CASSAVA SCIENCES INC - Annual Report: 2007 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2007

or

Commission File Number: 000-29959

Pain Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

2211 Bridgepointe Parkway

Suite 500

San Mateo, CA 94404

(650) 624-8200

(Address, including zip code, or registrant’s principal executive offices and

telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Common Stock, $0.001 par value

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(D) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

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  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2).    Yes  ¨    No  x

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates was $282,226,010 computed by reference to the last sales price of $8.71 as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market, as of the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, June 30, 2007.

The number of shares outstanding of the Registrant’s common stock on January 23, 2008 was 44,307,603.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant’s Proxy Statement for its 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Proxy Statement”), to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference to Part III of this Form 10-K Report.

Table of Contents

PAIN THERAPEUTICS, INC.

FORM 10-K

INDEX

Table of Contents

PART I

This document contains forward-looking statements that are based upon current expectations that are within the meaning of the Private Securities Reform Act of 1995. We intend that such statements be protected by the safe harbor created thereby. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties and our actual results and the timing of events may differ significantly from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Examples of such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to statements about:

Such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, those risks and uncertainties relating to:

1

Table of Contents

In addition, such statements are subject to the risks and uncertainties discussed in the “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this document.

Overview

We are a biopharmaceutical company that develops novel drugs. We have four drug candidates in clinical programs, including Remoxy, Oxytrex™, PTI-202 and a novel radio-labeled monoclonal antibody to treat metastatic melanoma. We are also working on a new treatment for patients with hemophilia. We were incorporated in Delaware in May 1998.

We and King are engaged in a strategic alliance to develop and commercialize Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers. King made an upfront cash payment of $150.0 million to us at the closing of this strategic alliance in December 2005 and paid us $5.0 million as a milestone payment in connection with the acceptance by the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, for PTI-202. We could also receive from King an additional $145.0 million in milestone payments in the course of clinical development of Remoxy, PTI-202 and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers under the strategic alliance. In addition, subject to certain limitations, King is obligated to fund development expenses incurred by us pursuant to the collaboration agreement. King is obligated to fund the commercialization expenses of, and has the exclusive right to market and sell, drugs developed in connection with the strategic alliance. King is obligated to pay us a 20% royalty on net sales of drugs developed in connection with the strategic alliance, except as to the first $1.0 billion in net sales of such drugs, for which the royalty is set at 15%.

Remoxy

Remoxy is being developed as an abuse-resistant long-acting oral oxycodone. Sales of controlled-release oxycodone were nearly $2.0 billion for the year ended August 2005.

In December 2007, we and King announced positive results of a Phase III study of Remoxy in patients with chronic pain. The study met the primary endpoint (p value was less than 0.01) that was prospectively defined by the FDA during a Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA, process. This pivotal Phase III randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial was designed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of twice-daily Remoxy versus placebo over a 12-week treatment period. The study randomized 412 male and female patients. All patients were diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip, as evidenced by X-ray and clinical criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Additionally, all patients had pain intensity scores corresponding to moderate-to-severe pain. Following informed consent, wash-out and dose titration, patients were randomized into a treatment period of 12 weeks. During treatment, patients received twice-daily Remoxy or matching placebo. The total drug dose per patient per day ranged from 10-80mg. Pain intensity scores were assessed on a pain scale. Concomitant pain medications or rescue medications were not allowed at any point during the 12-week treatment period.

In February 2006, we announced the completion of the SPA with the FDA. An SPA from the FDA specifies the Phase III trial objective, design, clinical endpoints and analyses needed to support a claim for efficacy. We expect to file an NDA for Remoxy with the FDA in the first half of 2008.

2

Table of Contents

The active drug ingredient in Remoxy is oxycodone. Oxycodone is a strong narcotic painkiller that was developed around 1920 as a substitute for morphine. When used as prescribed, oxycodone can relieve severe chronic pain. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, and the national media have linked illicit oxycodone use to widespread patterns of drug abuse, addiction, diversion and drug overdose. In the United States, drug related emergency room visits are reported by the Department of Health and Human Service’s Drug Abuse Warning Network, or DAWN. DAWN reports 22,000 oxycodone mentions in emergency room visits in 2002, a 450% increase from 4,000 oxycodone mentions in emergency room visits in 1994.

Remoxy is intended to meet the needs of physicians who appropriately prescribe opioid painkillers and who seek to minimize the risks of drug diversion, abuse or accidental patient misuse as well as the needs of pharmacists and the managed care healthcare system in the United States. Our clinical results to date demonstrate Remoxy is significantly less abusable than Oxycontin^®, a brand of controlled-release oxycodone. In a variety of clinical comparisons of the abuse-resistant characteristics of Remoxy and Oxycontin, Oxycontin released significantly more active ingredient than Remoxy during the time when abusers presumably expect to get high.

We expect to complete additional clinical trials or non-clinical studies of Remoxy in 2008, including additional abuse-resistance studies and other registration-enabling studies.

We believe the abuse-resistant technology used in Remoxy is applicable to different oral opioid painkillers. Pursuant to our agreement with King, we plan to develop abuse-resistant versions of additional opioid painkillers using this platform technology. We plan to formulate and scale-up a range of dosage forms of Remoxy.

PTI-202

In 2006, we conducted and announced positive data from a Phase I clinical trial program of a second abuse-resistant drug candidate, called PTI-202. The active ingredient in PTI-202 is an opioid whose identity has not been made public. This clinical trial was designed to investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic profile of a single, oral dose of PTI-202 in healthy volunteers. We believe results also indicate PTI-202 is safe and well-tolerated and its release profile appears well-suited to use with a chronic pain population. Like Remoxy, PTI-202 is intended to meet the needs of physicians who appropriately prescribe opioid painkillers and who seek to minimize the risks of drug diversion, abuse or accidental patient misuse. In connection with the acceptance by the FDA of the IND for PTI-202, King made a milestone payment to us of $5.0 million in August 2006.

Oxytrex

Oxytrex is an oral opioid painkiller with a novel mechanism of action. We have worldwide commercial rights to Oxytrex. Oxytrex is a proprietary combination of two active drug ingredients. The first component is the opioid agonist oxycodone. The second component is an ultra-low dose of the opioid antagonist naltrexone. Adding an antagonist to an agonist at usual clinical doses blocks the action of the agonist. This effect is clinically useful, for example, to reverse heroin overdose. At an ultra-low-dose, however, of an opioid antagonist can enhance pain relief and attenuate the development of tolerance or addiction. Oxytrex takes advantage of this effect by combining an opioid agonist with an ultra-low-dose of an opioid antagonist.

In late 2007, we initiated a clinical trial of Oxytrex in non-physically dependent patients with a history of drug abuse. The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate subjective effects of Oxytrex compared to oxycodone alone in individuals with a history of drug abuse. This type of trial is referred to as a ‘liking’ trial, because patients provide subjective information regarding preferences for one drug versus another drug. We expect to complete this trial in 2008.

In late 2006, we initiated a clinical trial of Oxytrex intended to enroll approximately 120 patients who have each been taking greater than or equal to 120 mg of oxycodone per day for over a year. The study’s primary endpoint is physical dependence/withdrawal scores in patients in the treatment arm compared to patients receiving placebo. The trial enrolled very few patients during 2007. Due to the difficulty of enrolling patients, we expect to cancel this study of Oxytrex in 2008.

3

Table of Contents

We rely on a limited number of third-party manufacturers to manufacture, fill, label, ship and store Oxytrex. We have had produced on our behalf additional clinical materials necessary to complete our planned clinical trials of Oxytrex.

Metastatic Melanoma

In November 2006, we announced a new antibody technology that we believe may enable clinicians to provide effective medical treatment for metastatic melanoma, a rare but deadly form of skin cancer.

Scientists at Albert Einstein College of Medicine developed novel radio-labeled monoclonal antibodies that target melanoma tumor sites and deliver a short burst of lethal radiation to melanoma tumors. We believe that the specificity of this treatment may be effective against tumors without harming normal tissue. The technology may also have therapeutic uses outside of oncology. We initiated a Phase I clinical study in Israel in metastatic melanoma in 2007. We expect to complete patient enrollment for this clinical study in 2008.

Hemophilia

In March 2007, we announced that we had licensed gene integration technology from Poetic Genetics, Inc., or Poetic. We are developing unique gene integration technology intended to cure hemophilia, which affects 400,000 people worldwide with average treatments ranging between $60,000 and $150,000 per patient/year. We expect to conduct pre-clinical studies with this technology in 2008.

Strategy

Our goal is to continue to develop novel drugs that are more effective or safer than drugs used in the clinic today. Our strategy includes the following elements:

Focus on Clinical Development Stage Products. We believe this focus will enable us to generate product revenues earlier than if we were focused on early-stage research and discovery activities.

Retain Significant Rights to Our Drugs. We currently retain worldwide commercialization rights to all of our technology and drug candidates in all markets and indications, except for Remoxy and certain other abuse-resistant drugs that are subject to our strategic alliance with King. In general, we intend to independently develop our drug candidates through late-stage clinical trials. In market segments that require large or specialized sales forces, we may seek sales and marketing alliances with third parties.

Outsource Key Functions. We intend to continue to outsource preclinical studies, clinical trials and formulation and manufacturing activities. We believe outsourcing permits significant time savings and allows for more efficient deployment of our resources.

Pursue In-licensing or Acquisition Opportunities. We intend to evaluate promising drug candidates or technologies to further expand our product pipeline. Our in-licensing strategy consists of evaluating clinical or preclinical stage opportunities in therapeutic areas that can benefit from our core expertise in drug development. Such in-licensing or acquisition opportunities may be in pain management or in other therapeutic areas outside of pain management. We believe this element of our corporate strategy could diversify some of the risks inherent in focusing on a single therapeutic area and could also increase our probability of commercial success.

We also conduct basic research in collaboration with academic and other partners. Company sponsored research and development expenditures were $32.9 million, $46.8 million and $47.7 million in 2005, 2006, and 2007 respectively. We recorded contract revenue of $1.4 million, $22.7 million and $42.7 million in 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively, related to customer-sponsored research activities under our collaboration with King.

4

Table of Contents

Our Intellectual Property

We seek to protect our technology by, among other methods, filing and prosecuting U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications with respect to our technology and products and their uses. The focus of our patent strategy is to secure and maintain intellectual property rights to technology for the following categories of our business:

We plan to prosecute and defend our patent applications, issued patents and proprietary information. Our competitive position and potential future revenues will depend in large part upon our ability to protect our intellectual property from challenges and to enforce our patent rights against potential infringements.

We and our collaborators have filed patent applications with the U.S. Patent Office to further protect our technologies. Certain patents are issued and a number of patent applications are pending. If issued, we believe these applications would protect certain of our technologies through at least 2020. If these patent applications do not result in issued patents, the duration or scope of our patent rights may be limited and our future revenues could be lower as a result.

If our competitors are able to successfully challenge the validity or scope of our patent rights, based on the existence of prior art or otherwise, they might be able to market products that contain features and clinical benefits similar to those of our drug candidates, and demand for our drug candidates could decline as a result.

We may be involved in additional challenges to our intellectual property. An adverse outcome of any challenges to our intellectual property could result in loss of claims of these patents that pertain to certain drugs we currently have under development and could have a material adverse impact on our future revenues.

Strategic Alliance with King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

We have a collaboration agreement and a license agreement with King to develop and commercialize Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers. King made an upfront cash payment of $150.0 million to us at the closing of this strategic alliance in December 2005. We have received a $5.0 million milestone payment to date from King. We could also receive from King up to $145.0 million in additional milestone payments in the course of clinical development of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers under the strategic alliance. In addition, subject to certain limitations, King is obligated to fund development expenses incurred by us pursuant to the collaboration agreement.

We formed a joint oversight committee, or JOC, with King to oversee drug development and commercialization strategies for the strategic alliance. Pursuant to the collaboration agreement in the strategic alliance, we retain sole control of drug development activities in the United States through Phase II clinical trials. We and King will jointly manage Phase III clinical trials and New Drug Applications, or NDA, submissions in

5

Table of Contents

the United States. King has responsibility for these development activities outside the United States. Upon regulatory approval, King will assume sole control and worldwide responsibility to exclusively commercialize Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid drugs developed pursuant to the strategic alliance. We retain all development and commercial rights in Australia and New Zealand.

Pursuant to the license agreement, King is obligated to fund the commercialization expenses of, and has the exclusive right to market and sell, drugs developed pursuant to the strategic alliance, and is obligated to pay us a 20% royalty on net sales, except as to the first $1.0 billion in cumulative net sales, for which the royalty is set at 15%. King is also obligated to reimburse us for our payment of third-party royalty obligations related to this strategic alliance.

The collaboration agreement continues until the later of the expiration of any patent rights licensed under the license agreement or developed under the collaboration agreement and the expiration of all periods of market exclusivity with respect to Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid drug candidates being developed under the strategic alliance. We and King can terminate the collaboration agreement under certain circumstances, including material breach and insolvency. King can terminate the collaboration agreement six months after the third anniversary of the effective date of the collaboration agreement, or sooner if the JOC determines that the development program under the collaboration agreement is unlikely to generate any marketable products. Our license agreement with King terminates at the time that the collaboration agreement terminates.

Formulation Agreement with Durect Corporation

We have an exclusive, worldwide licensing agreement with Durect Corporation, or Durect, to use a patented technology that forms the basis for a number of oral gel-cap drug candidates, including Remoxy. We have sub-licensed to King certain rights to develop and to commercialize Remoxy and certain other opioid drugs formulated in part with technology we licensed from Durect. Under the agreement with Durect, we control all of the preclinical, clinical, commercial manufacturing and sales/marketing activities for Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers. We reimburse Durect for formulation and related work, and will make milestone payments based on the achievement of certain technical, clinical or regulatory milestones. Durect will supply us with certain components of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers on a cost-plus basis. We also are obligated to pay Durect royalties on any related drug sales. In turn, King is obligated to reimburse us for costs we incur under the agreement with Durect, including royalties.

Under our license agreement with King, we are obligated not to amend or terminate our agreement with Durect if an amendment or termination would alter the rights or obligations of King under the collaboration agreement or license agreement.

License of Technology from Albert Einstein College of Medicine

We have licensed certain technology from Albert Einstein College of Medicine. We have a worldwide exclusive license to the technology and all intellectual property rights arising from the technology. Pursuant to the agreements for the licensed technology, we are required to pay Albert Einstein College of Medicine clinical milestone payments and royalties based on a percentage of net drug sales. If a product is combined with a drug or other substance for which we are paying an additional royalty, the royalty that we pay to Albert Einstein College of Medicine will be reduced by up to one-half of the amount of such additional royalty.

Albert Einstein College of Medicine originally received grants from the U.S. federal government to research some of the technology that we license. The terms of these grants provide the U.S. federal government with a non-exclusive, non-transferable paid-up license to practice inventions made with federal funds. Thus, our licenses are non-exclusive to the extent of the U.S. federal government’s license. If the U.S. federal government exercises its rights under this license, it could make use of the same technology that we license and the size of our potential market could thereby be reduced.

6

Table of Contents

License of Technology from Poetic Genetics, LLC

In March 2007, we announced that we licensed novel gene integration technology from Poetic. We have worldwide commercial rights and all intellectual rights arising from the technology in all indications in hemophilia and pain management. In connection with the license, we paid Poetic an undisclosed upfront fee and we are obliged to pay Poetic milestone payments of up to $4 million in the aggregate, based on clinical and regulatory progress, and a 4% royalty on net sales, or 6% if the first U.S. sale of a licensed product to treat hemophilia occurs before January 1, 2011.

Manufacturing

We do not own any manufacturing facilities. We rely on a limited number of third-party manufacturers to formulate, manufacture, fill, label, ship or store all of our drug candidates. We have entered into agreements with and rely upon qualified third parties for the formulation or manufacture of our clinical supplies. These supplies and the manufacturing facilities must comply with DEA regulations and current good manufacturing practices, or GMPs, enforced by the FDA and other government agencies. Remoxy uses bulk oxycodone supplied by Noramco, Inc. Remoxy and PTI-202 are formulated using, in part, proprietary technology licensed from Durect. We and King rely on Durect and other third-party manufacturers to formulate, manufacture, fill, label, ship or store Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates and their components. King is responsible for commercial manufacturing of Remoxy. We plan to continue to outsource formulation, manufacturing and related activities.

Government Regulation

Regulation by governmental authorities in the United States and other countries is a significant factor in the manufacture and marketing of pharmaceuticals and in our ongoing research and development activities. All of our products will require regulatory approval by governmental agencies prior to commercialization. In particular, human therapeutic products are subject to rigorous preclinical testing and clinical trials and other pre-marketing approval requirements by the FDA and regulatory authorities in other countries. In the United States, various federal, and in some cases state, statutes and regulations also govern or impact upon the manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage, record keeping and marketing of our products. The lengthy process of seeking required approvals and the continuing need for compliance with applicable statutes and regulations require us to spend substantial resources. Regulatory approval, when and if obtained, may be limited in scope which may significantly limit the indicated uses for which our products may be marketed. Further, approved drugs, as well as their manufacturers, are subject to ongoing review and discovery of previously unknown problems with such products that may result in restrictions on their manufacture, sale or use or in their withdrawal from the market.

Applicable FDA regulations require the filing of an NDA and approval by the FDA prior to commercialization of any of our drug candidates in the United States.

The Drug Approval Process

We will be required to complete several activities before we can market any of our drug candidates for human use in the United States, including:

7

Table of Contents

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety of the product. Preclinical safety tests must be conducted by laboratories that comply with FDA regulations regarding Good Laboratory Practice. We submitted the results of preclinical tests to the FDA as part of our INDs prior to commencing clinical trials. We may be required to conduct additional toxicology studies concurrently with the clinical trials.

Based on preclinical testing, an IND is filed with the FDA to begin human testing of the drug in the United States. The IND becomes effective if not rejected by the FDA within 30 days. The IND must indicate the results of previous experiments, how, where and by whom the new clinical trials will be conducted, the chemical structure of the compound, the method by which it is believed to work in the human body, any toxic effects of the compound found in the animal studies and how the compound is manufactured. All clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice. In addition, an Institutional Review Board, or IRB, generally comprised of physicians at the hospital or clinic where the proposed clinical trials will be conducted, must review and approve the IND. The IRB also continues to monitor the clinical trial. We must submit progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials to the FDA at least annually. In addition, the FDA may, at any time during the 30-day period or at any time thereafter, impose a clinical hold on proposed or ongoing clinical trials. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, clinical trials under the IND cannot commence or recommence without FDA authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA. An FDA imposed clinical hold on an IND application can result in substantial delay and large, unforeseen expenses, and it may cancel the viability of developing a new drug candidate in the United States.

Clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap. Phase I clinical trials typically study a drug’s safety profile, and may include the safe dosage range. Phase I clinical trials also determine how a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized and excreted by the body, and the duration of its action. In addition, we may, to the extent feasible, assess early indicators of a drug’s efficacy in our Phase I clinical trials. In Phase II clinical trials, controlled studies are conducted on volunteer patients with the targeted disease or condition. The primary purpose of these tests is to evaluate the effectiveness of the drug on the volunteer patients as well as to determine a drug’s side effect profile. These clinical trials may be conducted concurrently with Phase I clinical trials. In addition, Phase I/II clinical trials may be conducted to evaluate not only the efficacy of the drug on the patient population, but also its safety. During Phase III clinical trials, the drug is studied in an expanded patient population and in multiple sites. Physicians monitor the patients to determine efficacy and to observe and report adverse events that may result from use of the drug.

Our clinical trials are designed to produce clinical information about how our drugs perform compared to placebo or compared to existing opioid drugs where appropriate. We have designed most Phase II and Phase III clinical trials to date as randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging studies. A randomized clinical trial is one in which patients are randomly assigned to the various study treatment arms. A double-blind clinical trial is one in which the patient, the physician and our trial monitor are unaware if the patient is receiving placebo or study drug in order to preserve the integrity of the clinical trial and reduce bias. A placebo-controlled clinical trial is one in which a subset of patients is purposefully given inactive medication.

We may not successfully complete Phase I, Phase II or Phase III clinical trials within any specified time period, or at all, with respect to any of our drug candidates. Furthermore, we or the FDA may suspend clinical trials at any time in response to concerns that participants are exposed to an unacceptable health risk.

After the completion of clinical trials, if there is substantial evidence that the drug is safe and effective, an NDA is filed with the FDA. The NDA must contain all of the information on the drug gathered to that date, including data from the clinical trials. NDAs are often the equivalent of over 100,000 pages in length.

The FDA reviews all NDAs submitted before it accepts them for filing and may request additional information rather than accepting an NDA for filing. In such an event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information and, again, is subject to review before filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the NDA. Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the FDA has

8

Table of Contents

180 days in which to review the NDA and respond to the applicant. The review process is typically extended for significant amounts of time by the FDA’s requests for additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission. The FDA may refer the application to an appropriate advisory committee, typically a panel of clinicians, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee. If the FDA’s evaluations of the NDA and the manufacturing facilities are favorable, the FDA may issue either an approval letter, or an approvable letter which usually contains a number of conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA. When and if those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will issue an approval letter, authorizing commercial marketing of the drug for certain indications. If the FDA’s evaluation of the NDA submission or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA may refuse to approve the NDA or issue a not approvable letter.

If the FDA approves the NDA, the drug becomes available for physicians to prescribe. Periodic reports must be submitted to the FDA, including descriptions of any adverse reactions reported. The FDA may request additional post marketing studies, or Phase IV clinical trials, to evaluate long-term effects of the approved drug.

Other Regulatory Requirements

The FDA mandates that drugs be manufactured in conformity with current GMP. If the FDA approves any of our drug candidates we will be subject to requirements for labeling, advertising, record keeping and adverse experience reporting. Failure to comply with these requirements could result, among other things, in suspension of regulatory approval, recalls, injunctions or civil or criminal sanctions. We may also be subject to regulations under other federal, state, and local laws, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Environmental Protection Act, the Clean Air Act, national restrictions on technology transfer, and import, export, and customs regulations. In addition, any of our products that contain narcotics will be subject to DEA regulations relating to manufacturing, storage, distribution and physician prescribing procedures. It is possible that any portion of the regulatory framework under which we operate may change and that such change could have a negative impact on our current and anticipated operations.

The Controlled Substances Act imposes various registration, record-keeping and reporting requirements, procurement and manufacturing quotas, labeling and packaging requirements, security controls and a restriction on prescription refills on certain pharmaceutical products. A principal factor in determining the particular requirements, if any, applicable to a product is its actual or potential abuse profile. The DEA regulates chemical compounds as Schedule I, II, III, IV or V substances, with Schedule I substances considered to present the highest risk of substance abuse and Schedule V substances the lowest risk. Any of our drug candidates that contain a scheduled substance will be subject to regulation by the DEA.

Competition

Our success will depend, in part, upon our ability to achieve market share at the expense of existing and established and future products in the relevant target markets. Existing and future products, therapies, technological approaches or delivery systems will compete directly with our products. Competing products may provide greater therapeutic benefits for a specific indication, or may offer comparable performance at a lower cost. Companies that currently sell generic or proprietary opioid formulations include, but are not limited to, Roxane Laboratories, Purdue Pharma, Abbott Laboratories, Cephalon, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Elkins-Sinn, Watson Laboratories, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical and Forest Pharmaceuticals. Alternative technologies are being developed to increase opioid potency, as well as alternatives to opioid therapy for pain management, and improved treatments for metastatic melanoma and hemophilia, several of which are in clinical trials or are awaiting approval from the FDA.

We compete with fully integrated pharmaceutical companies, smaller companies that are collaborating with larger pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations. Many of these competitors have opioid drugs already approved by the FDA or in development and operate larger research and development programs in these fields than we do. In addition, many

9

Table of Contents

of these competitors, either alone or together with their collaborative partners, have substantially greater financial resources than we do, as well as significantly greater experience in:

Developments by competitors may render our drug candidates or technologies obsolete or non-competitive. We also compete with these companies for qualified personnel and opportunities for product acquisitions, joint ventures or other strategic alliances

Employees

As of December 31, 2007, we had 47 employees. We engage consultants from time to time to perform services on a per diem or hourly basis.

Available Information

We file electronically with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The public may read or copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that site is http://www.sec.gov.

You may obtain a free copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports on the day of filing with the SEC on our website on the World Wide Web at http://www.paintrials.com, by contacting the Investor Relations Department at our corporate offices by calling 650-624-8200 or by sending an e-mail message to cwaarich@paintrials.com.

Our future operating results may vary substantially from anticipated results due to a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. The following discussion highlights some of these factors and the possible impact of these factors on future results of operations. You should carefully consider these factors before making an investment decision. If any of the following factors actually occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be harmed. In that case, the price of our common stock could decline, and you could experience losses on your investment in our common stock.

Clinical and Regulatory Risks

If we are unable to design, conduct and complete clinical trials successfully, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates.

In order to obtain FDA approval for any of our drug candidates, we must submit to the FDA an NDA that demonstrates with substantive evidence that the drug candidate is both safe and effective in humans for its intended use. This demonstration requires significant research and animal tests, which are referred to as preclinical studies, as well as human tests, which are referred to as clinical trials.

10

Table of Contents

Results from our Phase I clinical programs may not support moving a drug candidate to Phase II or Phase III clinical trials. Our Phase III clinical trials may not demonstrate the safety or efficacy of our drug candidates. Success in preclinical studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful. Results of later clinical trials may not replicate the results of prior clinical trials and preclinical studies. Even if the results of our Phase III clinical trials are positive, we may have to commit substantial time and additional resources to conducting further preclinical studies and clinical trials before we can submit an NDA or obtain FDA approval for any of our drug candidates.

In December 2006, we and King announced positive results of a Phase III trial of Remoxy in patients with chronic pain. The study met the primary endpoint that was prospectively defined by the FDA during an SPA process. Under our SPA, we expect to use Remoxy Phase III data as part of a basis of approval with respect to efficacy. While we received the SPA for this Phase III clinical trial assessing Remoxy, there can be no assurance that we will ultimately receive approval for this drug candidate. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that other events will not occur that would allow the FDA to disregard our SPA.

Clinical trials are very expensive and difficult to design and implement, in part because they are subject to rigorous requirements. The clinical trial process also consumes a significant amount of time. Furthermore, if participating patients in clinical trials suffer drug-related adverse reactions during the course of such clinical trials, or if we or the FDA believe that participating patients are being exposed to unacceptable health risks, we will have to suspend or terminate our clinical trials. Failure can occur at any stage of the clinical trials, and we could encounter problems that cause us to abandon or repeat clinical trials.

Our clinical trials with Remoxy and Oxytrex measure clinical symptoms, such as pain and physical dependence. These symptoms are not biologically measurable. The success of Remoxy, our other abuse resistant drug candidates and Oxytrex in clinical trials depends on reaching statistically significant changes in patients’ symptoms based on clinician-rated scales. Due in part to a lack of consensus on standardized processes for assessing clinical outcomes, these scores may or may not be reliable, useful or acceptable to regulatory agencies.

We have no history of developing oncology or hemophilia drug candidates. We do not know whether any of our planned clinical trials in oncology or hemophilia will result in marketable drugs.

In addition, completion of clinical trials can be delayed by numerous factors, including:

Any of these delays could significantly impact the timing, approval and commercialization of our drug candidates and could significantly increase our overall costs of drug development.

Even if our clinical trials are completed as planned, their results may not support our expectations or intended marketing claims. The clinical trials process may fail to demonstrate that our drug candidates are safe and effective for indicated uses. Such failure would cause us to abandon a drug candidate and could delay development of other drug candidates.

If we fail to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals, or if such approval is limited, we will not be allowed to commercialize our drug candidates, and we will not generate product revenues.

Satisfaction of all regulatory requirements typically takes many years, is dependent upon the type, complexity and novelty of the drug candidate, and requires the expenditure of substantial resources for research and development. Our research and clinical approaches may not lead to drugs that the FDA considers safe for humans and effective for indicated uses we are studying. The FDA may require us to conduct additional clinical

11

Table of Contents

studies, in which case we would have to expend additional time and resources and would likely delay the date of potentially receiving regulatory approval. In particular, the FDA may require additional toxicology studies for certain excipients used in Remoxy or any of our other drug candidates. The approval process may also be delayed by changes in government regulation, future legislation or administrative action or changes in FDA policy that occur prior to or during our regulatory review. Delays in obtaining regulatory approvals would:

Even if we comply with all FDA regulatory requirements, we may never obtain regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates. If we fail to obtain regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates we will have fewer commercial products, if any, and corresponding lower product revenues, if any. Even if we receive regulatory approval of our drug candidates, such approval may involve limitations on the indications and conditions of use or marketing claims we may make for our products. Further, later discovery of previously unknown problems or adverse events could result in additional regulatory restrictions, including withdrawal of products. The FDA may also require us to commit to perform lengthy Phase IV post-approval clinical trials, for which we would have to expend additional resources, which could have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.

In jurisdictions outside the United States, we must receive marketing authorizations from the appropriate regulatory authorities before we can commercialize our drugs. Regulatory approval processes outside the United States generally include all of the aforementioned requirements and risks associated with FDA approval.

Clinical trial designs that were discussed with authorities prior to their commencement may subsequently be considered insufficient for approval at the time of application for regulatory approval.

We discuss with and obtain guidance from regulatory authorities on certain of our clinical development activities. With the exception of our SPA with the FDA for our Phase III clinical trial with Remoxy, these discussions are not binding obligations on the part of regulatory authorities.

Regulatory authorities may revise previous guidance or decide to ignore previous guidance at any time during the course of our clinical activities or after the completion of our clinical trials. Even with successful clinical safety and efficacy data, including such data from a clinical trial conducted pursuant to a SPA, we may be required to conduct additional, expensive clinical trials to obtain regulatory approval.

Developments by competitors may establish standards of care that affect our ability to conduct our clinical trials as planned.

We have conducted clinical trials of our drug candidates comparing our drug candidates to both placebo and other approved drugs. Changes in standards related to clinical trial design could affect our ability to design and conduct clinical trials as planned. For example, regulatory authorities may not allow us to compare our drug candidates to placebo in a particular clinical indication where approved products are available. In that case, both the cost and the amount of time required to conduct a clinical trial could increase.

The DEA limits the availability of the active ingredients in certain of our current drug candidates and, as a result, our quotas may not be sufficient to complete clinical trials, or to meet commercial demand or may result in clinical delays.

The DEA regulates chemical compounds as Schedule I, II, III, IV or V substances, with Schedule I substances considered to present the highest risk of substance abuse and Schedule V substances the lowest risk. Certain active ingredients in our current drug candidates, such as oxycodone, are listed by the DEA as Schedule II under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Consequently, their manufacture, research, shipment, storage, sale and use are subject to a high degree of oversight and regulation. For example, all Schedule II drug prescriptions must be signed by a physician, physically presented to a pharmacist and may not be refilled without a new prescription. Furthermore, the amount of Schedule II substances we can obtain for clinical trials and

12

Table of Contents

commercial distribution is limited by the DEA and our quota may not be sufficient to complete clinical trials or meet commercial demand. There is a risk that DEA regulations may interfere with the supply of the drugs used in our clinical trials, and, in the future, our ability to produce and distribute our products in the volume needed to meet commercial demand.

Conducting clinical trials of our drug candidates or potential commercial sales of a drug candidate may expose us to expensive product liability claims and we may not be able to maintain product liability insurance on reasonable terms or at all.

The risk of product liability is inherent in the testing of pharmaceutical products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit or terminate testing of one or more of our drug candidates. Our inability to obtain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of our drug candidates. We currently carry clinical trial insurance but do not carry product liability insurance. If we successfully commercialize one or more of our drug candidates, we may face product liability claims, regardless of FDA approval for commercial manufacturing and sale. We may not be able to obtain such insurance at a reasonable cost, if at all. Even if our agreements with any current or future corporate collaborators entitle us to indemnification against product liability losses, such indemnification may not be available or adequate should any claim arise.

If we receive regulatory approval for our drug candidates, we and our collaborators will also be subject to ongoing FDA obligations and continued regulatory review, such as continued safety reporting requirements, and we and our collaborators may also be subject to additional FDA post-marketing obligations or new regulations, all of which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize our potential drugs.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our drug candidates may also be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the drug may be marketed or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing follow-up studies. In addition, if the FDA approves any of our drug candidates, the labeling, packaging, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and record keeping for the drug will be subject to extensive regulatory requirements. The subsequent discovery of previously unknown problems with the drug, including but not limited to adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or the discovery that adverse events previously observed in preclinical research or clinical trials that were believed to be minor actually constitute much more serious problems, may result in restrictions on the marketing of the drug, and could include withdrawal of the drug from the market.

The FDA’s policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our drug candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution. Any of these events could prevent us from marketing our drugs and our business could suffer.

Risks Relating to our Collaboration Agreements

If King or other outside collaborators fail to devote sufficient time and resources to our drug development programs, or if their performance is substandard, our regulatory submissions and our product introductions may be delayed.

Pursuant to our strategic alliance with King, we will jointly manage and prepare Phase III clinical trials and NDA submissions in the United States for Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates with King. We rely on King to devote time and resources to the development, manufacturing and commercialization of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates. King may develop or acquire drugs or drug candidates that compete for resources with our drug candidates that are subject to this strategic alliance. For instance, King has acquired a

13

Table of Contents

drug candidate for the acute pain market. While we believe this drug candidate will not compete with our drug candidates under the collaboration with King, there can be no assurance that this drug candidate will not be developed to become competitive with our drug candidates under the collaboration with King. If King limits its time and resources devoted to the strategic alliance, or otherwise fails to perform as we expect, we may not achieve clinical and regulatory milestones and regulatory submissions and related product introductions may be delayed or prevented, and revenues that we would receive from these activities will be less than expected.

We depend on independent investigators and collaborators, such as universities and medical institutions, to conduct our clinical trials under agreements with us. These investigators and collaborators are not our employees and we cannot control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs. They may not assign as great a priority to our programs or pursue them as diligently as we would if we were undertaking such activities ourselves. If these investigators or collaborators fail to devote sufficient time and resources to our drug development programs, or if their performance is substandard, the approval of our regulatory submissions and our introductions of new drugs will be delayed or prevented.

Our collaborators may also have relationships with other commercial entities, some of which may compete with us. If outside collaborators assist our competitors to our detriment, the approval of our regulatory submissions will be delayed and the sales from our products, if any are commercialized, will be less than expected.

If we fail to maintain our strategic alliance for Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs, we may have to reduce or delay our drug candidate development.

Our plan for developing, manufacturing and commercializing Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs currently requires us to successfully maintain our strategic alliance with King to advance our programs and provide funding to support our expenditures on Remoxy and other drug candidates. If we are not able to maintain our existing strategic alliance with King, we may have to limit the size or scope of, or delay or abandon the development of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates or undertake and fund development of these drug candidates ourselves. If we elect to fund drug development efforts with respect to Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all.

We may not succeed at in-licensing drug candidates or technologies to expand our product pipeline.

We may not successfully in-license drug candidates or technologies to expand our product pipeline. The number of such candidates or technologies is limited. Competition among large pharmaceutical companies and biopharmaceutical companies for promising drug candidates or technologies is intense because such companies generally desire to expand their product pipelines through in-licensing.

Our collaborative agreements may not succeed or may give rise to disputes over intellectual property, disputes concerning the scope of collaboration activities or other issues.

Our strategy to focus on drug development requires us to enter into collaborative agreements with third parties, such as our strategic alliance with King. Such agreements are generally complex and contain provisions that could give rise to legal disputes, including potential disputes concerning ownership of intellectual property under collaborations or disputes concerning the scope of collaboration activities. Such disputes can delay or prevent the development of potential new drug products, or can lead to lengthy, expensive litigation or arbitration. Other factors relating to collaborative agreements may adversely affect the success of our drug candidates, including:

14

Table of Contents

Risks Relating to Commercialization

If physicians and patients do not accept and use our drugs, we will not achieve sufficient product revenues and our business will suffer.

Even if the FDA approves our drugs, physicians and patients may not accept and use them. Acceptance and use of our drugs will depend on a number of factors including:

Because we expect to rely on sales generated by our current lead drug candidates for substantially all of our revenues for the foreseeable future, the failure of any of these drugs to find market acceptance would harm our business and could require us to seek additional financing.

If King is not successful in commercializing Remoxy and other abuse resistant opioid drugs, our revenues and our business will suffer.

Our ability to earn royalties from sales of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs will depend on King’s abilities to maintain regulatory approval and achieve market acceptance of such drugs once commercialized. King may elect to independently develop drugs that could compete with ours or fail to commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs developed under our strategic alliance. King may not proceed with the commercialization of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs developed under our strategic alliance with the same degree of urgency as we would because of other priorities they face. If King is not successful in commercializing Remoxy for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to competition from other pharmaceutical companies, or if King fails to perform as we expect, our potential for revenue from drugs developed in connection with our strategic alliance with King, if any, could be dramatically reduced and our business would suffer.

If we are unable to develop our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, or if we are not successful in contracting with third parties for these services on favorable terms, or at all, our product revenues could be disappointing.

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities. Except with regard to products developed under our strategic alliance with King, in order to commercialize our products, if any are approved by the FDA, we will either have to develop such capabilities internally or collaborate with third parties who can perform these services for us. If we decide to commercialize any of our drugs ourselves, we may not be able to hire the necessary experienced personnel and build sales, marketing and distribution operations which are capable of successfully launching new drugs and generating sufficient product revenues. In addition, establishing such operations will take time and involve significant expense.

If we decide to enter into new co-promotion or other licensing arrangements with third parties, we may be unable to locate acceptable collaborators because the number of potential collaborators is limited and because of competition from others for similar alliances with potential collaborators. Even if we are able to identify one or more acceptable new collaborators, we may not be able to enter into any collaborative arrangements on favorable terms, or at all.

15

Table of Contents

In addition, due to the nature of the market for our drug candidates, it may be necessary for us to license all or substantially all of our drug candidates not covered by our strategic alliance with King to a single collaborator, thereby eliminating our opportunity to commercialize these other products independently. If we enter into any such new collaborative arrangements, our revenues are likely to be lower than if we marketed and sold our products ourselves.

In addition, any revenues we receive would depend upon our collaborators’ efforts which may not be adequate due to lack of attention or resource commitments, management turnover, change of strategic focus, business combinations or other factors outside of our control. Depending upon the terms of our collaboration, the remedies we have against an under-performing collaborator may be limited. If we were to terminate the relationship, it may be difficult or impossible to find a replacement collaborator on acceptable terms, or at all.

If we cannot compete successfully for market share against other drug companies, we may not achieve sufficient product revenues and our business will suffer.

The market for our drug candidates is characterized by intense competition and rapid technological advances. If our drug candidates receive FDA approval, they will compete with a number of existing and future drugs and therapies developed, manufactured and marketed by others. Existing or future competing products may provide greater therapeutic convenience or clinical or other benefits for a specific indication than our products, or may offer comparable performance at a lower cost. If our products are unable to capture and maintain market share, we may not achieve sufficient product revenues and our business will suffer.

We will compete for market share against fully integrated pharmaceutical companies or other companies that are collaborating with larger pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations. Many of these competitors have drugs already approved or drug candidates in development that will or may compete against our approved drug candidates. In addition, many of these competitors, either alone or together with their collaborative partners, operate larger research and development programs and have substantially greater financial resources than we do, as well as significantly greater experience in:

Our ability to generate product revenues will be diminished if we fail to obtain acceptable prices or an adequate level of reimbursement for our products from healthcare payers.

Our ability to commercialize our drugs, alone or with collaborators, will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement will be available from:

Significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. Healthcare payers, including Medicare, health maintenance organizations and managed care organizations, are challenging the prices charged for medical products and services and/or are seeking pharmacoeconomic data to justify formulary acceptance and reimbursement practices. We currently have not generated pharmacoeconomic

16

Table of Contents

data on any of our product candidates. Government and other healthcare payers increasingly are attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for drugs, and by refusing, in some cases, to provide coverage for uses of approved products for disease indications for which the FDA has or has not granted labeling approval. Adequate third-party insurance coverage may not be available to patients for any products we discover and develop, alone or with collaborators. If government and other healthcare payers do not provide adequate coverage and reimbursement levels for our products, market acceptance of our drug candidates could be limited.

Government agencies may establish and promulgate usage guidelines that could limit the use of our drug candidates.

Government agencies, professional and medical societies, and other groups may establish usage guidelines that apply to our drug candidates. These guidelines could address such matters as usage and dose, among other factors. Application of such guidelines could limit the use of our drug candidates.

Risks Relating to our Intellectual Property

Our ability to commercialize our drug candidates will depend on our ability to sell such products without infringing the patent or proprietary rights of third parties. If we are sued for infringing the intellectual property rights of third parties, such litigation will be costly and time consuming and an unfavorable outcome would have a significant adverse effect on our business.

Our ability to commercialize our drug candidates will depend on our ability to sell such products without infringing the patents or other proprietary rights of third parties. Intellectual property rights in the areas of controlled-release oxycodone, antibodies, and more generally, in oncology, neurology and radiopharmaceutical technologies are complicated and are continuously evolving. Holders of patent rights in these areas may allege that the commercialization of Remoxy or our other drug candidates infringes such patent rights. While we believe that we would have valid defenses to any claim of infringement, there can be no assurance that these or other third party patents will not limit our ability to commercialize Remoxy or our other drug candidates.

In addition, because patent applications are published 18 months after their filing, and because applications can take several years to issue, there may be currently pending third-party patent applications that are unknown to us, which may later result in issued patents. If a third-party claims that we infringe on its patents or other proprietary rights, we could face a number of issues that could seriously harm our competitive position, including:

17

Table of Contents

If we are unable to protect our intellectual property our competitors could develop and market products with similar features that may reduce demand for our drug candidates.

Our success, competitive position and potential future revenues will depend in part on our ability to protect our intellectual property. If we or our collaborators fail to file, prosecute, obtain or maintain certain patents, our competitors could market products that contain features and clinical benefits similar to those of our products, and demand for our products could decline as a result.

We and our collaborators have filed patent applications with the U.S. Patent Office to further protect our technologies. If these patent applications do not result in issued patents, the duration or scope of our patent rights may be limited and our future revenues could be lower as a result.

We may be involved in challenges to our intellectual property. An adverse outcome of a challenge to our intellectual property could result in loss of claims of patents or other intellectual property rights that pertain to certain drugs we currently have under development and could have a material adverse impact on our future revenues.

We intend to file additional patent applications relating to our technology, products and processes. We may direct our collaborators to file additional patent applications relating to the licensed technology or we may do so ourselves. However, our competitors may challenge, invalidate or circumvent any of our current or future patents. These patents may also fail to provide us with meaningful competitive advantages.

We may become involved in expensive litigation or other legal proceedings related to our existing intellectual property rights, including patents.

We expect that we will rely upon patents, trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovations and licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our competitive position. Others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information or be issued patents that may prevent the sale of our products or know-how or require us to license such information and pay significant fees or royalties in order to produce our products.

Our technology could infringe upon claims of patents owned by others. If we were found to be infringing on a patent held by another, we might have to seek a license to use the patented technology. In that case, we might not be able to obtain such a license on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If a legal action were to be brought against us or our licensors, we could incur substantial defense costs, and any such action might not be resolved in our favor. If such a dispute were to be resolved against us, we could have to pay the other party large sums of money and our use of our technology and the testing, manufacture, marketing or sale of one or more of our proposed products could be restricted or prohibited.

Risks Relating to our Business and Strategy

Competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical industry is intense, and if we are not successful in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, we could experience delays in completing necessary clinical trials, in the regulatory approval process or in formulating, manufacturing, marketing and selling our potential products.

We will need to hire additional qualified personnel with expertise in clinical research, preclinical testing, government regulation, formulation and manufacturing and sales and marketing. We compete for qualified individuals with numerous biopharmaceutical companies, universities and other research institutions. Competition for such individuals, particularly in the San Francisco Bay area, is intense, and our search for such personnel may not be successful. Attracting and retaining qualified personnel is critical to our success.

18

Table of Contents

If third-party manufacturers of our drug candidates fail to devote sufficient time and resources to our concerns, or if their performance is substandard, our clinical trials and product introductions may be delayed and our costs may be higher than expected.

We have no manufacturing facilities and have limited experience in drug product development and commercial manufacturing. We lack the resources and expertise to formulate, manufacture or test the technical performance of our drug candidates. We currently rely on a limited number of experienced personnel and a small number of contract manufacturers and other vendors to formulate, test, supply, store and distribute drug supplies for our clinical trials. Our reliance on a limited number of vendors exposes us to the following risks, any of which could delay our clinical trials, and, consequently, FDA approval of our drug candidates and commercialization of our products, result in higher costs, or deprive us of potential product revenues:

We expanded our research and development activities to include development of potential drug candidates for indications other than pain, and we may not be able to successfully develop or commercialize these potential new product candidates.

We have expanded our research and development activities to include development of potential drug candidates for indications other than pain, such as oncology and hemophilia. We initiated a Phase I clinical trial of our drug candidate in oncology in 2007. We have no history of developing oncology or hemophilia drug candidates or manufacturing radiopharmaceuticals. We do not know whether any of our planned clinical trials in oncology or hemophilia will result in marketable products. We do not anticipate that any additional drug candidates will reach the market for at least several years, if at all.

Our employees and consultants are generally subject to confidentiality or other agreements with their former employers and they may inadvertently or otherwise violate those agreements.

Many of our employees and consultants were previously employed at universities or biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. While we require our employees and consultants to honor any agreements they may have entered into prior to working with us, we may be subject to claims that we inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other confidential information belonging to former employers. Failure to defend such claims could result in loss of valuable rights or personnel, which in turn could harm or prevent commercialization of our drug candidates. Successful defense against such claims can be expensive and might distract us from executing our strategies.

19

Table of Contents

Law enforcement concerns over diversion of opioids and social issues around abuse of opioids may make the regulatory approval process and commercialization of our drug candidates very difficult.

Media stories regarding the diversion of opioids and other controlled substances are commonplace. Law enforcement agencies or regulatory agencies may apply policies that seek to limit the availability of opioids. Such efforts may adversely affect the regulatory approval and commercialization of our drug candidates.

Developments by competitors may render our products or technologies obsolete or non-competitive.

Alternative technologies and products are being developed to improve or replace the use of opioids for pain management, several of which are in clinical trials or are awaiting approval from the FDA. In addition, the active ingredients in nearly all opioid drugs are available in generic form. Drug companies that sell generic opioid drugs represent substantial competition. Many of these organizations competing with us have substantially greater capital resources, larger research and development staffs and facilities, greater experience in drug development and in obtaining regulatory approvals and greater manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we do. Our competitors may market less expensive or more effective drugs that would compete with our drug candidates or reach market with competing drugs before we are able to reach market with our drug candidates. These organizations also compete with us to attract qualified personnel and partners for acquisitions, joint ventures or other collaborations.

Business interruptions could limit our ability to operate our business.

Our operations as well as those of our collaborators on which we depend are vulnerable to damage or interruption from computer viruses, human error, natural disasters, electrical and telecommunication failures, international acts of terror and similar events. We have not established a formal disaster recovery plan and our back-up operations and our business interruption insurance may not be adequate to compensate us for losses we may suffer. A significant business interruption could result in losses or damages incurred by us and require us to cease or curtail our operations.

Risks Relating to Manufacturing

We rely on third-party commercial drug manufacturers for drug supply.

Approved third-party commercial drug manufacturers may subsequently be stopped from producing, storing, shipping or testing our drug products due to their non-compliance with federal, state or local regulations. Drug manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA, the DEA, and corresponding state and foreign government agencies to ensure strict compliance with GMP and other government regulations and corresponding foreign standards. We do not have control over third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards.

In addition, even if we enter into long-term supply arrangements with third-party suppliers, we cannot control changes in strategy by third-party suppliers that affect their ability or willingness to continue to supply our drug products on acceptable terms.

If our drug supply for one of our drug candidates was interrupted, our operations could be negatively affected.

20

Table of Contents

If we cannot formulate and scale-up a wide range of dosage forms of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates, we and King might determine that the commercial opportunity for Remoxy and other abuse resistant drug candidates in certain dosage forms is too limited to warrant further investment in clinical testing and development.

We plan to formulate and scale-up a wide range of dosage forms of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates. We may not be able to successfully complete our formulation or scale-up activities or we may determine that the commercial opportunity for Remoxy and other abuse resistant drug candidates in certain dosage forms is too limited to warrant further investment. If we are unsuccessful in our formulation or scale-up activities with Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates, our future revenue from milestones and royalties under our strategic alliance with King may be less than expected and our operations may suffer.

We rely solely on Durect to provide us with certain components of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates and will continue to rely on Durect to produce commercial supplies of these components.

We rely on Durect as our sole source provider of certain components of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates, and will rely solely on Durect to produce commercial supplies of these components. Durect’s failure to achieve and maintain satisfactory manufacturing standards could result in product recalls or withdrawals, delays or failures in product testing or delivery, cost overruns or other problems that could materially harm our business. Durect may encounter manufacturing difficulties involving production yields, quality control and quality assurance. Durect is subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA and corresponding state and foreign agencies to ensure strict compliance with government regulations and corresponding foreign standards. We cannot control Durect’s compliance with these regulations and standards.

To date, Durect has not produced commercial-scale supply of these components. If we and King receive marketing approval for and commercially launch Remoxy or other abuse resistant candidates, we anticipate that Durect will need to materially expand its manufacturing capacity. Durect may not be able to increase its manufacturing capacity for Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drug candidates in a timely or economic manner, or at all. Moreover, significant scale up of manufacturing will require additional validation studies, which are subject to FDA review and approval. If Durect is unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for such components of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs, at an acceptable cost or otherwise, and we are unable to establish alternative manufacturing capabilities, the commercial launch or continued commercialization after a commercial launch of Remoxy and other abuse-resistant drugs may be delayed, prevented or impaired or there may be a shortage in supply, which would harm our revenues and cause our business to suffer.

Risks Relating to our Financial Position and Need for Financing

Our operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate our business to date and to assess its future viability.

Our operations from our inception to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, acquiring, developing and securing our technology, undertaking preclinical studies and clinical trials of our drug candidates and forming collaborations. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to obtain regulatory approval, formulate and manufacture our drug candidates on a commercial scale or conduct sales and marketing activities. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history.

21

Table of Contents

We have a history of losses and expect to incur substantial losses and negative operating cash flows for the foreseeable future.

Although we were profitable in 2006 and 2007 based on payments from King and interest income, we have yet to generate any revenues from product sales. We had an accumulated deficit of $118.1 million as of December 31, 2007. Even if we succeed in developing and commercializing one or more of our drug candidates, we expect to continue to use significant cash resources in our operations for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially in the foreseeable future as we:

We will need to generate significant revenues to achieve and maintain profitability. If we cannot successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our drug candidates, we will not be able to generate such revenues or achieve profitability in the future. Our failure to achieve or maintain profitability would have a material adverse impact on the market price of our common stock.

If we cannot raise additional capital on acceptable terms, we may be unable to complete planned clinical trials of any or some of our drug candidates or to pursue attractive business opportunities.

We have funded all of our operations and capital expenditures with the proceeds from our public and private stock offerings, payments received under our strategic alliance with King, and interest earned on our investments. We expect that our current cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to meet our working capital and capital expenditure needs for at least the next year. However, we may elect to raise additional funds within such twelve-month period or need to raise additional funds thereafter and additional financing may not be available on favorable terms, if at all. Even if we succeed in selling additional securities to raise funds, our existing stockholders’ ownership percentage would be reduced and new investors may demand rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of existing stockholders. If we raise additional capital through debt financing, if available, such financings may involve covenants that restrict our business activities. If we raise additional capital through strategic alliance and license arrangements such as our strategic alliance with King, we may have to trade our rights to our technology, intellectual property or drug candidates to others in such arrangements on terms that may not be favorable to us.

If we determine that we need to raise additional funds and we are not successful in doing so, we may be unable to complete the clinical development of some or all of our drug candidates or to seek or obtain FDA approval of our drug candidates. We then could be forced to discontinue product development, enter into a relationship with an additional strategic partner earlier than currently intended, reduce sales and marketing efforts or forego attractive business opportunities.

22

Table of Contents

Risks Relating to an Investment in our Common Stock

Our stock price has been volatile and could experience a sudden decline in value.

Our common stock has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations and may continue to experience volatility in the future. You may not be able to sell your shares quickly or at the latest market price if trading in our stock is not active or the volume is low. The following factors, in addition to other risk factors described in this section, may have a significant impact on the market price of our common stock:

Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, SEC regulations and the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC create uncertainty for public companies. If we were unable to continue to comply with these requirements, we could be delisted from trading on the NASDAQ Global Market, or Nasdaq, and thereafter trading in our common stock, if any, may be conducted through the over-the-counter or other market. As a consequence of such delisting, an investor would likely find it more difficult to dispose of, or to obtain quotations as to the price of, our common stock. Delisting of our common stock could also result in lower prices per share of our common stock than would otherwise prevail.

In March 2007, we announced a stock repurchase program under which we can purchase up to $20.0 million of our common stock on the open market. As of December 31, 2007 we have $16.2 million available under this repurchase program. We are not obliged to purchase any additional stock pursuant to the stock repurchase program. The existence of such a program may contribute to the volatility of the price of our common stock and could contribute to a sudden decline in value.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents, our Stockholder Rights Plan and Delaware law may prevent or delay removal of incumbent management or a change of control.

Anti-takeover provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws, our Stockholder Rights Plan and Delaware law may have the effect of deterring or delaying attempts by our stockholders to remove or replace management, engage in proxy contests and effect changes in control. The provisions of our charter documents include:

23

Table of Contents

The rights issued pursuant to our Stockholder Rights Plan will become exercisable, subject to certain exceptions, the tenth day after a person or group announces acquisition of 15% or more of our common stock or announces commencement of a tender or exchange offer the consummation of which would result in ownership by the person or group of 15% or more of our common stock.

In addition, as a Delaware corporation, we are subject to Delaware law, including Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. In general, Section 203 prohibits a Delaware corporation from engaging in any business combination with any interested stockholder for a period of three years following the date that the stockholder became an interested stockholder unless certain specific requirements are met as set forth in Section 203.

These provisions, alone or together, could have the effect of deterring or delaying changes in incumbent management, proxy contests or changes in control.

Volatility in the stock prices of other companies may contribute to volatility in our stock price.

The stock market in general, Nasdaq and the market for technology companies in particular, have experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. Further, there has been particular volatility in the market prices of securities of early stage life sciences companies. These broad market and industry factors may seriously harm the market price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted. A securities class action suit against us could result in substantial costs, potential liabilities and the diversion of management’s attention and resources.

Our share ownership is concentrated, and our officers, directors and principal stockholders can exert significant control over matters requiring stockholder approval.

Due to their combined stock holdings, our officers, directors and principal stockholders (stockholders holding greater than 5% of our common stock) acting collectively may have the ability to exercise significant influence over matters requiring stockholder approval including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. This concentration of ownership may delay or prevent a change in control of the Company and may make some transactions more difficult or impossible to complete without the support of these stockholders. In addition, our recently initiated share repurchase program may have the effect of further concentrating the holdings of our officers, directors and principal stockholders.

Publicly available information regarding stockholders’ ownership may not be comprehensive because the SEC does not require certain large stockholders to publicly disclose their stock ownership positions.

Our operating results may fluctuate from quarter to quarter and this fluctuation may cause our stock price to decline.

Our quarterly operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely to fluctuate in the future. Factors contributing to these fluctuations include, among other items, the timing and amounts of collaboration revenue recognized from King, the timing and enrollment rates of clinical trials for our drug candidates, our need for

24

Table of Contents

clinical supplies and the valuation of stock-based compensation. Thus, quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our operating results are not indicative of what we might expect in the future. As a result, in some future quarters our clinical, financial or operating results may not meet the expectations of securities analysts and investors that could result in a decline in the price of our stock.

There may not be an active, liquid trading market for our common stock.

There is no guarantee that an active trading market for our common stock will be maintained on Nasdaq. Investors may not be able to sell their shares quickly or at the latest market price if trading in our stock is not active.

None.

We currently lease approximately 41,200 square feet of space in San Mateo and South San Francisco, California, which is used as general office space. We believe that our facilities are adequate and suitable for our current needs.

We are not a party to any legal proceedings.

There were no matters submitted to a vote of the security holders during the fourth quarter of 2007.

25

Table of Contents

PART II

Our common stock is quoted on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “PTIE.” The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market for the periods indicated.

We currently expect to retain future earnings, if any, for use in the operation and expansion of our business and have not paid and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. As of January 23, 2008, there were approximately 72 holders of record of our common stock.

The following table summarizes the securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2007

* Represents shares approved by our board of directors for inclusion in our proposed 2008 Equity Incentive Plan that are not eligible to be issued under such a plan until after stockholder approval is obtained. We currently plan to seek approval of such plan at our 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

26

Table of Contents

Performance Graph

The following line graph compares the percentage change in the cumulative return to the stockholders of the Company’s Common Stock with the cumulative return of the NASDAQ Composite Index and the NASDAQ Pharmaceutical Index for the period commencing December 31, 2002.

27

Table of Contents

28

Table of Contents

This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere in this report. Operating results are not necessarily indicative of results that may occur in future periods.

Overview

We are a biopharmaceutical company that develops novel drugs. We have four drug candidates in clinical programs, including Remoxy, Oxytrex, PTI-202 and a novel radio-labeled monoclonal antibody to treat metastatic melanoma. We are also working on a new treatment for patients with hemophilia.

We and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or King, are engaged in a strategic alliance to develop and commercialize Remoxy and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers. King made an upfront cash payment of $150.0 million to us at the closing of this strategic alliance in December 2005.

In December 2007, we and King announced positive results of a Phase III study of Remoxy in patients with chronic pain. The study met the primary endpoint that was prospectively defined by the FDA during an SPA process. This pivotal Phase III randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multi-center study was designed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of twice-daily Remoxy versus placebo over a 12-week treatment period. The study randomized 412 male and female patients. All patients were diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip, as evidenced by x-ray and clinical criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Additionally, all patients had pain intensity scores corresponding to moderate-to-severe pain. Following informed consent, wash-out and dose titration, patients were randomized into a treatment period of 12 weeks. During treatment, patients received twice-daily Remoxy or matching placebo. The total drug dose per patient per day ranged from 10-80mg. Pain intensity scores were assessed on a pain scale. Concomitant pain medications or rescue medications were not allowed at any point during the 12-week treatment period.

In August 2006, we and King announced the initiation of a Phase I clinical trial program of a second abuse-resistant drug candidate, called PTI-202. In connection with the acceptance by the FDA of the investigational new drug application, or IND, for PTI-202, King made a milestone payment to us of $5.0 million in 2006.

We could also receive from King up to $145.0 million in additional milestone payments in the course of clinical development of Remoxy, PTI-202 and other abuse-resistant opioid painkillers under the strategic alliance. Subject to certain limitations, King is also obligated to fund development expenses incurred by us pursuant to the collaboration agreement. King is obligated to fund the commercialization expenses of, and has the exclusive right to market and sell, drugs developed in connection with the strategic alliance. King is obligated to pay us a 20% royalty on net sales of drugs developed in connection with the strategic alliance, except as to the first $1.0 billion in net sales of such drugs, for which the royalty is set at 15%.

Although we were profitable in 2006 and 2007 based on payments received from King, we have yet to generate any revenues from product sales. Through December 31, 2007, we have recorded an accumulated deficit of approximately $118.1 million. These losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in connection with research and development activities, salaries and other personnel-related costs and general corporate expenses. Research and development activities include costs of preclinical and clinical trials as well as clinical supplies associated with our drug candidates. Salaries and other personnel-related costs include non-cash stock-based compensation associated with options granted to employees and non-employees. Our operating results may fluctuate substantially from period to period as a result of the timing and enrollment rates of clinical trials for our drug candidates and our need for clinical supplies.

We expect to continue to use significant cash resources in our operations for the next several years. Our cash requirements for operating activities and capital expenditures will increase substantially in the future as we:

29

Table of Contents

Product revenue will depend on our ability to receive regulatory approvals for, and successfully market, our drug candidates. If our development efforts result in regulatory approval and successful commercialization of our drug candidates, we will generate revenue from direct sales of our drugs and/or, if we license our drugs to future collaborators, from the receipt of license fees and royalties from sales of licensed products. We conduct our research and development programs through a combination of internal and collaborative programs. We rely on arrangements with universities, our collaborators, contract research organizations and clinical research sites for a significant portion of our product development efforts.

We focus substantially all our research and development efforts on the research and development of opioid drugs for the treatment of pain. The following table summarizes expenses by category for research and development efforts (in thousands):

Our technology has been applied across certain of our portfolio of drug candidates. Data, know-how, personnel, clinical results, research results and other matters related to the research and development of any one of our drug candidates also relate to, and further the development of, our other drug candidates. For example, we expect that results of non-clinical studies, such as pharmacokinetics, toxicology and other studies, regarding certain components of our drug candidate Remoxy to be applicable to the other potential drug candidates that may arise out of our collaboration with King since all such potential drug candidates are expected to utilize such components. As a result, costs allocated to a specific drug candidate may not necessarily reflect the actual costs surrounding research and development of that drug candidate due to cross application of the foregoing. In November 2006, we announced that we are developing a novel antibody technology that may transform how metastatic melanoma is treated. We spent approximately $3.2 million and $3.0 million on this technology, primarily in contractor fees and supplies, during 2007 and 2006, respectively. In March 2007, we announced that we licensed certain technology and are developing this technology for hemophilia and pain management. We spent approximately $1.0 million, primarily in contractor fees and supplies during 2007 on this technology.

Estimating the dates of completion of clinical development, and the costs to complete development, of our drug candidates would be highly speculative, subjective and potentially misleading. Pharmaceutical products take a significant amount of time to research, develop and commercialize. The clinical trial portion of the development of a new drug alone usually spans several years. We expect to reassess our future research and development plans based on our review of data we receive from our current research and development activities. The cost and pace of our future research and development activities are linked and subject to change.

30

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of our financial statements in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses and interest income in our financial statements and accompanying notes. We evaluate our estimates on an ongoing basis, including those estimates related to contract agreements, research collaborations and investments. We base our estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. The following items in our financial statements require significant estimates and judgments:

We adopted SFAS 123R on January 1, 2006 using the modified-prospective transition method. We record compensation expense for all awards granted after the date of adoption and for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that remain outstanding at the date of adoption. Accordingly, stock-based compensation expense recognized in the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2007 includes compensation cost for all outstanding stock-based awards. Prior to January 1, 2006, we used the intrinsic-value method of accounting for stock-based awards granted to employees and directors in accordance with APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees and its interpretations. Accordingly, we did not recognize compensation cost in our financial statements prior to January 1, 2006 for these awards because stock options granted to employees and directors had exercise prices equal to or greater than the fair value of the underlying security at the time the stock option was granted.

In adopting SFAS 123R, companies must choose among alternative valuation models and amortization approaches. After assessing alternative valuation models and amortization approaches, we continue to use the Black-Scholes option valuation model, or Black-Scholes and use the single-option award approach and straight-line attribution method for stock options granted since January 1, 2006. Using this approach, the compensation cost is amortized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of each respective stock option, generally four years.

Prior to adoption of SFAS 123R, we calculated the value of options granted to employees and directors for disclosure in the footnotes to our financial statements pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, or SFAS 123, using Black-Scholes, the multiple-option award approach and the accelerated attribution method. This approach uses a graded vesting method over the vesting period of each respective stock option, generally four years. The accelerated attribution method results in recognizing as compensation cost more than 50% of the fair value of an option in year one, with the

31

Table of Contents

remainder recognized in decreasing amounts from year two to year four. Under the modified prospective transition method of SFAS 123R, we will continue to calculate compensation cost for options granted prior to January 1, 2006 using the multiple-option award approach and accelerated attribution method.

We estimate forfeitures when recognizing expense under SFAS 123R and adjust this estimate periodically based on the extent to which future actual forfeitures differ, or are expected to differ, from such estimates. Accordingly, we have estimated forfeiture percentages for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that remain outstanding at the date of adoption and for awards granted subsequent to the date of adoption.

32

Table of Contents

Results of Operations

Years Ended December 31, 2007 and 2006

Revenue—Program fee revenue

King paid us a $150.0 million upfront fee in connection with the closing of our strategic alliance with King in December 2005. Revenues recognized from amortization of this upfront fee were $23.2 million and $26.2 million in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The decrease of $3.0 million in 2007 is due to the extension of the development period over which we recognize the program fee revenue in the fourth quarter of 2007 based upon recent clinical developments and communications with King regarding product development plans. We expect to recognize the rest of the program fee ratably over our estimate of the remainder of the development period under the strategic alliance with King. We currently estimate the development period for all four expected drug candidates to extend through September 2014.

Revenue—Collaboration revenue

Collaboration revenues were $42.7 million and $22.7 million in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. These revenues related to reimbursement of our development expenses incurred pursuant to the King strategic alliance. The increase of $20.0 million in 2007 was primarily because in 2006 we deferred recognition of approximately $10.4 million in costs incurred by us between September and December 2006 that were subject to completion of King’s review. King reviewed and paid for these expenses in 2007. We incurred expenses of $3.8 million in 2007 for which we expect King to complete their review and reimbursement us in 2008.

We expect the amount and timing of collaboration revenue to fluctuate in relation to the amount and timing of the underlying research and development expenses, as well as the timing of completion of King’s review of submitted expenses.

Revenue—Milestone revenue

We did not have any milestone revenue in the year ended December 31, 2007. Milestone revenue was $5.0 million for the year end December 31, 2006. In connection with the acceptance by the FDA of the investigational new drug application for PTI-202, King made a milestone payment to us of $5.0 million. We expect to file a NDA for Remoxy in the first half of 2008. When the NDA for Remoxy is accepted by the FDA, King will be obligated to pay us a milestone payment of $15.0 million. When the NDA for Remoxy is approved by the FDA, King will be obligated to pay us another milestone payment of $15.0 million.

Research and Development Expense

Research and development expense consists primarily of costs of drug development work associated with our drug candidates, including:

Research and development expense increased to $47.7 million from $46.8 million in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The increase was primarily due to increases in clinical and development activities for Remoxy, metastatic melanoma and hemophilia. Research and development expenses included non-cash stock related compensation costs of $3.7 million and $3.8 million in the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

33

Table of Contents

We expect research and development expenses to fluctuate over the next several years as we continue our development efforts. We expect our development efforts to result in our drug candidates progressing through various stages of clinical trials, including current and potential clinical trials for our other abuse-resistant drug candidates, as well as further clinical development of Oxytrex and our product candidates in metastatic melanoma and hemophilia. King is obligated to reimburse development expenses for our abuse-resistant drug candidates pursuant to our collaboration. Our research and development expenses may fluctuate from period to period due to the timing and scope of our development activities and the results of clinical trials and preclinical studies.

General and Administrative Expense

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and other general corporate expenses. General and administrative expenses increased to $8.1 million from $7.7 million in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The increase was primarily due to increases in non-cash stock-related compensation costs associated with the adoption of SFAS 123R. General and administrative expenses included non-cash stock related compensation costs of $2.6 million and $2.7 million in the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. We expect general and administrative expenses to increase over the next several years in connection with support of precommercialization and commercialization activities for our drug candidates. The increase may fluctuate from period to period due to the timing and scope of these activities and the results of clinical trials and preclinical studies.

Interest and Other Income, Net

Interest and other income net, increased to $10.1 million from $9.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, primarily due to increases in average balances of marketable securities and, to a lesser extent, increases in prevailing interest rates on investments in marketable securities. We expect our interest income to decrease in the future as we use cash to fund our operations.

Provision for Income Taxes

We did not provide for income taxes in 2007 because we did not have taxable income in 2007, primarily due to all of our program fee revenue having been recognized for tax purposes in prior years.

In 2005, King made an upfront cash payment of $150.0 million to us in connection with our strategic alliance. We had taxable income for 2006 primarily due to the recognition in 2006 of $146.3 million of the upfront cash payment for income tax purposes. We reduced our taxable income for 2006 with deductions related to a combination of our net operating losses and tax credits from prior years.

Years Ended December 31, 2006 and 2005

Revenue—Program fee revenue

King paid us a $150.0 million upfront fee in connection with the closing of our strategic alliance with King in December 2005. Revenues recognized from amortization of this upfront fee were $26.2 and $3.7 million in the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

Revenue—Collaboration revenue

Collaboration revenues were $22.7 million and $1.4 million in the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. These revenues related to reimbursement of our development expenses incurred pursuant to the King strategic alliance that commenced in the fourth quarter of 2005.

34

Table of Contents

Revenue—Milestone revenue

Milestone revenue was $5.0 million for the year end December 31, 2006. In connection with the acceptance by the FDA of the IND for PTI-202, King made a milestone payment to us of $5.0 million. We had no corresponding milestone revenue in 2005.

Research and Development Expense

Research and development expense consists primarily of costs of drug development work associated with our drug candidates, including:

Research and development expense increased to $46.8 million from $32.9 million in the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The increase was primarily due to increases in clinical and development activities for Remoxy and PTI-202 and non-cash stock-related compensation costs of $3.8 million associated with the adoption of SFAS 123R.

General and Administrative Expense

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and other general corporate expenses. General and administrative expenses increased to $7.7 million from $4.9 million in the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The increase was primarily due to increases in non-cash stock-related compensation costs of $2.7 million associated with the adoption of SFAS 123R.

Interest and Other Income

Interest and other income increased to $9.7 million from $2.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, primarily due to increases in average balances of marketable securities and, to a lesser extent, increases in prevailing interest rates on investments in marketable securities.

Provision for Income Taxes

In 2005, King made an upfront cash payment of $150.0 million to us in connection with our strategic alliance. We had taxable income for 2006 primarily due to the recognition in 2006 of $146.3 million of the upfront cash payment for income tax purposes. We have reduced our taxable income for 2006 with deductions related to a combination of our net operating losses and tax credits from prior years.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since inception, we have financed our operations primarily through public and private stock offerings, payments received under our strategic alliance with King, and interest earned on our investments. We intend to continue to use our capital resources to fund research and development activities, capital expenditures, working capital requirements and other general corporate purposes. As of December 31, 2007, cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were $205.1 million.

Net cash provided by operating activities was $2.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2007 compared to net cash used in operating activities of $11.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. The change was primarily due to the increase in our net income. In 2007, King completed its review and paid for approximately $10.4 million of our expenses from 2006 related to development of our abuse-resistant drug candidates under our strategic alliance.

35

Table of Contents

Net cash provided by investing activities was $69.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 and net cash used was $69.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. Investing activities for both years consisted primarily of the purchase and sale of marketable securities. Our investing activities to purchase property, equipment and leasehold improvements used cash of $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 and $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. We expect to continue to invest in our infrastructure to support our operations.

Net cash used in financing activities was $1.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $1.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2006. The decrease was primarily due to the purchase of treasury stock in 2007. In March, 2007, we announced a stock buyback plan for the repurchase of up to $20 million of our common stock. As of December 31, 2007 we had purchased $3.8 million of our common stock on the open market. The total number of shares to be purchased and the timing of purchases will be based on several factors, including the market price of our common stock, general market conditions, corporate and regulatory requirements and alternate investment opportunities. We intend to hold repurchased shares in treasury. This stock buyback program expires March 2008 and may be discontinued at any time. Other financing activities for both of these periods consisted primarily of proceeds received from the issuance of our common stock.

We have $49.6 million of total deferred tax assets at December 31, 2007. Realization of these deferred tax assets is dependent on future earnings, if any. We are uncertain about the timing and amount of any future earnings. We have concluded that it is more likely than not that such deferred tax assets will not be realized. Accordingly, except for $0.5 million of deferred tax assets included in other assets as of December 31, 2007, we offset the deferred tax asset with a valuation allowance. There is a high degree of uncertainty regarding the timing of future cash outflows associated with our FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” or Interpretation 48 liabilities. Our net Interpretation 48 liability at December 31, 2007 does not result in a material contractual obligation.

We currently lease approximately 41,200 square feet of general office space pursuant to non-cancelable operating leases that will expire in 2010 and 2012. Future minimum lease payments for our leases are as follows for the years ended December 31, (in thousands):

We believe that our facilities are adequate and suitable for our current needs.

We have license agreements that require us to make milestone payments upon the successful achievement of milestones, including clinical milestones. Our license agreements also require us to pay certain royalties to our licensors if we succeed in fully commercializing products under these license agreements. All of these potential future payments are cancelable as of December 31, 2007. Our formulation agreement with Durect Corporation obligates us to make certain milestone payments upon achieving clinical milestones and regulatory milestones. King is obligated to reimburse us for any of our milestone payments and royalty payments to Durect Corporation.

We have an accumulated deficit of $118.1 million at December 31, 2007. We expect our cash requirements to be significant in the future. The amount and timing of our future cash requirements will depend on regulatory and market acceptance of our drug candidates and the resources we devote to researching and developing, formulating, manufacturing, commercializing and supporting our products. We believe that our current resources should be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months. We may seek additional future funding through public or private financing within this timeframe, if such funding is available and on terms acceptable to us.

36

Table of Contents

Off-balance Sheet Arrangements

As of December 31, 2007, we did not have any relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities, which would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other contractually narrow or limited purposes. In addition, we do not engage in trading activities involving non-exchange traded contracts. Therefore, we are not materially exposed to financing, liquidity, market or credit risk that could arise if we had engaged in these relationships. We do not have relationships or transactions with persons or entities that derive benefits from their non-independent relationship with us or our related parties.

The primary objective of our cash investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing the income we receive from our investments without significantly increasing risk. Some of the securities that we invest in may be subject to market risk. This means that a change in prevailing interest rates may cause the principal amount of the investment to fluctuate. For example, if we hold a security that was issued with a fixed interest rate at the then-prevailing rate and the interest rate later rises, the principal amount of our investment will probably decline. A hypothetical 50 basis point increase in interest rates reduces the fair value of our available-for-sale securities at December 31, 2007 by approximately $0.6 million. To minimize this risk in the future, we intend to maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and marketable securities in a variety of securities, including commercial paper, government and non-government debt securities and/or money market funds that invest in such securities. We have no holdings of derivative financial or commodity instruments. As of December 31, 2007, our investments consisted of investments in corporate and government notes and obligations or in money market accounts and checking funds with variable market rates of interest. We believe our credit risk is immaterial.

37

Table of Contents

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

38

Table of Contents

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors and Stockholders

Pain Therapeutics, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Pain Therapeutics, Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Pain Therapeutics, Inc. at December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, in 2006, Pain Therapeutics, Inc. changed its method of accounting for stock-based compensation in accordance with guidance provided in Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment.” As discussed in Notes 8 and 9 to the financial statements, in 2007, Pain Therapeutics, Inc. changed its methods of accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and sabbatical leave in accordance with guidance provided in Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” and Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 06-2, “Accounting for Sabbatical Leave and Other Similar Benefits Pursuant to FASB Statement No. 43.”

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Pain Therapeutics, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in Internal Control--Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 8, 2008 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/    ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Palo Alto, California

February 8, 2008

39

Table of Contents

PAIN THERAPEUTICS, INC.

BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands except share and per share data)

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

40

Table of Contents

PAIN THERAPEUTICS, INC.

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands except per share data)

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

41

Table of Contents

PAIN THERAPEUTICS, INC.

STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

(in thousands except share data)