CUMBERLAND PHARMACEUTICALS INC - Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)
Table of Contents
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
    EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    Washington, D.C.
    20549
    Form 10-K
| (Mark One) | ||
| 
    þ
 | Annual Report Pursuant To Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 | |
| For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2010 | ||
| 
    o
 | Transition Report Pursuant To Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 | 
    Commission File
    No. 001-33637
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals
    Inc.
    (Exact name of registrant as
    specified in its charter)
| Tennessee State or other jurisdiction of Incorporation or organization | 62-1765329 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) | |
| 
    2525 West End Avenue, Suite 950, Nashville, Tennessee (Address of principal executive offices) | 37203 (Zip Code) | 
    (615) 255-0068
    (Registrants telephone
    number, Including area code)
    Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
    Act
| 
    Title of Each Class
 | 
    Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
 | |
| 
    Common stock, no par value
 | Nasdaq Global Select Market | 
    Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
    seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
    Act.  Yes o     No þ
    
    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 o     No þ
    
    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 time that the registrant was
    required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
    such filing requirements for the past
    90 days.  Yes þ     No o
    
    Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
    electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any,
    every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
    pursuant to Rule 405 of
    Regulation S-T
    (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
    12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
    was required to submit and post such
    files).  Yes o     No o
    
    Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
    pursuant to Item 405 of
    Regulation S-K
    (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein,
    and will not be contained, to the best of registrants
    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.  o
    
    Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
    accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
    filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
    large accelerated filer, accelerated
    filer and smaller reporting company in
    Rule 12b-2
    of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
| Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer þ | Non-accelerated filer o | Smaller reporting company o | 
    (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
    Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
    (as defined in
    Rule 12b-2
    of the Act.)
    Yes o     No þ
    
    The number of shares of the registrants Common Stock, no
    par value, outstanding as of March 1, 2011 was 20,411,484.
    DOCUMENTS
    INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
    Certain information required in Part III of
    Form 10-K
    is incorporated by reference from the registrants Proxy
    Statement for its 2011 annual meeting of shareholders.
    CUMBERLAND
    PHARMACEUTICALS INC. INDEX
Table of Contents
    Part I
    
    Item 1:
    Business
    
    BUSINESS
    Our
    Company
    We are a growing specialty pharmaceutical company focused on the
    acquisition, development and commercialization of branded
    prescription products. Our primary target markets are hospital
    acute care and gastroenterology, which are characterized by
    relatively concentrated physician prescriber bases that we
    believe can be penetrated effectively by relatively small,
    targeted sales forces. Cumberland is dedicated to providing
    innovative products which improve quality of care for patients
    and address poorly met medical needs.
    Our product portfolio includes
    Acetadote®
    (acetylcysteine) Injection for the treatment of
    acetaminophen poisoning,
    Caldolor®
    (ibuprofen) Injection, the first injectable treatment for
    pain and fever approved in the United States, and
    Kristalose®
    (lactulose) for Oral Solution, a prescription laxative.
    We market and sell our products through our dedicated hospital
    and gastroenterology sales forces in the United States, which
    together comprised more than 100 sales representatives and
    managers as of March 1, 2011. We are also partnering our
    products to reach international markets. Net revenues for the
    years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 were
    $45.9 million, $43.5 million and $35.1 million,
    respectively.
    We have both product development and commercial capabilities,
    and believe we can leverage our existing infrastructure to
    support our expected growth. Our management team consists of
    pharmaceutical industry veterans experienced in business
    development, product development, commercialization and finance.
    Our business development team identifies, evaluates and
    negotiates product acquisition, in-licensing and out-licensing
    opportunities. Our product development team develops proprietary
    product formulations, manages our clinical trials, prepares all
    regulatory submissions and manages our medical call center. Our
    quality and manufacturing professionals oversee the manufacture
    of our products. Our marketing and sales professionals are
    responsible for our commercial activities, and we work closely
    with our third party distribution partner to ensure availability
    and delivery of our products.
    We have been profitable since 2004, generating sufficient cash
    flows to fund our development and marketing programs. In 2009,
    we completed an initial public offering of our common stock to
    help facilitate our further growth. Our strategy includes
    maximizing the potential of our existing products and continuing
    to expand our portfolio of differentiated products. Our current
    products are approved for sale in the United States, and we are
    working with overseas partners to bring them to international
    markets. We also look for opportunities to expand into
    additional patient populations through new product indications,
    whether through our own clinical studies or by supporting
    investigator-initiated studies at reputable research
    institutions. We actively pursue opportunities to acquire
    additional late-stage development product candidates as well as
    marketed products in our target medical specialties. Further, we
    are supplementing these growth strategies with the early-stage
    drug development activities of Cumberland Emerging Technologies
    (CET), our majority-owned subsidiary. CET partners with
    universities and other research organizations to develop
    promising, early-stage product candidates, which Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals has the opportunity to commercialize.
    We were incorporated in 1999 and have been headquartered in
    Nashville, Tennessee since inception. Our website address is
    www.cumberlandpharma.com. We make available through our website,
    free of charge, our annual reports on
    Form 10-K,
    our quarterly reports on
    Form 10-Q,
    our current reports on
    Form 8-K
    and any amendments, as well as other documents, as soon as
    reasonably practicable after
    1
Table of Contents
    Part I
    their filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
    Commission, or SEC. These filings are also available to the
    public at www.sec.gov.
    Our
    Strategy
    Maximize sales of
    Acetadote and Kristalose
    Since its launch in June 2004, we have consistently grown
    product sales for Acetadote, our injectable treatment for
    acetaminophen poisoning. Net revenue from Acetadote sales grew
    from $18.8 million in 2007 to $35.1 million in 2010, a
    compound annual growth rate of 23%. In 2009, we expanded our
    hospital sales force in preparation for the launch of Caldolor,
    and are also leveraging this expansion to support Acetadote
    sales. In early 2011, we received FDA approval for a new
    formulation of Acetadote and have subsequently launched that new
    product. We are working to secure patent protection for this new
    formulation, which we believe could provide us with long term
    protection for the product.
    Kristalose competes in the high growth U.S. prescription
    laxatives market which, based on data from IMS Health, had sales
    of approximately $373 million in 2009. After acquiring
    exclusive U.S. rights to Kristalose in April 2006, we
    assembled an experienced, dedicated sales force and designed a
    new marketing program, re-launching the product in September
    2006. We inherited this product on a downtrend and have been
    successful in halting that decline and moving toward growth by
    enhancing brand awareness and highlighting the products
    many positive, competitive attributes.
    Successfully
    commercialize Caldolor
    We believe Caldolor, injectable ibuprofen, currently represents
    our most significant product opportunity based on the large
    potential markets for intravenous treatment of pain and fever,
    as well as clinical results for the product to date. In
    September 2009, we began marketing the product in the
    U.S. through our expanded hospital sales force. During
    2010, we focused on obtaining formulary approval and stocking of
    the product at U.S. hospitals and other medical facilities.
    Beginning in the first quarter of 2011, we began working to
    increase that stocking as well as drive use of the product in
    those facilities. We hold international patent rights for
    Caldolor and, in connection with certain current and potential
    future international partners, are working to seek regulatory
    approval for and market Caldolor outside of the U.S.
    Continue to build
    a high-performance sales organization to address our target
    markets
    We believe that continuing to build our sales infrastructure
    will help drive prescription volume and product sales. We
    currently utilize two distinct sales teams to address our
    primary target markets: a hospital sales force for the acute
    care market and a field sales force for the gastroenterology
    market.
    Hospital market:  We promote Acetadote and
    Caldolor through our dedicated hospital sales team of
    72 representatives and managers. This team addresses
    hospitals across the U.S., and is comprised of sales
    professionals with substantial experience in the hospital
    market. According to IMS Health, U.S. hospitals accounted
    for approximately $31 billion, or 10%, of
    U.S. pharmaceutical sales in 2009. However, IMS also
    reports that only 2% of approximately $21 billion total
    pharmaceutical industry promotional spending was focused on
    hospital-use drugs in 2009. The majority of promotional spending
    is directed toward large, outpatient markets on drugs intended
    for chronic use rather than short-term, hospital use. We believe
    the hospital market is underserved and highly concentrated, and
    that it can be penetrated effectively by a small, dedicated
    sales force without large-scale promotional activity.
    Gastroenterology market:  We promote Kristalose
    through a dedicated field sales force addressing a targeted
    group of physicians who are responsible for a majority of total
    retail Kristalose prescriptions nationally. By investing in our
    marketing program, we believe that we will be able to increase
    market share for Kristalose and that we will be equipped to
    promote any further gastroenterology product
    2
Table of Contents
    Part I
    additions as well. Because the market for gastrointestinal
    diseases is broad in patient scope, yet relatively narrow in
    physician base, we believe it provides product opportunities but
    can be penetrated with a modest sales force.
    Expand our
    product portfolio by acquiring rights to additional products and
    late-stage product candidates
    In addition to our product development activities, we are also
    seeking to acquire products or late-stage development product
    candidates to continue to build a portfolio of complementary
    products. We focus on under-promoted, FDA-approved drugs as well
    as late-stage development products that address poorly met
    medical needs, which we believe helps mitigate our exposure to
    risk, cost and time associated with drug discovery and research.
    We plan to continue to target products that are competitively
    differentiated, have valuable trademarks or other intellectual
    property, and allow us to leverage our existing infrastructure.
    We also plan to explore opportunities to seek approval for new
    uses of existing pharmaceutical products.
    Develop a
    pipeline of early-stage products through CET
    In order to build our product pipeline, we are supplementing our
    acquisition and late-stage development activities with the
    early-stage drug development activities of CET, our
    majority-owned subsidiary. CET partners with universities and
    other research organizations to develop promising, early-stage
    product candidates, and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals has the
    opportunity to negotiate rights to further develop and
    commercialize them.
    Our
    Products
    Our key products include:
| Product | Indication | Delivery | Status | |||
| 
    Acetadote®
 | Acetaminophen Poisoning | Injectable | Marketed | |||
| 
    Caldolor®
 | Pain and Fever | Injectable | Marketed | |||
| 
    Kristalose®
 | Chronic and Acute Constipation | Oral Solution | Marketed | |||
    Acetadote®
    Acetadote®
    is an intravenous formulation of N-acetylcysteine, or NAC,
    indicated for the treatment of acetaminophen poisoning.
    Acetadote, which has been available in the United States since
    Cumberlands 2004 introduction of the product, is currently
    used in hospital emergency departments to prevent or lessen
    potential liver damage resulting from an overdose of
    acetaminophen, a common ingredient in many
    over-the-counter
    pain relief and fever-reducing products. Acetaminophen continues
    to be the leading cause of poisonings reported by hospital
    emergency rooms in the United States, and Acetadote has become a
    standard of care for treating this potentially life-threatening
    condition.
    Originally approved in January 2004, Acetadote received FDA
    approval as an orphan drug, which provided seven years of
    marketing exclusivity from date of approval. In connection with
    the FDAs approval of Acetadote, we committed to certain
    post-marketing activities for the product. Our first
    Phase IV commitment (pediatric) was completed in 2004 and
    resulted in the FDAs 2006 approval of expanded labeling
    for Acetadote for use in pediatric patients. Our second
    Phase IV commitment (clinical) was completed in 2006 and
    resulted in further revised labeling for the product with FDA
    approval of additional safety data in 2008. We completed our
    third and final Phase IV commitment (manufacturing) for
    Acetadote in 2010, which has culminated in the approval and
    launch of a new, next generation formulation of the product.
    In October 2010, we submitted a supplemental new drug
    application (sNDA) to the FDA for approval of a new formulation
    of Acetadote designed to replace the original formulation. The
    new formulation,
    3
Table of Contents
    Part I
    which is the result of the aforementioned Phase IV
    commitment made to the FDA, addresses the FDAs safety
    concerns and contains no ethylene diamine tetracetic acid or
    other stabilization and chelating agents and is
    preservative-free. In January 2011, we received FDA approval and
    commenced U.S. launch activities for this new Acetadote
    product. The original formulation has been removed from FDA
    reference materials and we no longer manufacture it. We have
    filed a patent application with the U.S. Patent and
    Trademark Office to protect the proprietary new formulation.
    In March 2010, we submitted another sNDA to the FDA for the use
    of Acetadote in patients with non-acetaminophen acute liver
    failure. The sNDA included data from a clinical trial led by
    investigators at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical
    Center indicating that acute liver failure patients treated with
    Acetadote have a significantly improved chance of survival
    without a transplant. The study showed that these patients can
    also survive a significant number of days longer without
    transplant, which would provide patients requiring transplant
    increased time for a donor organ to become available.
    Acute liver failure is associated with a high mortality rate and
    frequent need for liver transplantation. Approximately half of
    acute liver failure cases are caused by acetaminophen poisoning
    while the other half result from a variety of causes including
    hepatitis and alcohol. Currently, transplantation of the liver
    is the only treatment for patients with liver failure not caused
    by acetaminophen overdose.
    In May 2010, the FDA officially accepted the sNDA and granted a
    priority review with a response expected in September 2010. In
    August 2010, we announced that the FDA extended its review of
    the sNDA by three months, resulting in a new Prescription Drug
    User Fee Act (PDUFA) goal date in December 2010. In December, we
    received a Complete Response Letter from the FDA indicating that
    the agency had completed its review of the application and had
    identified additional items that must be addressed prior to
    approving the new indication. We are in discussions with the FDA
    to gain clarity on a pathway to approval for this indication to
    treat a critically ill patient population with few treatment
    alternatives. In addition to expanded labeling for Acetadote, we
    have requested additional exclusivity for the product in
    association with the potential new indication.
    We are also supporting a number of investigator-initiated
    studies to explore other potential indications for Acetadote.
    Market
    for Acetadote
    Acetaminophen is one of the most widely used drugs for oral
    treatment of pain and fever in the U.S. and can be found in
    many common
    over-the-counter
    products and prescription narcotics. Though safe at recommended
    doses, the drug can cause liver damage with excessive use.
    According to the American Association of Poison Control
    Centers National Poison Data System, acetaminophen
    poisoning was the leading cause of toxic drug ingestions
    reported to U.S. poison control centers in 2008. In a study
    published in 2005 that examined acute liver failure, researchers
    concluded that acetaminophen poisoning was responsible for acute
    liver failure in over half the patients examined in 2003, up
    from 28% in 1998. While an estimated 48% of cases were due to
    the accidental use over several days, causing chronic liver
    failure, an estimated 44% of the cases were intentional
    overdoses, causing acute liver failure. According to the FDA,
    four grams of acetaminophen is the daily maximum dosage
    recommended for adults. Ingesting just eight grams of
    acetaminophen a day can cause serious complications, especially
    in people, whose livers are stressed by virus, medication or
    alcohol. When used in conjunction with opiates, acetaminophen
    can offer effective pain relief after surgery or injury;
    however, patients taking acetaminophen/opiate combination drugs
    on a chronic basis often eventually require increasing amounts
    to achieve the same level of pain relief, which can also lead to
    liver failure. In January 2011, the FDA initiated a campaign to
    heighten awareness of the potential toxicity associated with
    acetaminophen and announced that it is asking manufacturers of
    prescription
    4
Table of Contents
    Part I
    acetaminophen combination products to limit the maximum amount
    of acetaminophen in these products to 325 mg per tablet in
    an effort to reduce adverse events.
    NAC is widely accepted as the standard of care for acetaminophen
    overdose. According to The Medical Letter on Drugs and
    Therapeutics, NAC is virtually 100% effective in preventing
    severe liver damage, renal failure and death if administered
    within eight to ten hours of the overdose. Throughout Europe and
    much of the rest of the world, NAC has been available in an
    injectable formulation for over 25 years. Until the 2004
    approval of Acetadote, however, the only FDA-approved form of
    NAC available in the U.S. was an oral preparation. Many
    U.S. hospitals prepared an off-label, IV form of NAC from
    the oral solution to treat patients suffering from acetaminophen
    poisoning. For a number of these patients, an IV product is
    the only reasonable route of administration due to nausea and
    vomiting associated with oral administration. Given this market
    dynamic, we concluded that a medical need existed for an
    FDA-approved, injectable formulation of NAC for the
    U.S. market.
    Competitive
    Advantages
    We believe Acetadote offers clinical benefits relative to oral
    NAC including ease of administration, minimizing nausea and
    vomiting associated with oral NAC, accurate dosage control,
    shorter treatment protocol and reduction in overall cost of
    acetaminophen overdose management. Acetadote makes NAC
    administration easier to tolerate for patients and easier to
    administer for medical providers.
    Acetadote also offers a significant cost benefit to both patient
    and hospital by reducing treatment regimen, usually from three
    days to one day. An independently conducted study of Acetadote
    as a cost-saving treatment for acetaminophen poisoning was
    published in the December 2009 issue of the peer-reviewed
    Journal of Medical Economics. The study concludes that
    Acetadote is a less costly treatment regimen than oral NAC in
    all evaluated scenarios. The cost differential between the use
    of oral NAC and Acetadote was shown to range between $881 and
    $2,259, and was primarily attributable to the time required to
    complete recommended treatment. Under approved therapeutic
    protocols, the oral product requires 72 hours to administer
    compared to 21 hours for Acetadote. Consequently, the use
    of Acetadote results in shorter hospital stays, resulting in
    substantial cost disparity between the treatments.
    Caldolor®
    Caldolor, our intravenous formulation of ibuprofen, was the
    first injectable product approved in the United States for the
    treatment of both pain and fever. The FDA approved Caldolor for
    marketing in the United States in June 2009 following a priority
    review. The product is indicated for use in adults for the
    management of mild to moderate pain, for the management of
    moderate to severe pain as an adjunct to opioid analgesics, and
    for the reduction of fever.
    In September 2009, we successfully implemented the
    U.S. launch of Caldolor, with more than
    100 experienced sales professionals promoting the product
    across the country. Caldolor is stocked at the major wholesalers
    serving hospitals nationwide, and is available in 400mg and
    800mg vials. We are focused on securing formulary approval and
    stocking nationally for Caldolor. Our sales group is highly
    focused on meeting with members of hospital pharmacy and
    therapeutic committees to secure placement on committee agendas
    to continue growing widespread formulary approval.
    Beginning in 2011, we are reaching out to a wider audience
    within hospitals to drive pull-through sales of Caldolor in
    facilities that have added the product to formulary. Our sales
    professionals are equipped with marketing documents which
    highlight key differentiating factors including the
    products ability to be safely dosed not only
    post-operatively but also at induction of anesthesia. We
    supported the publication of Caldolor clinical data in 2010,
    with results from those trials appearing in peer-reviewed
    journals as well as being presented at appropriate medical
    meetings around the country.
    5
Table of Contents
    Part I
    We have worldwide commercial rights to Caldolor. We market
    Caldolor in the United States through our existing hospital
    sales force, and are partnering with third parties to reach
    markets outside the United States.
    The
    Market for Caldolor
    Therapeutic agents used to treat pain are known as analgesics.
    Physicians prescribe injectable analgesics for hospitalized
    patients who have high levels of pain, require rapid pain relief
    or cannot take oral analgesics. According to IMS, the
    U.S. market for injectable analgesics exceeded
    $329 million, or 671 million units, in 2009. This
    market consists principally of generic opioids and the NSAID
    ketorolac.
    Injectable opioids such as morphine, meperidine, hydromorphone
    and fentanyl accounted for approximately 622 million units
    sold in 2009. While opioids are widely used for acute pain
    management, they are associated with a variety of side effects
    including sedation, nausea, vomiting, constipation, headache,
    cognitive impairment, reduced GI motility and respiratory
    depression. Respiratory depression, if not monitored closely,
    can be deadly. Opioid-related side effects can warrant dosing
    limitations, which may reduce overall effectiveness of pain
    relief. Side effects from opioids can cause a need for further
    medication or treatment, and can increase lengths of stay in
    post-anesthesia care units as well as overall hospital stay,
    which can lead to increased costs for hospitals and patients.
    Despite a poor safety profile, use of ketorolac, the only
    non-opioid injectable analgesic available in the U.S., has grown
    from approximately 38 million units in 2004, or 5% of the
    market, to approximately 48 million units in 2009, or 7% of
    the market, according to IMS Health. The FDA warns that
    ketorolac should not be used in various patient populations that
    are at-risk for bleeding, as a prophylactic analgesic prior to
    major surgery or for intra-operative administration when
    stoppage of bleeding is critical.
    Caldolor is one of only two
    U.S.-approved
    injectable treatments for fever, with the other being an
    injectable acetaminophen product. Significant fever, generally
    defined as a temperature of greater than 102 degrees Fahrenheit,
    can cause hallucinations, confusion, convulsions and death.
    Hospitalized patients are subject to increased risk for
    developing fever, especially from exposure to infectious agents.
    Patients with endotracheal intubation, sedation, reduced gastric
    motility, nausea or recent surgery are frequently unable to
    ingest, digest, absorb, or tolerate oral products to reduce
    fever. Treatment for these patients ranges from rectal delivery
    of medication to physical cooling measures such as tepid baths,
    ice packs and cooling blankets.
    Clinical
    Development Overview
    We acquired from Vanderbilt University an exclusive, worldwide
    license to clinical trial data on the use of intravenous
    ibuprofen for treatment of hospitalized patients with severe
    sepsis syndrome, a complex inflammatory condition often
    resulting in high fever due to infection. Published in the
    New England Journal of Medicine, this data indicated that
    intravenous ibuprofen was effective in reducing high fever in
    critically ill patients who were largely unable to receive oral
    medication. Based upon data generated from this study, we met
    with the FDA to determine the requirements for gaining FDA
    approval of intravenous ibuprofen through a 505(b)(2)
    application. Following discussion with and recommendations by
    the FDA, we implemented a development program for Caldolor that
    was designed to obtain approval for a dual indication for the
    productmanagement of pain and reduction of fever. We
    performed extensive formulation work resulting in a patented,
    proprietary product and conducted a number of clinical studies
    evaluating the safety and efficacy of Caldolor for treatment of
    pain and fever.
    6
Table of Contents
    Part I
    More than 1,400 subjects, including over 800 receiving IV
    Ibuprofen, were studied in seven clinical trials supporting our
    new drug application (NDA) filing. Below is a summary of the
    clinical trials that supported the NDA and that are currently
    described in our package insert:
| Number | ||||||||
| of | ||||||||
| Study name | subjects | Setting | Study results | |||||
| 
    Pharmacokinetic Study
 | 36 | Healthy volunteers | Similar PK parameters between oral and Caldolor | |||||
| 
    Adult Safety Study
 | 12 | Healthy volunteers | Safe and well-tolerated IV infusion of Caldolor | |||||
| 
    Sepsis Study IND
    32803(1)
 | 455 | Hospitalized patients with severe sepsis | Significant and sustained reduction of temperature in patients with high fever (p<0.01)(3) | |||||
| 
    Adult Malaria Fever Study
 | 60 | Hospitalized adult malaria patients | Significant reduction in temperature over 24 hours of treatment (p=0.002) | |||||
| 
    Phase III Adult Fever
    Study(2)
 | 120 | Hospitalized adult febrile patients | Significant, dose-dependent, reduction in temperature supporting 400mg dose (p=0.0003) | |||||
| 
    Phase III Adult Dose Ranging Pain
    Study(2)
 | 406 | Hospitalized adult abdominal and orthopedic post-operative patients | Dose-dependent, morphine sparing effect (22%) supporting 800mg dose Significant reduction in pain intensity scores (VAS)(4) over 24 hours of treatment (p=0.001) | |||||
| 
    Phase III Adult Abdominal Hysterectomy Pain
    Study(2)
 | 319 | Hospitalized adult abdominal hysterectomy patients | 
Significant, morphine-sparing effect (19%, p <0.001)  Significant reduction in pain intensity scores (VAS) over 24 hours of treatment (p=0.011) | |||||
| 
    Total
 | 1,408 | |||||||
| (1) | Study data licensed from Vanderbilt University; Cumberland report filed 2003 | |
| (2) | Pivotal Study | |
| (3) | P-value <0.05 represents statistical significance | |
| (4) | Visual Analog Scale | 
    Additional
    Studies
    Adult Orthopedic Pain Study: We initiated a Phase III pain
    study in post-operative adult patients who had undergone
    orthopedic surgical procedures. Patients, all with access to
    patient controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine, were
    randomized to also receive either 800mg of Caldolor (multi-modal
    therapy) or placebo treatment (standard therapy) four times
    daily for up to five days. The first dose in this study
    7
Table of Contents
    Part I
    was administered prior (pre-operatively) to the surgical
    procedure. The primary endpoint was reduction in patient pain
    intensity scores using VAS measured with movement.
    We enrolled 185 patients in the safety population. There
    was a significant reduction in pain intensity scores using VAS.
    Patients receiving Caldolor reported a 26% greater reduction in
    pain intensity after 24 hours (p<0.001; with movement
    Area Under the Curve of VAS) compared to placebo. 24 hours
    after the first dose of Caldolor was administered patients
    receiving Caldolor reported a 32% greater reduction in pain at
    rest (p<0.001 at rest AUC-VAS) compared to placebo. In this
    study, we also investigated the efficacy of Caldolor in reducing
    morphine use by patients receiving the 800mg dose. There was a
    significant reduction in morphine use by those receiving 800mg
    of Caldolor after surgery and through hour 24.
    Adult Burn Study: We conducted a multicenter, randomized,
    double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at five U.S. and
    international clinical sites, including hospital burn units and
    burn centers, to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Caldolor in
    treating fever and pain in hospitalized burn patients. Patients
    were administered 800mg of Caldolor every six hours for five
    consecutive days. The study raised no safety concerns and the
    medication was well tolerated. There was no difference in
    adverse effects between patients who received a placebo and
    those receiving Caldolor. The study evaluated 61 adult burn
    patients with second or third degree burns covering more than
    10 percent total body surface area. Other participant
    criteria included an anticipated hospital stay of more than
    72 hours and temperatures of 38.0 degrees Celsius (100.4
    degrees Fahrenheit) or greater. Statistical significance was
    achieved for the primary endpoint of reducing fever in burn
    patients over the first 24 hours of treatment.
    Adult Pharmacokinetics Study: We conducted a randomized,
    double-blind, placebo-controlled, single dose crossover study of
    the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of Caldolor in
    healthy adult volunteers. Twelve subjects were randomized in
    equal proportions to receive a single dose of 800mg Caldolor,
    administered over five to seven minutes, and oral placebo
    administered concurrently, followed by a wash-out period of a
    single dose of 800mg oral ibuprofen and intravenous placebo
    given concurrently. There were no serious adverse events nor any
    adverse events classified as moderate or severe. The most common
    adverse event, which was classified as mild, was infusion site
    pain in three subjects. The results of the study indicate that
    the mean Cmax of Caldolor was approximately twice that of the
    oral dose and the median Tmax for Caldolor was 6.5 minutes
    compared to 1.5 hours for the oral product. The AUC was
    similar between the two products. Results from the trial
    demonstrate the effects of decreasing infusion time for Caldolor
    from the current package insert guideline of no less than 30
    minutes to an infusion time of five to seven minutes.
    Phase IV
    Required Pediatric Assessment
    The required pediatric assessment for the Caldolor NDA was
    deferred until 2011 for the treatment of fever and until 2012
    for the management of pain. Two clinical studies are currently
    underway to address the Phase IV requirements. By
    conducting pediatric clinical studies and supplying requested
    data to the FDA, Cumberland has the opportunity to obtain up to
    an additional six months of marketing exclusivity for Caldolor.
    If results of these trials are not favorable, we would not be
    eligible for additional pediatric exclusivity; however,
    unfavorable pediatric results would not impact marketing status
    for use in adults.
    No additional Phase IV commitments were assigned by the FDA.
    Safety
    Summary
    Extensive use and worldwide literature support the strong safety
    profile of oral ibuprofen. Building on the oral safety profile,
    we have assembled an integrated IV ibuprofen safety
    database combining data from our clinical trials as well as
    previously published study data. We used this data to support
    our
    8
Table of Contents
    Part I
    NDA filing and will continue to use and update the data as a
    part of our ongoing safety evaluation. In addition, this data
    will be used by our sales force and in our marketing materials
    to promote Caldolor.
    In clinical trials supporting our proposed indications, no
    serious adverse events have been directly attributed to
    Caldolor. The number and percentage of all patients in pivotal
    studies who reported treatment emergent adverse events was
    comparable between IV ibuprofen and placebo treatment
    groups. Additionally, there have been no safety related
    differences between Caldolor and placebo involving side effects
    sometimes observed with oral NSAIDs, such as changes in renal
    function, bleeding events or gastrointestinal disorders.
    Kristalose®
    Kristalose is a prescription laxative administered orally for
    the treatment of constipation. An innovative, dry powder
    crystalline formulation of lactulose, Kristalose is designed to
    enhance patient compliance and acceptance. We acquired exclusive
    U.S. commercialization rights to Kristalose in 2006,
    assembled a new dedicated field sales force and re-launched the
    product in September 2006 under the Cumberland brand. We direct
    our sales efforts to physicians who are the most prolific
    writers of prescription laxatives, including
    gastroenterologists, pediatricians, internists and colon and
    rectal surgeons.
    Market
    for Kristalose
    Constipation is a common condition in the U.S., affecting
    approximately 20% of the population each year. While many
    occurrences are non-recurring, a significant number are chronic
    in nature and require some treatment to control or resolve.
    Constipation treatments are sold in both the
    over-the-counter
    (OTC) and prescription segments. The prescription laxative
    market has historically consisted of a few highly promoted
    brands including
    MiraLax®
    (polyethylene glycol 3350), which is now being sold as an OTC
    product, and
    Amitiza®,
    as well as several generic forms of liquid lactulose. According
    to data from IMS Health, the prescription laxative market had
    sales of approximately $373 million in 2009.
    Competitive
    Advantages
    Kristalose is the only prescription-strength laxative available
    in pre-measured powder packets, making it very portable. The
    drug dissolves quickly in four ounces of water, offering
    patients a virtually tasteless, grit-free and calorie-free
    alternative to liquid lactulose treatments. We believe that
    Kristalose has competitive advantages over competing
    prescription laxatives, such as fewer potential side effects and
    contraindications as well as lower cost. There are no age
    limitations or length of use restrictions for Kristalose, and it
    is the only osmotic prescription laxative still sampled to
    physicians.
    In 2009, we completed a multicenter, randomized, open label,
    crossover patient preference study evaluating Kristalose
    compared to similar products in liquid forms. Over a
    14-day
    period, 50 patients with a recent diagnosis of chronic
    constipation were administered both Kristalose and liquid
    lactulose in a crossover study. Patient preference was measured
    through survey responses collected at the end of the study.
    Overall, more patients preferred Kristalose, noting portability
    as a key differentiating feature. More patients also preferred
    the taste of Kristalose as well as the consistency compared to
    the syrup formulations. There was no significant difference in
    adverse effects between patients who took Kristalose and those
    taking liquid lactulose. We are also exploring opportunities to
    expand into new indications with Kristalose.
    Early-stage
    product candidates
    Our pre-clinical product candidates are being developed through
    CET, our 85%-owned subsidiary. Cumberland Pharmaceuticals
    negotiates rights to develop and commercialize CET product
    candidates, and in conjunction with research institutions has
    obtained nearly $1 million in grant funding from the
    National Institutes of Health to support the development of
    these programs.
    9
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Four of the more advanced CET development programs are:
| Ø | In collaboration with Vanderbilt University, we are currently developing a new palliative treatment for fluid buildup in the lungs of cancer patients. The product candidate is a protein therapeutic being designed to treat pleural effusion, a condition which occurs when cancer spreads to the surface of the lung and chest cavity, causing fluid to accumulate and patients to suffer shortness of breath and chest pain. An estimated 100,000 patients are affected by this condition each year. Vanderbilt University researchers believe they have found a method of treating this condition which may involve less pain, a higher success rate and faster healing time, resulting in significantly shorter hospital stays. | 
| Ø | In collaboration with the University of Mississippi, we are developing a highly purified, injectable anti-infective used to treat fungal infections in immuno-compromised patients. This product candidates active ingredient is currently FDA-approved in a different formulation, and while it is the therapeutic of choice for infectious disease specialists in treating such fungal infections, it can produce serious side effects related to renal toxicity, often resulting in dosage limitations or discontinued use. University of Mississippi researchers have developed what they believe is a purer and safer form of the anti-infective. | 
| Ø | In collaboration with the University of Tennessee, we are currently developing a novel asthma therapeutic designed to prevent remodeling of airway smooth muscle to reduce asthmatic reaction in pediatric patients. Airway remodeling occurs when the cells or muscles that line the airway become inflamed and can result in decreased lung function. University of Tennessee researchers believe they have found a treatment that can reduce, or even prevent, asthma attacks in children. | 
| Ø | CET previously entered into an agreement with Vanderbilt University to develop a novel treatment to improve renal function in patients with hepatorenal syndrome, a condition where kidneys fail suddenly due to cirrhosis of the liver. The product candidate may reduce renal blood flow in association with acute kidney failure. In the third quarter of 2010, Cumberland Pharmaceuticals entered into an option agreement with CET to assume the rights and responsibilities associated with the product candidate. We have commenced product manufacturing and submitted an investigational new drug application for the clinical evaluation of this product candidate. | 
    BUSINESS
    DEVELOPMENT
    Since inception, we have had an active business development
    program focused on acquiring rights to marketed products and
    product candidates that fit our strategy and target markets. We
    source our business development leads through our senior
    executives and our international network of pharmaceutical and
    medical industry insiders. These opportunities are reviewed and
    considered on a regular basis by a multi-disciplinary team of
    our managers against a list of selection criteria. We have
    historically focused on product opportunities with relatively
    low acquisition, development and commercialization costs,
    employing a variety of deal structures.
    We intend to continue to build a portfolio of complementary,
    niche products largely through product acquisitions and
    late-stage product development. Our primary targets are
    under-promoted, FDA-approved drugs with existing brand
    recognition and late-stage development product candidates that
    address unmet medical needs in the hospital acute care and
    gastroenterology markets. We believe that by focusing mainly on
    approved or late-stage products, we can minimize the significant
    risk, cost and time associated with drug development.
    Through CET, we are collaborating with a growing list of
    reputable research institutions. Our business development team
    is responsible for identifying appropriate CET product
    candidates and negotiating with our university partners to
    secure rights to these candidates. Although we believe that
    these collaborations may be important to our business in the
    future, they are not material to our business at this time.
    10
Table of Contents
    Part I
    CLINICAL AND
    REGULATORY AFFAIRS
    We have in-house capabilities for the management of our
    clinical, professional and regulatory affairs. Our team develops
    and manages our clinical trials, prepares regulatory
    submissions, manages ongoing product-related regulatory
    responsibilities and manages our medical information call
    center. Team members have been responsible for devising the
    regulatory and clinical strategies and obtaining FDA approvals
    for Acetadote and Caldolor.
    Clinical
    development
    Our clinical development personnel are responsible for:
| Ø | creating clinical development strategies; | 
| Ø | designing and monitoring our clinical trials; | 
| Ø | creating case report forms and other study-related documents; | 
| Ø | overseeing clinical work contracted to third parties; and | 
| Ø | overseeing CET grant funding proposals. | 
    Regulatory and
    quality affairs
    Our internal regulatory and quality affairs team is responsible
    for:
| Ø | preparing and submitting NDAs and fulfilling post-approval marketing commitments; | 
| Ø | maintaining investigational and marketing applications through the submission of appropriate reports; | 
| Ø | submitting supplemental applications for additional label indications, product line extensions and manufacturing improvements; | 
| Ø | evaluating regulatory risk profiles for product acquisition candidates, including compliance with manufacturing, labeling, distribution and marketing regulations; | 
| Ø | monitoring applicable third-party service providers for quality and compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, Good Laboratory Practices, and Good Clinical Practices, and performing periodic audits of such vendors; and | 
| Ø | maintaining systems for document control, product and process change control, customer complaint handling, product stability studies and annual drug product reviews. | 
    Professional and
    medical affairs
    Our clinical and regulatory team provides in-house, medical
    information support for our marketed products. This includes
    interacting directly with healthcare professionals to address
    any product or medical inquiries through our medical information
    call center. Prior to the launch of Caldolor, we expanded our
    medical affairs staff to support inquiries from medical
    professionals regarding the appropriate use of Caldolor as well
    as to support the efforts of our expanded hospital sales force.
    In addition to coordinating the call center, our
    clinical/regulatory group generates medical information letters,
    provides informational memos to our sales forces and assists
    with ongoing training for the sales forces.
    SALES AND
    MARKETING
    Our sales and marketing team has broad industry experience in
    selling branded pharmaceuticals. Our sales and marketing
    professionals manage our dedicated hospital and gastroenterology
    sales forces, including more than 100 sales representatives and
    district managers, direct our national marketing
    11
Table of Contents
    Part I
    campaigns and maintain key national account relationships. In
    January 2007, we converted our hospital sales force, which had
    previously been contracted to us by Cardinal Health Inc., or
    Cardinal, to Cumberland employees through our wholly-owned
    subsidiary, Cumberland Pharma Sales Corp.
    Our gastroenterology-focused team was formed in September 2006
    with our re-launch of Kristalose and is a field sales force
    addressing high prescribers of laxatives. This gastroenterology
    sales force was previously contracted to us by Ventiv Commercial
    Services, LLC, or Inventiv. In September 2010, we converted the
    field sales force to Cumberland employees as we had previously
    done with our hospital force.
    Our sales and marketing executives conduct ongoing market
    analyses to evaluate marketing campaigns and promotional
    programs. The evaluations include development of product
    profiles, testing of the profiles against the needs of the
    market, determining what additional product information or
    development work is needed to effectively market the products
    and preparing financial forecasts. We utilize professional
    branding and packaging as well as promotional items to support
    our products, including direct mail, sales brochures, journal
    advertising, educational and reminder leave-behinds, patient
    educational pieces and product sampling. We also regularly
    attend targeted trade shows to promote broad awareness of our
    products. Our National Accounts group is responsible for key
    large buyers and related marketing programs. This group supports
    sales and marketing efforts by maintaining relationships with
    our wholesaler customers as well as with third-party payors such
    as Group Purchasing Organizations, Pharmacy Benefit Managers,
    Hospital Buying Groups, state and federal government purchasers
    and influencers and health insurance companies.
    International
    sales and marketing
    We have licensed to third parties the right to distribute
    certain products outside the U.S. We have granted Alveda
    Pharmaceuticals Inc., or Alveda, an exclusive license to
    distribute Caldolor in Canada subject to receipt of regulatory
    approval. Alveda is obligated to make payments to us of up to
    $1,000,000 Canadian upon Caldolors achieving specified
    regulatory milestones in Canada and to pay us a royalty based on
    Canadian sales of Caldolor. This license terminates five years
    after regulatory approval is obtained in Canada for the later of
    the fever or pain indications.
    In December 2009, we announced that we entered into an exclusive
    partnership with DB Pharm Korea Co. Ltd., a Korean-based
    pharmaceutical company, for the commercialization of Caldolor in
    South Korea. Under the terms of the agreement, DB Pharm
    Korea is responsible for obtaining any regulatory approval for
    the product and handling ongoing regulatory requirements,
    product marketing, distribution and sales in Korea. We maintain
    responsibility for product formulation, development and
    manufacturing. Under the agreement, Cumberland will receive up
    to $500,000 in upfront and milestone payments as well as a
    transfer price, and we will receive royalties on any future
    sales of Caldolor in South Korea.
    In October 2009, we announced that we entered into an exclusive
    partnership with Phebra Pty Ltd., or Phebra, an Australian-based
    specialty pharmaceutical company, for the commercialization of
    Caldolor in Australia and New Zealand. Phebra has responsibility
    for obtaining any regulatory approval for the product, and for
    handling all ongoing regulatory requirements, product marketing,
    distribution and sales in the territories. We will maintain
    responsibility for product formulation, development and
    manufacturing. Under the terms of the agreement, Cumberland will
    receive up to $500,000 in upfront and milestone payments as well
    as a transfer price, and we will receive royalties on any future
    sales of Caldolor in those territories.
    We also granted Phebra an exclusive license to market and
    distribute Acetadote in Australia, New Zealand, and
    Southeast Asia, subject to the receipt of regulatory approval.
    Phebra is obligated to make payments to us of up to $325,000
    upon Phebras achieving specified milestones as well as
    royalty
    12
Table of Contents
    Part I
    payments. In April 2010, the Therapeutic Goods Administration
    granted approval for the commercialization of Acetadote in
    Australia and in October 2010, Phebra commenced with the
    Australian launch of the product. This introduction of Acetadote
    in Australia marked the introduction of Cumberlands
    products into international markets. In addition to Australia,
    Phebra has exclusive marketing rights to Acetadote for New
    Zealand and has obtained marketing approval in that country.
    MANUFACTURING AND
    DISTRIBUTION
    We partner certain non-core, capital-intensive functions,
    including manufacturing and distribution. Our executives are
    experienced in these areas and manage these third-party
    relationships with a focus on quality assurance.
    Manufacturing
    Our key manufacturing relationships include:
| Ø | In July 2000, we established an international manufacturing alliance with a predecessor to Hospira Australia Pty. Ltd., or Hospira. Hospira sources active pharmaceutical ingredients, or APIs, and manufactures Caldolor for us under an agreement that expires in June 2014, subject to early termination upon 45 days prior notice in the event of uncured material breach by us or Hospira. The agreement will automatically renew for successive three-year terms unless Hospira or we provide at least 12 months prior written notice of non-renewal. Under the agreement, we pay Hospira a transfer price per unit of Caldolor supplied. In addition, we reimburse Hospira for agreed-upon development, regulatory and inspection and audit costs. | 
| Ø | Bioniche Teoranta, or Bioniche, sources APIs and has manufactured our Acetadote product for sale in the U.S. at its FDA-approved manufacturing facility in Ireland. Our relationship with Bioniche began in January 2002. Bioniche manufactures and packages Acetadote for us, and we purchase Acetadote from Bioniche pursuant to an agreement that we are currently renegotiating. | 
| Ø | Inalco S.p.A. and Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., or collectively Inalco, from which we licensed exclusive U.S. commercialization rights to Kristalose in April 2006, source APIs and supply us with the product under an agreement that expires in 2021. The agreement renews automatically for successive three-year terms unless we or Inalco provide written notice of intent not to renew at least 12 months prior to expiration of a term. Either we or Inalco may terminate this agreement upon at least 45 days prior written notice in the event of uncured material breach. Under the agreement, we are required to pay Inalco a transfer price per unit of Kristalose supplied and a percentage royalty in the low to mid single-digits throughout the term of the agreement based on our net sales of Kristalose. We are required to purchase minimum quantities of Kristalose. In 2010, Inalco sold its facility that manufactured the API for Kristalose, resulting in shipping delays and possible increases in supply prices. We are currently in discussions with Inalco regarding these price increases, as well as an amendment to the Inalco agreement. | 
| Ø | We entered into an agreement with Bayer Healthcare, LLC, or Bayer, in February 2008 for the manufacture of Caldolor and Acetadote. The agreement expires in February 2013, subject to early termination upon 30 days prior written notice in the event of uncured material breach by us or Bayer. The agreement will automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless Bayer or we provide at least six months prior written notice of non-renewal. Under the agreement, we pay Bayer a transfer price per each unit of Caldolor or Acetadote supplied. In addition, we pay Bayer for agreed upon development costs. | 
    13
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Distribution
    Like many other pharmaceutical companies, we employ an outside
    third-party logistics contractor to facilitate our distribution
    efforts. Since August 2002, Specialty Pharmaceutical Services,
    or SPS, (formerly CORD Logistics, Inc.) has exclusively handled
    all aspects of our product logistics efforts, including
    warehousing, shipping, customer billing and collections. SPS is
    a division of Cardinal. SPSs main facility is located
    outside of Nashville, Tennessee, with more than
    325,000 square feet of space and a well-established
    infrastructure. In 2008, SPS opened a second, distribution-only
    facility in Reno, Nevada, with an additional 88,000 square
    feet of space. We began utilizing this facility for distribution
    to certain locations in the second half of 2008. We maintain
    ownership of our finished products until sale to our customers.
    INTELLECTUAL
    PROPERTY
    We seek to protect our products from competition through a
    combination of patents, trademarks, trade secrets, FDA
    exclusivity and contractual restrictions on disclosure.
    Proprietary rights, including patents, are an important element
    of our business. We seek to protect our proprietary information
    by requiring our employees, consultants, contractors and other
    advisors to execute agreements providing for protection of our
    confidential information upon commencement of their employment
    or engagement. We also require confidentiality agreements from
    entities that receive our confidential data or materials.
    Acetadote
    Acetadote was approved by the FDA in January 2004 as an orphan
    drug for the intravenous treatment of acetaminophen overdose. As
    an orphan drug, we were entitled to seven years of marketing
    exclusivity for the treatment of this approved indication, which
    expired in January 2011. In January 2011, we received FDA
    approval for our next generation, new formulation of Acetadote,
    for which we have applied for patent protection through
    U.S. patent application No. 11/209,804, as well as
    through international application No. PCT/US06/20691, both
    of which are directed to acetylcysteine compositions, methods of
    making the same and methods of using the same. In addition, we
    have an exclusive, worldwide license to NAC clinical data from
    Newcastle Master Misercordiae Hospital in Australia. We have no
    expected outstanding payment obligations pursuant to this
    contract.
    Caldolor
    We are the owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,727,286, which
    is directed to ibuprofen solution formulations, methods of
    making the same, and methods of using the same, and which
    expires in 2021. This U.S. patent is associated with our
    completed international application No. PCT/US01/42894. We
    have filed for international patent protection in association
    with this PCT application in various countries, some of which
    have been allowed and some of which remain pending.
    In 2009, we also filed the first of several new patent
    applications for Caldolor. Part of an ongoing initiative to
    protect the value of our intellectual property, the new
    applications address our proprietary method of dosing
    intravenous ibuprofen.
    We have an exclusive, worldwide license to clinical data for
    intravenous ibuprofen from Vanderbilt University, in
    consideration for royalty and other payment obligations related
    to Caldolor.
    In addition, we received three years marketing exclusivity upon
    receipt of FDA approval for Caldolor. We intend to seek further
    exclusivity from the FDA upon completion of successful pediatric
    clinical trials for the product.
    14
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Kristalose
    We are the exclusive licensee of U.S. Patent
    No. 5,480,491 owned by Inalco relating to Kristalose,
    directed to a process for preparation of crystalline lactulose.
    Related license rights include an exclusive license to use
    related Inalco know-how and the Kristalose trademark to
    manufacture, market and distribute Kristalose in the
    U.S. Under our agreement with Inalco, Inalco is solely
    responsible for prosecuting and maintaining both the patents and
    know-how that we license from them. Our license expires in 2021
    and is subject to earlier termination for material breach. Our
    payment obligations under this agreement are described under
    Manufacturing and DistributionManufacturing.
    COMPETITION
    The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense
    competition and rapid innovation. Our continued success in
    developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products will
    depend, in part, upon our ability to compete against existing
    and future products in our target markets. Competitive factors
    directly affecting our markets include but are not limited to:
| Ø | product attributes such as efficacy, safety, ease-of-use and cost-effectiveness; | 
| Ø | brand awareness and recognition driven by sales and marketing and distribution capabilities; | 
| Ø | intellectual property and other exclusivity rights; | 
| Ø | availability of resources to build and maintain developmental and commercial capabilities; | 
| Ø | successful business development activities; | 
| Ø | extent of third-party reimbursements; and | 
| Ø | establishment of advantageous collaborations to conduct development, manufacturing or commercialization efforts. | 
    A number of our competitors possess research and development and
    sales and marketing capabilities as well as financial resources
    greater than ours. These competitors, in addition to emerging
    companies and academic research institutions, may be developing,
    or in the future could develop, new technologies that could
    compete with our current and future products or render our
    products obsolete.
    Acetadote
    Acetadote is our injectable formulation of NAC for the treatment
    of acetaminophen overdose. NAC is accepted worldwide as the
    standard of care for acetaminophen overdose. Despite the
    availability of injectable NAC outside the United States,
    Acetadote, to our knowledge, is the only injectable NAC product
    approved in the U.S. to treat acetaminophen overdose. Our
    competitors in the acetaminophen overdose market are those
    companies selling orally administered NAC including, but not
    limited to, Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bedford Laboratories
    division of Ben Venue Laboratories, Inc., Roxane Laboratories,
    Inc. and Hospira Inc.
    Caldolor
    Caldolor is marketed for the treatment of pain and fever,
    primarily in a hospital setting. A variety of other products
    address the acute pain market:
| Ø | Morphine, the most commonly used product for the treatment of acute, post-operative pain, is manufactured and distributed by several generic pharmaceutical companies. | 
| Ø | DepoDur® is an extended release injectable formulation of morphine that is marketed by EKR Therapeutics, Inc. | 
    15
Table of Contents
    Part I
| Ø | Other generic injectable opioids, including fentanyl, meperidine and hydromorphone, address this market. | 
| Ø | Ketorolac (brand name Toradol®), an injectable NSAID, is also manufactured and distributed by several generic pharmaceutical companies. | 
| Ø | Ofirmev®, an injectable acetaminophen product, was approved by the FDA in 2010. | 
    We are aware of other product candidates in development to treat
    acute pain including injectable NSAIDs, novel opioids, new
    formulations of existing therapies and extended release
    anesthetics. We believe non-narcotic analgesics for the
    treatment of post-surgical pain are the primary potential
    competitors to Caldolor.
    In addition to the injectable analgesic products above, many
    companies are developing analgesics for specific indications
    such as migraine and neuropathic pain, oral extended-release
    forms of existing narcotic and non-narcotic products, and
    products with new methods of delivery such as transdermal. We
    are not aware of any approved injectable products indicated for
    the treatment of fever in the U.S. other than Caldolor and
    Ofirmev. There are, however, numerous drugs available to
    physicians to reduce fevers in hospital settings via oral
    administration to the patient, including ibuprofen,
    acetaminophen, and aspirin. These drugs are manufactured by
    numerous pharmaceutical companies.
    Kristalose
    Kristalose is a dry powder crystalline prescription formulation
    of lactulose indicated for the treatment of constipation. The
    U.S. constipation therapy market includes various
    prescription and OTC products. The prescription products which
    we believe are our primary competitors are
    Amitiza®
    and liquid lactuloses. Amitiza is indicated for the treatment of
    chronic idiopathic constipation in adults and is marketed by
    Sucampo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company
    Limited. Liquid lactulose products are marketed by a number of
    pharmaceutical companies.
    There are several hundred OTC products used to treat
    constipation marketed by numerous pharmaceutical and consumer
    health companies.
    MiraLax®
    (polyethylene glycol 3350), previously a prescription product,
    was indicated for the treatment of constipation and manufactured
    and marketed by Braintree Laboratories, Inc. Under an agreement
    with Braintree, Schering-Plough introduced MiraLax as an OTC
    product in February 2007.
    GOVERNMENT
    REGULATION
    Pharmaceutical companies are subject to extensive regulation by
    national, state, and local agencies in countries in which they
    do business. The manufacture, distribution, marketing and sale
    of pharmaceutical products is subject to government regulation
    in the U.S. and various foreign countries. Additionally, in
    the U.S., we must follow rules and regulations established by
    the FDA requiring the presentation of data indicating that our
    products are safe and efficacious and are manufactured in
    accordance with cGMP regulations. If we do not comply with
    applicable requirements, we may be fined, the government may
    refuse to approve our marketing applications or allow us to
    manufacture or market our products and we may be criminally
    prosecuted. We and our manufacturers and clinical research
    organizations may also be subject to regulations under other
    federal, state and local laws, including the Occupational Safety
    and Health Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the
    Clean Air Act and import, export and customs regulations as well
    as the laws and regulations of other countries.
    16
Table of Contents
    Part I
    FDA Approval
    Process
    The steps required to be taken before a new prescription drug
    may be marketed in the U.S. include:
| Ø | completion of pre-clinical laboratory and animal testing; | 
| Ø | the submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, which must be evaluated and found acceptable by the FDA before human clinical trials may commence; | 
| Ø | performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug for its intended use; and | 
| Ø | submission and approval of an NDA. | 
    The sponsor of the drug typically conducts human clinical trials
    in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In Phase
    I clinical trials, the product is tested in a small number of
    patients or healthy volunteers, primarily for safety at one or
    more dosages. In Phase II clinical trials, in addition to
    safety, the sponsor evaluates the efficacy of the product on
    targeted indications, and identifies possible adverse effects
    and safety risks in a patient population. Phase III
    clinical trials typically involve testing for safety and
    clinical efficacy in an expanded population at
    geographically-dispersed test sites.
    The FDA requires that clinical trials be conducted in accordance
    with the FDAs good clinical practices (GCP) requirements.
    The FDA may order the partial, temporary or permanent
    discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time or impose other
    sanctions if it believes that the clinical trial is not being
    conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an
    unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. The
    institutional review board (IRB), or ethics committee (outside
    of the U.S.), of each clinical site generally must approve the
    clinical trial design and patient informed consent and may also
    require the clinical trial at that site to be halted, either
    temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the
    IRBs requirements, or may impose other conditions.
    The results of the pre-clinical and clinical trials, together
    with, among other things, detailed information on the
    manufacture and composition of the product and proposed
    labeling, are submitted to the FDA in the form of an NDA for
    marketing approval. The FDA reviews all NDAs submitted before it
    accepts them for filing and may request additional information
    rather than accepting an NDA for filing. Once the submission is
    accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the
    NDA. Under the policies agreed to by the FDA under the
    Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA has ten months
    in which to complete its initial review of a standard NDA and
    respond to the applicant. The review process and the PDUFA goal
    date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the
    NDA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or
    clarification regarding information already provided in the
    submission within the last three months of the PDUFA goal date.
    If the FDAs evaluations of the NDA and the clinical and
    manufacturing procedures and facilities are favorable, the FDA
    may issue an approval letter. The FDA may also issue an
    approvable letter setting forth further conditions that must be
    met in order to secure final approval of the NDA. If and when
    those conditions have been met to the FDAs satisfaction,
    the FDA will issue an approval letter. An approval letter
    authorizes commercial marketing of the drug for certain
    indications. According to the FDA, the median total approval
    time for NDAs approved during calendar year 2004 was
    approximately 13 months for standard applications. If the
    FDAs evaluations of the NDA submission and the clinical
    and manufacturing procedures and facilities are not favorable,
    it may refuse to approve the NDA and issue a not-approvable
    letter. The time and cost of completing these steps and
    obtaining FDA approval can vary dramatically depending on the
    drug. However, to complete these steps for a novel drug can take
    many years and cost millions of dollars.
    17
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Section 505(b)(2)
    New Drug Applications
    As an alternate path for FDA approval of new indications or new
    formulations of previously-approved products, a company may file
    a Section 505(b)(2) NDA, instead of a
    stand-alone or full NDA.
    Section 505(b)(2) of the FDC Act was enacted as part of the
    Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984,
    otherwise known as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments.
    Section 505(b)(2) permits the submission of an NDA where at
    least some of the information required for approval comes from
    studies not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the
    applicant has not obtained a right of reference. Some examples
    of products that may be allowed to follow a 505(b)(2) path to
    approval are drugs which have a new dosage form, strength, route
    of administration, formulation or indication.
    We successfully secured FDA approvals for Acetadote in January
    2004 and for Caldolor in June 2009 pursuant to the 505(b)(2)
    pathway. Upon approval of a full or 505(b)(2) NDA, a
    drug may be marketed only for the FDA-approved indications in
    the approved dosage forms. Further clinical trials are necessary
    to gain approval for the use of the product for any additional
    indications or dosage forms. The FDA may also require
    post-market reporting and may require surveillance programs to
    monitor the side effects of the drug, which may result in
    withdrawal of approval after marketing begins.
    Special Protocol
    Assessment Process
    The special protocol assessment, or SPA, process generally
    involves FDA evaluation of a proposed Phase III clinical
    trial protocol and a commitment from the FDA that the design and
    analysis of the trial are adequate to support approval of an
    NDA, if the trial is performed according to the SPA and meets
    its endpoints. The FDAs guidance on the SPA process
    indicates that SPAs are designed to evaluate individual clinical
    trial protocols primarily in response to specific questions
    posed by the sponsors. In practice, the sponsor of a product
    candidate may request an SPA for proposed Phase III trial
    objectives, designs, clinical endpoints and analyses. A request
    for an SPA is submitted in the form of a separate amendment to
    an IND, and the FDAs evaluation generally will be
    completed within a
    45-day
    review period under applicable PDUFA goals, provided that the
    trials have been the subject of discussion at an
    end-of-Phase II
    and pre-Phase III meeting with the FDA, or in other limited
    cases.
    On June 14, 2004, we submitted a request for SPA of our
    Caldolor Phase III clinical study. During a meeting with
    the FDA on September 29, 2004, the FDA confirmed that the
    efficacy data from our study of post-operative pain with a
    positive outcome was considered sufficient to support a
    505(b)(2) application for the pain indication. Final
    determinations by the FDA with respect to a product candidate,
    including as to the scope of its labeling, are made
    after a complete review of the applicable NDA and are based on
    the entire data in the application.
    Orphan Drug
    Designation
    The Orphan Drug Act of 1983, or Orphan Drug Act, encourages
    manufacturers to seek approval of products intended to treat
    rare diseases and conditions with a prevalence of
    fewer than 200,000 patients in the U.S. or for which
    there is no reasonable expectation of recovering the development
    costs for the product. For products that receive orphan drug
    designation by the FDA, the Orphan Drug Act provides tax credits
    for clinical research, FDA assistance with protocol design,
    eligibility for FDA grants to fund clinical studies, waiver of
    the FDA application fee, and a period of seven years of
    marketing exclusivity for the product following FDA marketing
    approval. Acetadote received Orphan Drug designation in October
    2001 and was approved by the FDA for the intravenous treatment
    of moderate to severe acetaminophen overdose in January 2004. As
    an orphan drug, Acetadote was entitled to marketing exclusivity
    until January 2011 for the treatment of this approved
    indication, and we intend to seek additional exclusivity for
    this product through new potential indications. This exclusivity
    would not prevent a product with a different formulation from
    competing with Acetadote, however.
    18
Table of Contents
    Part I
    The Hatch-Waxman
    Act
    The Hatch-Waxman Act provides three years of marketing
    exclusivity for the approval of new and supplemental NDAs,
    including Section 505(b)(2) NDAs, for, among other things,
    new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug, if
    new clinical investigations that were conducted or sponsored by
    the applicant are essential to the approval of the application.
    It is under this provision that we received three years
    marketing exclusivity for Caldolor upon receipt of FDA approval
    in June 2009.
    Recent Health
    Care Legislation
    On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the
    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or PPACA. On
    March 30, 2010, the Health Care and Education
    Reconciliation Act of 2010, or HCERA, was enacted into law,
    which modified the revenue provisions of the PPACA. The PPACA as
    amended by the HCERA constitutes the healthcare reform
    legislation. The following highlights certain provisions of the
    legislation that may affect us.
    Pharmaceutical
    Industry Fee
    Beginning in calendar-year 2011, an annual fee will be imposed
    on pharmaceutical manufacturers and importers that sell branded
    prescription drugs to specified government programs (e.g.,
    Medicare Part D, Medicare Part B, Medicaid, Department
    of Veterans Affairs programs, Department of Defense programs and
    TRICARE). The annual fee will be allocated to companies based on
    their previous calendar-year market share using sales data that
    the government agencies that purchase the pharmaceuticals will
    provide to the Treasury Department. Although we participate in
    governmental programs that would subject us to this fee, our
    sales volume in such programs is less than $10 million,
    with the first $5 million of sales being exempt from the
    fee. We do not anticipate this fee will have a material impact
    on our results of operations.
    Medicaid
    Rebate Rate
    We currently provide rebates for Kristalose sold to Medicaid
    beneficiaries. Effective January 1, 2010, the rebate
    increased from eleven percent to thirteen percent of the average
    manufacturer price. Our sales of Kristalose under the Medicaid
    program have been increasing. We expect the increased rebate
    percentage will impact our net revenue for Kristalose by less
    than $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
    Federal Grant
    Funding
    The legislation established a fifty-percent nonrefundable
    investment tax credit or grant for qualified investments in
    qualifying therapeutic discovery projects. The provision
    allocated $1 billion during the two-year period
    (2009-2010)
    for the program. The credit is available only to companies with
    250 or fewer employees. The qualified investment for any tax
    year is the aggregate amount of the costs paid or incurred in
    that year for expenses necessary for and directly related to the
    conduct of the qualifying therapeutic discovery project. We
    submitted applications for four of our research projects prior
    to the deadline of July 21, 2010. In November 2010, we
    received a response from the Internal Revenue Service indicating
    approval for funding. We received grants of approximately
    $0.9 million based on actual 2009 and 2010 expenditures.
    Other Regulatory
    Requirements
    Regulations continue to apply to pharmaceutical products after
    FDA approval occurs. Post-marketing safety surveillance is
    required in order to continue to market an approved product. The
    FDA also may, in its discretion, require post-marketing testing
    and surveillance to monitor the effects of approved
    19
Table of Contents
    Part I
    products or place conditions on any approvals that could
    restrict the commercial applications of these products.
    If we seek to make certain changes to an FDA-approved product,
    such as promoting or labeling a product for a new indication,
    making certain manufacturing changes or product enhancements or
    adding labeling claims, we will need FDA review and approval
    before the change can be implemented. While physicians may use
    products for indications that have not been approved by the FDA,
    we may not label or promote the product for an indication that
    has not been approved. Securing FDA approval for new indications
    or product enhancements and, in some cases, for manufacturing
    and labeling claims, is generally a time-consuming and expensive
    process that may require us to conduct clinical trials under the
    FDAs IND regulations. Even if such studies are conducted,
    the FDA may not approve any change in a timely fashion, or at
    all. In addition, adverse experiences associated with use of the
    products must be reported to the FDA, and FDA rules govern how
    we can label, advertise or otherwise commercialize our products.
    In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical
    products, several other types of state and federal laws have
    been applied to restrict certain marketing practices in the
    pharmaceutical industry in recent years. These laws include
    anti-kickback statutes and false claims statutes. The federal
    health care program anti-kickback statute prohibits, among other
    things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or
    receiving remuneration to induce or in return for purchasing,
    leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order
    of any health care item or service reimbursable under Medicare,
    Medicaid or other federally financed health care programs. This
    statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between
    pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers,
    purchasers and formulary managers on the other. Violations of
    the anti-kickback statute are punishable by imprisonment,
    criminal fines, civil monetary penalties and exclusion from
    participation in federal health care programs. Federal false
    claims laws prohibit any person from knowingly presenting, or
    causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the
    federal government, or knowingly making, or causing to be made,
    a false statement to have a false claim paid. Recently, several
    pharmaceutical and other health care companies have been
    prosecuted under these laws for allegedly inflating drug prices
    they report to pricing services, which in turn were used by the
    government to set Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, and
    for allegedly providing free product to customers with the
    expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for
    the product.
    Outside of the U.S., our ability to market our products will
    also depend on receiving marketing authorizations from the
    appropriate regulatory authorities. The foreign regulatory
    approval process includes all of the risks associated with the
    FDA approval process described above. The requirements governing
    the conduct of clinical trials and marketing authorization vary
    widely from country to country.
    ENVIRONMENTAL
    MATTERS
    We are subject to federal, state, and local environmental laws
    and regulations and we believe that our operations comply with
    such regulations. We anticipate that the effects of compliance
    with federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to
    the discharge of materials into the environment will not have
    any material effect on our capital expenditures, earnings or
    competitive position.
    SEASONALITY
    There are no significant seasonal aspects to our business.
    BACKLOG
    Due to the relatively short lead-time required to fill orders
    for our products, backlog of orders is not considered material
    to our business.
    20
Table of Contents
    Part I
    EMPLOYEES
    As of March 1, 2011, we had 131 full-time employees.
    In addition, we believe that utilizing experienced, independent
    contractors and consultants is a cost-efficient and effective
    way to accomplish our goals and a number of individuals have
    provided or are currently providing services to us pursuant to
    agreements between the individuals or their employers and us.
    None of our employees are represented by a collective bargaining
    unit. We believe that we have positive relationships with our
    employees.
    21
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Item 1A:
    Risk Factors
    You should carefully consider the risk factors described
    below and throughout this report, which could materially affect
    our business. There are also risks that are not presently known
    or not presently material, as well as the other information set
    forth in this report that could materially affect our business.
    In addition, in our periodic filings with the SEC, press
    releases and other statements, we discuss estimates and
    projections regarding our future performance and business
    outlook. By their nature, such forward-looking
    statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties
    and other factors that in some cases are out of our control. For
    a further discussion of forward-looking statements, please refer
    to the section entitled Special Note Regarding
    Forward-Looking Statements. These factors could cause our
    actual results to differ materially from our historical results
    or our present expectations and projections. These risk factors
    and uncertainties include, but are not limited to the
    following:
    RISKS RELATED TO
    OUR BUSINESS
    An adverse
    development regarding our products could have a material and
    adverse impact on our future revenues and
    profitability.
    A number of factors may impact the effectiveness of our
    marketing and sales activities and the demand for our products,
    including:
| Ø | The prices of our products relative to other drugs or competing treatments; | 
| Ø | Any unfavorable publicity concerning us, our products, or the markets for these products such as information concerning product contamination or other safety issues in either of our product markets, whether or not directly involving our products; | 
| Ø | Perception by physicians and other members of the healthcare community of the safety or efficacy of our products or competing products; | 
| Ø | Regulatory developments related to our marketing and promotional practices or the manufacture or continued use of our products; | 
| Ø | Changes in intellectual property protection available for our products or competing treatments; | 
| Ø | The availability and level of third-party reimbursement for sales of our products; and | 
| Ø | The continued availability of adequate supplies of our products to meet demand. | 
    If demand for our products weaken, our revenues and
    profitability will likely decline. Known adverse effects of our
    marketed products are documented in product labeling, including
    the product package inserts, medical information disclosed to
    medical professionals and all marketing-related materials. At
    this time, no unforeseen or serious adverse effects outside of
    those specified in current product labeling have been directly
    attributed to our approved products.
    If any
    manufacturer we rely upon fails to produce our products in the
    amounts we require on a timely basis, or fails to comply with
    stringent regulations applicable to pharmaceutical drug
    manufacturers, we may be unable to meet demand for our products
    and may lose potential revenues.
    We do not manufacture any of our products, and we do not
    currently plan to develop any capacity to do so. Our dependence
    upon third parties for the manufacture of products could
    adversely affect our profit margins or our ability to develop
    and deliver products on a timely and competitive basis. If for
    any reason we are unable to obtain or retain third-party
    manufacturers on commercially acceptable terms, we may not be
    able to sell our products as planned. Furthermore, if we
    encounter delays or
    22
Table of Contents
    Part I
    difficulties with contract manufacturers in producing our
    products, the distribution, marketing and subsequent sales of
    these products could be adversely affected.
    Caldolor is manufactured at Hospira Australia Pty. Ltd.s
    facility in Australia and Bayers facility in Kansas.
    Beginning in early 2011, Acetadote is manufactured primarily at
    Bayers facility in Kansas and Bioniches
    manufacturing plant in Ireland is an alternative manufacturing
    source for Acetadote. The active pharmaceutical ingredient for
    Kristalose is manufactured at a single facility in Italy. If any
    one of these facilities is damaged or destroyed, or if local
    conditions result in a work stoppage, we could suffer an
    inability to meet demand for our products. Kristalose is
    manufactured through a complex process involving trade secrets
    of the manufacturer; therefore, it would be particularly
    difficult to find a new manufacturer of Kristalose on an
    expedited basis. As a result of these factors, our ability to
    manufacture Kristalose may be substantially impaired if the
    manufacturer is unable or unwilling to supply sufficient
    quantities of the product.
    In addition, all manufacturers of our products and product
    candidates must comply with current good manufacturing
    practices, referred to as cGMP, enforced by the FDA through its
    facilities inspection program. These requirements include
    quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of
    records and documentation. Manufacturers of our products may be
    unable to comply with cGMP requirements and with other FDA,
    state and foreign regulatory requirements.
    We have no control over our manufacturers compliance with
    these regulations and standards. If our third-party
    manufacturers do not comply with these requirements, we could be
    subject to:
| Ø | fines and civil penalties; | 
| Ø | suspension of production or distribution; | 
| Ø | suspension or delay in product approval; | 
| Ø | product seizure or recall; and | 
| Ø | withdrawal of product approval. | 
    We are dependent
    on a variety of other third parties. If these third parties fail
    to perform as we expect, our operations could be disrupted and
    our financial results could suffer.
    We have a relatively small internal infrastructure. We rely on a
    variety of third parties, other than our third-party
    manufacturers, to help us operate our business. Other third
    parties on which we rely include:
| Ø | Cardinal Health Specialty Pharmaceutical Services, a logistics and fulfillment company and business unit of Cardinal, which warehouses and ships our marketed products; and | 
| Ø | Vanderbilt University and the Tennessee Technology Development Corporation, co-owners with us of CET, and the universities that collaborate with us in connection with CETs research and development programs. | 
    If these third parties do not continue to provide services to
    us, or collaborate with us, we might not be able to obtain
    others who can serve these functions. This could disrupt our
    business operations, increase our operating expenses or
    otherwise adversely affect our operating results.
    Competitive
    pressures could reduce our revenues and profits.
    The pharmaceutical industry is intensely competitive. Our
    strategy is to target differentiated products in specialized
    markets. However, this strategy does not relieve us from
    competitive pressures, and can entail distinct competitive
    risks. Certain of our competitors do not aggressively promote
    their products in our markets. An increase in promotional
    activity in our markets could result in large shifts in market
    share, adversely affecting us.
    23
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Our competitors may sell or develop drugs that are more
    effective and useful and less costly than ours, and they may be
    more successful in manufacturing and marketing their products.
    Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial and
    marketing resources than we do. Additional competitors may enter
    our markets.
    The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by constant and
    significant investment in new product development, which can
    result in rapid technological change. The introduction of new
    products could substantially reduce our market share or render
    our products obsolete. The selling prices of pharmaceutical
    products tend to decline as competition increases, through new
    product introduction or otherwise, which could reduce our
    revenues and profitability.
    Governmental and private health care payors have recently
    emphasized substitution of branded pharmaceuticals with less
    expensive generic equivalents. An increase in the sales of
    generic pharmaceutical products could result in a decrease in
    revenues of branded pharmaceuticals. While there are no generic
    equivalents competing with our products at this time, in the
    future we could face generic competition.
    The commercial
    launch of Caldolor is subject to many internal and external
    challenges and if we cannot overcome these challenges in a
    timely manner, our future revenues and profits could be
    materially and adversely impacted.
    Caldolor represents a substantial portion of our future growth.
    Caldolor was approved by the FDA in June 2009, and we started
    commercializing Caldolor in the United States in September 2009.
    The commercial success of Caldolor is dependent on many
    third-parties, including physicians, pharmacists, hospital
    pharmacy and therapeutics committees, or P&T committees,
    suppliers and distributors, all of whom we have little or no
    control over. We expect Caldolor to be administered primarily to
    hospitalized patients who are unable to receive oral therapies
    for the treatment of pain or fever. Before we can distribute
    Caldolor to any new hospital customers, Caldolor must be
    approved for addition to the hospitals formulary lists by
    their P&T committees. A hospitals P&T committee
    generally governs all matters pertaining to the use of
    medications within the institution, including review of
    medication formulary data and recommendations of drugs to the
    medical staff. We cannot guarantee that we will be successful in
    getting the approvals we need from enough P&T committees to
    be able to optimize hospital sales of Caldolor. Even if we
    obtain hospital approval for Caldolor, we must still convince
    individual hospital physicians to prescribe Caldolor repeatedly.
    Because Caldolor is a new drug with little track record, any
    mistakes made in the timely supply of Caldolor, education about
    how to properly administer Caldolor or any unexpected side
    effects that develop from use of the drug, may lead physicians
    to not accept Caldolor as a viable treatment alternative.
    In addition to the extensive external efforts required, the
    commercial success of Caldolor also depends on our ability to
    coordinate supply, distribution, marketing, sales and education
    efforts. Internally, the successful commercialization of
    Caldolor depends on our ability to maintain a well-trained,
    qualified sales force, to equip our sales force with effective
    supportive materials, to target appropriate markets and to
    accurately price Caldolor. In addition, as Caldolor is a newly
    marketed drug, our sales force will need to be credible and
    persuasive in order to convince physicians and pharmacists in
    target markets to use Caldolor. If we are unable to provide our
    sales force with convincing supportive materials, such as
    clinical papers, sales literature and formulary kits, they may
    not be able to sell Caldolor in sufficient quantities. We must
    also target the right hospitals across the United States. Any
    failure in sales force coverage could limit our ability to
    generate market acceptance for Caldolor. We also have set a
    price for Caldolor that we believe hospitals and other
    purchasers are willing to pay, but that will also generate
    sufficient profits. If we have set a price for Caldolor that
    hospitals consider too high, we may need to subsequently reduce
    the price for Caldolor. If we have set the initial price for
    Caldolor too low, we may not generate adequate profits and may
    not be able to raise the price of the drug in the future.
    24
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Any attempt by us
    to expand the potential market for Caldolor is subject to
    limitations.
    In its June 2009 Caldolor approval letter, the FDA required us
    to conduct two additional Phase IV pediatric studies by
    2011 and 2012, respectively. If the results of these
    Phase IV clinical studies are not favorable, we may not be
    able to expand the market for Caldolor to children
    ages 1-16.
    We may also experience delays associated with these required
    Phase IV clinical studies potentially resulting from, among
    other factors, difficulty enrolling pediatric patients. Such
    delays could impact our ability to obtain an additional six
    months of FDA exclusivity.
    In addition, we have only obtained regulatory approval to market
    Caldolor in the United States. In foreign jurisdictions such as
    Canada, New Zealand, South Korea, Southeast Asia and Australia
    we have licensed the right to market Caldolor to third parties.
    These third parties are responsible for seeking regulatory
    approval for Caldolor in their respective jurisdictions. We have
    no control over these third parties and cannot be sure that
    marketing approval for Caldolor will be obtained outside the
    United States.
    Our future growth
    depends on our ability to identify and acquire rights to
    products. If we do not successfully identify and acquire rights
    to products and successfully integrate them into our operations,
    our growth opportunities may be limited.
    We acquired rights to Caldolor, Acetadote and Kristalose. Our
    business strategy is to continue to acquire rights to
    FDA-approved products as well as pharmaceutical product
    candidates in the late stages of development. We do not plan to
    conduct basic research or pre-clinical product development,
    except to the extent of our investment in CET. As compared to
    large multi-national pharmaceutical companies, we have limited
    resources to acquire third-party products, businesses and
    technologies and integrate them into our current infrastructure.
    Many acquisition opportunities involve competition among several
    potential purchasers including large multi-national
    pharmaceutical companies and other competitors that have access
    to greater financial resources than we do. With future
    acquisitions, we may face financial and operational risks and
    uncertainties. We may not be able to engage in future product
    acquisitions, and those we do complete may not be beneficial to
    us in the long term.
    If we are unable
    to maintain and build an effective sales and marketing
    infrastructure, we will not be able to commercialize and grow
    our products and product candidates successfully.
    As we grow, we may not be able to secure sales personnel or
    organizations that are adequate in number or expertise to
    successfully market and sell our products. This risk would be
    accentuated if we acquire products in areas outside of hospital
    acute care and gastroenterology, since our sales forces
    specialize in these areas. If we are unable to expand our sales
    and marketing capability or any other capabilities necessary to
    commercialize our products and product candidates, we will need
    to contract with third parties to market and sell our products.
    If we are unable to establish and maintain adequate sales and
    marketing capabilities, we may not be able to increase our
    product revenue, may generate increased expenses and may not
    continue to be profitable.
    If governmental
    or third-party payors do not provide adequate reimbursement for
    our products, our revenue and prospects for continued
    profitability may be limited.
    Our financial success depends, in part, on the availability of
    adequate reimbursement from third-party healthcare payors. Such
    third-party payors include governmental health programs such as
    Medicare and Medicaid, managed care providers and private health
    insurers. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the
    pricing of medical products and services, while governments
    continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the
    cost of healthcare. Adoption of such legislation could further
    limit reimbursement for pharmaceuticals.
    25
Table of Contents
    Part I
    For example, in March 2010, the U.S. government passed into
    law and enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,
    as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability
    Reconciliation Act (collectively, Health Care Reform
    Act). Among other provisions, the Health Care Reform Act
    calls for an increase in certain Medicare drug rebates paid by
    pharmaceutical manufacturers and an industry fee imposed on
    pharmaceutical manufacturers according to the individual
    manufacturers relative percentage of total industry sales
    to specified government programs. At this time no assurances can
    be given that these measures, or any other measures included in
    the Health Care Reform Act, will not have an adverse effect on
    our revenues in the future. Furthermore, future cost control
    initiatives, legislation, and regulations could decrease the
    price that we would receive for any products, which would limit
    our revenue and profitability.
    Also, reimbursement practices of third-party payors might
    preclude us from achieving market acceptance for our products or
    maintaining price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate
    return on our investment in product acquisition and development.
    If we cannot obtain adequate reimbursement levels, our business,
    financial condition and results of operations would be
    materially and adversely affected.
    Formulary
    practices of third-party payors could adversely affect our
    competitive position.
    Many managed health care organizations are now controlling the
    pharmaceutical products listed on their formulary lists. Having
    products listed on these formulary lists creates competition
    among pharmaceutical companies which, in turn, has created a
    trend of downward pricing pressure in our industry. In addition,
    many managed care organizations are pursuing various ways to
    reduce pharmaceutical costs and are considering formulary
    contracts primarily with those pharmaceutical companies that can
    offer a full line of products for a given therapy sector or
    disease state. Our products might not be included on the
    formulary lists of managed care organizations, and downward
    pricing pressure in our industry generally could negatively
    impact our operations.
    Continued
    consolidation of distributor networks in the pharmaceutical
    industry as well as increases in retailer concentration may
    limit our ability to profitably sell our products.
    We sell most of our products to large pharmaceutical
    wholesalers, who in turn sell to, thereby supplying, hospitals
    and retail pharmacies. The distribution network for
    pharmaceutical products has become increasingly consolidated in
    recent years. Further consolidation or financial difficulties
    could also cause our customers to reduce the amounts of our
    products that they purchase, which would materially and
    adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
    of operations.
    Our CET joint
    initiative may not result in our gaining access to commercially
    viable products.
    Our CET joint initiative with Vanderbilt University and
    Tennessee Technology Development Corporation is designed to help
    us investigate, in a cost-effective manner, early-stage products
    and technologies. However, we may never gain access to
    commercially viable products from CET for a variety of reasons,
    including:
| Ø | CET investigates early-stage products, which have the greatest risk of failure prior to FDA approval and commercialization; | 
| Ø | In some programs, we do not have pre-set rights to product candidates developed by CET. We would need to agree with CET and its collaborators on the terms of any product licensed to, or acquired by, us; | 
| Ø | We rely principally on government grants to fund CETs research and development programs. If these grants were no longer available, we or our co-owners might be unable or unwilling to fund CET operations at current levels or at all; | 
    26
Table of Contents
    Part I
| Ø | We may become involved in disputes with our co-owners regarding CET policy or operations, such as how best to deploy CET assets or which product opportunities to pursue. Disagreement could disrupt or halt product development; and | 
| Ø | CET may disagree with one of the various universities with which CET is collaborating on research. A disagreement could disrupt or halt product development. | 
    We depend on our
    key personnel, the loss of whom would adversely affect our
    operations. If we fail to attract and retain the talent required
    for our business, our business will be materially
    harmed.
    We are a relatively small company, and we depend to a great
    extent on principal members of our management and scientific
    staff. If we lose the services of any key personnel, in
    particular, A.J. Kazimi, our Chief Executive Officer, it could
    have a material adverse effect on our business prospects. We
    currently have a key man life insurance policy covering the life
    of Mr. Kazimi. We have entered into agreements with each of
    our employees that contain restrictive covenants relating to
    non-competition and non-solicitation of our customers and
    suppliers for one year after termination of employment.
    Nevertheless, each of our officers and key employees may
    terminate his or her employment at any time without notice and
    without cause or good reason, and so as a practical matter these
    agreements do not guarantee the continued service of these
    employees. Our success depends on our ability to attract and
    retain highly qualified scientific, technical and managerial
    personnel and research partners. Competition among
    pharmaceutical companies for qualified employees is intense, and
    we may not be able to retain existing personnel or attract and
    retain qualified staff in the future. If we experience
    difficulties in hiring and retaining personnel in key positions,
    we could suffer from delays in product development, loss of
    customers and sales and diversion of management resources, which
    could adversely affect operating results.
    We face potential
    product liability exposure, and if successful claims are brought
    against us, we may incur substantial liability for a product or
    product candidate and may have to limit its
    commercialization.
    We face an inherent risk of product liability lawsuits related
    to the testing of our product candidates and the commercial sale
    of our products. An individual may bring a liability claim
    against us if one of our product candidates or products causes,
    or appears to have caused, an injury. If we cannot successfully
    defend ourselves against the product liability claim, we may
    incur substantial liabilities. Liability claims may result in:
| Ø | decreased demand for our products; | 
| Ø | injury to our reputation; | 
| Ø | withdrawal of clinical trial participants; | 
| Ø | significant litigation costs; | 
| Ø | substantial monetary awards to or costly settlement with patients; | 
| Ø | product recalls; | 
| Ø | loss of revenue; and | 
| Ø | the inability to commercialize our product candidates. | 
    We are highly dependent upon medical and patient perceptions of
    us and the safety and quality of our products. We could be
    adversely affected if we or our products are subject to negative
    publicity. We could also be adversely affected if any of our
    products or any similar products sold by other companies prove
    to be, or are asserted to be, harmful to patients. Also, because
    of our dependence upon medical and patient perceptions, any
    adverse publicity associated with illness or other adverse
    effects resulting
    27
Table of Contents
    Part I
    from the use or misuse of our products or any similar products
    sold by other companies could have a material adverse impact on
    our results of operations.
    We have product liability insurance that covers our clinical
    trials and the marketing and sale of our products up to a
    $10 million annual aggregate limit, subject to specified
    deductibles. Our current or future insurance coverage may prove
    insufficient to cover any liability claims brought against us.
    Because of the increasing costs of insurance coverage, we may
    not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost
    or obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy
    any liability that may arise.
    Regulatory
    approval for any approved product is limited by the FDA to those
    specific indications and conditions for which clinical safety
    and efficacy have been demonstrated.
    Any regulatory approval is limited to those specific diseases
    and indications for which a product is deemed to be safe and
    effective by the FDA. In addition to the FDA approval required
    for new formulations, any new indication for an approved product
    also requires FDA approval. If we are not able to obtain FDA
    approval for any desired future indications for our products,
    our ability to effectively market and sell our products may be
    reduced and our business may be adversely affected.
    While physicians may choose to prescribe drugs for uses that are
    not described in the products labeling and for uses that
    differ from those tested in clinical studies and approved by the
    regulatory authorities, our ability to promote the products is
    limited to those indications that are specifically approved by
    the FDA. These off-label uses are common across
    medical specialties and may constitute an appropriate treatment
    for some patients in varied circumstances. Regulatory
    authorities in the U.S. generally do not regulate the
    behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. Regulatory
    authorities do, however, restrict communications by
    pharmaceutical companies on the subject of off-label use. If our
    promotional activities fail to comply with these regulations or
    guidelines, we may be subject to warnings from, or enforcement
    action by, these authorities. In addition, our failure to follow
    FDA rules and guidelines relating to promotion and advertising
    may cause the FDA to suspend or withdraw an approved product
    from the market, require a recall or institute fines, or could
    result in disgorgement of money, operating restrictions,
    injunctions or criminal prosecution, any of which could harm our
    business.
    Our business and
    operations would suffer in the event of system
    failures.
    Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal
    computer systems are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses,
    unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and
    telecommunication and electrical failures. Any system failure,
    accident or security breach that causes interruptions in our
    operations could result in a material disruption of our drug
    development programs. To the extent that any disruption or
    security breach results in a loss or damage to our data or
    applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or
    proprietary information, we may incur liability and the further
    development of our products or product candidates may be delayed.
    RISKS RELATING TO
    GOVERNMENT REGULATION
    We are subject to
    stringent government regulation. All of our products face
    regulatory challenges.
    Virtually all aspects of our business activities are regulated
    by government agencies. The manufacturing, processing,
    formulation, packaging, labeling, distribution, promotion and
    sampling, and advertising of our products, and disposal of waste
    products arising from such activities, are subject to
    governmental regulation. These activities are regulated by one
    or more of the FDA, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the
    Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Department of
    Agriculture and the
    28
Table of Contents
    Part I
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as by
    comparable agencies in foreign countries. These activities are
    also regulated by various agencies of the states and localities
    in which our products are sold. For more information, see
    BusinessGovernment Regulation.
    Like all pharmaceutical manufacturers, we are subject to
    regulation by the FDA under the authority of the Federal Food,
    Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDC Act). All new drugs must
    be the subject of an FDA-approved NDA before they may be
    marketed in the United States. The FDA has the authority to
    withdraw existing NDA approvals and to review the regulatory
    status of products marketed under the enforcement policy. The
    FDA may require an approved NDA for any drug product marketed
    under the enforcement policy if new information reveals
    questions about the drugs safety and effectiveness. All
    drugs must be manufactured in conformity with cGMP, and drug
    products subject to an approved NDA must be manufactured,
    processed, packaged, held and labeled in accordance with
    information contained in the NDA. Since we rely on third parties
    to manufacture our products, cGMP requirements directly affect
    our third party manufacturers and indirectly affect us. The
    manufacturing facilities of our third-party manufacturers are
    continually subject to inspection by such governmental agencies,
    and manufacturing operations could be interrupted or halted in
    any such facilities if such inspections prove unsatisfactory.
    Our third-party manufacturers are subject to periodic inspection
    by the FDA to assure such compliance.
    Pharmaceutical products must be distributed, sampled and
    promoted in accordance with FDA requirements. The FDA also
    regulates the advertising of prescription drugs. The FDA has the
    authority to request post-approval commitments that can be
    time-consuming and expensive.
    Under the FDC Act, the federal government has extensive
    enforcement powers over the activities of pharmaceutical
    manufacturers to ensure compliance with FDA regulations. Those
    powers include, but are not limited to, the authority to
    initiate court action to seize unapproved or non-complying
    products, to enjoin non-complying activities, to halt
    manufacturing operations that are not in compliance with cGMP,
    and to seek civil monetary and criminal penalties. The
    initiation of any of these enforcement activities, including the
    restriction or prohibition on sales of our products, could
    materially adversely affect our business, financial condition
    and results of operations.
    Any change in the FDAs enforcement policy could have a
    material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
    results of operations.
    We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations or
    statutes or legal interpretation, when and if promulgated or
    enacted, may have on our business in the future. Such changes,
    or new legislation, could have a material adverse effect on our
    business, financial condition and results of operations.
    Proposed
    legislation may permit re-importation of drugs from other
    countries into the U.S., including foreign countries where the
    drugs are sold at lower prices than in the U.S., which could
    materially adversely affect our operating results and our
    overall financial condition.
    Legislation has been introduced in Congress that if enacted
    would permit more widespread re-importation of drugs from
    foreign countries into the U.S. which may include
    re-importation from foreign countries where the drugs are sold
    at lower prices than in the U.S. Such legislation, or
    similar regulatory changes, could decrease the price we receive
    for any approved products which, in turn could materially
    adversely affect our operating results and our overall financial
    condition.
    29
Table of Contents
    Part I
    RISKS RELATING TO
    INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
    Our strategy to
    secure and extend marketing exclusivity or patent rights may
    provide only limited protection from competition.
    We seek to secure and extend marketing exclusivity for our
    products through a variety of means, including FDA exclusivity
    and patent rights. Acetadote is indicated to prevent or lessen
    hepatic (liver) injury when administered intravenously within
    eight to ten hours after ingesting quantities of acetaminophen
    that are potentially toxic to the liver. Although a patent
    application and other applications relating to uses of Acetadote
    are in prosecution, they have not yet been issued. Barriers to
    competitive market entry include the time and cost associated
    with the development, regulatory approval and manufacturing of a
    similar formulation.
    We do not have composition of matter or
    use patents for our marketed products. We do have a
    U.S. patent, No. 6,727,286 for Caldolor, and some
    related international patents, which are directed to ibuprofen
    solution formulations, methods of making the same, and methods
    of using the same, and which are related to our formulation and
    manufacture of Caldolor. Additionally, the active ingredient in
    Caldoloribuprofenis in the public domain, and if a
    competitor were to develop a sufficiently distinct formulation,
    it could develop and seek FDA approval for another ibuprofen
    product that competes with Caldolor. Upon receipt of FDA
    approval in June 2009, we received three years of marketing
    exclusivity for Caldolor.
    Kristalose is manufactured under a contract with Inalco, which
    owns U.S. Patent No. 5,480,491, related to the
    manufacture of Kristalose. This patent is not directed to the
    composition or use of Kristalose and does not prevent a
    competitor from developing a formulation and developing and
    seeking FDA approval for a product that competes with Kristalose.
    While we consider patent protection when evaluating product
    acquisition opportunities, any products we acquire in the future
    may not have significant patent protection. Neither the
    U.S. Patent and Trademark Office nor the courts have a
    consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed or the
    degree of protection afforded under many pharmaceutical patents.
    Patent applications in the U.S. and many foreign
    jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months
    following the filing date of the first related application, and
    in some cases not at all. In addition, publication of
    discoveries in scientific literature often lags significantly
    behind actual discoveries. Therefore, neither we nor our
    licensors can be certain that we or they were the first to make
    the inventions claimed in our issued patents or pending patent
    applications, or that we or they were the first to file for
    protection of the inventions set forth in these patent
    applications. In addition, changes in either patent laws or in
    interpretations of patent laws in the U.S. and other
    countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or
    narrow the scope of our patent protection. Furthermore, our
    competitors may independently develop similar technologies or
    duplicate technology developed by us in a manner that does not
    infringe our patents or other intellectual property. As a result
    of these factors, our patent rights may not provide any
    commercially valuable protection from competing products.
    If we are unable
    to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information
    and know-how, the value of our technology and products could be
    adversely affected.
    In addition to patents, we rely upon trade secrets, unpatented
    proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation
    where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or
    attainable. For example, the manufacturing process for
    Kristalose involves substantial trade secrets and proprietary
    know-how. We have entered into confidentiality agreements with
    certain key employees and consultants pursuant to which such
    employees and consultants must assign to us any inventions
    relating to our business if made by them while they are our
    employees, as well as certain confidentiality agreements
    relating to the acquisition of rights to products.
    Confidentiality agreements can be breached, though,
    30
Table of Contents
    Part I
    and we might not have adequate remedies for any breach. Also,
    others could acquire or independently develop similar technology.
    We depend on our
    licensors for the maintenance and enforcement of our
    intellectual property and have limited, if any, control over the
    amount or timing of resources that our licensors devote on our
    behalf.
    When we license products, we often depend on our licensors to
    protect the proprietary rights covering those products. We have
    limited, if any, control over the amount or timing of resources
    that our licensors devote on our behalf or the priority they
    place on maintaining patent or other rights and prosecuting
    patent applications to our advantage. While any such licensor is
    expected to be under contractual obligations to us to diligently
    prosecute its patent applications and allow us the opportunity
    to consult, review and comment on patent office communications,
    we cannot be sure that it will perform as required. If a
    licensor does not perform and if we do not assume the
    maintenance of the licensed patents in sufficient time to make
    required payments or filings with the appropriate governmental
    agencies, we risk losing the benefit of all or some of those
    patent rights.
    If the use of our
    technology conflicts with the intellectual property rights of
    third parties, we may incur substantial liabilities, and we may
    be unable to commercialize products based on this technology in
    a profitable manner or at all.
    If our products conflict with the intellectual property rights
    of others, they could bring legal action against us or our
    licensors, licensees, manufacturers, customers or collaborators.
    If we were found to be infringing a patent or other intellectual
    property rights held by a third party, we could be forced to
    seek a license to use the patented or otherwise protected
    technology. We might not be able to obtain such a license on
    terms acceptable to us or at all. If an infringement or
    misappropriation legal action were to be brought against us or
    our licensors, we would incur substantial costs in defending the
    action. If such a dispute were to be resolved against us, we
    could be subject to significant damages, and the manufacturing
    or sale of one or more of our products could be enjoined.
    We may be
    involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the
    patents of our collaborators or licensors, which could be
    expensive and time consuming.
    Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our
    collaborators or licensors. To counter infringement or
    unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement
    claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition,
    in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent
    of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop
    the other party from using the technology at issue on the
    grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in
    question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense
    proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being
    invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent
    applications at risk of not issuing.
    Interference proceedings brought by the U.S. Patent and
    Trademark Office may be necessary to determine the priority of
    inventions with respect to our patent applications or those of
    our collaborators or licensors. Litigation or interference
    proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in
    substantial costs and distract our management. We may not be
    able, alone or with our collaborators and licensors, to prevent
    misappropriation of our proprietary rights, particularly in
    countries where the laws may not protect such rights as fully as
    in the United States.
    Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery
    required in connection with intellectual property litigation,
    some of our confidential information could be disclosed during
    this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public
    announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other
    interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or
    investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a
    substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock.
    31
Table of Contents
    Part I
    If we breach any
    of the agreements under which we license rights to our products
    and product candidates from others, we could lose the ability to
    continue commercialization of our products and development and
    commercialization of our product candidates.
    We have exclusive licenses for the marketing and sale of certain
    products and may acquire additional licenses. Such licenses may
    terminate prior to expiration if we breach our obligations under
    the license agreement related to these pharmaceutical products.
    For example, the licenses may terminate if we fail to meet
    specified quality control standards, including cGMP with respect
    to the products, or commit a material breach of other terms and
    conditions of the licenses. Such early termination could have a
    material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
    results of operations.
    We may be subject
    to claims that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed
    alleged trade secrets of their former employers.
    As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry,
    we employ individuals who were previously employed at other
    biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our
    competitors or potential competitors. Although no claims against
    us are currently pending, we may be subject to claims that these
    employees or we have inadvertently or otherwise used or
    disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of
    their former employers. Litigation may be necessary to defend
    against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending
    against these claims, litigation could result in substantial
    costs and be a distraction to management.
    RISKS RELATED TO
    OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
    Our operating
    results are likely to fluctuate from period to period.
    We are a relatively new company seeking to capture significant
    growth. While our revenues and operating income have increased
    over time, we anticipate that there may be fluctuations in our
    future operating results. We may not be able to maintain or
    improve our current levels of revenue or income. Potential
    causes of future fluctuations in our operating results may
    include:
| Ø | new product launches, which could increase revenues but also increase sales and marketing expenses; | 
| Ø | acquisition activity and other charges (such as for inventory expiration); | 
| Ø | increases in research and development expenses resulting from the acquisition of a product candidate that requires significant additional development; | 
| Ø | changes in the competitive, regulatory or reimbursement environment, which could drive down revenues or drive up sales and marketing or compliance costs; and | 
| Ø | unexpected product liability or intellectual property claims and lawsuits. | 
    See also Managements discussion and analysis of
    financial condition and results of operationsLiquidity and
    capital resources. Fluctuation in operating results,
    particularly if not anticipated by investors and other members
    of the financial community, could add to volatility in our stock
    price.
    Our focus on
    acquisitions as a growth strategy has created a large amount of
    intangible assets whose amortization could negatively affect our
    results of operations.
    Our total assets include intangible assets related to our
    acquisitions. As of December 31, 2010, intangible assets
    relating to product and data acquisitions represented
    approximately 8% of our total assets. We may never realize the
    value of these assets. Generally accepted accounting principles
    require that we evaluate on a regular basis whether events and
    circumstances have occurred that indicate that all or a portion
    of the carrying amount of the asset may no longer be
    recoverable, in which case we would write down the value of the
    asset and take a corresponding charge to earnings. Any
    32
Table of Contents
    Part I
    determination requiring the write-off of a significant portion
    of unamortized intangible assets would adversely affect our
    results of operations.
    We may need
    additional funding and may be unable to raise capital when
    needed, which could force us to delay, reduce or eliminate our
    product development or commercialization and marketing
    efforts.
    We may need to raise additional funds in order to meet the
    capital requirements of running our business and acquiring and
    developing new pharmaceutical products. If we require additional
    funding, we may seek to sell common stock or other equity or
    equity-linked securities, which could result in dilution to our
    shareholders. We may also seek to raise capital through a debt
    financing, which would result in ongoing debt-service payments
    and increased interest expense. Any financings would also likely
    involve operational and financial restrictions being imposed on
    us. We might also seek to sell assets or rights in one or more
    commercial products or product development programs. Additional
    capital might not be available to us when we need it on
    acceptable terms or at all. If we are unable to raise additional
    capital when needed, we could be forced to scale back our
    operations to conserve cash.
    RISKS RELATED TO
    OWNING OUR STOCK
    The market price
    of our common stock may fluctuate substantially.
    The price for the shares of our common stock sold in our initial
    public offering was determined by negotiation between the
    representatives of the underwriters and us. This price may not
    have reflected the market price of our common stock following
    our initial public offering. Through March 1, 2011, the
    closing price of our common stock has ranged from a low of $4.70
    to a high of $17.05 per share. Moreover, the market price of our
    common stock might decline below current levels. In addition,
    the market price of our common stock is likely to be highly
    volatile and may fluctuate substantially. Sales of a substantial
    number of shares of our common stock in the public market or the
    perception that these sales may occur could cause the market
    price of our common stock to decline.
    The realization of any of the risks described in these
    Risk Factors could have a dramatic and material
    adverse impact on the market price of our common stock. In
    addition, securities class action litigation has often been
    instituted against companies whose securities have experienced
    periods of volatility in market price. Any such securities
    litigation brought against us could result in substantial costs
    and a diversion of managements attention and resources,
    which could negatively impact our business, operating results
    and financial condition. Sales of a substantial number of shares
    of our common stock in the public market or the perception that
    these sales may occur could cause the market price of our common
    stock to decline.
    Unstable market
    conditions may have serious adverse consequences on our
    business.
    The recent economic downturn and market instability has made the
    business climate more volatile and more costly. Our general
    business strategy may be adversely affected by unpredictable and
    unstable market conditions. While we believe we have adequate
    capital resources to meet current working capital and capital
    expenditure requirements, a radical economic downturn or
    increase in our expenses could require additional financing on
    less than attractive rates or on terms that are dilutive to
    existing shareholders. Failure to secure any necessary financing
    in a timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material
    adverse effect on our growth strategy, financial performance and
    stock price and could require us to delay or abandon clinical
    developments plans. There is a risk that one or more of our
    current service providers, manufacturers and other partners may
    encounter difficulties during challenging economic times, which
    would directly affect our ability to attain our operating goals
    on schedule and on budget.
    33
Table of Contents
    Part I
    We are
    experiencing increased costs as a result of operating as a
    public company, and our management will be required to devote
    additional time to new compliance initiatives.
    We have and will continue to incur increased costs as a result
    of operating as a public company, and our management is required
    to devote additional time to new compliance initiatives. As a
    public company, we have and will continue to incur legal,
    accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private
    company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
    (Sarbanes-Oxley Act), Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
    Protection Act of 2010, and other rules subsequently implemented
    by the SEC and Nasdaq, have imposed various requirements on
    public companies, including requiring establishment and
    maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and
    changes in corporate governance practices. These rules and
    regulations have and will continue to increase our legal and
    financial compliance costs and will render some activities more
    time-consuming and costly.
    The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we
    maintain effective internal controls for financial reporting and
    disclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we must
    perform system and process evaluation and testing of our
    internal controls over financial reporting to allow management
    and our independent registered public accounting firm to report
    on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial
    reporting, beginning with our Annual Report on
    Form 10-K
    for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010, as required
    by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Our testing, or
    the subsequent testing by our independent registered public
    accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal
    controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material
    weaknesses.
    Our compliance with Section 404 requires that we incur
    substantial accounting expense and expend significant management
    efforts. Moreover, if we are not able to comply with the
    requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner, or if we or
    our independent registered public accounting firm identifies
    deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting
    that are deemed to be material weaknesses, the market price of
    our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or
    investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory
    authorities, which would require additional financial and
    management resources.
    Some provisions
    of our third amended and restated charter, bylaws, credit
    facility and Tennessee law may inhibit potential acquisition
    bids that you may consider favorable.
    Our corporate documents contain provisions that may enable our
    board of directors to resist a change in control of our company
    even if a change in control were to be considered favorable by
    you and other shareholders. These provisions include:
| Ø | the authorization of undesignated preferred stock, the terms of which may be established and shares of which may be issued without shareholder approval; | 
| Ø | advance notice procedures required for shareholders to nominate candidates for election as directors or to bring matters before an annual meeting of shareholders; | 
| Ø | limitations on persons authorized to call a special meeting of shareholders; | 
| Ø | a staggered board of directors; | 
| Ø | a restriction prohibiting shareholders from removing directors without cause; | 
| Ø | a requirement that vacancies in directorships are to be filled by a majority of the directors then in office and the number of directors is to be fixed by the board of directors; and | 
| Ø | no cumulative voting. | 
    These and other provisions contained in our third amended and
    restated charter and bylaws could delay or discourage
    transactions involving an actual or potential change in control
    of us or our management, including transactions in which our
    shareholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares
    34
Table of Contents
    Part I
    over then current prices, and may limit the ability of
    shareholders to remove our current management or approve
    transactions that our shareholders may deem to be in their best
    interests and, therefore, could adversely affect the price of
    our common stock.
    Under our bank credit agreement, it is an event of default if
    any person or entity obtains ownership or control, in one or a
    series of transactions, of more than 30% of our common stock or
    30% of the voting power entitled to vote in the election of
    members of our board of directors.
    In addition, we are subject to control share acquisitions
    provisions and affiliated transaction provisions of the
    Tennessee Business Corporation Act, the applications of which
    may have the effect of delaying or preventing a merger, takeover
    or other change in control of us and therefore could discourage
    attempts to acquire our company.
    We have never
    paid cash dividends on our capital stock, and we do not
    anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable
    future.
    We have never paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We do
    not anticipate paying cash dividends to our shareholders in the
    foreseeable future. The availability of funds for distributions
    to shareholders will depend substantially on our earnings. Even
    if we become able to pay dividends in the future, we expect that
    we would retain such earnings to enhance capital
    and/or
    reduce long-term debt.
    SPECIAL
    NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
    Statements in this Annual Report on
    Form 10-K
    that are not historical factual statements are
    forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
    statements include, among other things, statements regarding our
    intent, belief or expectations, and can be identified by the use
    of terminology such as may, will,
    expect, believe, intend,
    plan, estimate, should,
    seek, anticipate and other comparable
    terms or the negative thereof. In addition, we, through our
    senior management, from time to time make forward-looking oral
    and written public statements concerning our expected future
    operations and other developments. While forward-looking
    statements reflect our good-faith beliefs and best judgment
    based upon current information, they are not guarantees of
    future performance and are subject to known and unknown risks
    and uncertainties, including those mentioned in Risk
    factors, Managements discussion and analysis
    of financial condition and results of operations and
    elsewhere in this
    Form 10-K.
    Actual results may differ materially from the expectations
    contained in the forward-looking statements as a result of
    various factors. Such factors include, without limitation:
| Ø | legislative, regulatory or other changes in the healthcare industry at the local, state or federal level which increase the costs of, or otherwise affect our operations; | 
| Ø | changes in reimbursement available to us by government or private payers, including changes in Medicare and Medicaid payment levels and availability of third-party insurance coverage; | 
| Ø | competition; and | 
| Ø | changes in national or regional economic conditions, including changes in interest rates and availability and cost of capital to us. | 
    35
Table of Contents
    Part I
    Item 1B:
    Unresolved Staff Comments
    None
    Item 2:
    Properties
    As of December 31, 2010, we leased approximately
    25,500 square feet of office space in Nashville, Tennessee
    for our corporate headquarters. The lease expires in October
    2016. Of the 25,500 square feet of leased office space, we
    have subleased to others approximately 9,900 square feet.
    We believe these facilities are adequate to meet our current
    needs for office space. We currently do not plan to purchase or
    lease facilities for manufacturing, packaging or warehousing, as
    such services are provided to us by third-party contract groups.
    Under an agreement expiring in July 2011, CET leases
    approximately 6,900 square feet of office and wet
    laboratory space in Nashville, Tennessee. CET uses this space to
    operate the CET Life Sciences Center for product development
    work to be carried out in collaboration with universities,
    research institutions and entrepreneurs. The CET Life Sciences
    Center provides laboratory and office space, equipment and
    infrastructure to early-stage life sciences companies and
    university spin-outs. In January 2011, we notified the landlord
    of our intent to renew CETs lease for five years.
    Item 3:
    Legal Proceedings
    We are not currently engaged in any legal proceedings.
    36
Table of Contents
    Part II
    
| Item 5: | Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities | 
    MARKET
    INFORMATION
    Our common stock, no par value, has been traded on the Nasdaq
    Global Select Market since August 11, 2009 under the symbol
    CPIX. Prior to that time, there was no public market
    for our common stock. As of March 1, 2011, there were
    134 shareholders of record, which excludes shareholders
    whose shares are held in nominee or street name by brokers. The
    closing price of our common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select
    Market on March 1, 2011 was $5.75 per share. The following
    table sets forth the high and low trading sales prices for our
    common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market for
    the full quarterly periods since the completion of our initial
    public offering and through December 31, 2010:
| High | Low | |||||||
| 
    Fiscal year ended December 31, 2009:
 | ||||||||
| 
    Fourth quarter
 | $ | 16.77 | $ | 11.78 | ||||
| 
    Fiscal year ended December 31, 2010:
 | ||||||||
| 
    First quarter
 | 14.52 | 10.26 | ||||||
| 
    Second quarter
 | 11.11 | 6.16 | ||||||
| 
    Third quarter
 | 6.90 | 4.70 | ||||||
| 
    Fourth quarter
 | 8.18 | 5.63 | ||||||
    DIVIDEND
    POLICY
    We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our common
    stock nor do we anticipate paying dividends for the foreseeable
    future. We currently intend to retain any future earnings for
    use in the operation of our business and to fund future growth.
    The payment of dividends by us on our common stock is limited by
    our loan agreement with Bank of America. Any future decision to
    declare or pay dividends will be at the sole discretion of our
    Board of Directors.
    SECURITIES
    AUTHORIZED FOR ISSUANCE UNDER EQUITY COMPENSATION
    PLANS
    The information required by this section is incorporated by
    reference to Note 10 to the consolidated financial
    statements for the year ended December 31, 2010 beginning
    on
    page F-22
    of this Annual Report on
    Form 10-K.
    37
Table of Contents
    Part II
    PERFORMANCE
    GRAPH
    The following stock performance graph illustrates a comparison
    of the total cumulative stockholder return on our common stock
    since August 10, 2009, which is the date of our initial
    public offering on the Nasdaq Global Select Market, to the
    Nasdaq Composite and Nasdaq Pharmaceutical Stocks. The graph
    assumes an initial investment of $100 on August 10, 2009,
    and that all dividends were reinvested.
    Comparison
    of Cumulative Total Return
 
 
    USE OF PROCEEDS
    FROM INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING OF COMMON STOCK
    On August 10, 2009, our Registration Statement on
    Form S-1
    (File
    No. 333-142535)
    was declared effective for our initial public offering. The use
    of our proceeds from our initial public offering since
    December 31, 2009 has been reflected in the periodic
    reports filed during the year ending December 31, 2010. The
    remaining funds are expected to be used for general corporate
    purposes and acquisitions of product candidates, new products
    and intellectual property rights to products or companies that
    complement our business.
    PURCHASES OF
    EQUITY SECURITIES
    The following table summarizes the activity, by month, during
    the fourth quarter of 2010:
| Maximum number | ||||||||||||||||
| Total number of
    shares | (or
    approximate | |||||||||||||||
| (or units) | dollar value)
    of | |||||||||||||||
| Average | purchased as | shares (or
    units) | ||||||||||||||
| Total number
    of | price paid | part of
    publicly | that may yet
    be | |||||||||||||
| shares (or
    units) | per share | announced plans
    or | purchased under
    the | |||||||||||||
| Period | purchased | (or unit) | programs | plans or programs | ||||||||||||
| 
    October 1October 31
 | 39,751 | $ | 6.38 | 381,796 | $ | 7,531,094 | (1) | |||||||||
| 
    November 1November 30
 | 18,035 | 6.69 | 399,831 | 7,410,516 | ||||||||||||
| 
    December 1December 31
 | 52,602 | 6.87 | 452,433 | 7,049,308 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Total
 | 110,388 | |||||||||||||||
| (1) | On May 13, 2010, we announced a share repurchase program to purchase up to $10 million of our common stock pursuant to Rule 10b-18 of the Securities Act. In January 2011, our Board of Directors modified the existing repurchase program to provide for the repurchase of $10 million of our outstanding common stock, in addition to the amount repurchased in 2010. | 
    38
Table of Contents
    Part II
| Item 6: | Selected Financial Data | 
    The selected consolidated financial data set forth below should
    be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial
    statements and related notes and Managements
    Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
    Operations and other financial information appearing
    elsewhere in this
    Form 10-K.
    The historical results are not necessarily indicative of the
    results to be expected for any future periods.
| Years ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Statement of income data: | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||
| (in thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Net revenues
 | $ | 45,876 | $ | 43,537 | $ | 35,075 | $ | 28,064 | $ | 17,815 | ||||||||||
| 
    Cost of products sold
 | 3,587 | 4,137 | 3,046 | 2,670 | 2,399 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Selling and marketing
 | 22,675 | 20,194 | 14,387 | 10,053 | 7,349 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Research and development
 | 4,327 | 4,993 | 4,429 | 3,694 | 2,233 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    General and administrative
 | 7,990 | 7,643 | 5,140 | 4,138 | 2,999 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Other operating expenses
 | 796 | 794 | 791 | 783 | 612 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Operating income
 | 6,502 | 5,777 | 7,282 | 6,725 | 2,224 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Earnings per sharebasic
 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.22 | $ | 0.47 | $ | 0.40 | $ | 0.45 | ||||||||||
| 
    Earnings per sharediluted
 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.17 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.24 | $ | 0.27 | ||||||||||
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Balance sheet data: | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | |||||||||||||||
| (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Cash and cash equivalents
 | $ | 65,894 | $ | 78,702 | $ | 11,830 | $ | 10,815 | $ | 6,255 | ||||||||||
| 
    Working capital
 | 71,811 | 74,549 | 10,104 | 6,669 | 3,945 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Total assets
 | 92,054 | 103,724 | 31,119 | 28,919 | 26,481 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Total long-term debt and other long-term
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    obligations (including current portion)
 | 7,802 | 20,155 | 7,666 | 7,623 | 10,543 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Convertible preferred stock
 |  |  | 2,604 | 2,743 | 2,743 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Retained earnings (accumulated deficit)
 | 6,999 | 4,542 | 1,451 | (3,316 | ) | (7,360 | ) | |||||||||||||
| 
    Total equity
 | 77,715 | 72,221 | 17,555 | 16,746 | 11,126 | |||||||||||||||
| Item 7: | Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations | 
    The following discussion and analysis of our financial
    position and results of operations should be read together with
    our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes
    appearing elsewhere in this
    Form 10-K.
    This discussion and analysis may contain forward-looking
    statements that involve risks and uncertaintiesplease
    refer to the section entitled Special Note Regarding
    Forward-Looking Statements. You should review the
    Risk Factors section of this
    Form 10-K
    for a discussion of important factors that could cause actual
    results to differ materially from the results described in or
    implied by the forward-looking statements described in the
    following discussion and analysis.
    OVERVIEW
    We are a profitable and growing specialty pharmaceutical company
    focused on the acquisition, development and commercialization of
    branded prescription products. Cumberland is dedicated to
    providing innovative products which improve quality of care for
    patients. Our primary target markets are hospital acute care and
    gastroenterology, which are characterized by relatively
    concentrated
    39
Table of Contents
    Part II
    physician prescriber bases that we believe can be penetrated
    effectively with relatively small, targeted sales forces.
    Our product portfolio includes
    Caldolor®
    (ibuprofen) Injection, the first injectable treatment for
    pain and fever approved in the United States,
    Acetadote®
    (acetylcysteine) Injection for the treatment of
    acetaminophen poisoning and
    Kristalose®
    (lactulose) for Oral Solution, a prescription laxative.
    We market our products through our dedicated hospital and
    gastroenterology sales forces in the United States, and
    work to partner our products to reach international markets.
    We have both product development and commercial capabilities,
    and believe we can leverage our existing infrastructure to
    support our expected growth. Our management team consists of
    pharmaceutical industry veterans experienced in business
    development, clinical and regulatory affairs, and sales and
    marketing. Our internal product development and regulatory
    executives develop proprietary product formulations, design and
    manage our clinical trials, prepare all regulatory submissions
    and manage our medical call center. Our products are
    manufactured by third parties, which are overseen and managed by
    Cumberlands quality control and manufacturing group. All
    aspects of commercialization are handled by our sales and
    marketing professionals, and we work closely with our
    distribution partner to make our products available across the
    United States.
    Our strategy to grow our company includes maximizing the
    potential of our existing products and continuing to build a
    portfolio of new, differentiated products. All of our current
    products are approved for sale in the United States, and
    Acetadote is approved for sale in Australia. We are expanding
    our partner base outside of the U.S. to bring our products
    to select international markets. We also look for opportunities
    to expand into additional patient populations through new
    product indications, whether through proprietary clinical
    studies or by supporting investigator-initiated studies at
    reputable research institutions. We are actively pursuing
    opportunities to acquire additional late-stage development
    product candidates as well as marketed products in our target
    medical specialties. Further, we are supplementing the
    aforementioned growth strategies with the early-stage drug
    development activities of CET, our majority-owned subsidiary.
    CET partners with universities and other research organizations
    to cost-effectively develop promising, early-stage product
    candidates, which Cumberland has the opportunity to
    commercialize.
    Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely
    to fluctuate in the future. These fluctuations can result from
    competitive factors, new product acquisitions or introductions,
    the nature, scope and result of our research and development
    programs, execution of our growth strategy and other factors. As
    a result of these fluctuations, our historical financial results
    are not necessarily indicative of future results.
    2010 HIGHLIGHTS
    AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
    Acetadote®
    Submission of
    Application for New Formulation of Acetadote
    In October 2010, we submitted a supplemental New Drug
    Application (sNDA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
    (FDA) for approval of a new formulation of Acetadote, which was
    the result of a Phase IV commitment Cumberland made to the
    FDA upon receipt of initial marketing approval of the product.
    In January 2011, the FDA approved the new formulation, which
    does not contain ethylene diamine tetracetic acid or any other
    stabilization and chelating agents and is free of preservatives.
    We have commenced U.S. launch activities for this next
    generation product, which will replace the currently marketed
    product. We will no longer manufacture the previously approved
    formulation for the U.S. market and the original
    formulation has been delisted. We have provided a request to the
    FDA that they not approve a generic to the previous formulation
    and documented that the new formulation was developed based on
    their Phase IV requirement. We have also filed a patent
    application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to
    protect the proprietary new formulation.
    40
Table of Contents
    Part II
    Supplemental New
    Drug Application for Acetadote
    In March 2010, we submitted a sNDA to the FDA for the use of
    Acetadote in patients with non-acetaminophen acute liver
    failure. The sNDA includes data from a clinical trial led by
    investigators at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical
    Center indicating that acute liver failure patients treated with
    Acetadote have a significantly improved chance of survival
    without a transplant. The study showed that these patients can
    also survive a significant number of days longer without
    transplant, which would provide patients requiring transplant
    increased time for a donor organ to become available.
    In May 2010, the FDA officially accepted the sNDA and granted a
    priority review with a response expected in September 2010. In
    August 2010, we announced that the FDA extended its review of
    the sNDA by three months, resulting in a new Prescription Drug
    User Fee Act (PDUFA) goal date in December 2010. In December,
    the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter indicating that it had
    completed its review of the application and had identified
    additional work required or items that must be addressed prior
    to approval of the potential new indication. We are currently in
    discussion with the FDA to gain clarity on the pathway to
    approval for this important indication.
    Launch of
    Acetadote in Australia
    In April 2010, the Therapeutic Goods Administration granted
    approval to our partner Phebra Pty Ltd., an Australian-based
    specialty pharmaceutical company, for the commercialization of
    Acetadote in Australia. In October 2010, Phebra commenced with
    the Australian launch of Acetadote and began promoting wide
    distribution of the product. This introduction of Acetadote in
    Australia marked Cumberlands entry into international
    markets. In addition to Australia, Phebra has exclusive
    marketing rights to Acetadote for New Zealand and has obtained
    marketing approval in that country. Phebra is also our marketing
    partner for Acetadote in certain Asia Pacific markets, and
    continues to work toward obtaining approval for the product in
    those areas.
    Caldolor®
    In June 2009, the FDA approved Caldolor, our intravenous
    formulation of ibuprofen, for marketing in the United States
    through a priority review. In September 2009, we implemented the
    U.S. launch of Caldolor with our experienced sales
    professionals promoting the product across the country. Caldolor
    is fully stocked at the wholesalers serving hospitals
    nationwide, available in both 400mg and 800mg vials.
    In 2010, we focused our sales and marketing efforts primarily on
    securing formulary approval nationally for Caldolor, and the
    product is now stocked at a growing number of U.S. medical
    facilities. In early 2011, we began transitioning some of our
    sales and marketing resources to also drive pull-through sales
    for the product. We expect those activities to generate greater
    use of the product in 2011.
    Submission of
    Marketing Application in South Korea
    In December 2009, we entered into an exclusive partnership with
    DB Pharm Korea Co. Ltd., a Korean-based pharmaceutical company,
    for the commercialization of Caldolor in South Korea. Under the
    terms of the agreement, DB Pharm Korea is responsible for
    obtaining any regulatory approval for the product and handling
    ongoing regulatory requirements, product marketing, distribution
    and sales in Korea. We maintain responsibility for product
    formulation, development and manufacturing. DB Pharm Korea has
    submitted its application for regulatory approval of Caldolor in
    South Korea, and is preparing for the launch of the product in
    that territory.
    License Agreement
    for Canada
    In April 2010, we entered into an exclusive agreement with
    Alveda Pharmaceuticals Inc., a Toronto-based specialty
    pharmaceutical company, for the commercialization of Caldolor in
    Canada. Under the agreement, Alveda will seek Canadian
    regulatory approval for Caldolor and, upon approval, will handle
    ongoing regulatory requirements as well as product marketing,
    distribution and sales throughout Canada. Cumberland will
    maintain responsibility for product formulation, development and
    41
Table of Contents
    Part II
    manufacturing. In exchange for the license to the product,
    Cumberland will receive royalties on future sales of Caldolor in
    addition to upfront and milestone payments as well as a transfer
    price.
    Compassionate Use
    in Australia
    In December 2009, we entered into an exclusive agreement with
    Phebra Pty Ltd. for distribution of Caldolor in Australia and
    New Zealand. In April 2010, Phebra made the product available in
    Australia on a limited, compassionate use basis. The TGA, which
    regulates drugs and medical devices in Australia, operates
    compassionate use programs that allow patients with critical
    clinical needs to access products not yet approved through their
    medical practitioner. Phebra is also pursuing full regulatory
    approval of Caldolor for these territories.
    Other
    Developments
    New Board of
    Directors Appointments
    In April 2010, we added three new members to our Board of
    Directors when Cumberland shareholders elected Gordon R.
    Bernard, M.D., Jonathan Griggs and James Jones at our
    annual meeting. In January 2011, Joey Jacobs also joined our
    Board of Directors. We believe each new director brings
    significant experience in an area critical to our companys
    continued growth and success.
    Amendment of
    Senior Credit Facility
    In September 2010, we amended our senior credit facility with
    Bank of America. With this amendment, we reduced the outstanding
    balance on our term loan from $12 million to
    $6 million on an original term loan of $18 million. We
    also expanded our line of credit to $6 million, which
    increases our access to funding for future growth. We expect to
    achieve a net interest savings by retiring debt with cash that
    would have earned a much lower yield. The debt repayment, which
    was funded with excess cash flow, is consistent with our efforts
    to efficiently manage our capital resources.
    Share Repurchase
    Program
    In May 2010, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of
    up to $10 million of Cumberlands outstanding common
    stock. Pursuant to the share repurchase program, we are
    purchasing shares of our common stock from
    time-to-time
    on the open market. The timing and amount of purchases are
    determined by us based on evaluation of market conditions, stock
    price and other factors. For the period from January 1,
    2011 to March 1, 2011, we had repurchased an additional
    94,662 shares, or $0.6 million, of our common stock
    under this program.
    In January 2011, our Board of Directors modified the existing
    repurchase program to provide for the repurchase of
    $10 million of our outstanding common stock, in addition to
    the amount repurchased in 2010.
    Federal Grant
    Funding
    In November 2010, Cumberland was awarded $860,000 in federal
    grant funding under the Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery
    Project, a U.S. healthcare reform initiative designed to
    support promising research and development programs at small
    life sciences firms.
    Transfer of
    License Rights
    As previously reported, CET has entered into an agreement with
    Vanderbilt University to in-license rights to a new product
    candidate. In the third quarter of 2010, Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals entered into an option agreement with CET to
    assume the rights and responsibilities associated with that
    product
    42
Table of Contents
    Part II
    candidate. Since then, we have commenced product manufacturing
    and submitted an investigational new drug application for the
    clinical evaluation of this product candidate. This transferring
    of product rights from CET to Cumberland is consistent with our
    goals in establishing CET to give us access to an early-stage
    development product pipeline.
    CRITICAL
    ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND SIGNIFICANT JUDGMENTS AND
    ESTIMATES
    Accounting
    Estimates and Judgments
    The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in
    conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
    principles requires management to make estimates, judgments and
    assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
    liabilities and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date
    of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
    and expenses during the period. We base our estimates on past
    experience and on other factors we deem reasonable given the
    circumstances. Past results help form the basis of our judgments
    about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not
    determined from other sources. Actual results could differ from
    these estimates. These estimates, judgments and assumptions are
    most critical with respect to our accounting for revenue
    recognition, provision for income taxes, stock-based
    compensation, research and development accounting, and
    intangible assets.
    Revenue
    Recognition
    We recognize revenue in accordance with the SECs Staff
    Accounting Bulletin No. 101, Revenue Recognition in
    Financial Statements, as amended by Staff Accounting
    Bulletin No. 104 (together, SAB 101), and Topic
    605-15 of
    the Accounting Standards Codification.
    Our revenue is derived primarily from the product sales of
    Acetadote, Caldolor and Kristalose. Revenue is recognized when
    persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has
    occurred, the fee is fixed and determinable and collectability
    is probable. Delivery is considered to have occurred upon either
    shipment of the product or arrival at its destination based on
    the shipping terms of the transaction. When these conditions are
    satisfied, we recognize gross product revenue, which is the
    price we charge generally to our wholesalers for a particular
    product. Other income, which is a component of net revenues,
    includes rental and grant income. Other income was less than
    three percent of net revenues in 2010, and less than one percent
    in 2009 and 2008.
    Our net product revenue reflects the reduction of gross product
    revenue at the time of initial sales recognition for estimated
    accounts receivable allowances for chargebacks, discounts and
    damaged product as well as provisions for sales related accruals
    of rebates, product returns and administrative fees and fee for
    services. Our financial statements reflect accounts receivable
    allowances of $0.2 million, $0.2 million and
    $0.1 million as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
    respectively, for chargebacks, discounts and allowances for
    product damaged in shipment. We had accrued liabilities of
    $2.6 million, $1.9 million and $1.0 million as of
    December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, for
    rebates, product returns, service fees, and administrative fees.
    The following table reflects our sales-related accrual activity:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Balance at January 1
 | $ | 1,863,012 | $ | 1,040,203 | $ | 738,362 | ||||||
| 
    Current Provision
 | 4,933,553 | 3,436,208 | 1,690,134 | |||||||||
| 
    Current Provision for Prior Period Sales
 | 306,706 | 75,589 | (73,960 | ) | ||||||||
| 
    Actual Returns/Credits
 | (4,476,958 | ) | (2,688,988 | ) | (1,314,333 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Balance at December 31
 | $ | 2,626,313 | $ | 1,863,012 | $ | 1,040,203 | ||||||
    43
Table of Contents
    Part II
    The allowances for chargebacks, discounts, and damaged products
    and sales related accruals for rebates and product returns are
    determined on a
    product-by-product
    basis and are established by management as our best estimate at
    the time of sale based on each products historical
    experience, adjusted to reflect known changes in the factors
    that impact such allowances and accruals. Additionally, these
    allowances and accruals are established based on the following:
| Ø | the contractual terms with customers; | 
| Ø | analysis of historical levels of discounts, returns, chargebacks and rebates; | 
| Ø | communications with customers; | 
| Ø | purchased information about the rate of prescriptions being written and the level of inventory remaining in the distribution channel, if known; and | 
| Ø | expectations about the market for each product, including any anticipated introduction of competitive products. | 
    The allowances for chargebacks and accruals for rebates and
    product returns are the most significant estimates used in the
    recognition of our revenue from product sales. Of the accounts
    receivable allowances and our sales related accruals, our
    accrual for fee for services and product returns represent the
    majority of the balance. Sales related accrued liabilities
    totaled $2.6 million, $1.9 million and
    $1.0 million as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
    respectively. Of these amounts, our estimated liability for fee
    for services represented $0.8 million, $0.7 million
    and $0.3 million, respectively, while our accrual for
    product returns totaled $1.4 million, $1.0 million and
    $0.6 million, respectively. If the actual amount of cash
    discounts, chargebacks, rebates, and product returns differ from
    the amounts estimated by management, material differences may
    result from the amount of our revenue recognized from product
    sales. A change in our rebate estimate of one percentage point
    would have impacted net sales by approximately $0.1 million
    in each of the three years ended December 31, 2010. A
    change in our product return estimate of one percentage point
    would have impacted net sales by $0.5 million,
    $0.5 million and $0.4 million for the years ended
    December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Any expired
    product return would be from a prior period, given the
    shelf-life of the products.
    As a general rule, we do not allow customers to purchase
    additional product prior to a scheduled price increase. We
    occasionally make an exception to this policy when we offer
    odd-lot quantities at a slightly reduced price or when a
    customer opens a new facility and requests special terms on
    their initial purchase. To date, we believe these types of
    transactions have not been material. Moreover, when we offer
    special terms, we review the transaction against our revenue
    recognition policy for proper treatment. If we determine such
    transactions become material, we will disclose the impact in the
    notes to our financial statements.
    While we do not have regular access to our customers
    inventory levels, we review each order from all of our
    customers. To the extent that an order reflects more than a
    normal purchasing pattern, management discusses the order with
    the customer prior to agreeing to process the order.
    Income
    Taxes
    We provide for deferred taxes using the asset and liability
    approach. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities
    are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to
    operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards and differences
    between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing
    assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Our
    principal differences are related to the timing of deductibility
    of certain items such as depreciation, amortization and expense
    for options issued to nonemployees. Deferred tax assets and
    liabilities are measured using managements estimate of tax
    rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which
    management believes those temporary differences are expected to
    be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and
    liabilities of a
    44
Table of Contents
    Part II
    change in tax rates is recognized in our results of operations
    in the period that includes the enactment date.
    In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets,
    management considers whether it is more likely than not that
    some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
    realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is
    dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
    the periods in which those temporary differences become
    deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of
    deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income and
    tax planning strategies in making this assessment.
    The tax benefit associated with the exercise of nonqualified
    stock options is recognized when the benefit is used to offset
    income taxes payable. As of December 31, 2010, we have
    unrecognized federal net operating loss carryforwards associated
    with the exercise of nonqualified options of $63.1 million.
    Stock-Based
    Compensation
    We recognize compensation expense for all share-based payments
    based on the fair value of the award on the date of grant. In
    addition, incremental compensation expense is recognized upon
    the modification, cancellation or repurchase of equity awards.
    The fair value of stock options and warrants are calculated
    using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model on the date of
    grant. We estimate volatility in accordance with SEC Staff
    Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 107, as amended by
    SAB No. 110. As there was no public market for our
    common stock prior to our initial public offering and,
    therefore, a lack of company-specific historical or implied
    volatility data, we have determined the share-price volatility
    based on an analysis of certain publicly-traded companies that
    we consider to be our peers. The comparable peer companies used
    for our estimated volatility are publicly-traded companies with
    operations which we believe to be similar to ours. When
    identifying companies as peers, we consider such characteristics
    as the type of industry, size
    and/or type
    of product(s), research
    and/or
    product development capabilities, and stock-based transactions.
    We intend to continue to consistently estimate our volatility in
    this manner until sufficient historical information regarding
    the volatility of our own shares becomes available, or
    circumstances change such that the identified entities are no
    longer similar to us. In this latter case, we would utilize
    other similar entities whose share prices are publicly
    available. We estimate the expected life of employee share
    options based on the simplified method allowed by
    SAB No. 107, as amended by SAB No. 110.
    Under this approach, the expected term is presumed to be the
    average between the weighted-average vesting period and the
    contractual term. The expected term for options granted to
    nonemployees is generally the contractual term of the option.
    The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury
    Note, Stripped Principal, on the date of grant with a term
    substantially equal to the corresponding options expected
    term. We have never declared or paid any cash dividends nor do
    we plan to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
    The following assumptions were used in calculating the fair
    value of employee options granted during 2010, 2009 and 2008:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Dividend yield
 | % | % | % | |||||||||
| 
    Expected term (in years)
 | 2.5-6.0 | 3.7-6.2 | 3.5-6.0 | |||||||||
| 
    Expected volatility
 | 49%-53% | 50%-52% | 49%-51% | |||||||||
| 
    Risk-free interest rate
 | 0.8%-2.8% | 1.4%-2.7% | 3.1% | |||||||||
    45
Table of Contents
    Part II
    The following assumptions were used in calculating the fair
    value of nonemployee options granted during 2010, 2009 and 2008:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Dividend yield
 | % | % | % | |||||||||
| 
    Expected term (in years)
 | 5.0 | 2.3-10.0 | 10.0 | |||||||||
| 
    Expected volatility
 | 52%-53% | 51%-67% | 68% | |||||||||
| 
    Risk-free interest rate
 | 2.2%-2.4% | 1.1%-2.7% | 3.7% | |||||||||
    Research and
    Development
    We account for research and development costs and accrue
    expenses based on estimates of work performed, patient
    enrollment or fixed-fee-for-services. As work is performed
    and/or
    invoices are received, we adjust our estimates and accruals. To
    date, our accruals have been within our estimates. Total
    research and development costs are a function of studies being
    conducted and will increase or decrease depending on the level
    of activity in any particular year.
    Intangible
    Assets
    Intangible assets include license agreements, product rights and
    other identifiable intangible assets. We assess the impairment
    of identifiable intangible assets whenever events or changes in
    circumstances indicate the carrying value may not be
    recoverable. In determining the recoverability of our intangible
    assets, we must make assumptions regarding estimated future cash
    flows and other factors. If the estimated undiscounted future
    cash flows do not exceed the carrying value of the intangible
    assets, we must determine the fair value of the intangible
    assets. If the fair value of the intangible assets is less than
    the carrying value, an impairment loss will be recognized in an
    amount equal to the difference. Fair value is determined through
    various valuation techniques including quoted market prices,
    third-party independent appraisals and discounted cash flow
    models, as considered necessary.
    RESULTS OF
    OPERATIONS
    Description of
    Operating Accounts
    Net revenues consist of net product revenue and other
    revenue. Net product revenue consists primarily of gross revenue
    less discounts and allowances, such as cash discounts, rebates,
    chargebacks and returns. Other revenue includes rental and grant
    income.
    Cost of products sold consists principally of the cost to
    acquire each unit of product sold. Cost of products sold also
    includes expense associated with the write-off of slow moving or
    expired product.
    Selling and marketing expense consists primarily of
    expense relating to the promotion, distribution and sale of
    products, including royalty expense, salaries and related costs.
    Research and development expense consists primarily of
    clinical trial expenses, salary and wages and related costs of
    materials and supplies, and certain activities of third-party
    providers participating in our clinical studies.
    General and administrative expense includes finance and
    accounting expenses, executive expenses, office expenses and
    business development expenses, including salaries and related
    costs.
    Amortization of product license right resulted from our
    acquisition of the exclusive U.S. commercialization rights
    to Kristalose.
    Interest income consists primarily of interest income
    earned on cash deposits.
    Interest expense consists primarily of interest incurred
    on debt and other long-term obligations.
    46
Table of Contents
    Part II
    Income tax expense consists primarily of current and
    deferred income taxes on our taxable income for financial
    reporting purposes.
    Year ended
    December 31, 2010 compared to year ended December 31,
    2009
    Net revenues.  Net revenues for 2010 totaled
    approximately $45.9 million, representing an increase of
    approximately $2.3 million, or 5%, over the same period in
    2009. Net revenue increased $4.9 million for Acetadote and
    decreased $0.2 million and $3.2 million for Kristalose
    and Caldolor, respectively. The increase in Acetadote revenue
    was positively impacted by a 4% increase in volume and an
    increase in the average selling price, offset by an increase in
    fee-for-service
    deductions due to additional arrangements with our wholesalers.
    While Kristalose gross revenue increased, net revenue was
    impacted by an increase in the
    gross-to-net
    revenue deductions primarily associated with rebates and expired
    product returns. Additionally, in the third quarter of 2009, we
    completed the commercial launch of Caldolor, and recognized
    $3.3 million of net revenue in 2009. Our sales forces
    continue to maintain a consistent level of focus on Acetadote
    and Kristalose while they progress the promotion of Caldolor.
    In 2010, we focused our sales and marketing efforts primarily on
    securing formulary approval and stocking nationally for
    Caldolor. During the first quarter of 2011, we initiated a shift
    in focus and began transitioning part of our sales and marketing
    resources to driving pull-through use of Caldolor in facilities
    stocking the product.
    In 2010, we recognized approximately $0.9 million in
    federal grant funding from the Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery
    Project, a component of the healthcare reform legislation
    enacted in 2010.
    Cost of products sold.  Cost of products sold
    as a percentage of net revenues decreased from 9.5% for 2009 to
    7.8% for the same period in 2010. This decrease was primarily
    due to the sales mix in the periods.
    Kristalose is manufactured by Inalco. In 2010, Inalco sold its
    facility that manufactured the API for Kristalose. We are
    currently in discussions with Inalco regarding supply prices for
    2011. We expect cost of products sold for Kristalose to increase.
    Selling and marketing.  Selling and marketing
    expense for 2010 totaled approximately $22.7 million,
    representing an increase of approximately $2.5 million, or
    12%, over the same period in 2009. The increase was primarily
    due to the expansion of our hospital sales force during the
    third quarter of 2009, and the resulting increases in payroll
    and related taxes, travel, meals and promotional activities.
    These increases were offset by a decrease in marketing,
    advertising and hiring expenses related to Caldolor in 2010 as
    compared to the significant investment made in 2009 related to
    the launch.
    Research and development.  Research and
    development expense for 2010 totaled approximately
    $4.3 million, representing a decrease of approximately
    $0.7 million, or 13%, over the same period in 2009. The
    decrease was primarily due to the inclusion in 2009 of
    approximately $2.0 million of milestone expenses incurred
    upon the FDA approval of Caldolor in June 2009. This decrease
    was offset by additional costs incurred in 2010 related to
    annual FDA product and establishment fees, increased salary and
    related expenses resulting from an increase in personnel and
    increased costs related to furthering our development efforts
    for our products and product candidates. Research and
    development expense is expected to increase in 2011 as we pursue
    more clinical studies for our products and product candidates.
    As a part of our Phase IV commitments to the FDA, we have
    initiated two multi-center trials evaluating Caldolor for
    treatment of pain and fever in pediatric patients. In addition,
    we have initiated two new registry studies related to the
    administration of Caldolor, primarily related to the rapid
    infusion of Caldolor to patients.
    General and administrative.  General and
    administrative expense for 2010 totaled approximately
    $8.0 million, representing an increase of approximately
    $0.3 million, or 5%, over the same period in
    47
Table of Contents
    Part II
    2009. The increase is primarily due to additional expenses
    associated with being an SEC registrant, including legal,
    accounting and insurance costs.
    Interest income.  Interest income for 2010
    totaled approximately $0.2 million, representing an
    increase of approximately $0.1 million, or 152%, over the
    same period in 2009. The increase was primarily due to the
    higher cash balances maintained in 2010 as a result of the
    proceeds received from the initial public offering in the third
    quarter of 2009.
    Interest expense.  Interest expense for 2010
    totaled approximately $1.4 million, representing an
    increase of approximately $0.7 million as compared to the
    same period in 2009. The increase is primarily attributable to
    (1) an average higher outstanding debt balance in 2010 as
    compared to 2009 and (2) the inclusion of approximately
    $0.1 million of deferred financing costs and approximately
    $0.2 million of prepayment fees associated with the early
    extinguishment and amendment of our term debt facility in
    September 2010.
    Income tax expense.  Income tax expense for
    2010 totaled approximately $2.9 million, representing an
    increase of approximately $0.8 million, over the same
    period in 2009. As a percentage of income before income taxes,
    income tax expense increased from 39.8% for the year ended
    December 31, 2009 to 54.0% for the same period in 2010. The
    increase in the percentage was primarily due to
    (1) research and development expenses utilized in the
    Therapeutic Discovery Tax Credit not being deductible for
    federal income tax purposes, (2) an increase in stock
    compensation expense that is not deductible for income tax
    purposes and (3) an increase in nondeductible meals and
    entertainment expenses associated with the expansion of our
    sales force.
    Year ended
    December 31, 2009 compared to year ended December 31,
    2008
    Net revenues.  Net revenues for 2009 totaled
    $43.5 million, representing an increase of
    $8.5 million, or 24%, over the same period in 2008. Of this
    increase, approximately $4.7 million related to Acetadote,
    $3.3 related to the launch of Caldolor and $0.2 million
    related to Kristalose. The remaining increase was due to
    increased grant and rental revenue. The increase in revenues for
    Acetadote was primarily due to increased volume as our products
    continued to grow in our target markets.
    Gross product sales were reduced by $5.2 million and
    $2.8 million in 2009 and 2008, respectively. In 2009, this
    reduction included $1.6 million for damaged and expired
    product returns, $1.0 million for cash discounts,
    $1.7 million related to
    fee-for-service
    costs and $0.9 million for estimated rebates, chargebacks
    and discounts related to our products. For 2008 this reduction
    included $1.1 million for damaged and expired product
    returns, $0.7 million for cash discounts, $0.7 million
    related to
    fee-for-service
    costs and $0.3 million for estimated rebates, chargebacks
    and discounts related to Kristalose.
    Cost of products sold.  Cost of products sold
    totaled $4.1 million, representing an increase of
    $1.1 million, or 36%, over cost of products sold in 2008 of
    $3.0 million. Of this increase, approximately
    $1.0 million related to Caldolor which was launched during
    the second half of 2009. As a percentage of net revenues, cost
    of products sold increased from 8.7% in 2008 to 9.5% for 2009.
    The increase in cost of products sold, as a percentage of net
    revenues, was primarily due to a shift in the sales mix between
    the periods.
    Selling and marketing.  Selling and marketing
    expense for 2009 totaled $20.2 million, representing an
    increase of $5.8 million, or 40%, over 2008. The increase
    was primarily due to $1.9 million for the expansion and
    ongoing costs of our sales forces as we launched our new product
    Caldolor, continued to grow our products in our target markets
    and expanded our territories. Our marketing and advertising
    expense increased $1.7 million due to our marketing
    campaign for the commercial introduction of Caldolor. In
    addition, our field promotions expense increased
    $0.9 million primarily due to our launch of Caldolor,
    royalty expense increased $0.3 million, sales meeting
    expense increased $0.2 million, and
    48
Table of Contents
    Part II
    hiring expense increased $0.3 million. We expect selling
    and marketing expense to increase in 2010 as we continue our
    efforts to promote our products.
    Research and development.  Research and
    development expense for 2009 totaled $5.0 million,
    representing an increase of $0.6 million, or 13%, over
    2008. The increase was primarily due to approximately
    $2.0 million in milestone expenses associated with the FDA
    approval of Caldolor. This expense was partially offset by
    reduced studies costs in 2009 as compared to 2008 noting 2008
    included $1.2 million for the new drug application fee
    associated with Caldolor.
    General and administrative.  General and
    administrative expense for 2009 totaled $7.6 million,
    representing an increase of $2.5 million, or 49%, over the
    same period in 2008. The increase was primarily due to increased
    payroll tax expense of $1.1 million associated with the
    employers portion of payroll taxes that resulted from the
    exercise of nonqualified options. Additionally, we incurred
    increased salary and bonus expense of $0.5 million as we
    continue to increase our infrastructure, increased stock
    compensation expense of $0.2 million, increased D&O
    insurance expense of $0.1 million for additional
    public-company coverage, increased consulting expense of
    $0.2 million and increased bank service charges of
    $0.1 million. The additional payroll tax expense of
    $1.1 million noted above resulted from the exercise of
    approximately 4.7 million nonqualified options held by
    employees. As of December 31, 2009, employees held 201,000
    nonqualified options with a weighted-average exercise price of
    $6.68 per share for which we are required to pay payroll-related
    taxes upon exercise, provided the holder is still an employee at
    the time of exercise. If all outstanding nonqualified options
    held by employees were exercised at December 31, 2009, the
    maximum exposure to us would have been approximately
    $0.1 million.
    Interest income.  Interest income totaled
    $0.1 million for 2009, representing a decrease of
    $0.2 million, or 67%, over 2008. The decrease was primarily
    due to lower interest rates throughout 2009.
    Interest expense.  Interest expense totaled
    $0.8 million for 2009, representing an increase of
    $0.6 million, or 262%, over 2008. The increase was
    primarily due to additional borrowings during 2009. In July
    2009, we amended our loan agreement to provide for an
    $18 million term loan and a $4 million line of credit.
    Income tax expense.  Income tax expense for
    2009 totaled $2.0 million, representing a decrease of
    $0.5 million, or 20%, over 2008. As a percentage of net
    income before income taxes, income tax expense increased from
    34.8% for 2008 to 39.8% for 2009. The increase in the tax rate
    was primarily due to the recognition in 2008 of previously
    unrecognized tax benefits.
    LIQUIDITY AND
    CAPITAL RESOURCES
    Our primary sources of liquidity are cash flows provided by our
    operations, our borrowings and the cash proceeds from our
    initial public offering of common stock. We believe that our
    internally generated cash flows and amounts available under our
    debt agreements will be adequate to service existing debt,
    finance internal growth and fund capital expenditures. As of
    December 31, 2010 and 2009, our cash and cash equivalents
    was $65.9 million and $78.7 million, respectively,
    working capital (current assets minus current liabilities) was
    $71.8 million and $74.5 million, respectively, and our
    current ratio (current assets to current liabilities) was 8.8x
    and 5.0x. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, we also had the
    ability to make additional draws of up to approximately
    $4.2 million and $2.2 million, respectively, on our
    line of credit.
    The information included in footnote 6 to the consolidated
    financial statements included in this annual report on
    Form 10-K
    is hereby incorporated by reference into this Item.
    49
Table of Contents
    Part II
    The following table summarizes our net changes in cash and cash
    equivalents for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
    2008:
| Years ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| (in thousands) | ||||||||||||
| 
    Cash provided by (used in):
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Operating activities
 | $ | 347 | $ | 405 | $ | 6,397 | ||||||
| 
    Investing activities
 | (769 | ) | (712 | ) | (134 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Financing activities
 | (12,386 | ) | 67,180 | (5,248 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash
    equivalents(1)
 | $ | (12,808 | ) | $ | 66,872 | $ | 1,015 | |||||
| (1) | The sum of the individual amounts may not agree due to rounding. | 
    The net decrease in cash and cash equivalents of
    $12.8 million for year ended December 31, 2010 was
    primarily due to cash used in financing activities, which
    included principal payments on our term debt of
    $12.7 million and the repurchase of common stock of
    approximately $4.8 million. These expenditures were offset
    by proceeds from the exercise of stock options of approximately
    $1.4 million and the excess tax benefit derived from the
    exercise of nonqualified options of approximately
    $3.9 million. Cash provided by operating activities for the
    year ended December 31, 2010 was primarily due to net
    income for the period and the collection of accounts receivable
    offset by (1) the purchase of inventory, (2) the
    decrease in accounts payable and (3) the excess tax benefit
    derived from the exercise of stock options. The excess tax
    benefit represents the income taxes that would have been paid if
    not for the tax deductions created upon the exercise of
    nonqualified stock options. We expect to pay minimal income
    taxes in 2011 due to the continued usage of the unrecognized tax
    benefit related to the excess tax deduction described in
    footnote 8 to the consolidated financial statements included in
    this annual report on
    Form 10-K.
    The net increase in cash and cash equivalents of
    $66.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 was
    primarily due to the net cash proceeds from our initial public
    offering in August 2009 of $77.5 million and additional
    debt proceeds of $13.0 million, offset by the repurchase of
    common shares of $27.3 million associated with the
    tendering of shares to settle the minimum statutory tax
    withholding requirement resulting from the exercise of
    nonqualified options by an employee. In addition, we received a
    tax benefit of approximately $4.0 million related to
    nonqualified options exercised in 2009.
    The net increase in cash and cash equivalents of
    $1.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 was
    primarily due to cash generated from operations offset by cash
    paid for our $5.0 million share repurchase.
    In July 2009, we amended our debt agreement with Bank of
    America, N.A. (the Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement)
    to provide for $18.0 million in term debt and a
    $4.0 million revolving credit facility, both with an
    interest rate of LIBOR plus an applicable margin based on the
    Companys Leverage Ratio, as defined in the agreement. The
    interest rate at December 31, 2009 was 5.73% per annum. In
    addition, we were required to pay a commitment fee of 0.75% per
    annum on the unused portion of the commitment. The term debt was
    payable in quarterly installments of $1.5 million beginning
    on March 31, 2010 and continuing until December 31,
    2012. The revolving credit facility was due on December 31,
    2012. We may be required to make additional principal payments
    on the term debt if the Leverage Ratio, as defined, exceeds 1.75
    to 1.0 on an annual basis. The borrowings were collateralized by
    a first lien against all of the Companys assets. The
    proceeds from the term debt were restricted for the payment, in
    part, of the minimum statutory tax withholding requirements of
    approximately $24.6 million due from option holders who
    exercised options to purchase shares of our common stock at the
    pricing of the Companys initial public offering. The
    consideration for that
    50
Table of Contents
    Part II
    payment was the transfer to the Company of shares acquired upon
    exercise at the then-current fair market value of the
    Companys common stock. In connection with the amendment of
    the debt agreement, we capitalized approximately
    $0.5 million of debt issue costs, of which
    $0.1 million related to the fair value of common stock and
    $0.1 million related to the fair value of warrants issued
    to the lender. Deferred financing costs were being expensed to
    interest expense using the effective-interest method over the
    term of the debt agreement.
    The Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement contained
    restrictive covenants, which we were in compliance with during
    2010 and 2009.
    The Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement required us to
    make an additional principal payment within 120 days after
    the end of the fiscal year in an amount equal to its Excess Cash
    Flow, as defined in the agreement. The additional principal
    payment of $3.1 million, which was included as a current
    portion of long-term debt in the consolidated balance sheet at
    December 31, 2009, was paid during the first quarter of
    2010.
    In September 2010, we further amended our loan agreement with
    Bank of America, N.A. (the Agreement). The amendment provided
    for an increase in the availability under the existing line of
    credit from $4.0 million to $6.0 million, with
    interest payable monthly at LIBOR plus an Applicable Margin, as
    defined in the Agreement (4.76% at December 31, 2010). In
    addition, the term debt was reduced to $6.0 million, with
    quarterly payments under the term debt reduced to $666,667, plus
    interest at the same rate as the line of credit, beginning
    December 31, 2010. We reduced the commitment fee from
    three-quarters of one percent (0.75%) to one-half of one percent
    (0.50%) per annum on the unused line of credit. The borrowings
    are collateralized by a first priority lien on all of our
    assets. Concurrent with the amendment of the Agreement, we
    elected to prepay approximately $5.9 million of its term
    debt, incurring a prepayment penalty of approximately
    $0.2 million. At December 31, 2010, the outstanding
    term loan and line of credit balances were $5.3 million and
    $1.8 million, respectively.
    The Agreements covenants include a Leverage Ratio, as
    defined in the Agreement, of 2.00 to 1.00 for the quarter ended
    December 31, 2010, 1.75 to 1.00 for each of the three
    quarters ended March 31, 2011, June 30, 2011 and
    September 30, 2011 and 1.25 to 1.00 for quarter ending
    December 31, 2011 and thereafter, as well as a Fixed Charge
    Coverage Ratio, as defined in the Agreement, of at least 1.25 to
    1.00 at each quarter-annual reporting period. In addition, we
    must maintain deposits with Bank of America, N.A. at amounts
    equal to at least the sum of (a) the maximum amount of the
    line of credit plus (b) the aggregate principal amount then
    outstanding under the term debt. We were in compliance with all
    restrictive covenants at December 31, 2010.
    We are subject to additional loan fees if certain performance
    metrics measured at March 31, 2011 and September 30,
    2011 are not met. If required, the additional loan fee amounts
    of $102,000 each are due within 45 days of the end of the
    respective period. As of December 31, 2010, we have not
    recognized any additional loan fees.
    Our manufacturing and supply agreement with one manufacturer,
    which expires in 2021, contains a minimum purchase obligation
    which requires us to purchase 25% of its prior year purchases,
    or $0.5 million, during 2011. We expect our normal
    inventory purchasing levels to be above the required minimum
    amounts. As of December 31, 2010, we had met our purchase
    obligations for 2010 under this agreement.
    During 2001, we signed an agreement with Cato Research Ltd., or
    Cato, to cover a variety of development efforts related to
    Caldolor, including preparation of submissions to the FDA. Under
    the terms of the agreement, we deferred a portion of each bill
    from Cato. One-third of the deferred amount accrued interest at
    an annual rate of 12.5% and was due after eighteen months. The
    remaining two-thirds were due upon specific milestone events,
    one of which was Caldolor obtaining marketing approval from the
    FDA. We received such approval in June 2009, triggering a
    milestone obligation of
    51
Table of Contents
    Part II
    approximately $1.0 million. The milestone was payable as
    follows: approximately $0.8 million was paid in the third
    quarter of 2009 and the remaining $0.2 million was paid in
    equal monthly installments through July 2010. In addition to the
    milestone payments, Cato vested in options to purchase
    60,000 shares of our common stock with an exercise price of
    $1.625 per share.
    The following table sets forth a summary of our contractual cash
    obligations as of December 31, 2010:
| Payments due by year | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Contractual obligations | Total(1) | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015+ | ||||||||||||||||||
| (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Amounts reflected in the balance sheet:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Term
    loan(2)
 | $ | 5,333 | $ | 2,667 | $ | 2,667 | $ |  | $ |  | $ |  | ||||||||||||
| 
    Line of credit
 | 1,826 |  | 1,826 |  |  |  | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Estimated interest on
    debt(3)
 | 459 | 293 | 166 |  |  |  | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Other cash obligations not reflected on the balance sheet:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Operating
    leases(4)
 | 5,204 | 833 | 860 | 886 | 913 | 1,712 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Purchase
    obligations(5)
 | 689 | 517 | 129 | 32 | 8 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Total(1)
 | $ | 13,512 | $ | 4,309 | $ | 5,648 | $ | 918 | $ | 921 | $ | 1,715 | ||||||||||||
| (1) | The sum of the individual amounts may not agree due to rounding. | |
| (2) | The term debt is payable in quarterly installments of $666,667. | |
| (3) | Represents the estimated interest payments on our line of credit and term loan based on the December 31, 2010 interest rate of LIBOR plus an applicable margin, or 4.76%. Interest payments are due and payable quarterly in arrears. The line of credit becomes due and payable in December 2012. Estimated interest for the line of credit is based on the assumption of a consistent outstanding balance. | |
| (4) | Includes minimum lease commitments for the CET facility for the five-year option renewal beginning in July 2011 for which we have notified the landlord in January 2011 of our intent to exercise. | |
| (5) | Represents minimum purchase obligations under our manufacturing agreements. The agreement requires us to purchase 25% of our prior year purchases. | 
    OFF-BALANCE SHEET
    ARRANGEMENTS
    During 2010, 2009 and 2008, we did not engage in any off-balance
    sheet arrangements.
    RECENTLY ISSUED
    BUT NOT YET ADOPTED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
    In October 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
    issued guidance setting forth requirements that must be met for
    an entity to recognize revenue from the sale of a delivered item
    that is part of a multiple-element arrangement when other items
    have not yet been delivered. The overall arrangement fee will be
    allocated to each element based on their relative selling
    prices. If an entity does not have a selling price for an
    element, then management must estimate the selling price. This
    guidance is effective for us for all revenue arrangements
    entered into or materially modified after January 1, 2011.
    Early adoption is permitted. The future impact of adopting this
    standard will depend on the nature and extent of transaction
    covered by this standard. This standard would not have
    materially impacted the consolidated financial statements as of
    December 31, 2010.
    52
Table of Contents
    Part II
| Item 7A: | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk | 
    INTEREST RATE
    RISK
    We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest
    rates on our cash on deposit in highly-liquid money market
    accounts, our revolving credit facility and our term note
    payable. We do not utilize derivative financial instruments or
    other market risk-sensitive instruments to manage exposure to
    interest rate changes. The main objective of our cash investment
    activities is to preserve principal while maximizing interest
    income through low-risk investments. Our investment policy
    focuses on principal preservation and liquidity.
    We believe that our interest rate risk related to our portfolio
    of money market accounts is not material. Additionally, we have
    immediate access to these funds and could shift these funds to
    certificates of deposits with guaranteed rates. The risk related
    to interest rates for our money market accounts is that these
    accounts would produce less income than expected if market
    interest rates fall. Based on current interest rates, we do not
    believe we are exposed to significant downside risk related to
    interest on our money market accounts.
    The interest rate risk related to borrowings under our line of
    credit and term debt is a variable rate of LIBOR plus an
    applicable margin, as defined in the loan agreement (4.76% at
    December 31, 2010). As of December 31, 2010, we had
    outstanding borrowings of $7.2 million under our line of
    credit and term debt combined. If interest rates increased by
    1.0%, the impact on interest expense in future periods would be
    less than $0.1 million.
    EXCHANGE RATE
    RISK
    While we operate primarily in the U.S., we are exposed to
    foreign currency risk. During 2010, our primary manufacturer of
    Acetadote denominated supply prices in Canadian dollars. In
    2011, our primary supplier of Acetadote will be denominating the
    prices in U.S. dollars. One of our supply agreements for
    Caldolor is denominated in Australian dollars. Additionally, a
    portion of our research and development is performed abroad. As
    of December 31, 2010, our outstanding payables denominated
    in a foreign currency totaled approximately $0.2 million.
    Currently, we do not utilize financial instruments to hedge
    exposure to foreign currency fluctuations. We believe our
    exposure to foreign currency fluctuation is minimal as our
    purchases in foreign currency have a maximum exposure of
    90 days based on invoice terms with a portion of the
    exposure being limited to 30 days based on the due date of
    the invoice. Foreign currency exchange losses were immaterial
    for 2010 and 2009. Neither a 5% increase nor decrease from
    current exchange rates would have had a material effect on our
    operating results or financial condition.
| Item 8: | Financial Statements and Supplementary Data | 
    See consolidated financial statements, including the report of
    the independent registered public accounting firm, starting on
    page F-1.
| Item 9: | Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure | 
    None.
    53
Table of Contents
    Part II
| Item 9A: | Controls and Procedures | 
    Cumberlands Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
    Officer have evaluated the effectiveness of the design and
    operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
    December 31, 2010. Based on that evaluation, they have
    concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are
    effective to ensure that material information relating to
    Cumberland and our consolidated subsidiaries is made known to
    officers within these entities in order to allow for timely
    decisions regarding required disclosure.
    Managements report on internal control over financial
    reporting and the related attestation report of KPMG LLP, our
    independent registered public accounting firm, are included on
    page F-1
    and F-3, respectively, of this annual report on
    Form 10-K.
    During our fourth quarter of 2010, there were no changes in our
    internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
    Rule 13a-15(f)
    or
    15d-15(f)).
| Item 9B: | Other Information | 
    None
    54
Table of Contents
    Part III
    
    The information called for by Part III of
    Form 10-K
    (Item 10Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate
    Governance, Item 11Executive Compensation,
    Item 12Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial
    Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters,
    Item 13Certain Relationships and Related
    Transactions, and Director Independence,
    Item 14Principal Accounting Fees and Services), is
    incorporated by reference from our proxy statement related to
    our 2011 annual meeting of shareholders, which will be filed
    with the SEC not later than April 30, 2011 (120 days
    after the end of the fiscal year covered by this report).
    55
Table of Contents
    Part IV
    
| Item 15: | Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules | 
    (a) Documents filed as part of this report:
    (1)  Financial Statements
| Page Number | ||||
| F-1 | ||||
| F-2 | ||||
| F-3 | ||||
| F-4 | ||||
| F-5 | ||||
| F-6 | ||||
| F-7 | ||||
| F-8 | ||||
| 
    (2)  Financial Statement Schedule
 | ||||
| F-27 | ||||
    (b) Exhibits
| Exhibit | ||||
| Number | Description | |||
| 3 | .1 | Third Amended and Restated Charter of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 19 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 17, 2009 | ||
| 3 | .2 | Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 19 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 17, 2009 | ||
| 4 | .1 | Specimen Common Stock Certificate of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 5 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on August 6, 2007 | ||
| 4 | .2 | Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., issued to Bank of America, N.A. on October 21, 2003, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
    56
Table of Contents
    Part IV
| Exhibit | ||||
| Number | Description | |||
| 4 | .3 | Stock Purchase Warrant, issued to S.C.O.U.T. Healthcare Fund L.P. on April 15, 2004, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 1 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on June 22, 2007 | ||
| 4 | .4 | Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., issued to Bank of America, N.A. on April 6, 2006, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
| 4 | .5# | Form of Option Agreement under 1999 Stock Option Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
| 4 | .6.1# | Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement under 2007 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on May 17, 2010 | ||
| 4 | .6.2# | Form of Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreement under 2007 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on May 17, 2010 | ||
| 4 | .7# | Form of Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreement under 2007 Directors Compensation Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on May 17, 2010 | ||
| 4 | .8 | Warrant to Purchase Common Stock of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., issued to Bank of America, N.A. on July 22, 2009, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on March 19, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .1 | Manufacturing and Supply Agreement for N-Acetylcysteine, dated January 15, 2002, by and between Bioniche Life Sciences, Inc. and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 5 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on August 6, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .2 | Novation Agreement, dated January 27, 2006, by and among Bioniche Life Sciences, Inc., Bioniche Pharma Group Ltd., and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .3 | First Amendment to Manufacturing and Supply Agreement for N-Acetylcysteine, dated November 16, 2006, by and between Bioniche Teoranta and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 3 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 11, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .3.1 | Second Amendment to Manufacturing and Supply Agreement for N-Acetylcysteine, dated March 25, 2008, by and between Bioniche Teoranta and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 10 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 21, 2008 | ||
    57
Table of Contents
    Part IV
| Exhibit | ||||
| Number | Description | |||
| 10 | .7 | Exclusive Distribution Agreement, effective as of July 1, 2010, by and between Cardinal Health 105, Inc. and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit of the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on August 13, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .8 | Strategic Alliance Agreement, dated July 21, 2000, by and between F.H. Faulding & Co. Limited and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., including notification of assignment from F.H. Faulding & Co. Limited to Mayne Pharma Pty Ltd., dated April 16, 2002, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 4 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 23, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .9 | Kristalose Agreement, dated April 7, 2006, by and among Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., Inalco S.p.A., and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 3 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 11, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .9.1 | Amendment to Kristalose Agreement, dated April 3, 2008, by and between Inalco S.p.A., Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 10 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 21, 2008 | ||
| 10 | .9.2 | Second Amendment to Kristalose Agreement, dated July 1, 2008, by and among Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., Inalco S.p.A., and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 13 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on August 12, 2008 | ||
| 10 | .9.3 | Third Amendment to Kristalose Agreement, dated April 6, 2009, by and between Inalco S.p.A., Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 18 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 12, 2009 | ||
| 10 | .9.4 | Fourth Amendment to Kristalose Agreement, effective January 1, 2010, by and between Inalco S.p.A., Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on May 17, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .10 | License Agreement, dated May 28, 1999, by and between Vanderbilt University and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 3 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 11, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .11# | Employment Agreement dated March 9, 2011, effective as of January 1, 2011, by and between A.J. Kazimi and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. | ||
| 10 | .12# | Employment Agreement dated March 9, 2011, effective as of January 1, 2011, by and between Jean W. Marstiller and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. | ||
| 10 | .13# | Employment Agreement dated March 9, 2011, effective as of January 1, 2011, by and between Leo Pavliv and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. | ||
| 10 | .15# | Employment Agreement dated March 9, 2011, effective as of January 1, 2011, by and between David L. Lowrance and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. | ||
    58
Table of Contents
    Part IV
| Exhibit | ||||
| Number | Description | |||
| 10 | .16 | Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement by and between Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Bank of America, N.A., dated July 22, 2009, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 20 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 29, 2009 | ||
| 10 | .16.1 | Third Amendment to Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement dated as of September 29, 2010 by and between Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on October 5, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .17# | 1999 Stock Option Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .18# | 2007 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., as amended on November 4, 2010, incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on November 15, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .19# | 2007 Directors Compensation Plan of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on May 17, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .20 | Form of Indemnification Agreement between Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. and all members of its Board of Directors, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .21 | Lease Agreement, dated September 10, 2005, by and between Nashville Hines Development, LLC and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 3 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on July 11, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .21.1 | First Amendment to Office Lease Agreement, dated April 25, 2008, by and between 2525 West End, LLC (successor in interest to Nashville Hines Development LLC) and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 10 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 21, 2008 | ||
| 10 | .21.2 | Second Amendment to Office Lease Agreement, dated March 2, 2010, by and between 2525 West End, LLC (successor in interest to Nashville Hines Development LLC) and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-33637) as filed with the SEC on May 17, 2010 | ||
| 10 | .23 | Amended and Restated Lease Agreement, dated November 11, 2004, by and between The Gateway to Nashville LLC and Cumberland Emerging Technologies, Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
| 10 | .24 | First Amendment to Amended and Restated Lease Agreement, dated August 23, 2005, by and between The Gateway to Nashville LLC and Cumberland Emerging Technologies, Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | ||
    59
Table of Contents
    Part IV
| Exhibit | ||||
| Number | Description | |||
| 10 | .24.1 | Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Lease Agreement, dated January 9, 2006, by and between The Gateway to Nashville LLC and Cumberland Emerging Technologies, Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 10 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 21, 2008 | ||
| 10 | .25 | Manufacturing Agreement, dated February 6, 2008, by and between Bayer HealthCare, LLC, and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to Amendment No. 12 of the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on June 20, 2008 | ||
| 10 | .26# | Employment Agreement dated March 9, 2011, effective as of January 1, 2011, by and between Martin E. Cearnal and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. | ||
| 21 | Subsidiaries of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., incorporated herein by reference to the corresponding exhibit to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-142535) as filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007 | |||
| 23 | .1 | Consent of KPMG LLP | ||
| 31 | .1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
| 31 | .2 | Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
| 32 | .1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | ||
| # | Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan. | |
|  | Confidential treatment has been granted for portions of this exhibit. These portions have been omitted from the Registration Statement and submitted separately to the Securities and Exchange Commission. | |
|  | Confidential treatment has been requested for portions of this exhibit. These portions have been omitted from the Registration Statement and submitted separately to the Securities and Exchange Commission. | 
    60
Table of Contents
Signatures
    Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
    Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
    this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
    thereunto duly authorized, on the 11th day of March 2011.
    CUMBERLAND PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
| By: | /s/  A.
    J. Kazimi | 
    A. J. Kazimi
    Chief Executive Officer
    (Principal Executive Officer)
    Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
    on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
    dates indicated.
| Signature | Title | Date | ||||
| /s/ A.J. KazimiA.J. Kazimi | Chairman and CEO (Principal Executive Officer and Director) | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ David L. LowranceDavid L. Lowrance | Vice President and CFO (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Robert G. EdwardsRobert G. Edwards | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Thomas R. LawrenceThomas R. Lawrence | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Lawrence W. GreerLawrence W. Greer | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Martin E. CearnalMartin E. Cearnal | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Gordon BernardGordon Bernard | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Jonathan GriggsJonathan Griggs | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ James JonesJames Jones | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
| /s/ Joey JacobsJoey Jacobs | Director | March 11, 2011 | ||||
    61
Table of Contents
    Management report on
    internal control over financial reporting
    
    The management of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. is responsible
    for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
    financial reporting. Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.s
    internal control system was designed to provide reasonable
    assurance to the Companys management and board of
    directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of
    published financial statements. All internal control systems, no
    matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore,
    even those systems determined to be effective can provide only
    reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement
    preparation and presentation.
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.s management assessed the
    effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
    financial reporting as of December 31, 2010. In making this
    assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of
    Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in
    Internal ControlIntegrated Framework.
    Based on our assessment we believe that, as of December 31,
    2010, the Companys internal control over financial
    reporting is effective based on those criteria.
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.s independent registered
    public accounting firm has issued an audit report on Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals Inc.s internal control over financial
    reporting. This report appears on
    page F-3
    of this Annual Report on
    Form 10-K.
    /s/  A. J. Kazimi
    A.J. Kazimi
    Chief Executive Officer
    March 11, 2011
    /s/  David L. Lowrance
    David L. Lowrance
    Chief Financial Officer
    March 11, 2011
    F-1
Table of Contents
    Report of
    independent registered public accounting firm
    
    The Board of Directors
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.:
    We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company)
    as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related
    consolidated statements of income, cash flows, and equity and
    comprehensive income for each of the years in the three-year
    period ended December 31, 2010. In connection with our
    audits of the consolidated financial statements, we have also
    audited the financial statement Schedule IIValuation
    and Qualifying Accounts for each of the years in the three-year
    period ended December 31, 2010. These consolidated
    financial statements and financial statement schedule are the
    responsibility of the Companys management. Our
    responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated
    financial statements and financial statement schedule 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, 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 consolidated financial statements referred
    to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
    position of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. and subsidiaries as
    of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of their
    operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the
    three-year period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity
    with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also,
    in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
    considered in relation to the consolidated financial statements
    taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the
    information set forth herein.
    We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
    Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
    Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
    December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in
    Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
    Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
    (COSO), and our report dated March 11, 2011 expressed an
    unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Companys
    internal control over financial reporting.
/s/  KPMG
    LLP
    Nashville, Tennessee
    March 11, 2011
    F-2
Table of Contents
    Report of
    independent registered public accounting firm
    
    The Board of Directors
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.:
    We have audited Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.s (the
    Company) internal control over financial reporting as of
    December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in
    Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
    Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
    (COSO). The Companys management is responsible for
    maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
    and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
    over financial reporting, included in the accompanying
    Management Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.
    Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
    Companys internal control over financial reporting based
    on our audit.
    We conducted our audit 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 effective internal control
    over financial reporting was maintained in all material
    respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
    internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
    that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the
    design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
    the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other
    procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
    believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our
    opinion.
    A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
    process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
    reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
    financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
    generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
    internal control over financial reporting includes those
    policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
    of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
    reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
    company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
    are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
    statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
    principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
    are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
    management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
    reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
    unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
    companys assets that could have a material effect on the
    financial statements.
    Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
    financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
    Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
    periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
    inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
    of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
    In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material
    respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
    of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in
    Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
    Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
    We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
    Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
    consolidated balance sheets of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.
    and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the
    related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, and
    equity and comprehensive income for each of the years in the
    three-year period ended December 31, 2010, and our report
    dated March 11, 2011 expressed an unqualified opinion on
    those consolidated financial statements.
/s/  KPMG
    LLP
    Nashville, Tennessee
    March 11, 2011
    F-3
Table of Contents
    Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Subsidiaries
    Consolidated
    balance sheets 
    
    December 31,
    2010 and 2009
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||
| 
    ASSETS
 | ||||||||
| 
    Current assets:
 | ||||||||
| 
    Cash and cash equivalents
 | $ | 65,893,970 | $ | 78,701,682 | ||||
| 
    Accounts receivable, net of allowances
 | 5,145,494 | 6,176,585 | ||||||
| 
    Inventories
 | 7,683,842 | 4,822,873 | ||||||
| 
    Prepaid and other current assets
 | 1,336,765 | 2,746,259 | ||||||
| 
    Deferred tax assets
 | 978,771 | 726,196 | ||||||
| 
    Total current assets
 | 81,038,842 | 93,173,595 | ||||||
| 
    Property and equipment, net
 | 1,220,010 | 918,412 | ||||||
| 
    Intangible assets, net
 | 7,427,223 | 7,956,009 | ||||||
| 
    Deferred tax assets
 | 2,265,192 | 1,306,514 | ||||||
| 
    Other assets
 | 102,787 | 369,790 | ||||||
| 
    Total assets
 | $ | 92,054,054 | $ | 103,724,320 | ||||
| LIABILITIES AND EQUITY | ||||||||
| 
    Current liabilities:
 | ||||||||
| 
    Current portion of long-term debt
 | $ | 2,666,668 | $ | 9,061,973 | ||||
| 
    Current portion of other long-term obligations
 | 24,692 | 144,828 | ||||||
| 
    Accounts payable
 | 2,124,654 | 5,632,796 | ||||||
| 
    Other accrued liabilities
 | 4,411,606 | 3,784,777 | ||||||
| 
    Total current liabilities
 | 9,227,620 | 18,624,374 | ||||||
| 
    Revolving line of credit
 | 1,825,951 | 1,825,951 | ||||||
| 
    Long-term debt, excluding current portion
 | 2,666,665 | 8,938,027 | ||||||
| 
    Other long-term obligations, excluding current portion
 | 618,343 | 184,632 | ||||||
| 
    Total liabilities
 | 14,338,579 | 29,572,984 | ||||||
| 
    Commitments and contingencies
 | ||||||||
| 
    Redeemable common stock
 |  | 1,930,000 | ||||||
| 
    Equity:
 | ||||||||
| 
    Shareholders equity:
 | ||||||||
| 
    Common stockno par value; 100,000,000 shares
    authorized; 20,338,461 and
    20,180,486(1)
    shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2010 and
    2009, respectively
 | 70,778,874 | 67,711,746 | ||||||
| 
    Retained earnings
 | 6,998,806 | 4,542,126 | ||||||
| 
    Total shareholders equity
 | 77,777,680 | 72,253,872 | ||||||
| 
    Noncontrolling interests
 | (62,205 | ) | (32,536 | ) | ||||
| 
    Total equity
 | 77,715,475 | 72,221,336 | ||||||
| 
    Total liabilities and equity
 | $ | 92,054,054 | $ | 103,724,320 | ||||
| (1) | Number of shares issued and outstanding represents total shares of common stock regardless of classification on the consolidated balance sheet. The number of shares of redeemable common stock as of December 31, 2009 was 142,016. | 
    See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
    F-4
Table of Contents
    Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Subsidiaries
    Consolidated
    statements of income 
    
    Years ended
    December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Revenues:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Net product revenue
 | $ | 44,704,570 | $ | 43,142,350 | $ | 34,889,967 | ||||||
| 
    Other revenue
 | 1,171,801 | 394,928 | 185,193 | |||||||||
| 
    Net revenues
 | 45,876,371 | 43,537,278 | 35,075,160 | |||||||||
| 
    Costs and expenses:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Cost of products sold
 | 3,586,646 | 4,136,541 | 3,045,672 | |||||||||
| 
    Selling and marketing
 | 22,674,505 | 20,194,074 | 14,387,153 | |||||||||
| 
    Research and development
 | 4,327,485 | 4,993,278 | 4,429,064 | |||||||||
| 
    General and administrative
 | 7,990,222 | 7,643,070 | 5,139,937 | |||||||||
| 
    Amortization of product license right
 | 686,911 | 686,904 | 686,904 | |||||||||
| 
    Other
 | 108,855 | 106,776 | 104,209 | |||||||||
| 
    Total costs and expenses
 | 39,374,624 | 37,760,643 | 27,792,939 | |||||||||
| 
    Operating income
 | 6,501,747 | 5,776,635 | 7,282,221 | |||||||||
| 
    Interest income
 | 200,207 | 79,363 | 241,282 | |||||||||
| 
    Interest expense
 | (1,423,523 | ) | (772,927 | ) | (213,303 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Income before income taxes
 | 5,278,431 | 5,083,071 | 7,310,200 | |||||||||
| 
    Income tax expense
 | (2,851,420 | ) | (2,024,192 | ) | (2,543,951 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Net income
 | 2,427,011 | 3,058,879 | 4,766,249 | |||||||||
| 
    Net loss at subsidiary attributable to noncontrolling interests
 | 29,669 | 32,536 |  | |||||||||
| 
    Net income attributable to common shareholders
 | $ | 2,456,680 | $ | 3,091,415 | $ | 4,766,249 | ||||||
| 
    Earnings per share attributable to common shareholders
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Basic
 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.22 | $ | 0.47 | ||||||
| 
    Diluted
 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.17 | $ | 0.29 | ||||||
| 
    Weighted-average shares outstanding
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Basic
 | 20,333,932 | 14,199,479 | 10,142,807 | |||||||||
| 
    Diluted
 | 21,058,577 | 18,234,171 | 16,539,662 | |||||||||
    See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
    F-5
Table of Contents
    Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Subsidiaries
    Consolidated
    statements of cash flows 
    
    Years ended
    December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Cash flows from operating activities:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Net income
 | $ | 2,427,011 | $ | 3,058,879 | $ | 4,766,249 | ||||||
| 
    Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
    operating activities:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Gain on early extinguishment of other long-term obligations
 |  |  | (38,577 | ) | ||||||||
| 
    Depreciation and amortization expense
 | 978,398 | 816,499 | 786,597 | |||||||||
| 
    Deferred tax (benefit) expense
 | (332,349 | ) | (525,467 | ) | 683,914 | |||||||
| 
    Nonemployee stock granted for services received
 | 37,121 | 210,740 | 106,558 | |||||||||
| 
    Nonemployee stock option grant expense
 | 43,101 | 845,661 | 58,646 | |||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationemployee stock options
 | 688,408 | 606,395 | 397,500 | |||||||||
| 
    Excess tax benefit derived from exercise of stock options
 | (3,874,966 | ) | (3,968,894 | ) | (398,529 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Noncash interest expense
 | 352,484 | 128,800 | 71,933 | |||||||||
| 
    Net changes in assets and liabilities affecting operating
    activities:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Accounts receivable
 | 1,031,091 | (3,047,238 | ) | (755,810 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Inventory
 | (2,860,969 | ) | (3,060,097 | ) | (813,667 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Prepaid, other current assets and other assets
 | 1,342,032 | (721,464 | ) | (163,274 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Accounts payable and other accrued liabilities
 | 201,725 | 6,572,098 | 1,652,911 | |||||||||
| 
    Other long-term obligations
 | 313,575 | (510,942 | ) | 42,501 | ||||||||
| 
    Net cash provided by operating activities
 | 346,662 | 404,970 | 6,396,952 | |||||||||
| 
    Cash flows from investing activities:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Additions to property and equipment
 | (577,159 | ) | (601,802 | ) | (67,572 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Additions to trademarks and patents
 | (191,483 | ) | (110,541 | ) | (66,576 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Net cash used in investing activities
 | (768,642 | ) | (712,343 | ) | (134,148 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Cash flows from financing activities:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Proceeds from initial public offering of common stock
 |  | 85,000,000 |  | |||||||||
| 
    Costs of initial public offering
 |  | (7,479,011 | ) | (687,977 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Proceeds from borrowings on long-term debt
 |  | 18,000,000 | 4,083,340 | |||||||||
| 
    Principal payments on note payable
 | (12,666,667 | ) | (5,000,000 | ) | (1,833,336 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Net borrowings on line of credit
 |  |  | 500,000 | |||||||||
| 
    Payment of other long-term obligations
 |  |  | (2,760,000 | ) | ||||||||
| 
    Costs of financing for long-term debt and credit facility
 | (110,000 | ) | (189,660 | ) | (29,491 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Payments made in connection with repurchase of common shares
 | (4,846,791 | ) | (27,295,808 | ) | (4,999,995 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Proceeds from exercise of stock options
 | 1,362,760 | 175,089 | 81,159 | |||||||||
| 
    Excess tax benefit derived from exercise of stock options
 | 3,874,966 | 3,968,894 | 398,529 | |||||||||
| 
    Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
 | (12,385,732 | ) | 67,179,504 | (5,247,771 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
 | (12,807,712 | ) | 66,872,131 | 1,015,033 | ||||||||
| 
    Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
 | 78,701,682 | 11,829,551 | 10,814,518 | |||||||||
| 
    Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
 | $ | 65,893,970 | $ | 78,701,682 | $ | 11,829,551 | ||||||
| 
    Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Cash paid during the year for:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Interest
 | $ | 814,373 | $ | 677,387 | $ | 221,000 | ||||||
| 
    Income taxes
 | 52,136 | 196,187 | 1,486,991 | |||||||||
| 
    Noncash investing and financing activities:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Reclass of redeemable common stock to (from) equity
 | 1,930,000 | (1,930,000 | ) |  | ||||||||
| 
    Deferred financing costs
 |  | 335,075 | 125,000 | |||||||||
    See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
    F-6
Table of Contents
    Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Subsidiaries
    Consolidated
    statements of equity and comprehensive income 
    
    Years ended
    December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
| Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. Shareholders | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Retained | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| earnings | Non- | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock | Common stock | (accumulated | controlling | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares | Amount | Shares | Amount | deficit) | interests | equity | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Balance, December 31, 2007
 | 855,495 | $ | 2,742,994 | 10,091,260 | $ | 17,318,713 | $ | (3,315,538 | ) | $ |  | $ | 16,746,169 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationemployee stock option grants
 |  |  |  | 397,500 |  |  | 397,500 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Issuance of common stock for services received
 |  |  | 7,961 | 106,558 |  |  | 106,558 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationnonemployee stock option grants
 |  |  |  | 58,646 |  |  | 58,646 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Conversion of preferred stock into common stock
 | (42,746 | ) | (138,924 | ) | 85,492 | 138,924 |  |  |  | |||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Repurchase of common shares
 |  |  | (384,615 | ) | (4,999,995 | ) |  |  | (4,999,995 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Exercise of options and related tax benefit, net of mature
    shares redeemed for the exercise price
 |  |  | 102,949 | 479,688 |  |  | 479,688 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Net and comprehensive income
 |  |  |  |  | 4,766,249 |  | 4,766,249 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Balance, December 31, 2008
 | 812,749 | 2,604,070 | 9,903,047 | 13,500,034 | 1,450,711 |  | 17,554,815 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Initial public offering of common stock, net of offering costs
 |  |  | 5,000,000 | 74,801,596 |  |  | 74,801,596 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationemployee stock option grants
 |  |  |  | 606,395 |  |  | 606,395 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Issuance of common stock for services received
 |  |  | 20,250 | 338,240 |  |  | 338,240 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationnonemployee stock option grants
 |  |  |  | 845,661 |  |  | 845,661 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Conversion of preferred stock into common stock
 | (812,749 | ) | (2,604,070 | ) | 1,625,498 | 2,604,070 |  |  |  | |||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Repurchase of common shares
 |  |  | (4,018 | ) | (52,234 | ) |  |  | (52,234 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Issuance of common stock warrants
 |  |  |  | 97,575 |  |  | 97,575 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Exercise of options and related tax benefit, net of mature
    shares redeemed for the exercise price and statutory tax
    withholdings
 |  |  | 3,635,709 | (23,099,591 | ) |  |  | (23,099,591 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Net and comprehensive income
 |  |  |  |  | 3,091,415 | (32,536 | ) | 3,058,879 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Reclass of redeemable common stock
 |  |  |  | (1,930,000 | ) |  |  | (1,930,000 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Balance, December 31, 2009
 |  |  | 20,180,486 | 67,711,746 | 4,542,126 | (32,536 | ) | 72,221,336 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationemployee stock option grants
 |  |  |  | 688,408 |  |  | 688,408 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Issuance of common stock for services received
 |  |  | 5,636 | 55,140 |  |  | 55,140 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Stock-based compensationnonemployee stock option grants
 |  |  |  | 43,101 |  |  | 43,101 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Repurchase of common shares
 |  |  | (615,455 | ) | (4,887,247 | ) |  |  | (4,887,247 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Exercise of options and related tax benefit, net of mature
    shares redeemed for the exercise price and statutory tax
    withholdings
 |  |  | 767,794 | 5,237,726 |  |  | 5,237,726 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Net and comprehensive income
 |  |  |  |  | 2,456,680 | (29,669 | ) | 2,427,011 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Reclass of redeemable common stock
 |  |  |  | 1,930,000 |  |  | 1,930,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Balance, December 31, 2010
 |  | $ |  | 20,338,461 | $ | 70,778,874 | $ | 6,998,806 | $ | (62,205 | ) | $ | 77,715,475 | |||||||||||||||
    See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
    F-7
Table of Contents
    CUMBERLAND
    PHARMACEUTICALS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    
| (1) | ORGANIZATION | 
    Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. and its subsidiaries (the
    Company or Cumberland) is a specialty pharmaceutical company
    incorporated in Tennessee on January 6, 1999. Its mission
    is to provide high-quality products to address underserved
    medical needs. Cumberland is focused on acquiring rights to,
    developing and commercializing branded prescription products for
    the hospital acute care and gastroenterology markets.
    The Companys corporate operations and product acquisitions
    have been funded by a combination of equity and debt financings.
    Cumberland focuses its resources on maximizing the commercial
    potential of its products, as well as developing new product
    candidates, and has both internal development and commercial
    capabilities. The Companys products are manufactured by
    third parties, which are overseen by Cumberlands quality
    control and manufacturing professionals. The Company works
    closely with its third-party distribution partner to make its
    products available in the United States.
    In order to create access to a pipeline of early-stage product
    candidates, the Company formed a subsidiary, Cumberland Emerging
    Technologies, Inc. (CET), which assists universities and other
    research organizations to help bring biomedical projects from
    the laboratory to the marketplace. The Companys ownership
    in CET is 85%. The remaining interest is owned by Vanderbilt
    University and the Tennessee Technology Development Corporation.
    During 2002, CETs losses reduced its equity to a deficit
    position. Accordingly, the Company reduced the noncontrolling
    interest balance to zero and recorded 100% of the losses
    associated with the joint venture until January 1, 2009.
    Effective January 1, 2009, the Company adopted a new
    accounting standard that required the allocation of operating
    results, including losses, to the noncontrolling interests.
    During 2010 and 2009, approximately $30,000 and $33,000,
    respectively, of losses from CET were allocated to the
    noncontrolling interests.
    Effective January 1, 2007, the Company formed a
    wholly-owned subsidiary, Cumberland Pharma Sales Corp. (CPSC),
    for the purpose of employing the hospital sales force that
    promotes the Companys products,
    Acetadote®
    and
    Caldolor®,
    in the acute care market. In September 2010, the Company
    converted its field sales force, which promotes Caldolor and
    Kristalose®,
    to Cumberland employees. Previously, these sales forces were
    contracted through a third-party contract sales organization.
    The Company operates in a single operating segment of specialty
    pharmaceutical products. Management has chosen to organize the
    Company based on the type of products sold. All of the
    Companys assets are located in the United States. Total
    revenues are primarily attributable to U.S. customers. Net
    revenues from
    non-U.S. customers
    were approximately $0.1 million, $0.7 million and
    $0.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2010,
    2009 and 2008, respectively.
| (2) | SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES | 
| (a) | Principles of Consolidation | 
    These consolidated financial statements are stated in
    U.S. dollars and are prepared under U.S. generally
    accepted accounting principles. The consolidated financial
    statements include the accounts of the Company and its
    majority-owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany
    transactions and accounts have been eliminated.
| (b) | Cash and Cash Equivalents | 
    Cash and cash equivalents include highly liquid investments with
    an original maturity of three months or less when purchased.
    F-8
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
| (c) | Accounts Receivable | 
    Trade accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount
    and do not bear interest. The Company records allowances for
    uncollectible amounts, cash discounts, chargebacks and credits
    to be taken by customers for product damaged in shipments based
    on historical experience. The Company reviews each customer
    balance for collectibility.
    Discounts are reductions to invoiced amounts offered to
    customers for payment within a specified period of time from the
    date of the invoice.
    The majority of the Companys products are distributed
    through independent pharmaceutical wholesalers. Net product
    revenue and accounts receivable take into account the sale of
    the product at the wholesale acquisition cost, and an accrual is
    recorded to reflect the difference between the wholesale
    acquisition cost and the estimated average end-user contract
    price. This accrual is calculated on a product-specific basis
    and is based on the estimated number of outstanding units sold
    to wholesalers that will ultimately be sold under end-user
    contracts. When the wholesaler sells the product to the end-user
    at the agreed upon end-user contract price, the wholesaler
    charges the Company for the difference between the wholesale
    acquisition price and the end-user contract price and that
    chargeback is offset against the initial accrual balance.
    The Companys estimate of the allowance for damaged product
    is based upon historical experience of claims made for damaged
    product. At the time the transaction is recognized as a sale,
    the Company records a reduction in revenue for the estimate of
    product damaged in shipment.
| (d) | Inventories | 
    The Company works closely with third parties to manufacture and
    package finished goods for sale, takes title to the finished
    goods at the time of shipment from the manufacturer and
    warehouses such goods until distribution and sale. Inventories
    are stated at the lower of cost or market with cost determined
    using the
    first-in,
    first-out method.
    In the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company purchased certain
    packaging materials related to the manufacture of Caldolor. As
    these materials are consumed as part of the manufacturing
    process, the costs associated with these materials will be used
    to offset the finished goods price from the manufacturer. As of
    December 31, 2010 and 2009, inventory was comprised of the
    following:
| December 31, | ||||||||
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||
| 
    Raw materials
 | $ | 356,676 | $ |  | ||||
| 
    Finished goods
 | 7,327,166 | 4,822,873 | ||||||
| 
    Total
 | $ | 7,683,842 | $ | 4,822,873 | ||||
| (e) | Prepaids and Other Current Assets | 
    Prepaid and other current assets consist of unamortized deferred
    financing costs, prepaid insurance premiums, prepaid consulting
    services, prepaid royalties and annual fees to the
    U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Company
    expenses all prepaid amounts as used or over the period of
    benefit on a straight-line basis, as applicable. In addition,
    the Company recognized an income tax receivable of approximately
    $1.4 million at December 31, 2009 related to the
    utilization of net operating losses that was carried back to
    recover income taxes that were paid in prior years. In 2010, the
    Company received approximately $1.3 million related to
    these operating losses. The difference
    F-9
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    reduced equity as an adjustment of the excess tax benefit
    associated with the underlying exercise of nonqualified stock
    options.
| (f) | Property and Equipment | 
    Property and equipment, including leasehold improvements, are
    stated at cost. Depreciation is provided using the straight-line
    method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. Leasehold
    improvements are amortized over the shorter of the initial lease
    term plus its renewal options, if renewal is reasonably assured,
    or the remaining useful life of the asset. Upon retirement or
    disposal of assets, the asset and accumulated depreciation or
    amortization accounts are adjusted accordingly and any gain or
    loss is reflected as a component of operating income in the
    consolidated statement of income. Repairs and maintenance costs
    are expensed as incurred. Improvements that extend an
    assets useful life are capitalized.
| (g) | Intangible Assets | 
    The Companys intangible assets consist of costs incurred
    related to licenses, trademarks and patents.
    In 2006, the Company acquired the exclusive
    U.S. commercialization rights (license) to
    Kristalose®.
    The cost of acquiring the licenses of products that are approved
    for commercial use are capitalized and amortized ratably over
    the estimated economic life of the products. At the time of
    acquisition, the product life is estimated based upon the term
    of the license agreement, patent life or market exclusivity of
    the products and our assessment of future sales and
    profitability of the product. We assess this estimate regularly
    during the amortization period and adjust the asset value or
    useful life when appropriate. The total purchase price for
    Kristalose, which included the cost of the
    U.S. commercialization rights and other related costs of
    obtaining the licenses, is being amortized on a straight-line
    basis over 15 years, which is managements estimate of
    the assets useful life.
    Trademarks are amortized on a straight-line basis over
    10 years, which is managements estimate of the
    assets useful life.
    Patents consist of outside legal costs associated with obtaining
    patents for products that have already been approved for
    marketing by the FDA. Upon issuance of a patent, the finite
    useful economic life of the patent (or family of patents) is
    determined, and the patent is amortized on a straight-line basis
    over such useful life. If it becomes probable that a patent will
    not be issued, related costs associated with the patent
    application will be expensed at the time such determination is
    made. All costs associated with obtaining patents for products
    that have not been approved for marketing by the FDA are
    expensed as incurred.
    When the Company acquires license agreements, product rights and
    other identifiable intangible assets, it records the aggregate
    purchase price as an intangible asset. The Company allocates the
    purchase price to the fair value of the various intangible
    assets in order to amortize their cost as an expense in its
    consolidated statements of income over the estimated useful
    lives of the related assets.
| (h) | Impairment of Long-Lived Assets | 
    Long-lived assets, such as property and equipment and purchased
    intangible assets subject to amortization, are reviewed for
    impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
    the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If
    circumstances require a long-lived asset to be tested for
    possible impairment, the Company first compares undiscounted
    cash flows expected to be generated by an asset to the carrying
    value of the asset. If the carrying amount of the long-lived
    asset is not recoverable on an undiscounted cash flow basis, an
    impairment charge is recognized to the extent
    F-10
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    that the carrying value exceeds its fair value. Fair value is
    determined through various valuation techniques including quoted
    market prices, third-party independent appraisals and discounted
    cash flow models, as considered necessary. Assets to be disposed
    of would be separately presented in the consolidated balance
    sheet and reported at the lower of the carrying amount or fair
    value less costs to sell, and would no longer be depreciated.
    The assets and liabilities of a disposed group classified as
    held-for-sale
    would be presented separately in the appropriate asset and
    liability sections of the consolidated balance sheet. The
    Company recorded no impairment charges during the three-year
    period ended December 31, 2010.
| (i) | Revenue Recognition | 
    Revenue is realized or realizable and earned when all of the
    following criteria are met: (1) persuasive evidence of an
    arrangement exists; (2) delivery has occurred or services
    have been rendered; (3) the sellers price to the
    buyer is fixed and determinable; and (4) collectibility is
    reasonably assured. Delivery is considered to have occurred upon
    either shipment of the product or arrival at its destination,
    depending upon the shipping terms of the transaction.
    The Companys net product revenue reflects reduction from
    gross product revenue for estimated allowances for chargebacks,
    discounts, and damaged goods and for accruals for rebates,
    product returns, certain administrative fees and fee for
    services. Allowances of $0.2 million as of
    December 31, 2010 and 2009 for chargebacks, discounts and
    product damaged in shipment are recorded as a reduction of
    accounts receivable, and liabilities of $2.6 million and
    $1.9 million as of December 31, 2010 and 2009,
    respectively, for rebates, product returns and administrative
    fees are included in other accrued liabilities.
    As discussed in 2(c) above, the allowances for chargebacks,
    discounts and damaged goods are determined on a
    product-by-product
    basis, and are established by management as the Companys
    best estimate at the time of sale based on each products
    historical experience adjusted to reflect known changes in the
    factors that impact such allowances. These allowances are
    established based on the contractual terms with direct and
    indirect customers and analyses of historical levels of
    chargebacks, discounts and credits claimed for damaged product.
    Other organizations, such as managed care providers, pharmacy
    benefit management companies and government agencies, may
    receive rebates from the Company based on either negotiated
    contracts to carry the Companys product or reimbursements
    for filled prescriptions. These entities represent indirect
    customers of the Company. In addition, the Company may provide
    rebates to the end-user. In conjunction with recognizing a sale
    to a wholesaler, sales revenues are reduced and accrued
    liabilities are increased by the Companys estimates of the
    rebates that will be owed.
    Consistent with industry practice, the Company maintains a
    return policy that allows customers to return product within a
    specified period prior to and subsequent to the expiration date.
    The Companys estimate of the provision for returns is
    based upon historical experience. Any changes in the assumptions
    used to estimate the provision for returns is recognized in the
    period those assumptions were changed.
    The Company has agreements with certain key wholesalers that
    include fee for service costs. These costs have been netted
    against product revenues.
    F-11
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    The Companys net product revenue consisted of the
    following as of December 31:
| Net product revenue | ||||||||||||
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Acetadote
 | $ | 35,092,796 | $ | 30,176,981 | $ | 25,438,774 | ||||||
| 
    Kristalose
 | 9,510,275 | 9,688,998 | 9,468,562 | |||||||||
| 
    Caldolor(1)
 | 101,499 | 3,276,371 |  | |||||||||
| 
    Other
 |  |  | (17,369 | ) | ||||||||
| $ | 44,704,570 | $ | 43,142,350 | $ | 34,889,967 | |||||||
| (1) | The Company obtained FDA approval for Caldolor in June 2009 and launched the product in September 2009. | 
    Other revenue is comprised of revenue generated by CET through
    grant funding from federal Small Business (SBIR/STTR) grant
    programs, lease income generated by CETs Life Sciences
    Center and contract services. The Life Sciences Center is a
    research center that provides scientists with access to flexible
    lab space and other resources to develop biomedical products.
    Revenue related to grants is recognized when all conditions
    related to such grants have been met. Grant revenue from
    SBIR/STTR programs totaled approximately $133,000, $228,000 and
    $7,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
    2008, respectively.
    In addition to the items identified above, other revenue in 2010
    includes approximately $0.9 million of federal grants
    associated with the Therapeutic Discovery Project Credit, a
    component of the U.S. health care reform act enacted in
    March 2010. The Therapeutic Discovery Project Credit allowed
    entities to apply for funding based on qualified research
    activities. Funds were then granted to entities based on their
    qualified research expenses. Revenue was recognized after the
    application was approved and as qualified research expenses were
    incurred.
| (j) | Income Taxes | 
    The Company provides for deferred taxes using the asset and
    liability approach. Under this method, deferred tax assets and
    liabilities are recognized for future tax consequences
    attributable to operating loss and tax credit carryforwards, as
    well as differences between the carrying amounts of existing
    assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. The
    Companys principal differences are related to the timing
    of deductibility of certain items, such as depreciation,
    amortization and expense for nonqualified stock options.
    Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted
    tax rates that are expected to apply to taxable income in the
    years such temporary differences are expected to be recovered or
    settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a
    change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period of
    enactment. The Company does not recognize income tax benefits
    associated with any income tax position where it is not
    more likely than not that the position would be
    sustained upon examination by the taxing authorities.
    The tax benefit associated with the exercise of nonqualified
    stock options is recognized when the benefit is used to offset
    income taxes payable.
    The Companys accounting policy with respect to interest
    and penalties arising from income tax settlements is to
    recognize them as part of the provision for income taxes.
| (k) | Share-Based Payments | 
    The Company recognizes compensation cost for all share-based
    payments issued, modified, repurchased or cancelled. The cost of
    stock options is measured based on the grant-date fair value
    using the Black-
    F-12
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    Scholes option-pricing model, and the expense is recognized over
    the employees requisite service period. Depending on the
    nature of the vesting provisions, restricted stock awards are
    measured using either the fair value on the grant date or the
    fair value of common stock on the date the vesting provisions
    lapse. Prior to the lapse, the fair value is measured on the
    last day of the reporting period.
| (l) | Research and Development | 
    Research and development costs are expensed in the period
    incurred. Research and development costs are comprised mainly of
    clinical trial expenses, salary and wages and other related
    costs such as materials and supplies. Development expense
    includes activities performed by third-party providers
    participating in the Companys clinical studies. The
    Company accounts for these costs based on estimates of work
    performed, patients enrolled or fixed fee for services.
| (m) | Advertising Costs | 
    Advertising costs are expensed as incurred and amounted to
    $0.8 million, $1.4 million and $0.7 million in
    2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
| (n) | Selling and Marketing Expense | 
    Selling and marketing expense consists primarily of expense
    relating to the promotion, distribution and sale of products,
    including royalty expense, salaries and related costs.
| (o) | Distribution Costs | 
    The Company expenses distribution costs as incurred.
    Distribution costs included in selling and marketing expenses
    amounted to $1.2 million, $1.1 million and
    $1.0 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
| (p) | Cost of Products Sold | 
    Cost of products sold consists principally of the cost to
    acquire each unit of product sold, including in-bound freight
    expense. Cost of products sold also includes expenses associated
    with the write-off of slow-moving or expired product.
| (q) | Earnings per Share | 
    Basic earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income by
    the weighted-average number of shares outstanding. Except where
    the result would be antidilutive to income from continuing
    operations, diluted earnings per share is calculated by assuming
    the vesting of unvested restricted stock and the
    F-13
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    exercise of stock options and warrants, as well as their related
    income tax benefits. The following table reconciles the
    numerator and the denominator used to calculate diluted earnings
    per share:
| Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Numerator:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Net income attributable to common shareholders
 | $ | 2,456,680 | $ | 3,091,415 | $ | 4,766,249 | ||||||
| 
    Denominator:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Weighted-average shares outstandingbasic
 | 20,333,932 | 14,199,479 | 10,142,807 | |||||||||
| 
    Convertible preferred stock shares
 |  | 986,840 | 1,710,990 | |||||||||
| 
    Dilutive effect of other securities
 | 724,645 | 3,047,852 | 4,685,865 | |||||||||
| 
    Weighted-average shares outstandingdiluted
 | 21,058,577 | 18,234,171 | 16,539,662 | |||||||||
    The calculation of diluted earnings per share excludes 640,718,
    246,332 and 206,670 outstanding options and warrants as of
    December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, because the
    effect would be antidilutive.
| (r) | Comprehensive Income | 
    Total comprehensive income was comprised solely of net income
    for all periods presented.
| (s) | Use of Estimates | 
    The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in
    conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
    principles requires management of the Company to make estimates
    and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
    liabilities and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date
    of the consolidated financial statements and the reported
    amounts of revenues and expenses during the period. Significant
    items subject to estimates and assumptions include those related
    to chargebacks, rebates, discounts, credits for damaged product
    and returns, the valuation and determination of useful lives of
    intangible assets and the rate such assets are amortized, the
    realization of deferred tax assets and stock-based compensation.
    Actual results could differ from those estimates.
| (t) | Fair Value of Financial Instruments | 
    The Companys financial instruments include cash and cash
    equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued
    liabilities, revolving line of credit and long-term debt. The
    carrying values for cash and cash equivalents, accounts
    receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate
    fair value due to their short-term nature. The terms of the
    revolving line of credit and term debt include variable interest
    rates, which approximate current market rates.
| (u) | Recently Adopted Accounting Standards | 
    In March 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or
    FASB, issued guidance providing for the recognition of revenue
    using the milestone method. Under this new guidance, an entity
    can recognize revenue associated with milestones if the
    milestones are substantive and there is substantive uncertainty
    about whether the milestone will be achieved. To meet the
    definition of a substantive milestone, the consideration earned
    by achieving the milestone (1) would have to be
    commensurate with either the level of effort required to achieve
    the milestone or the enhancement in the value of the item
    delivered, (2) would have to relate solely to past
    performance and (3) should be reasonable relative to all
    F-14
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement. The new
    guidance was effective for our third quarter ended
    September 30, 2010. The adoption of this guidance did not
    have a material impact on our consolidated financial position or
    results of operations.
| (3) | PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT | 
    Property and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
| Range of | ||||||||||||
| useful lives | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||
| 
    Computer hardware and software
 | 3-5 years | $ | 417,681 | $ | 343,494 | |||||||
| 
    Office equipment
 | 3-15 years | 108,140 | 62,447 | |||||||||
| 
    Furniture and fixtures
 | 5-15 years | 488,982 | 364,158 | |||||||||
| 
    Leasehold improvements
 | 3-15 years, or remaining lease term | 931,097 | 607,444 | |||||||||
| 1,945,900 | 1,377,543 | |||||||||||
| 
    Less accumulated depreciation and amortization
 | (725,890 | ) | (459,131 | ) | ||||||||
| $ | 1,220,010 | $ | 918,412 | |||||||||
    Depreciation expense, including amortization expense related to
    leasehold improvements, during 2010, 2009 and 2008 was
    approximately $0.3 million, $0.1 million and
    $0.1 million, respectively, and is included in general and
    administrative expense in the consolidated statements of income.
| (4) | INTANGIBLE ASSETS | 
    Intangible assets consisted of the following at December 31:
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||
| 
    Trademarks
 | $ | 9,020 | $ | 9,020 | ||||
| 
    Less accumulated amortization
 | (8,123 | ) | (7,396 | ) | ||||
| 
    Total trademarks
 | 897 | 1,624 | ||||||
| 
    License
 | 10,303,595 | 10,303,595 | ||||||
| 
    Less accumulated amortization
 | (3,262,805 | ) | (2,575,895 | ) | ||||
| 
    Total license
 | 7,040,790 | 7,727,700 | ||||||
| 
    Patents
 | 409,536 | 226,685 | ||||||
| 
    Less accumulated amortization
 | (24,000 | ) |  | |||||
| 
    Total patents
 | 385,536 | 226,685 | ||||||
| $ | 7,427,223 | $ | 7,956,009 | |||||
    Amortization expense related to trademarks and license rights
    totaled approximately $0.7 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008,
    and is expected to be approximately $0.8 million in each of
    the years 2012 through 2016.
    In April 2006, the Company acquired the exclusive
    U.S. commercialization rights (product license) for
    Kristalose from Inalco Biochemicals, Inc. and Inalco S.p.A.
    (collectively Inalco) for $10,303,595. This amount included cash
    paid on the effective date of the agreement of $6,500,000,
    discounted future obligations totaling $3,823,937 due in April
    2007 and April 2009, and acquisition costs of $13,775,
    F-15
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    and was net of the fair value of services received by the
    Company in 2006 of $34,117 under a transition service agreement.
    The fair value of these services was expensed over the
    transition period in 2006. In April 2007, the Company made an
    installment payment of $1,500,000 (inclusive of $102,440 of
    imputed interest). In April 2008, the Company amended its
    agreement and paid the remaining obligation related to the
    purchase of the Kristalose rights. The terms of the amendment
    provided for an 8% discount on the $3,000,000 face value of the
    obligation for a net payment of $2,760,000. The gain of
    approximately $39,000 was recognized as a component of interest
    expense in the consolidated income statement for the year ended
    December 31, 2008.
| (5) | OTHER ACCRUED LIABILITIES | 
    Other accrued liabilities consisted of the following at December
    31:
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||
| 
    Rebates, fee for services, and product returns
 | $ | 2,626,383 | $ | 1,863,012 | ||||
| 
    Employee wages and benefits
 | 1,078,367 | 919,913 | ||||||
| 
    Outside sales force and related expenses
 |  | 192,711 | ||||||
| 
    Other
 | 706,856 | 809,141 | ||||||
| $ | 4,411,606 | $ | 3,784,777 | |||||
| (6) | LONG-TERM DEBT | 
    In July 2009, the Company amended its debt agreement with Bank
    of America, N.A. (the Fourth Amended and Restated Loan
    Agreement) to provide for $18.0 million in term debt and a
    $4.0 million revolving credit facility, both with an
    interest rate of LIBOR plus an applicable margin based on the
    Companys Leverage Ratio, as defined in the agreement. The
    interest rate at December 31, 2009 was 5.73% per annum. In
    addition, the Company was required to pay a commitment fee of
    0.75% per annum on the unused portion of the commitment. The
    term debt was payable in quarterly installments of
    $1.5 million beginning on March 31, 2010 and
    continuing until December 31, 2012. The revolving credit
    facility was due on December 31, 2012. The Company may be
    required to make additional principal payments on the term debt
    if the Leverage Ratio, as defined, exceeds 1.75 to 1.0 on an
    annual basis. The borrowings were collateralized by a first lien
    against all of the Companys assets. The proceeds from the
    term debt were restricted for the payment, in part, of the
    minimum statutory tax withholding requirements of approximately
    $24.6 million due from option holders who exercised options
    to purchase shares of our common stock at the pricing of the
    Companys initial public offering. The consideration for
    that payment was the transfer to the Company of shares acquired
    upon exercise at the then-current fair market value of the
    Companys common stock. In connection with the amendment of
    the debt agreement, the Company capitalized approximately
    $0.5 million of debt issue costs, of which
    $0.1 million related to the fair value of common stock and
    $0.1 million related to the fair value of warrants issued
    to the lender. Deferred financing costs were being expensed to
    interest expense using the effective-interest method over the
    term of the debt agreement.
    The Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement contained
    restrictive covenants, which the Company was in compliance with
    during 2010 and 2009.
    The Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement required the
    Company to make an additional principal payment within
    120 days after the end of the fiscal year in an amount
    equal to its Excess Cash Flow, as defined in the agreement. The
    additional principal payment of $3.1 million, which was
    included as a current portion of long-term debt in the
    consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2009, was paid
    during the first quarter of 2010.
    F-16
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    On September 29, 2010, the Company further amended its loan
    agreement with Bank of America, N.A. (the Agreement). The
    amendment provided for an increase in the availability under the
    existing line of credit from $4.0 million to
    $6.0 million, with interest payable monthly at LIBOR plus
    an Applicable Margin, as defined in the Agreement (4.76% at
    December 31, 2010). In addition, the term debt was reduced
    to $6.0 million, with quarterly payments under the term
    debt reduced to $666,667, plus interest at the same rate as the
    line of credit, beginning December 31, 2010. The Company
    reduced its commitment fee from three-quarters of one percent
    (0.75%) to one-half of one percent (0.50%) per annum on the
    unused line of credit. The borrowings are collateralized by a
    first priority lien on all of the Companys assets.
    The Agreements covenants include a Leverage Ratio, as
    defined in the Agreement, of 2.00 to 1.00 for the quarter ended
    December 31, 2010, 1.75 to 1.00 for each of the three
    quarters ended March 31, 2011, June 30, 2011 and
    September 30, 2011 and 1.25 to 1.00 for quarter ending
    December 31, 2011 and thereafter, as well as a Fixed Charge
    Coverage Ratio, as defined in the Agreement, of at least 1.25 to
    1.00 at each quarter-annual reporting period. In addition, the
    Company must maintain deposits with Bank of America, N.A. at
    amounts equal to at least the sum of (a) the maximum amount
    of the line of credit plus (b) the aggregate principal
    amount then outstanding under the term debt. The Company was in
    compliance with all restrictive covenants at December 31,
    2010.
    The Company is subject to additional loan fees if certain
    performance metrics measured at March 31, 2011 and
    September 30, 2011 are not met. If required, the additional
    loan fee amounts of $102,000 each are due within 45 days of
    the end of the respective period. As of December 31, 2010,
    the Company has not recognized any additional loan fees.
    Concurrent with the amendment of the Agreement, the Company
    elected to prepay approximately $5.9 million of its term
    debt, incurring a prepayment penalty of approximately
    $0.2 million. The prepayment penalty is included as a
    component of interest expense for the year ended
    December 31, 2010.
    The scheduled debt payments are as follows:
| 
    Year ending December 31:
 | ||||
| 
    2011
 | $ | 2,666,668 | ||
| 
    2012
 | 4,492,616 | |||
| $ | 7,159,284 | |||
| (7) | OTHER LONG-TERM OBLIGATIONS | 
    Other long-term obligations consisted of the following
    components at December 31:
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||
| 
    Third-party development costs
 | $ |  | $ | 101,369 | ||||
| 
    Deferred rent
 | 558,035 | 168,091 | ||||||
| 
    Deferred revenue
 | 85,000 | 60,000 | ||||||
| 643,035 | 329,460 | |||||||
| 
    Less current portion
 | (24,692 | ) | (144,828 | ) | ||||
| $ | 618,343 | $ | 184,632 | |||||
    In June 2009, the Company received marketing approval for
    Caldolor from the FDA. The approval triggered a milestone
    obligation of approximately $1.0 million to a third party
    who assisted in a variety
    F-17
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    of development efforts related to Caldolor and was payable as
    follows: approximately $0.8 million was paid in the third
    quarter of 2009 and the remaining $0.2 million was paid in
    equal monthly installments through July 2010. The remaining
    balance of $0.1 million at December 31, 2009 was
    included in the current portion of other long-term obligations
    in the consolidated balance sheet. The milestone expense was
    included in research and development expenses in the
    consolidated statement of income for the year ended
    December 31, 2009.
    In addition to the milestone obligation discussed above, the
    third party immediately vested in performance-based options to
    acquire 60,000 common shares with an exercise price of $1.63 per
    share. The Company calculated the fair value of this award to be
    $13.41 per share using the Black-Scholes methodology and the
    following assumptions: expected term of 2.3 years,
    risk-free interest rate of 1.1%, volatility of 51% and an
    expected dividend yield of 0%. For the year ended
    December 31, 2009, the Company recognized approximately
    $0.8 million of research and development expense associated
    with this award.
    The Company recognizes lease expense on a straight-line basis
    over the term of the lease, including any renewal option
    periods. For leases with increasing payments, the difference
    between the straight-line expense and the amount paid is
    recognized as deferred rent. In addition, any tenant improvement
    allowances are deferred and recognized on a straight-line basis
    as a reduction of rent expense.
| (8) | INCOME TAXES | 
    Income tax benefit (expense) includes the following components:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Current:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Federal
 | $ | (2,665,404 | ) | $ | (2,240,827 | ) | $ | (1,593,865 | ) | |||
| 
    State
 | (518,365 | ) | (308,832 | ) | (266,172 | ) | ||||||
| (3,183,769 | ) | (2,549,659 | ) | (1,860,037 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Deferred:
 | ||||||||||||
| 
    Federal
 | 268,563 | 528,602 | (571,114 | ) | ||||||||
| 
    State
 | 63,786 | (3,135 | ) | (112,800 | ) | |||||||
| 332,349 | 525,467 | (683,914 | ) | |||||||||
| $ | (2,851,420 | ) | $ | (2,024,192 | ) | $ | (2,543,951 | ) | ||||
    The Companys deferred tax expense in 2008 was primarily
    due to the utilization of deferred tax assets from federal tax
    credit carryforwards. The deferred tax benefit for 2009 was
    primarily due to the expense for nonqualified stock options
    issued to employees. The deferred tax benefit for 2010 was
    primarily due to rent and expired product expenses recognized
    for book purposes in 2010 that will not be deductible for tax
    purposes until the future.
    F-18
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    The deferred income tax benefit (expense) is comprised of the
    following components for the years ended December 31:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Deferred tax benefit exclusive of components listed below
 | $ | 468,840 | $ | 170,648 | $ | 158,864 | ||||||
| 
    Creation (utilization) of operating loss carryforwards
 | 9,567 | (60,266 | ) | (248,651 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Creation (utilization) of tax credit carryforwards
 | (3,115 | ) | 7,172 | (626,956 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Change in valuation allowance due to changes in net deferred tax
    asset balances
 | (10,750 | ) | (11,342 | ) | (11,291 | ) | ||||||
| 
    Non-qualified stock options
 | (132,193 | ) | 419,255 | 44,120 | ||||||||
| 
    Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
 | $ | 332,349 | $ | 525,467 | $ | (683,914 | ) | |||||
    The valuation allowance at December 31, 2010 and 2009 is
    primarily related to state tax benefits at CET that will likely
    not be realized.
    The Companys effective income tax rate for 2010, 2009 and
    2008 reconciles with the federal statutory tax rate as follows:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Federal tax expense at statutory rate
 | 34 | % | 34 | % | 34 | % | ||||||
| 
    State income tax expense (net of federal income tax benefit)
 | 6 | 4 | 4 | |||||||||
| 
    Permanent differences associated with tax grants
 | 5 |  |  | |||||||||
| 
    Permanent differences associated with stock options
 | 4 | 2 | 2 | |||||||||
| 
    Other permanent differences
 | 4 | 1 |  | |||||||||
| 
    Recognition of previously unrecognized tax benefits
 |  |  | (4 | ) | ||||||||
| 
    Other
 | 1 | (1 | ) | (1 | ) | |||||||
| 
    Net income tax expense
 | 54 | % | 40 | % | 35 | % | ||||||
    During 2010, the Company applied for and received tax-free
    grants under the Therapeutic Discovery Project. Qualifying
    expenses certified under this program are nondeductible for
    federal income tax purposes. Approximately $0.4 million of
    qualifying expenses relate to 2009 for which the Company is
    filing an amended tax return in 2011. The Company also incurred
    expenses in 2010, 2009 and 2008 associated with the grant of
    incentive stock options. These expenses are nondeductible for
    federal income tax purposes.
    F-19
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    Components of the net deferred tax assets at December 31 are as
    follows:
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||
| 
    Net operating loss and tax credits
 | $ | 957,888 | $ | 72,532 | ||||
| 
    Property and equipment
 | 181,156 | 169,852 | ||||||
| 
    Allowance for accounts receivable
 | 62,951 | 89,160 | ||||||
| 
    Reserve for expired product
 | 559,492 | 386,669 | ||||||
| 
    Inventory
 | 141,492 | 80,462 | ||||||
| 
    Deferred charges
 | 507,306 | 257,413 | ||||||
| 
    Cumulative compensation costs incurred on nonqualified options
 | 914,540 | 1,046,734 | ||||||
| 
    Total deferred tax assets
 | 3,324,825 | 2,102,822 | ||||||
| 
    Less deferred tax asset valuation allowance
 | (80,862 | ) | (70,112 | ) | ||||
| 
    Net deferred tax assets
 | $ | 3,243,963 | $ | 2,032,710 | ||||
    In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets,
    management considers whether it is more likely than not that
    some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
    realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is
    dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
    the periods in which those temporary differences become
    deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of
    deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income and
    tax planning strategies in making this assessment. Excluding the
    AMT tax credits, the Company will need to generate future
    taxable income of approximately $8.5 million in order to
    fully realize the deferred tax assets. Taxable income, excluding
    tax deductions generated by the exercise of nonqualified
    options, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
    2008 was approximately $7.3 million, $7.0 million and
    $7.9 million, respectively. Based upon the level of taxable
    income over the last three years and projections for future
    taxable income over the periods in which the deferred tax assets
    are deductible, management believes it is more likely than not
    that the Company will realize the benefits of these deductible
    differences, net of the existing valuation allowances, at
    December 31, 2010. The amount of the deferred tax assets
    considered realizable, however, could be reduced in the near
    term if estimates of future taxable income during the
    carryforward period are reduced.
    At December 31, 2010, the Company had $63.1 million of
    federal net operating loss carryforwards that expire in 2029.
    All of the federal net operating loss originated from the
    exercise of nonqualified options in 2009. These benefits will be
    recognized in the year in which they are able to reduce current
    taxes payable. As a result of using these carryforwards in 2010,
    the Company paid minimal state and federal income taxes.
    At December 31, 2010, the Company has $63.5 million of
    state net operating loss carryforwards. This amount includes
    $61.7 million from the exercise of nonqualified stock
    options in 2009, of which $2.9 million will expire in 2014.
    The remaining carryforwards begin to expire in 2018. The
    remaining state net operating loss carryforward of
    $1.7 million is subject to a full valuation allowance.
    Approximately $0.5 million of these state net operating
    losses are set to expire between 2015 and 2017. The remaining
    state net operating losses will begin expiring in 2018.
    Federal tax years that remain open to examination are 2009 to
    2010. State tax years that remain open to examination are 2005
    to 2010.
    F-20
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
| (9) | SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY | 
| (a) | Initial Public Offering | 
    On August 10, 2009, the Company completed its initial
    public offering of 5,000,000 shares of common stock at a
    price of $17.00 per share, raising gross proceeds of
    $85.0 million. After deducting underwriting discounts of
    approximately $6.0 million and offering costs incurred of
    approximately $4.2 million, the net proceeds to the Company
    were approximately $74.8 million. Contemporaneously with
    the offering, each outstanding share of preferred stock was
    automatically converted into two shares of common stock.
| (b) | Preferred Stock | 
    The Company is authorized to issue 20,000,000 shares of
    preferred stock. The Board of Directors is authorized to divide
    these shares into classes or series, and to fix and determine
    the relative rights, preferences, qualifications and limitations
    of the shares of any class or series so established. At
    December 31, 2010 and 2009, there was no preferred stock
    outstanding.
| (c) | Common Stock | 
    During 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company issued 5,636, 2,750 and
    7,961 shares of common stock, respectively, valued at
    $56,000, $39,750 and $107,000, respectively, to executives,
    related parties, and advisors as compensation for services, and
    is included in general and administrative expenses in the
    consolidated statements of income. Included in these amounts are
    3,461 shares of common stock granted to board members in
    2008 for services rendered. The expense associated with these
    grants to board members was approximately $45,000 in 2008. In
    addition, the Company issued 2,924,202 and 87,142 net
    shares of common stock to a key executive and an advisor upon
    exercise of options in 2009 and 2008, respectively.
    The payment of dividends is restricted by the Agreement with
    Bank of America, N.A.
| (d) | Warrants | 
    In 2003, the Company issued warrants to purchase
    25,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $6.00
    per share as partial consideration for a modification to its
    line of credit. The warrants expire 10 years from the date
    of issuance. All of these warrants were outstanding and
    exercisable as of December 31, 2010 and 2009.
    In connection with the issuance of shares of stock to a related
    party in 2004, the Company issued warrants to purchase
    40,000 shares of stock at $6.00 per share at any time
    within ten years of issuance. All of these warrants were
    outstanding and exercisable as of December 31, 2010 and
    2009.
    In 2006, the Company signed a new line of credit agreement along
    with a term loan agreement with a financial institution. In
    conjunction with these agreements, the Company issued warrants
    to purchase up to 3,958 shares of common stock at $9.00 per
    share, which expire in April 2016, and which were outstanding
    and exercisable as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. In
    connection with the Fourth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement,
    the Company issued warrants to purchase up to 7,500 shares
    of common stock at $17.00 per share, which expire in July 2019.
    The fair value of these warrants of $97,575, as determined using
    the Black-Scholes methodology and utilizing an expected term of
    10 years, risk-free interest rate of 4.0%, volatility of
    67% and an expected dividend yield of 0%, was recorded in the
    consolidated balance sheet as equity and deferred financing
    costs.
    F-21
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
| (e) | Share Repurchases | 
    On December 12, 2008, the Board of Directors authorized the
    Company to repurchase up to 384,615 shares of common stock
    at $13.00 per share. On December 30, 2008, the Company
    completed its $5.0 million repurchase of common stock. In
    connection with the repurchase, 42,746 shares of preferred
    stock were converted into 85,492 shares of common stock.
    The repurchase was financed, in part, by additional borrowings
    under its term debt with Bank of America.
    In February and April 2010, the Company repurchased
    163,022 shares of common stock totaling approximately
    $1.9 million for the settlement of tax liabilities
    associated with the exercise of certain options in 2009. As of
    December 31, 2009, this amount was included in redeemable
    common stock in the condensed consolidated balance sheet. The
    repurchase amount was based on the fair-market value of common
    stock on the date of settlement.
    In May 2010, the Company announced a share repurchase program to
    repurchase up to $10.0 million of its outstanding common
    shares. Pursuant to the plan, the Company repurchased
    452,433 shares for approximately $3.0 million through
    December 31, 2010.
| (10) | STOCK OPTIONS | 
    The Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan (the
    1999 Plan), which allowed for both incentive stock options and
    nonqualified stock options to be granted to employees, officers,
    consultants, directors and affiliates of the Company, was
    superseded and replaced by the 2007 Long-Term Incentive
    Compensation Plan (the 2007 Plan) and 2007 Directors
    Incentive Plan (the Directors Plan). The new plans were
    approved by the Companys Board of Directors and
    shareholders in April 2007. The implementation of the new plans
    did not result in a modification of the terms and conditions of
    the outstanding awards granted under the 1999 Plan that would
    result in the awards being treated as an exchange of the
    original award for a new award.
    The purposes of the 2007 Plan are to encourage the
    Companys employees and consultants to acquire stock and
    other equity-based interests and to replace the 1999 Plan. The
    Company has reserved 2.4 million shares of common stock for
    issuance under the 2007 Plan.
    The purposes of the Directors Plan are to strengthen the
    Companys ability to attract, motivate, and retain
    Directors with experience and ability, and to encourage the
    highest level of performance by providing Directors with a
    proprietary interest in the Companys financial success and
    growth. The Directors Plan supersedes and replaces the
    provisions pertaining to grants of stock options to Directors in
    the 1999 Plan, but does not impair the vesting or exercise of
    any options granted under the 1999 Plan. The Company has
    reserved 250,000 shares of common stock under the
    Directors Plan.
    Incentive stock options must be granted at an exercise price not
    less than the fair market value of the common stock on the grant
    date. Options granted to shareholders owning more than 10% of
    the common stock on the grant date must be granted at an
    exercise price not less than 110% of fair market value of the
    common stock on the grant date.
    The options are exercisable on the dates established by each
    grant; however, options granted to officers or directors are not
    exercisable until at least six months after grant date. The
    maximum exercise life of an option is ten years from grant date
    and is five years for stock options issued to shareholders who
    own 10% or more of the Companys common stock. Vesting is
    determined on a
    grant-by-grant
    basis in accordance with the terms of the plans and the related
    grant agreements. Upon exercise, the Company issues new shares
    of common stock.
    F-22
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    Stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2010
    was as follows:
| Weighted- | Weighted- | |||||||||||||||
| average | average | |||||||||||||||
| exercise | remaining | Aggregate | ||||||||||||||
| Number of | price | contractual | intrinsic | |||||||||||||
| shares | per share | term (years) | value | |||||||||||||
| 
    Outstanding, December 31, 2009
 | 2,509,585 | $ | 4.65 | |||||||||||||
| 
    Options granted
 | 223,607 | 11.36 | ||||||||||||||
| 
    Options exercised
 | (785,740 | ) | 1.94 | |||||||||||||
| 
    Options forfeited/expired
 | (41,982 | ) | 9.62 | |||||||||||||
| 
    Outstanding, December 31, 2010
 | 1,905,470 | 6.45 | 3.28 | $ | 2,853,707 | |||||||||||
| 
    Exercisable at December 31, 2010
 | 1,658,479 | $ | 5.59 | 2.93 | $ | 2,851,950 | ||||||||||
    Information related to the stock option plans during 2010, 2009
    and 2008 was as follows:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Intrinsic value of options exercised
 | $ | 5,519,588 | $ | 86,155,328 | $ | 1,162,796 | ||||||
| 
    Weighted-average fair value of options granted
 | $ | 4.13 | $ | 6.42 | $ | 6.27 | ||||||
    Of the options outstanding at December 31, 2010, 2009 and
    2008, 136,930, 86,930 and 4,795,420, respectively, were options
    issued to a key executive.
    The fair value of employee options granted during 2010, 2009 and
    2008 were estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model
    and the following assumptions:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||
| 
    Dividend yield
 |  |  |  | |||
| 
    Expected term (years)
 | 2.5-6.0 | 3.7-6.2 | 3.5-6.0 | |||
| 
    Expected volatility
 | 49%-53% | 50%-52% | 49%-51% | |||
| 
    Risk-free interest rate
 | 0.8%-2.8% | 1.4%-2.7% | 3.1% | |||
    The fair value of nonemployee options granted during 2010, 2009
    and 2008 were estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing
    model and the following assumptions:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||
| 
    Dividend yield
 |  |  |  | |||
| 
    Expected term (years)
 | 5 | 2.3-10.0 | 10.0 | |||
| 
    Expected volatility
 | 52%-53% | 51%-67% | 68% | |||
| 
    Risk-free interest rate
 | 2.2%-2.4% | 1.1%-2.7% | 3.7% | |||
    The Company determined the expected life of employee share
    options based on the simplified method allowed by SEC Staff
    Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 107, as amended by
    SAB No. 110. Under this approach, the expected term is
    presumed to be the average between the weighted-average vesting
    period and the contractual term. The expected term for options
    granted to nonemployees is generally the contractual term of the
    option. The expected volatility over the term of the respective
    option was based on the volatility of similar publicly-traded
    entities. In evaluating similarity, the Company considered
    factors such as industry, stage of life cycle, size, and
    financial leverage. The risk-free interest rate is based on the
    U.S. Treasury Note, Stripped Principal, on the date of
    grant with a term substantially equal to the corresponding
    options expected term. The Company has never declared or
    paid any cash dividends and does not presently plan to pay cash
    dividends in the foreseeable future.
    F-23
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    Stock compensation expense is presented as a component of
    general and administrative expenses in the accompanying
    consolidated statements of income. At December 31, 2010,
    there was approximately $1.2 million of unrecognized
    compensation cost related to share-based payments, which is
    expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of
    2.3 years. This amount relates primarily to unrecognized
    compensation cost for employees.
    In the first quarter of 2009, options to purchase
    773,556 shares of common stock were exercised with a
    weighted-average exercise price of $0.11 per share. A portion of
    the options were exercised using a net-share settlement feature
    that provided for the option holder to use 204,245 shares
    acquired upon exercise to settle the minimum statutory tax
    withholding requirements of approximately $2.7 million.
    During the third quarter of 2009, options to purchase
    4,605,962 shares of common stock were exercised with a
    weighted-average exercise price of $0.55 per share. A portion of
    the options were exercised using a net-share settlement feature
    that provided for the option holder to use 1,445,074 shares
    acquired upon exercise to settle the minimum statutory tax
    withholding requirements of approximately $24.6 million.
    The payment of the exercise price for these options of
    approximately $2.6 million was settled by cash and the
    tendering of 140,788 shares of common stock by the
    optionees. In connection with these exercises, the Company
    agreed to repurchase up to $1.9 million in common stock
    during the first quarter of 2010 to provide for the settlement
    of the remaining tax liabilities associated with the exercise.
    The estimated repurchase amount is presented as redeemable
    common stock in the condensed consolidated balance sheet as of
    December 31, 2009. The repurchase of these shares was
    completed in 2010.
| (11) | LEASES | 
    The Company is obligated under long-term real estate leases for
    corporate office space expiring in October 2016. In addition,
    the research lab space at CET is leased through July 2011, with
    options to extend the lease through July 2021. The Company also
    subleases a portion of the space under these leases. Rent
    expense is recognized over the expected term of the lease,
    including renewal option periods, if applicable, on a
    straight-line basis. Rent expense for 2010, 2009 and 2008 was
    approximately $626,000, $575,000 and $526,000, respectively, and
    sublease income was approximately $274,000, $203,000 and
    $170,000, respectively. Future minimum sublease income under
    noncancelable sublease operating leases is approximately
    $0.9 million through October 2016. Future minimum lease
    payments under noncancelable operating leases (with initial or
    remaining lease terms in excess of one year) are:
| 
    Year ending December 31:
 | ||||
| 
    2011
 | $ | 740,167 | ||
| 
    2012
 | 762,372 | |||
| 
    2013
 | 785,343 | |||
| 
    2014
 | 808,824 | |||
| 
    2015 and thereafter
 | 1,548,140 | |||
| 
    Total minimum lease payments
 | $ | 4,644,846 | ||
| (12) | MANUFACTURING AND SUPPLY AGREEMENTS | 
    The Company utilizes one primary supplier to manufacture each of
    its respective products and product candidates. In February
    2008, the Company entered into an agreement with a second
    supplier of Acetadote. The agreement for the second supplier
    expires in February 2013. Although there are a limited number of
    manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, the Company believes
    it could utilize other suppliers to manufacture its prescription
    products on comparable terms. A change in suppliers,
    F-24
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
    any problems with such manufacturing operations or capacity, or
    contract disputes with the suppliers, however, could cause a
    delay in manufacturing and a possible loss of sales, which would
    adversely affect operating results.
    The Companys manufacturing and supply agreement with one
    manufacturer, which expires in 2021, contains minimum purchase
    obligations which requires the Company to purchase 25% of its
    prior year purchases, or $0.5 million, during 2011.
| (13) | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | 
    Prior to September 2010, the Company outsourced a portion of its
    sales force activities through an agreement with a third party.
    Under the terms of the agreement, the Company made monthly
    payments to the third party of approximately $393,000 for these
    activities. In September 2010, the Company converted this
    portion of its sales force into Cumberland employees.
    In connection with its manufacturing and supply agreement for
    Acetadote and its licensing agreements for Kristalose and
    Caldolor, the Company is required to pay a royalty based on net
    sales over the life of the contracts. Royalty expense is
    recognized as a component of selling and marketing expense in
    the period that revenue is recognized.
| (14) | EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS | 
    The Company has entered into employment agreements with its
    full-time and part-time employees. Each employment agreement
    provides for a salary for services performed, a potential annual
    bonus and, if applicable, a grant of incentive options to
    purchase the Companys common shares pursuant to an option
    agreement. Two of the employment agreements address expense
    reimbursements for relevant and applicable licenses and
    continuing education. Employment agreements are amended each
    successive one-year period, unless terminated. In 2011,
    restricted shares will replace the award of stock options as
    part of the compensation package.
| (15) | MARKET CONCENTRATIONS | 
    The Company currently focuses on acquiring, developing, and
    commercializing branded prescription products for the acute care
    and gastroenterology markets. The Companys principal
    financial instruments subject to potential concentration of
    credit risk are accounts receivable, which are unsecured, and
    cash equivalents. The Companys cash equivalents consist
    primarily of money market funds. Certain bank deposits may at
    times be in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
    (FDIC) insurance limits.
    The Companys primary customers are wholesale
    pharmaceutical distributors in the U.S. Total revenues from
    customers representing 10% or more of total revenues for the
    respective years are summarized as follows:
| 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
| 
    Customer 1
 | 35 | % | 37 | % | 37 | % | ||||||
| 
    Customer 2
 | 31 | 29 | 25 | |||||||||
| 
    Customer 3
 | 26 | 27 | 31 | |||||||||
    Additionally, 80% and 96% of the Companys accounts
    receivable balances were due from these three customers at
    December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
    F-25
Table of Contents
    Notes to
    consolidated financial statements
| (16) | EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN | 
    The Company sponsors an employee benefit plan that was
    established on January 1, 2006, the Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals 401(k) Plan (the Plan), under
    Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
    amended, for the benefit of all employees over the age of 21,
    having been employed by the Company for at least six months. The
    Plan provides that participants may contribute up to the maximum
    amount of their compensation as set forth by the Internal
    Revenue Service each year. Employee contributions are invested
    in various investment funds based upon elections made by the
    employees. During 2010 and 2009, the Company contributed $16,000
    and $13,800 to the Plan as an employer match of participant
    contributions.
| (17) | SUBSEQUENT EVENTS | 
    Pursuant to the share repurchase plan announced in May 2010, the
    Company repurchased an additional 94,662 shares for
    approximately $0.6 million for the period from
    January 1, 2011 to March 1, 2011. The weighted-average
    repurchase price was $6.06 per share.
    In January 2011, the Company exercised its option to renew its
    lease at CET for five years. The lease will expire in July 2016,
    with a second five-year renewal option available to the Company.
| (18) | QUARTER FINANCIAL INFORMATION (Unaudited) | 
    The following table sets forth the unaudited operating results
    for each fiscal quarter of 2010 and 2009:
| First | Second | Third | Fourth | |||||||||||||||||
| Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Total | ||||||||||||||||
| 
    2010
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Net revenues
 | $ | 10,130,652 | $ | 10,739,935 | $ | 12,190,870 | $ | 12,814,914 | $ | 45,876,371 | ||||||||||
| 
    Operating income
 | 810,508 | 1,009,860 | 2,443,857 | 2,237,522 | 6,501,747 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Net income attributable to common shareholders
 | 323,578 | 287,304 | 1,008,244 | 837,554 | 2,456,680 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Earnings per share attributable to common
    shareholders(1)
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Basic
 | $ | 0.02 | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.05 | $ | 0.04 | $ | 0.12 | ||||||||||
| 
    Diluted
 | $ | 0.02 | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.05 | $ | 0.04 | $ | 0.12 | ||||||||||
| 
    2009
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Net revenues
 | $ | 9,404,599 | $ | 9,820,613 | $ | 13,597,760 | (2) | $ | 10,714,306 | $ | 43,537,278 | |||||||||
| 
    Operating income
 | 2,117,025 | 594,116 | 2,372,059 | 693,435 | 5,776,635 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Net income attributable to common shareholders
 | 1,218,090 | 295,871 | 1,288,137 | 289,317 | 3,091,415 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    Earnings per share attributable to common
    shareholders(1)
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Basic
 | $ | 0.12 | $ | 0.03 | $ | 0.08 | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.22 | ||||||||||
| 
    Diluted
 | $ | 0.08 | $ | 0.02 | $ | 0.07 | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.17 | ||||||||||
| (1) | Due to the nature of interim earnings per share calculations, the sum of the quarterly earnings per share amounts may not equal the reported earnings per share for the year. | |
| (2) | Includes $3.3 million of net revenue associated with the launch of Caldolor in September 2009. | 
    F-26
Table of Contents
    Cumberland
    Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Subsidiaries
    Schedule II
    valuation and qualifying accounts
    
| Column A | Column B | Column C | Column D | Column E | ||||||||||||||||
| Balance at | Charged to | Charged to | ||||||||||||||||||
| beginning of | costs and | other accounts | Deductions | Balance at | ||||||||||||||||
| Description | period | expenses | describe | describe(1) | end of period | |||||||||||||||
| Years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    Allowance for uncollectible amounts, cash discounts,
    chargebacks, and credits issued for damaged products:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    For the period ended:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    December 31, 2008
 | $ | 146,972 | $ | 1,242,300 | $ |  | $ | (1,242,226 | ) | $ | 147,046 | |||||||||
| 
    December 31, 2009
 | 147,046 | 1,734,521 |  | (1,646,287 | ) | 235,280 | ||||||||||||||
| 
    December 31, 2010
 | 235,280 | 1,494,834 |  | (1,566,366 | ) | 163,748 | ||||||||||||||
| 
    Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    For the period ended:
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 
    December 31, 2008
 | $ | 47,479 | $ | 11,291 | $ |  | $ |  | $ | 58,770 | ||||||||||
| 
    December 31, 2009
 | 58,770 | 11,342 |  |  | 70,112 | |||||||||||||||
| 
    December 31, 2010
 | 70,112 | 10,750 |  |  | 80,862 | |||||||||||||||
| (1) | Actual discounts, chargebacks, and credits taken by customers. | 
    See accompanying report of independent registered public
    accounting firm.
    F-27
Similar companies
See also JOHNSON & JOHNSON - Annual report 2023 (10-K 2023-01-01) Annual report 2023 (10-Q 2023-10-01)See also ELI LILLY & Co - Annual report 2022 (10-K 2022-12-31) Annual report 2023 (10-Q 2023-09-30)
See also PFIZER INC - Annual report 2022 (10-K 2022-12-31) Annual report 2023 (10-Q 2023-10-01)
See also AbbVie Inc. - Annual report 2022 (10-K 2022-12-31) Annual report 2023 (10-Q 2023-09-30)
See also NOVO NORDISK A S
