retrospective method and applied the new guidance to the most current period presented with the cumulative effect of changes reflected in the opening balance of accumulated deficit. The Company conducted an analysis with respect to its active revenue arrangements, including those with EUSA, CANbridge and Novartis.

The adoption of ASC 606 resulted in an approximate $2.7 million increase in each of deferred revenue and the accumulated deficit at the transition date. The transition adjustment related solely to the Company’s revenue arrangement with EUSA. The transition adjustment resulted from a change to the Company’s accounting policy with respect to the recognition of milestone payments as a result of adopting ASC 606. Prior to the adoption of ASC 606, the Company generally recognized milestone payments in their entirety as revenue in the period the payment was earned. However, under ASC 606, milestone payments are considered to be a form of variable consideration that, upon inclusion in the transaction price, is recognized when (or as) the remaining performance obligation(s) are satisfied. Because the Company’s performance obligation under the EUSA Agreement was only partially satisfied at January 1, 2018, a milestone payment received under that arrangement prior to the January 1, 2018 transition date has not been fully recognized as revenue as under ASC 606 as of the transition date.

As a result of adopting ASC 606, the Company established a deferred revenue deferred tax asset, in the amount of $0.7 million, and a corresponding offsetting valuation allowance, such that there was not tax impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements as a result of adopting ASC 606.

There was no impact from adopting ASC 606 to the Company’s revenue arrangements with CANbridge and Novartis as (i) the Company did not have any unsatisfied performance obligations under the CANbridge Agreement and the Company’s license agreement with Novartis (the “Novartis Agreement”) upon the adoption of ASC 606 and (ii) the transaction price under ASC 606 as of the transition date was the same as the arrangement consideration under ASC Topic 605.

Financial results for reporting periods beginning after January 1, 2018, are presented under ASC 606, while prior period amounts are not adjusted and continue to be reported in accordance with the Company’s historical accounting under ASC 605.

The following table summarizes the cumulative effect of the adoption of ASC 606 to the Company’s contracts with customers that were not completed as of the January 1, 2018 transition date (in thousands):

18

The following tables summarize the impact of the adoption of ASC 606 to the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements at June 30, 2018 and for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 as follows (in thousands, except per share figures):

Refer to Note 3 “Significant Accounting Policies – Revenue Recognition” and Note 4 “Collaborations and License Agreements” for further details.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. The new standard clarifies certain aspects of the statement of cash flows, including the classification of debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs, settlement of zero-coupon debt instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the borrowing, contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims, proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, distributions received from equity method investees and beneficial interests in securitization transactions. The new standard also clarifies that an entity should determine each separately identifiable source or use within the cash receipts and cash payments on the basis of the nature of the underlying cash flows. In situations in which cash receipts and payments have aspects of more than one class of cash flows and cannot be separated by source or use, the appropriate classification should depend on the activity that is likely to be the predominant source or use of cash flows for the item. The Company adopted the new standard upon the required effective date of January 1, 2018. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows.

19

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting, which clarifies when to account for a change to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award as a modification. The new standard does not change the accounting for modifications but clarifies that modification accounting guidance should only be applied if the fair value, vesting conditions, or classification of the award changes as a result of the change in terms or conditions. The new standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within, beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company adopted the new standard effective January 1, 2018. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows.

Pending Accounting Pronouncements

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which requires lessees to recognize a right-of-use asset and lease liability for most lease arrangements. The new standard is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the potential changes from this ASU.

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting, which simplifies the accounting for share-based payments to nonemployees by aligning it with the accounting for share-based payments to employees, with certain exceptions. The new standard is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the potential changes from this ASU.

(4) Collaborations and License Agreements

Out-License Agreements

CANbridge

On March 16, 2016, the Company entered into the CANbridge Agreement. Under the terms of the CANbridge Agreement, the Company granted CANbridge the exclusive right to develop, manufacture and commercialize AV-203, the Company’s proprietary ErbB3 (HER3) inhibitory antibody, for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease in all countries outside of North America (the “CANbridge Licensed Territory”). In addition, CANbridge has the right of first refusal if the Company determines to out-license any North American rights. The parties have both agreed not to develop or commercialize any ErbB3 inhibitory antibody other than AV-203 during the term of the CANbridge Agreement.

Pursuant to the CANbridge Agreement, CANbridge made an upfront payment to the Company of $1.0 million in April 2016, net of $0.1 million of foreign withholding taxes. CANbridge also reimbursed the Company for $1.0 million of certain AV-203 manufacturing costs incurred by the Company prior to entering into the CANbridge Agreement. CANbridge paid this manufacturing reimbursement in two installments of $0.5 million each, one in March 2017 and one in September 2017, net of foreign withholding taxes. In December 2017, CANbridge filed an IND application with the China Food and Drug Administration for a clinical study of AV-203 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The Company is entitled to receive a $2.0 million development and regulatory milestone payment upon the receipt of the regulatory approval of this IND application. The Company is also eligible to receive up to $40.0 million in potential additional development and regulatory milestone payments and up to $90.0 million in potential commercial milestone payments based on annual net sales of licensed products. Upon commercialization, the Company is eligible to receive a tiered royalty, with a percentage range in the low double-digits, on net sales of approved licensed products. CANbridge’s obligation to pay royalties for each licensed product expires on a country-by-country basis on the later of the expiration of patent rights covering such licensed product in such country, the expiration of regulatory data exclusivity in such country and ten years after the first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country. No development and regulatory milestone payments have been earned as of June 30, 2018.

CANbridge is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize AV-203 in each of China, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, and Germany. CANbridge has responsibility for all activities and costs associated with the further development, manufacture and commercialization of AV-203 in the CANbridge Licensed Territory, including the clinical development of AV-203 through phase 2 proof-of-concept in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, after which the Company may elect to contribute to certain worldwide development efforts.

A percentage of any milestone and royalty payments received by the Company pursuant to the CANbridge Agreement, excluding upfront and reimbursement payments, are due to Biogen Idec International GmbH (“Biogen”) as a sublicensing fee under the option and license agreement between the Company and Biogen dated March 18, 2009, as amended.

Accounting Analysis Under ASC 606

20

The Company evaluated the CANbridge Agreement under ASC 606. Based on this evaluation, the Company identified the following promised goods and services at the inception of the CANbridge Agreement: the Company’s grant of an exclusive license to develop and commercialize AV-203 in the CANbridge Licensed Territory, including all technical knowledge and data useful in the development and manufacture of AV-203. The Company determined that the license and know-how represented functional intellectual property. The Company concluded its promise to participate on a joint steering committee was immaterial in the context of the contract based on consideration of qualitative and quantitative factors. In making this evaluation the Company considered the specific personnel and time commitment that would be required to provide the joint steering committee services, concluding that the time commitment would be insignificant. Accordingly, the Company determined the CANbridge Agreement contained a single performance obligation related to the exclusive license to develop and commercialized AV-203 that was satisfied at the inception of the arrangement.

The Company determined that the $1.0 million in upfront consideration received upon the execution of the CANbridge Agreement in March 2016 and the $1.0 million reimbursement received in the year ended December 31, 2017 for certain manufacturing costs incurred by the Company prior to the Effective Date constituted the amount of the consideration to be included in the transaction price upon the adoption of ASC 606 on January 1, 2018 and attributed these amounts to the Company’s single performance obligation. Because the Company satisfied the single performance obligation at the inception of the contract and had no remaining performance obligations, each of these amounts were recognized upon receipt. None of the development and regulatory milestones have been included in the transaction price, as these milestone amounts are fully constrained. As part of its evaluation of the constraint, the Company considered multiple factors: (i) regulatory approvals are outside of the control of CANbridge, (ii) certain development and regulatory milestones are contingent upon the success of future clinical trials, if any, which is out of the control of CANbridge, and (iii) efforts by CANbridge. Any consideration related to development and regulatory milestones will be recognized when the corresponding milestones are no longer constrained as the Company does not have any ongoing performance obligations. Any consideration related to sales-based milestones (including royalties) will be recognized when the related sales occur as these amounts have been determined to relate predominantly to the license granted to CANbridge and therefore are recognized at the later of when the performance obligation is satisfied or the related sales occur. The Company will re-evaluate the transaction price, including its estimated variable consideration for milestones included in the transaction price and all constrained amounts, in each reporting period and as uncertain events are resolved or other changes in circumstances occur.

Previously, under ASC 605, the Company recognized the $1.0 million in upfront consideration as collaboration and licensing revenue in the first quarter of 2016 upon delivery of the exclusive license, and recognized the two $0.5 million payments by CANbridge for the reimbursement of manufacturing development activities conducted by the Company prior to the Effective Date as collaboration and licensing revenue in each of March 2017 and September 2017, respectively, as the amounts were fixed, determinable and non-refundable, and the Company did not have any further performance obligations. Accordingly, as the timing and amount of revenue recognition for the payments received from CANbridge are the same under ASC 605 and ASC 606, there was no transition adjustment required as of January 1, 2018.

EUSA

In December 2015, the Company entered into the EUSA Agreement, under which the Company granted to EUSA the exclusive, sublicensable right to develop, manufacture and commercialize tivozanib in the territories of Europe (excluding Russia, Ukraine and the Commonwealth of Independent States), Latin America (excluding Mexico), Africa and Australasia (collectively, the “EUSA Licensed Territories”) for all diseases and conditions in humans, excluding non-oncologic diseases or conditions of the eye.

EUSA made research and development reimbursement payments to the Company of $2.5 million upon the execution of the EUSA Agreement during the year ended December 31, 2015 and $4.0 million in September 2017 upon its receipt of marketing approval from the EMA in August 2017 for tivozanib (FOTIVDA) for the treatment of aRCC.  In September 2017, EUSA elected to opt-in to co-develop the ongoing TiNivo trial. As a result of exercising its opt-in right, EUSA made an additional research and development reimbursement payment to the Company of $2.0 million. This $2.0 million payment was received in October 2017, in advance of the completion of the TiNivo trial, and represents EUSA’s approximate 50% share of the total estimated costs of the TiNivo trial. The Company is also eligible to receive an additional research and development reimbursement payment from EUSA of 50% of the total costs for the Company’s TIVO-3 phase 3 study in third-line RCC, up to $20.0 million, if EUSA elects to opt-in to that study.

The Company is entitled to receive milestone payments of $2.0 million per country upon reimbursement approval for RCC, if any, in each of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom, and an additional $2.0 million for the grant of marketing approval for RCC, if any, in three of the licensed countries outside of the European Union, as mutually agreed by the parties. In February 2018, EUSA obtained reimbursement approval from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (“NICE”) in the United Kingdom for the first-line treatment of aRCC. Accordingly, the Company earned a $2.0 million milestone payment that was received in March 2018. The Company is also eligible to receive a payment of $2.0 million per indication in

21

connection with a filing by EUSA with the EMA for marketing approval, if any, for tivozanib for the treatment of each of up to three additional indications and $5.0 million per indication in connection with the EMA’s grant of marketing approval for each of up to three additional indications, as well as potentially up to $335.0 million upon EUSA’s achievement of certain sales thresholds. The Company is also eligible to receive tiered double-digit royalties on net sales, if any, of licensed products in the EUSA Licensed Territories ranging from a low double digit up to mid-twenty percent depending on the level of annual net sales.

The research and development reimbursement payments under the EUSA Agreement are not subject to the 30% sublicensing payment payable to KHK, subject to certain limitations. The Company, however, would owe KHK 30% of other, non-research and development payments it may receive from EUSA pursuant to the EUSA Agreement, including reimbursement approvals for RCC in up to five specified European Union (“EU”) countries, marketing approvals for RCC in three specified non-EU licensed territories, EU marketing approval filings and corresponding marketing approvals by the EMA for up to three additional indications beyond RCC, and sales-based milestones and royalties, as set forth above. The $2.0 million milestone the Company earned in February 2018 upon EUSA’s reimbursement approval from the NICE in the UK in first-line aRCC was subject to the 30% KHK sub-license fee, or $0.6 million, which was paid in April 2018.

EUSA is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to seek regulatory approval for and commercialize tivozanib throughout the EUSA Licensed Territories in RCC. EUSA has responsibility for all activities and costs associated with the further development, manufacture, regulatory filings and commercialization of tivozanib in the EUSA Licensed Territories.

Accounting Analysis Under ASC 606

Pursuant to ASC Topic 606, the Company identified the following promised goods and services at the inception of the EUSA Agreement: (i) the Company’s grant of an exclusive license to develop and commercialize tivozanib in the EUSA Licensed Territories, including the Company’s obligation to transfer all technical knowledge and data useful in the development and manufacture of tivozanib; (ii) the Company’s obligation to cooperate with EUSA and support its efforts to file for marketing approval in the EUSA Licensed Territories and in its commercialization efforts, (iii) the Company’s obligation to provide access to certain regulatory information resulting from the Company’s ongoing development activities outside of the EUSA Licensed Territories and (iv) the Company’s participation in a joint steering committee. The Company determined that the license to develop and commercialize tivozanib in the EUSA Licensed Territories was not distinct from the other promised goods and services and has accordingly accounted for these items as a single performance obligation. In reaching this conclusion, the Company concluded the remaining promises were essential to EUSA’s use of the license.

The Company concluded at contract inception that EUSA’s opt-in rights with respect to the TiNivo trial and the TIVO-3 trial did not represent material rights because at contract inception the Company had not yet initiated either trial and the option price (representing approximately 50% of the costs of the respective trial) was proportional to the value attributed to the EUSA Licensed Territories relative to the territorial rights retained by AVEO. Accordingly, the Company accounts for each opt-in as a separate arrangement when such opt-ins occur.

The Company evaluated the promised goods and services at the inception of the EUSA Agreement under ASC 606. Based on this evaluation, the Company determined that $6.5 million in research and development payments by EUSA, including the $2.5 million upfront consideration received upon the execution of the EUSA Agreement in December 2015 and the $4.0 million payment upon the receipt of marketing approval from the EMA for tivozanib (FOTIVDA) for the treatment of aRCC in August 2017, constituted the amount of the consideration that was included in the transaction price upon the adoption of ASC 606 on January 1, 2018 and attributed this amount to the Company’s single performance obligation. None of the remaining regulatory-related milestones have been included in the transaction price as these milestone amounts are fully constrained. As part of its evaluation of the constraint, the Company considered multiple factors: (i) the remaining reimbursement and marketing approvals in RCC are outside of the control of EUSA and vary on a country-by-country basis, (ii) milestones related to the submission filings for EMA approval of tivozanib in up to three additional indications are contingent upon the success of future clinical trials in additional indications, if any, and are outside of the control of EUSA, (iii) milestones related to the marketing approval by the EMA for tivozanib in up to three additional indications are contingent upon the success of the corresponding future clinical trials, if any, and are outside of the control of EUSA, and (iv) efforts by EUSA. Any consideration related to sales-based milestones (including royalties) will be recognized when the related sales occur as these amounts have been determined to relate predominantly to the license granted to EUSA and therefore are recognized at the later of when the performance obligation is satisfied (or partially satisfied) or the related sales occur. The Company will re-evaluate the transaction price, including its estimated variable consideration for milestones included in the transaction price and all constrained amounts, in each reporting period and as uncertain events are resolved or other changes in circumstances occur.

Under ASC 606, the upfront consideration and regulatory milestones included in the transaction price are being recognized as collaboration and licensing revenue over the Company’s performance period from contract execution in December 2015 through the remaining patent life of tivozanib in April 2022. Under ASC 606, upon the achievement of a regulatory milestone, the amount that represents the cumulative catch-up for the period from contract execution in December 2015 through the date of the

22

milestone achievement is recognized as collaboration and licensing revenue, with the balance classified as deferred revenue and recognized as collaboration and licensing revenue over the remainder of the performance period through April 2022.

Previously, under ASC 605, the $2.5 million in upfront consideration was being recognized over the Company’s performance period from contract execution in December 2015 through the remaining patent life of tivozanib in April 2022 and, accordingly, did not represent a change under ASC 606.

Previously, under ASC 605, the Company recognized regulatory milestones when they were achieved. The $4.0 million research and development reimbursement payment upon marketing approval by the EMA in aRCC in August 2017 was recognized as revenue in the third quarter of 2017 in accordance with ASC 605-28, Revenue Recognition—Milestone Method, as the underlying milestone was considered to be substantive and, accordingly, did represent a change under ASC 606. The impact of the adoption of ASC 606 on January 1, 2018 resulted in increases of approximately $2.7 million in each of deferred revenue and the accumulated deficit. This amount represents the $4.0 million gross amount of the research and development reimbursement payment for marketing approval by the EMA in aRCC, less the approximate $1.3 million that otherwise would have been recognized as collaboration and licensing revenue related to the cumulative catch-up for the period from contract execution in December 2015 through December 31, 2017, just prior to the adoption of ASC 606.

In November 2017, the Company began earning sales royalties upon EUSA’s commencement of the first commercial launch of tivozanib (FOTIVDA) with the initiation of product sales in Germany. The commercial launch expanded to the UK following the reimbursement approval by the NICE in February 2018, to Austria in April 2018 and to Scotland in July 2018. The Company recognized approximately $97,000 and $143,000 in revenue for sales royalties in the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018, respectively.

In the first quarter of 2018, the Company increased the transaction price to $8.5 million to include the $2.0 million milestone for reimbursement approval from the NICE in the UK in first-line aRCC that was achieved in February 2018. Accordingly, the Company recognized approximately $0.7 million in collaboration and licensing revenue for the cumulative catch-up for the period from contract execution in December 2015 through the milestone achievement in February 2018, with the approximate $1.3 million balance classified as deferred revenue that is being recognized as collaboration and licensing revenue over the remainder of the performance period through April 2022. The Company recognized approximately $0.4 million and $0.1 million, respectively, in total revenues under the EUSA Agreement in the three months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively, and approximately $1.5 million and $0.2 million in the six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively. As of June 30, 2018, there was approximately $5.1 million in total deferred revenue that will continue to be recognized as collaboration and licensing revenue, in the approximate amount of $0.3 million per quarter, over the duration of the Company’s performance period through April 2022.

The following table summarizes the revenues earned in connection with the EUSA Agreement under ASC 606 for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2018 (in thousands):

The following table summarizes changes in the Company’s accounts receivable and contract liabilities (deferred revenue) in connection with the EUSA Agreement for the six months ended June 30, 2018 (in thousands):

23

Opt-In to the TiNivo Trial

In September 2017, EUSA elected to opt-in to co-develop the TiNivo trial. As previously described, the Company accounts for each opt-in as a separate arrangement. As a result of EUSA’s exercise of its opt-in right, it became an active participant in the ongoing conduct of the TiNivo trial and is able to utilize the resulting data from the TiNivo trial for regulatory and commercial purposes in the EUSA Licensed Territories. Upon the exercise of its opt-in right, EUSA became responsible for funding 50% of the total estimated costs of the TiNivo trial, up to $2.0 million. The Company is accounting for the joint development activities relative to the TiNivo trial as a joint risk-sharing collaboration in accordance with ASC 808 because EUSA is an active participant in the ongoing TiNivo trial and is exposed to significant risk and rewards in connection with the activity. Payments from EUSA with respect to its share of TiNivo trial development costs incurred by the Company pursuant to a joint development plan are recorded as a reduction in research and development expenses due to the joint risk-sharing nature of the activities that is not representative of a vendor-customer relationship. The Company recognized reductions in research and development expenses of approximately $0.2 million and $0 in the three months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively, and approximately $0.5 million and $0 in the six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had recognized approximately $1.3 million in cumulative total reductions in research and development expenses related to EUSA’s approximate 50% share of the cumulative study-to-date costs. EUSA paid the $2.0 million maximum amount of cost sharing per the EUSA Agreement in advance of the completion of the trial. The remaining $0.7 million in prepaid cost sharing was classified as deferred research and development reimbursements as of June 30, 2018 and will continue to be recognized as a reduction in research and development expenses as the related TiNivo trial costs are incurred over the duration of the trial.

Novartis

In August 2015, the Company entered into the Novartis Agreement under which the Company granted to Novartis the exclusive right to develop and commercialize AV-380 and the Company’s related antibodies worldwide. The Company also granted Novartis an option to purchase the Company’s then-existing supply of AV-380 biological drug substance at an undiscounted price. Novartis was responsible under the Novartis Agreement for the development, manufacture and commercialization of the Company’s antibodies and any resulting approved therapeutic products.

On June 29, 2018, Novartis notified the Company that it is terminating the Novartis Agreement without cause effective on August 28, 2018. Pursuant to the Novartis Agreement, Novartis’ termination without cause triggers, among other things, the termination of all licenses and other rights granted by the Company to Novartis with regard to the AV-380 program, and the grant by Novartis to the Company of an irrevocable, exclusive, fully paid-up license, with a right to sub-license, to any patent rights or know-how controlled by Novartis as of the termination date related to the AV-380 program. Following termination, Novartis also has an obligation to transfer to the Company all preclinical, technical, manufacturing and other data developed by Novartis. The Company has the right to purchase the inventory of AV-380 biological drug substance from Novartis at a price equal to Novartis’ cost.

On June 28, 2018, the Company had separately provided Novartis with notice under the Novartis Agreement’s dispute resolution provisions of a dispute regarding Novartis’ compliance with its diligence obligations with respect to the development of the AV-380 program. If the parties are unable to resolve the dispute at the management level, an arbitration could be commenced. These dispute resolution procedures run in parallel to the termination process.

24

In connection with entry into the Novartis Agreement, Novartis made a non-refundable upfront payment to the Company of $15.0 million in September 2015. In December 2015, Novartis exercised an option to acquire the Company’s inventory of clinical quality, AV-380 biological drug substance and reimbursed the Company approximately $3.5 million for such existing inventory. In February 2017, Novartis agreed to pay the Company $1.8 million out of its future payment obligations, if any, to the Company under the Novartis Agreement. The funds were used to satisfy a $1.8 million time-based milestone obligation that the Company owed to St. Vincent’s Hospital Sydney Limited (“St. Vincent’s”) in March 2017. Novartis will reduce any subsequent payment obligations to the Company by $1.8 million. The Company had been eligible to receive milestone payments and royalties tied to the commencement of clinical trials, to regulatory approvals and to sales of such products upon commercialization. None of the milestones set forth in the Novartis Agreement had been achieved as of June 30, 2018.

Accounting Analysis Under ASC 606

The Company evaluated the Novartis Agreement under ASC 606. Based on this evaluation, the Company identified the following promised goods and services at the inception of the Novartis Agreement: the Company’s grant of an exclusive, worldwide license to develop and commercialize the Product, including all technical knowledge and data useful in the development and manufacture of the Product. The Company concluded the license and know-how were functional intellectual property. The Company concluded its promise to provide 90 days of transition assistance was immaterial in the context of the contract based on consideration of qualitative and quantitative factors. In making this evaluation the Company considered the specific personnel and time commitment that would be required to provide any transition services, concluding that the time commitment would be insignificant. The Company also concluded the option to purchase AV-380 drug substance did not represent a material right as the purchase price was undiscounted and thus did not represent a performance obligation but would instead be accounted for as a separate arrangement if and when the option was exercised. Accordingly, the Company determined at inception the agreement contained a single performance obligation related to the exclusive license to develop and commercialize AV-380 that was satisfied at the inception of the arrangement.

The Company determined that the $15.0 million in upfront consideration upon the execution of the Novartis Agreement in August 2015 and the $1.8 million payment in February 2017 constituted the amount of the consideration to be included in the transaction price upon the adoption of ASC 606 on January 1, 2018 and attributed these amounts to the Company’s single performance obligation. Because the Company satisfied the single performance obligation at the inception of the contract and had no remaining performance obligations, each of these amounts were recognized upon receipt. None of the clinical, development and regulatory milestones have been included in the transaction price as these milestone amounts were fully constrained.

The Company evaluated Novartis’ exercise of its option to purchase AV-380 drug substance in the fourth quarter of 2015 and identified a single performance obligation related to the delivery of AV-380 drug substance. The performance obligation was satisfied in connection with Novartis’ exercise of its option and thus the Company recognized the total transaction price of $3.5 million at the time the option was exercised.

Previously, under ASC 605, the Company recognized the $15.0 million in upfront consideration as collaboration and licensing revenue in the third quarter of 2015 and the $1.8 million payment in February 2017 as collaboration and licensing revenue in the first quarter of 2017 as these amounts were fixed, determinable and non-refundable, and there were no undelivered elements. Previously, under ASC 605, the Company recognized the $3.5 million purchase of the Company’s inventory of clinical quality, AV-380 biological drug substance as collaboration and licensing revenue in the fourth quarter of 2015 upon the satisfaction of its performance obligation to deliver the AV-380 drug substance. Accordingly, as the timing and amount of revenue recognition for the payments received from Novartis are the same under ASC 605 and ASC 606, there was no transition adjustment required as of January 1, 2018.

Biodesix

In April 2014, the Company entered into a worldwide co-development and collaboration agreement with Biodesix (the “Biodesix Agreement”) to develop and commercialize ficlatuzumab, the Company’s HGF inhibitory antibody. Under the Biodesix Agreement, the Company granted Biodesix perpetual, non-exclusive rights to certain intellectual property, including all clinical and biomarker data related to ficlatuzumab, to develop and commercialize VeriStrat^®, Biodesix’s proprietary companion diagnostic test. Biodesix granted the Company perpetual, non-exclusive rights to certain intellectual property, including diagnostic data related to VeriStrat, with respect to the development and commercialization of ficlatuzumab; each license includes the right to sublicense, subject to certain exceptions. Pursuant to a joint development plan, the Company retains primary responsibility for clinical development of ficlatuzumab. In September 2016, the Company and Biodesix announced the termination of a phase 2 proof-of-concept clinical study of ficlatuzumab in which VeriStrat^® was used to select clinical trial subjects (the “FOCAL” trial).

Under the Biodesix Agreement, with the exception of the costs incurred for the FOCAL trial, the Company and Biodesix are each required to contribute 50% of all clinical, regulatory, manufacturing and other costs to develop ficlatuzumab. Pursuant to the

25

Biodesix Agreement, Biodesix was obligated to provide up to $15 million for the FOCAL trial, following which all costs of the FOCAL trial would be shared equally. In connection with the discontinuation of the FOCAL trial on October 14, 2016, the Company and Biodesix amended the Biodesix Agreement. Under the amendment, the Company agreed to share 50% of the shutdown costs for the FOCAL trial after August 1, 2016. In return for bearing these shutdown costs, the Company will be entitled to recover an agreed multiple of the additional costs borne by the Company out of any income Biodesix receives from the partnership in connection with the licensing or commercialization of ficlatuzumab. Following such recovery, the payment structure under the original Biodesix Agreement, which generally provides that the parties share equally in any costs and revenue, will resume without such modification.

In addition, the Company and Biodesix are funding investigator-sponsored clinical trials, including ficlatuzumab in combination with ERBITUX^® (cetuximab) in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, ficlatuzumab in combination with Cytosar (cytarabine) in acute myeloid leukemia and ficlatuzumab in combination with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer.    

Pending marketing approval or the sublicense of ficlatuzumab, and subject to the negotiation of a commercialization agreement, each party would share equally in commercialization profits and losses, subject to the Company’s right to be the lead commercialization party.

Prior to the first commercial sale of ficlatuzumab, each party has the right to elect to discontinue participating in further development or commercialization efforts with respect to ficlatuzumab, which is referred to as an “Opt-Out”. If either AVEO or Biodesix elects to Opt-Out, with such party referred to as the “Opting-Out Party”, then the Opting-Out Party shall not be responsible for any future costs associated with developing and commercializing ficlatuzumab other than any ongoing clinical trials. If AVEO elects to Opt-Out, it will continue to make the existing supply of ficlatuzumab available to Biodesix for the purposes of enabling Biodesix to complete the development of ficlatuzumab, and Biodesix will have the right to commercialize ficlatuzumab. After election of an Opt-Out, the non-opting out party shall have sole decision-making authority with respect to further development and commercialization of ficlatuzumab. Additionally, the Opting-Out Party shall be entitled to receive, if ficlatuzumab is successfully developed and commercialized, a royalty equal to 10% of net sales of ficlatuzumab throughout the world, if any, subject to offsets under certain circumstances.

Prior to any Opt-Out, the parties shall share equally in any payments received from a third-party licensee; provided, however, after any Opt-Out, the Opting-Out Party shall be entitled to receive only a reduced portion of such third-party payments. The agreement will remain in effect until the expiration of all payment obligations between the parties related to development and commercialization of ficlatuzumab, unless earlier terminated.

The Company is accounting for the joint development activities under the Biodesix Agreement as a joint risk-sharing collaboration in accordance with ASC 808 because Biodesix is an active participant in the ongoing development of ficlatuzumab via its participation on a joint steering committee that oversees the development plans for ficlatuzumab and is exposed to significant risk and rewards in connection with the activity based on its obligation to share in the costs, as defined above. Payments from Biodesix with respect to its share of ficlatuzumab development costs incurred by the Company pursuant to a joint development plan are recorded as a reduction in research and development expenses due to the joint risk-sharing nature of the activities that is not representative of a vendor-customer relationship.

The Company records reimbursements from Biodesix for expenses related to these trials and drug manufacturing as a reduction in research and development expense during the period that reimbursable expenses are incurred. As a result of the cost sharing provisions in the Biodesix Agreement, the Company reduced research and development expenses by approximately $44 thousand and $(0.1) million during the three months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively, and by approximately $0.2 million in each of the six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The amount due to the Company from Biodesix pursuant to the cost-sharing provision was approximately $0.2 million as of June 30, 2018.

Astellas Pharma

In February 2011, the Company, together with its wholly-owned subsidiary AVEO Pharma Limited, entered into a collaboration and license agreement (the “Astellas Agreement”) with Astellas Pharma Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries (together, “Astellas”), pursuant to which the Company and Astellas intended to develop and commercialize tivozanib for the treatment of a broad range of cancers. Astellas elected to terminate the agreement effective on August 11, 2014, at which time the tivozanib rights were returned to the Company. In accordance with the Astellas Agreement, committed development costs, including the costs of completing certain tivozanib clinical development activities, continue to be shared equally.

The Company accounts for the joint development and commercialization activities in North America and Europe as a joint risk-sharing collaboration in accordance with ASC 808. Payments from Astellas with respect to Astellas’ share of tivozanib

26

development and commercialization costs incurred by the Company pursuant to the joint development plan, including the costs of completing certain tivozanib clinical development activities described in the preceding paragraph, were recorded as a reduction to research and development expense and general and administrative expense in the accompanying consolidated financial statements due to the joint risk-sharing nature of the activities in North America and Europe. As a result of cost-sharing provisions in the Astellas Agreement, the Company reduced research and development expenses by approximately $0.1 million and $0 during each of the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The net amount due to the Company from Astellas pursuant to the cost-sharing provisions was $0.4 million at June 30, 2018.

Biogen Idec International GmbH

In March 2009, the Company entered into an exclusive option and license agreement with Biogen regarding the development and commercialization of the Company’s discovery-stage ErbB3-targeted antibodies, AV-203, for the potential treatment and diagnosis of cancer and other diseases outside of North America (the “Biogen Agreement”). Under the Biogen Agreement, the Company was responsible for developing ErbB3 antibodies through completion of the first phase 2 clinical trial designed in a manner that, if successful, will generate data sufficient to support advancement to a phase 3 clinical trial.

In March 2014, the Company and Biogen amended the exclusive option and license agreement (the “Biogen Amendment”). Pursuant to the Biogen Amendment, Biogen agreed to the termination of its rights and obligations under the Biogen Agreement, including Biogen’s option to (i) obtain a co-exclusive (with AVEO) worldwide license to develop and manufacture ErbB3 targeted antibodies and (ii) obtain exclusive commercialization rights to ErbB3 products in countries in the world other than North America. As a result, AVEO has worldwide rights to AV-203. Pursuant to the Biogen Amendment, the Company was obligated to use reasonable efforts to seek a collaboration partner for the purpose of funding further development and commercialization of ErbB3 targeted antibodies. The Company is also obligated to pay Biogen a percentage of milestone payments received by AVEO from future partnerships after March 28, 2016 and single digit royalty payments on net sales related to the sale of ErbB3 products, if any, up to a cumulative maximum amount of $50.0 million

In March 2016, the Company entered into a collaboration and license agreement for AV-203 with CANbridge, which satisfied its obligation to seek a collaboration partner for the purpose of funding further development and commercialization of ErbB3 targeted antibodies. Refer to “—CANbridge” within this Note 4 for a further description of that arrangement.

In-License Agreements

St. Vincent’s

In July 2012, the Company entered into a license agreement with St. Vincent’s, under which the Company obtained an exclusive, worldwide sublicensable right to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize products for human therapeutic, preventative and palliative applications that benefit from inhibition or decreased expression or activity of GDF15, which is also referred to as MIC-1 (the “St. Vincent’s Agreement”). Under the St. Vincent’s Agreement, St. Vincent’s also granted the Company non-exclusive rights for certain related diagnostic products and research tools.

In order to sublicense certain necessary intellectual property rights to Novartis in August 2015, the Company amended and restated the St. Vincent’s Agreement and made an additional upfront payment to St. Vincent’s of $1.5 million. The Company is required to make milestone payments, up to an aggregate total of $16.7 million, upon the earlier of achievement of specified development and regulatory milestones or a specified date for the first indication, and upon the achievement of specified development and regulatory milestones for the second and third indications, for licensed therapeutic products, some of which payments may be increased by a mid to high double-digit percentage rate for milestones payments made after the Company grants any sublicense, depending on the sublicensed territory. In March 2017, as further described above under the heading “—Novartis,” the Company paid a $1.8 million time-based milestone obligation that it owed to St. Vincent’s and recognized $1.8 million in research and development expense. In January 2019, the Company will owe an additional $2.3 million time-based milestone obligation to St. Vincent’s. The Company will also be required to pay St. Vincent’s tiered royalty payments equal to a low-single-digit percentage of any net sales it or its sublicensees make from licensed therapeutic products. The royalty rate escalates within the low-single-digit range during each calendar year based on increasing licensed therapeutic product sales during such calendar year.

Kyowa Hakko Kirin (KHK)

In December 2006, the Company entered into a license agreement with KHK (“KHK Agreement”) under which it obtained an exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses subject to certain restrictions, to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize tivozanib, pharmaceutical compositions thereof and associated biomarkers in all potential indications. Its exclusive license covers all territories in the world except for Asia and the Middle East, where KHK has retained the rights to tivozanib. Under

27

the KHK Agreement, the Company obtained exclusive rights in its territory under certain KHK patents, patent applications and know-how related to tivozanib, to research, develop, make, have made, use, import, offer for sale, and sell tivozanib for the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of any and all human diseases and conditions. The Company and KHK each have access to and can benefit from the other party’s clinical data and regulatory filings with respect to tivozanib and biomarkers identified in the conduct of activities under the KHK Agreement.

Under the KHK Agreement, the Company is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize tivozanib in its territory. Prior to the first anniversary of the first post-marketing approval sale of tivozanib in its territory, neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries has the right to conduct certain clinical trials of, seek marketing approval for or commercialize any other cancer product that also works by inhibiting the activity of a VEGF receptor.

The Company has upfront, milestone and royalty payment obligations to KHK under the KHK Agreement. Upon entering into the KHK Agreement, the Company made an upfront payment in the amount of $5.0 million. In March 2010, the Company made a milestone payment to KHK in the amount of $10.0 million in connection with the dosing of the first patient in the Company’s first phase 3 clinical trial of tivozanib (TIVO-1). In December 2012, the Company made a $12.0 million milestone payment to KHK in connection with the acceptance by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) of the Company’s 2012 New Drug Application (“NDA”) filing for tivozanib. Each milestone under the KHK Agreement is a one-time only payment obligation, accordingly, the Company did not owe KHK another milestone payment in connection with the dosing of the first patient in the Company’s TIVO-3 trial, and would not owe a milestone payment to KHK if the Company files an NDA with the FDA following the completion of the TIVO-3 clinical trial. If the Company obtains approval for tivozanib in the United States., the Company would owe KHK a one-time milestone payment of $18.0 million, provided that the Company does not sublicense U.S. rights for tivozanib prior to obtaining a U.S. regulatory approval. If the Company were to sublicense the U.S. rights, the associated U.S. regulatory milestone would be replaced by a specified percentage of sublicensing revenue, as set forth below.

If the Company sublicenses any of its rights to tivozanib to a third party, as it has done with EUSA, the sublicense defines the payment obligations of the sublicensee, which may vary from the milestone and royalty payment obligations under the KHK Agreement relating to rights the Company retains. The Company is required to pay KHK a fixed 30% of amounts the Company receives from its sublicensees, including upfront license fees, milestone payments and royalties, but excluding amounts the Company receives in respect of research and development reimbursement payments or equity investments, subject to certain limitations. Certain research and development reimbursement payments by EUSA, including the $2.5 million upfront payment in December 2015, the $4.0 million payment in September 2017 upon the approval from the EMA of tivozanib (FOTIVDA) and the $2.0 million payment upon EUSA’s election in September 2017 to opt-in to co-develop the TiNivo trial were not subject to sublicense revenue payments to KHK. In addition, if EUSA elects to opt-in to the TIVO-3 trial, the additional research and development reimbursement payment from EUSA of 50% of the total trial costs, up to $20.0 million, would also not be subject to a sublicense revenue payment to KHK, subject to certain limitations. The Company would, however, owe KHK 30% of other, non-research and development payments the Company may receive from EUSA pursuant to the EUSA Agreement, including reimbursement approvals for RCC in up to five specified EU countries, marketing approvals for RCC in three specified non-EU licensed territories, EU marketing approval filings and corresponding marketing approvals by the EMA for up to three additional indications beyond RCC, and sales-based milestones and royalties. The $2.0 million milestone the Company earned in February 2018 upon EUSA’s reimbursement approval from the NICE in the UK in first-line aRCC was subject to the 30% KHK sub-license fee, or $0.6 million, which was paid in April 2018.

The Company is also required to pay tiered royalty payments on net sales it makes of tivozanib in its North American territory, which range from the low to mid-teens as a percentage of net sales. The royalty rate escalates within this range based on increasing tivozanib sales. The Company’s royalty payment obligations in a particular country in its territory begin on the date of the first commercial sale of tivozanib in that country, and end on the later of 12 years after the date of first commercial sale of tivozanib in that country or the date of the last to expire of the patents covering tivozanib that have been issued in that country.

The KHK Agreement will remain in effect until the expiration of all of the Company’s royalty and sublicense revenue obligations to KHK, determined on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, unless the Company elects to terminate the KHK Agreement earlier. If the Company fails to meet its obligations under the KHK Agreement and is unable to cure such failure within specified time periods, KHK can terminate the KHK Agreement, resulting in a loss of our rights to tivozanib and an obligation to assign or license to KHK any intellectual property or other rights the Company may have in tivozanib, including its regulatory filings, regulatory approvals, patents and trademarks for tivozanib.

(5) Other Accrued Liabilities

Other accrued expenses consisted of the following (in thousands):

28

(6) Loans Payable