GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC - Quarter Report: 2016 March (Form 10-Q)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File No. 001-31791

GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC.

(678) 620-3186

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.05 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    x  Yes    ¨  No

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.

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

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock as of May 6, 2016 was 28,979,179.

Table of Contents

GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC.

INDEX TO FORM 10-Q

FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2015

2

Table of Contents

GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (UNAUDITED)

See notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

3

Table of Contents

GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)

See notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

4

Table of Contents

GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)

See notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

5

Table of Contents

GALECTIN THERAPEUTICS INC.

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Galectin Therapeutics Inc. (the “Company”) is a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company that is applying its leadership in galectin science and drug development to create new therapies for fibrotic disease and cancer. These candidates are based on the Company’s targeting of galectin proteins which are key mediators of biologic and pathologic function. These compounds also may have application for drugs to treat other diseases and chronic health conditions.

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements as reported in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q reflect all adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary to present fairly the financial position of the Company as of March 31, 2016 and the results of its operations for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 and its cash flows for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015. All adjustments made to the interim financial statements include all those of a normal and recurring nature. The Company considers events or transactions that occur after the balance sheet date but before the financial statements are issued to provide additional evidence relative to certain estimates or to identify matters that require additional disclosure. Subsequent events have been evaluated through the date these financial statements are available to be issued. The results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results which may be expected for any other interim period or for the full year. The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company should be read in conjunction with its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.

The Company has operated at a loss since its inception and has had no significant revenues. The Company anticipates that losses will continue for the foreseeable future. At March 31, 2016, the Company had $22.4 million of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents available to fund future operations. The Company believes that with the cash on hand at March 31, 2016, there is sufficient cash to fund currently planned operations through March 31, 2017. The Company’s ability to fund operations after its current cash resources are exhausted depends on its ability to obtain additional financing or achieve profitable operations, as to which no assurances can be given. Accordingly, based on the forecasts and estimates underlying the Company’s current operating plan, the financial statements do not currently include any adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.

The Company was founded in July 2000, was incorporated in the State of Nevada in January 2001 under the name “Pro-Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,” and changed its name to “Galectin Therapeutics Inc.” on May 26, 2011.

Accrued expenses consist of the following:

Following is the stock-based compensation expense related to common stock options, common stock, restricted common stock and common stock warrants:

6

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes the stock option activity in the Company’s equity incentive plans, including non-plan grants to Company executives, from December 31, 2015 through March 31, 2016:

As of March 31, 2015, there was $1,621,000 of unrecognized compensation related to 920,468 unvested options, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted–average period of approximately 2.0 years. The weighted-average grant date fair value for options granted during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was $1.05 and $2.78, respectively. The Company granted 277,500 stock options during the three months ended March 31, 2016, of which 69,375 options vested upon grant with the remaining 208,125 options vesting over 3 years. Approximately $73,000 of non-cash, stock-based compensation expense was recorded during the three months ended March 31, 2016 related to the options granted during the quarter that were vested upon the grant date.

The fair value of all other options granted is determined using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The following weighted average assumptions were used:

The following table summarizes the restricted stock grant activity in the Company’s equity incentive plans from December 31, 2015 through March 31, 2016:

On March 12, 2015, the Company granted 81,352 shares of restricted stock to non-employee directors as a component of their compensation. A total of 77,784 shares were issued to seven directors representing non-cash compensation cost of $280,000 which will be recognized on a straight-line basis from the grant date through May 21, 2016, when the restricted shares will vest in full. A total of 3,568 shares were issued to two directors, who were not nominated for reelection, representing non-cash compensation cost of $12,845 that will be recognized on a straight-line basis from the grant date through May 21, 2016, when the restricted shares will vest in full.

The following table summarizes the common stock warrant activity from December 31, 2015 through March 31, 2016:

7

Table of Contents

The Company has certain financial assets and liabilities recorded at fair value. Fair values determined by Level 1 inputs utilize observable data such as quoted prices in active markets. Fair values determined by Level 2 inputs utilize data points other than quoted prices in active markets that are observable either directly or indirectly. Fair values determined by Level 3 inputs utilize unobservable data points in which there is little or no market data, which require the reporting entity to develop its own assumptions. The carrying amounts reflected in the consolidated balance sheets for cash equivalents, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their carrying value due to their short-term nature. There were no level 2 or level 3 assets or liabilities at March 31, 2016 or December 31, 2015.

Basic net loss per common share is computed by dividing the net loss available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per common share is computed by dividing the net loss available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares and other potential common shares then outstanding. Potential common shares consist of common shares issuable upon the assumed exercise of in-the-money stock options and warrants and potential common shares related to the conversion of the preferred stock. The computation of diluted net loss per share does not assume the issuance of common shares that have an anti-dilutive effect on net loss per share.

Dilutive shares which could exist pursuant to the exercise of outstanding stock instruments and which were not included in the calculation because their affect would have been anti-dilutive are as follows:

2014 At Market Issuance of Common Stock

On March 30, 2014, the Company entered into an At Market Issuance Sales Agreement (the “2014 At Market Agreement”) with a sales agent under which the Company may issue and sell shares of its common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $30.0 million from time to time through the sales agent. Sales of the Company’s common stock through the sales agent, if any, will be made by any method that is deemed an “at the market” offering as defined by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company will pay to the sales agent a commission rate equal to 3.0% of the gross proceeds from the sale of any shares of common stock sold through the sales agent under the 2014 At Market Agreement. In three months ended March 31, 2015, the Company issued 1,279,416 shares of common stock for net proceeds of approximately $4,532,000 under the 2014 At Market Agreement.

8

Table of Contents

Shareholder Class Actions and Derivative Lawsuits

Between July 30, 2014, and August 6, 2014, three putative class action complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (the “Nevada District Court”) against the Company and certain of its officers and directors on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s stock between January 6, 2014 and July 28, 2014. The complaints allege that the defendants made false or misleading statements in certain press releases and other public statements in violation of the federal securities laws and seek class certification, unspecified monetary damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. The Company disputes the allegations in the complaints and intends to vigorously defend against the claims. On August 22, 2014, the Nevada District Court entered an order consolidating the three cases, relieving the defendants of any obligation to respond to the complaints currently on file, and providing that defendants may respond to a consolidated amended complaint after it is filed by a lead plaintiff(s) to be appointed pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. On January 5, 2015, the Nevada District Court granted Defendants’ motion to transfer the consolidated putative securities class action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. On March 24, 2015, the Court appointed a lead plaintiff (“Plaintiff’). Plaintiff filed his Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Complaint”) on May 8, 2015. The Complaint asserts claims on behalf of a putative class of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s common stock between October 25, 2013 and July 28, 2014. The Complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and directors (the “Class Action Individual Defendants”) violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and SEC Rule 10b-5 through allegedly false or misleading statements in certain SEC filings, press releases and other public statements. The Complaint further alleges that the Class Action Individual Defendants and one of the Company’s shareholders face liability for the alleged Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 violations pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The Complaint seeks class certification, unspecified monetary damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. The Company disputes the allegations and filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint on June 26, 2015. On December 30, 2015, the Court dismissed the putative class action with prejudice and entered a final judgment in favor of the defendants. Plaintiff has filed a notice of appeal seeking review of the dismissal order and final judgment. The appeal has been docketed and is currently pending.

On August 1 and 25, 2014, persons claiming to be Galectin shareholders filed putative shareholder derivative complaints in the Nevada District Court, seeking recovery on behalf of the Company against certain of the Company’s directors and officers. On September 10, 2014, the Nevada District Court entered an order consolidating the two cases, relieving the defendants of any obligation to respond to the initial complaints, and providing that defendants may respond to a consolidated complaint to be filed by the plaintiffs. On January 5, 2015, the Nevada District Court granted Defendants’ motion to transfer the consolidated putative derivative litigation to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (hereinafter referred to as the “Georgia Federal Derivative Action.”) The plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on February 27, 2015. On April 6, 2015, the Company and defendants filed motions to dismiss the consolidated complaint. Rather than respond to those motions, the plaintiffs sought and obtained leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their amended complaint (the “Complaint”) on May 26, 2015. The Complaint alleges that certain of the Company’s directors and officers (the “Derivative Action Individual Defendants”) breached their fiduciary duties to the Company’s shareholders by causing or permitting the Company to make allegedly false and misleading public statements concerning the Company’s financial and business prospects. The Complaint also alleges that the Derivative Action Individual Defendants violated the federal securities laws by allegedly making false or misleading statements of material fact in the Company’s proxy filings, committed waste of corporate assets, were unjustly enriched, and that certain defendants breached their fiduciary duties through allegedly improper sales of Galectin stock. In addition, the Complaint alleges that the Derivative Action Individual Defendants and one of the Company’s shareholders aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. The Complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages on behalf of the Company, corporate governance reforms, disgorgement of profits, benefits and compensation by the defendants, costs, and attorneys ‘and experts’ fees. The Company and defendants filed motions to dismiss the Complaint on July 8, 2015. On December 30, 2015, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia dismissed the Georgia Federal Derivative Action with prejudice and entered a final judgment in favor of the defendants. Plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal seeking review of the dismissal order and final judgment. The appeal has been docketed and is currently pending.

        On August 29, 2014, another alleged Galectin shareholder filed a putative shareholder derivative complaint in state court in Las Vegas, Nevada, seeking recovery on behalf of the Company against the same Galectin directors and officers who are named as defendants in the derivative litigation pending in the Georgia Federal Derivative Action. The plaintiff in the Nevada action subsequently filed first and second amended complaints. The second amended complaint alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets, based on allegations that are substantially similar to those asserted in the Georgia Federal Derivative Action (except that the Nevada action does not allege violations of the federal securities laws and does not assert any claim against the Galectin shareholder named as a defendant in the Georgia Federal Derivative Action), and seeks unspecified monetary damages on behalf of the Company, corporate governance reforms, disgorgement of profits, benefits and compensation by the defendants, costs, and attorneys’ and experts’ fees. The Company and defendants filed motions to dismiss the second amended complaint on April 22, 2015. On April 29, 2015, the plaintiffs in the Georgia Federal Derivative Action filed a motion to intervene in the Nevada action which, among other things, raised questions regarding the Nevada plaintiffs standing. Thereafter, the Nevada plaintiff filed a motion to join additional plaintiffs. At a hearing held on June 11, 2015, the Nevada court: (i) granted the Georgia Federal Derivative Action plaintiffs’ motion to intervene; (ii) directed the Georgia Federal Derivative Action plaintiffs to file a complaint in intervention; (iii) directed the Nevada plaintiff to file a motion for leave to file a further amended complaint to add additional plaintiffs; (iv) stated that the defendants’ motions to dismiss the second amended complaint were denied “at this point;” (v) ordered the Nevada action stayed until December 11 , 2015; and (vi) directed the parties to submit a status report on December 11, 2015, updating the court on the progress and status of the Georgia Federal Derivative Action. On July 9, 2015, pursuant to the Nevada State Court’s instruction, the Georgia Federal Derivative Action plaintiffs filed a complaint-in-intervention in Nevada State Court, asserting similar claims to the ones they alleged in the Georgia Federal Derivative Action described above. On December 11, 2015, further to the Nevada State Court’s instruction, the parties submitted status reports detailing the status of the Georgia Federal Derivative Action. On January 5, 2016, the Nevada State Court held a status conference during which the dismissal of the Georgia Federal Derivative Action was discussed. Subsequent to that conference, on January 19, 2016, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Nevada State Court litigation based on the dismissal of the similar Georgia Federal Derivative Action, among other grounds. Defendants’ motion to dismiss was fully briefed to the Nevada court in February 2016. At a hearing on March 3, 2016, the Nevada State Court granted dismissal of the Nevada State Court litigation pending entry of a final order of dismissal. The Nevada State Court issued its order of dismissal on April 1, 2016. Defendants thereafter filed a motion requesting that the Nevada State Court correct certain language in the dismissal order. A decision on the motion is expected by June 2016.

Estimating an amount or range of possible losses resulting from litigation proceedings is inherently difficult and requires an extensive degree of judgment, particularly where the matters involve indeterminate claims for monetary damages, are in the early stages of the proceedings, and are subject to appeal. In addition, because most legal proceedings are resolved over extended periods of time, potential losses are subject to change due to, among other things, new developments, changes in legal strategy, the outcome of intermediate procedural and substantive rulings and other parties’ settlement posture and their evaluation of the strength or weakness of their case against us. For these reasons, we are currently unable to predict the ultimate timing or outcome of, or reasonably estimate the possible losses or a range of possible losses resulting from, the matters described above. Based on information currently available, the Company does not believe that any reasonably possible losses arising from currently pending legal matters will be material to the Company’s results of operations or financial condition. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties involved in such matters, an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could materially and adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in any particular reporting period.

9

Table of Contents

Other Legal Proceedings

The Company records accruals for such contingencies to the extent that the Company concludes that their occurrence is probable and the related damages are estimable. There are no other pending legal proceedings except as noted above.

In January 2014, we created Galectin Sciences, LLC (the “LLC” or “Investee”), a collaborative joint venture co-owned by SBH Sciences, Inc. (“SBH”), to research and develop small organic molecule inhibitors of galectin-3 for oral administration. The LLC was initially capitalized with a $400,000 cash investment to fund future research and development activities, which was provided by the Company, and specific in-process research and development (“IPR&D”) contributed by SBH. The estimated fair value of the IPR&D contributed by SBH, on the date of contribution, was $400,000. Initially, the Company and SBH had a 50% equity ownership interest in the LLC, with neither party having control over the LLC. Accordingly, from inception through the fourth quarter of 2014, the Company accounted for its investment in the LLC using the equity method of accounting. Under the equity method of accounting, the Company’s investment was initially recorded at cost with subsequent adjustments to the carrying value to recognize additional investments in or distributions from the Investee, as well as the Company’s share of the Investee’s earnings, losses and/or changes in capital. The estimated fair value of the IPR&D contributed to the LLC was immediately expensed upon contribution as there was no alternative future use available at the point of contribution. The operating agreement provides that if either party does not desire to contribute its equal share of funding required after the initial capitalization, then the other party, providing all of the funding, will have its ownership share increased in proportion to the total amount contributed from inception. In the fourth quarter of 2014, after the LLC had expended the $400,000 in cash, SBH decided not to contribute its share of the funding required. As a result, the Company contributed the $73,000 needed for the fourth quarter of 2014 expenses of the LLC. As a result, the Company’s ownership percentage in the LLC was 54.2% at December 31, 2014. The Company contributed $687,000 for the LLC expenses in 2015 adjusting the Company’s ownership percentage to 74.7% at December 31, 2015. The Company also contributed $227,000 for the LLC expenses in the quarter ended March 31, 2016 which adjusted the Company’s ownership percentage to 77.9% at March 31, 2016. The Company accounts for the interest in the LLC as a consolidated, less than wholly owned subsidiary. Because the LLC’s equity is immaterial, the value of the non-controlling interest is also deemed to be immaterial.

10

Table of Contents

In addition to historical information, the following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contains forward-looking statements as defined under Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is subject to the safe harbor created therein for forward-looking statements. Such statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning our anticipated operating results, research and development, clinical trials, regulatory proceedings, and financial resources, and can be identified by use of words such as, for example, “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe” and “would,” “should,” “could” or “may.” All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included herein that address activities, events, or developments that the Company expects or anticipates will or may occur in the future, are forward-looking statements, including statements regarding: plans and expectations regarding clinical trials; plans and expectations regarding regulatory approvals; our strategy and expectations for clinical development and commercialization of our products; potential strategic partnerships; expectations regarding the effectiveness of our products; plans for research and development and related costs; statements about accounting assumptions and estimates; expectations regarding liquidity and the sufficiency of cash to fund currently planned operations through March 31, 2017; our commitments and contingencies; and our market risk exposure. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about the industry and markets in which Galectin Therapeutics operates, and management’s beliefs and assumptions. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. Such risks and uncertainties are related to and include, without limitation,

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of Galectin Therapeutics appearing elsewhere herein.

11

Table of Contents

Overview

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company engaged in drug research and development to create new therapies for fibrotic disease and cancer. Our drug candidates are based on our method of targeting galectin proteins, which are key mediators of biologic and pathologic functions. We use naturally occurring, readily-available plant materials as starting material in manufacturing processes to create proprietary complex carbohydrates with specific molecular weights and other pharmaceutical properties. These complex carbohydrate molecules are appropriately formulated into acceptable pharmaceutical formulations. Using these unique carbohydrate-based candidate compounds that largely bind and inhibit galectin proteins, particularly galectin-3, we are undertaking the focused pursuit of therapies for indications where galectins have a demonstrated role in the pathogenesis of a given disease. We focus on diseases with serious, life-threatening consequences to patients and those where current treatment options are limited. Our strategy is to establish and implement clinical development programs that add value to our business in the shortest period of time possible and to seek strategic partners when a program becomes advanced and requires additional resources.

We endeavor to leverage our scientific and product development expertise as well as established relationships with outside sources to achieve cost-effective and efficient development. These outside sources, amongst others, provide us with expertise in preclinical models, pharmaceutical development, toxicology, clinical development, pharmaceutical manufacturing, sophisticated physical and chemical characterization, and commercial development. We also have established several collaborative scientific discovery programs with leading experts in carbohydrate chemistry and characterization. These discovery programs are generally aimed at the targeted development of new carbohydrate molecules which bind galectin proteins and offer alternative options to larger market segments in our primary disease indications, such as subcutaneous or oral administration. We also have established a discovery program aimed at the targeted development of small molecules (non-carbohydrate) which bind galectin proteins and may afford options for alternative means of drug delivery (e.g., oral) and as a result expand the potential uses of our compounds. We are pursuing a development pathway to clinical enhancement and commercialization for our lead compounds in immune enhancement for cancer therapy as well as in both liver fibrosis and fatty liver disease. All of our proposed products are presently in development, including pre-clinical and clinical trials.

Our Drug Development Programs

Galectins are a class of proteins that are made by many cells in the body. As a group, these proteins are able to bind to sugar molecules that are part of other proteins, glycoproteins, in and on the cells of our body. Galectin proteins act as a kind of molecular glue, bringing together molecules that have sugars on them. Galectin proteins, in particular galectin-3, are known to be markedly increased in a number of important diseases including inflammatory diseases, scarring of organs (e.g. liver, lung, kidney, and heart) and cancers of many kinds. The increase in galectin protein promotes the disease and is detrimental to the patient. Published data show that mice lacking the galectin-3 gene, and thus unable to produce galectin-3, are incapable of developing liver fibrosis in response to toxic insult to the liver and in fatty liver disease. We have one new chemical entity (NCE) in development, GR-MD-02, which has shown promise in preclinical and early clinical studies in treatment of fibrosis and in cancer therapy. Currently we are focusing on development of GR-MD-02 intended to be used in the treatment of liver fibrosis associated with fatty liver disease (NASH), moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, and in cancer therapy in combination with immune-system modifying agent(s). GR-MD-02 is a proprietary, patented compound derived from natural, readily available, plant-based starting materials, which, following chemical processing, exhibits the properties of binding to and inhibiting galectin-3 proteins. A second NCE, GM-CT-01 is a proprietary, patented compound that is made from a completely different starting source plant material and also binds and inhibits galectin proteins. Previously in clinical development for cancer indications, this compound continues to be explored in preclinical studies.

Our product pipeline is shown below:

12

Table of Contents

Fibrosis. GR-MD-02 is our lead product candidate for treatment of fibrotic disease. Our preclinical data show that GR-MD-02 has a significant therapeutic effect on liver fibrosis as shown in several relevant animal models. In addition, in NASH animal models GR-MD-02 has been shown to reduce liver fat, inflammation, and ballooning degeneration or death of liver cells. Therefore, we chose GR-MD-02 as the lead candidate in a development program targeted initially at fibrotic liver disease associated with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH, or fatty liver disease). In January 2013, an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) was submitted to the FDA with the goal of initiating a Phase 1 study in patients with NASH and advanced liver fibrosis to evaluate the human safety of GR-MD-02 and pharmacodynamics biomarkers of disease. On March 1, 2013, the FDA indicated we could proceed with a US Phase 1 clinical trial for GR-MD-02 with a development program aimed at obtaining support for a proposed indication of GR-MD-02 for treatment of NASH with advanced fibrosis. The Phase 1 trial was completed and demonstrated that GR-MD-02 up to 8 mg/Kg, i.v. was safe and well tolerated and the human pharmacokinetic data defined a drug dose for use in the planned Phase 2 trials. Additionally, there was evidence of a pharmacodynamic effect of GR-MD-02 at the 8 mg/kg dose with a decrease in alpha 2 macroglobulin, a serum marker of fibrotic activity, and a reduction in liver stiffness as determined by FibroScan^®. An “End of Phase 1 Meeting” was held with FDA which, amongst other items, provided guidance on the primary endpoint for the Phase 2 clinical trial.

Additionally, an open label drug-drug interaction study was completed during the second quarter of 2015 with GR-MD-02 and it showed that with 8 mg/kg dose of GR-MD-02 and 2 mg/kg dose of midazolam there was no drug-drug interaction and no serious adverse events or drug-related adverse events were observed. This study was required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the primary objective was to determine if single or multiple intravenous (IV) doses of GR-MD-02 affect the pharmacokinetics (PK) of midazolam. The secondary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of GR-MD-02 when administered concomitantly with midazolam. The lack of a drug interaction in this study enables Galectin to expand the number of patients eligible for its Phase 2 clinical trial. In addition, should GR-MD-02 be approved for marketing, the success of this study supports a broader patient population for the drug label.

Our Phase 2 program in fibrotic disease consists of two separate human clinical trials. The first clinical trial is the NASH-CX study for patients with NASH with cirrhosis, which began enrolling in June 2015. This study is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group Phase 2 trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GR-MD-02 for the treatment of liver fibrosis and resultant portal hypertension in patients with NASH cirrhosis. A total of 156 patients at approximately 50 sites in the United States will be randomized to receive either 2 mg/kg of GR-MD-02, 8 mg/kg of GR-MD-02 or placebo, with 52 patients in each group. The primary endpoint is a reduction in change in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). Patients will receive an infusion every other week for one year, total of 26 infusions, and will be evaluated to determine the change in HVPG as compared with placebo. HVPG will be correlated with secondary endpoints of fibrosis on liver biopsy as well as with measurement of liver stiffness (FibroScan^(R)) and assessment of liver metabolism (¹³C-methacetin breath test, Exalenz), which are non-invasive measures of the liver that may be used in future studies. Data readout is expected by the end of 2017.

The second clinical trial is the NASH-FX for patients with NASH advanced fibrosis uses a variety of non-invasive fibrosis assessment technologies. The first patient in this 30 patient study was consented in September 2015, and the study is designed for 15 patients receiving 8 mg/kg of GR-MD-02 and 15 receiving placebo to be treated. That study will evaluate the safety and efficacy of GR-MD-02 for a four month treatment period of bi-weekly infusions of GR-MD-02 on non-invasive measures on liver stiffness as assessed imaging of liver fibrosis using multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (LiverMultiScan^(R), Perspectum Diagnostics), as the primary endpoint, as well as magnetic resonance-elastography and FibroScan score, as secondary endpoints. Top-line data is expected to be available in the third quarter of 2016.

13

Table of Contents

Our drug candidate provides a promising new approach for the therapy of fibrotic diseases, and liver fibrosis in particular. Fibrosis is the formation of excess connective tissue (collagen and other proteins plus cellular elements such as myofibroblasts) in response to damage, inflammation or repair. When the fibrotic tissue becomes confluent, it obliterates the cellular architecture, leading to scarring and dysfunction of the underlying organ. Given galectin-3’s broad biological functionality, it has been demonstrated to be involved in cancer, inflammation and fibrosis, heart disease, renal disease and stroke. We have further demonstrated the broad applicability of the actions of our galectin-3 inhibitor’s biological effect in ameliorating fibrosis involving lung, kidney and cardiac tissues in a variety of animal models.

The focus and goal of the therapeutic program is to stop the progression of and reverse the fibrosis in the liver and, thereby improve liver function and prevent the development of complications of fibrosis/cirrhosis and liver-related mortality in patients.

Cancer Immunotherapy. We believe there is potential for galectin inhibition to play a key role in the burgeoning area of cancer immunotherapy. For example, there have been several recent approvals of drugs that enhance a patient’s immune system to fight cancer. With many additional vaccines and immune stimulatory agents in development, industry analysts forecast that this market could generate over $35 billion in sales over the next 10 years. It is our goal to use a galectin inhibitor to enhance the immune system function to fight cancer in a way that complements other approaches to this type of therapy. Our drug candidates provide a promising new therapeutic approach to enhance the activity of the immune system against cancer cells. Preclinical studies have indicated that GR-MD-02 enhances the immune response to cancer cells, increased tumor shrinkage and enhanced survival in immune competent mice with prostate, breast, melanoma and sarcoma cancers when combined with one of the immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-CTLA-4 or anti-PD-1. These preclinical data led to the filing of an Investigator-sponsored IND and the initiation of a study of GR-MD-02 in combination with Yervoy^® (ipilimumab) in a Phase 1B study of patients with metastatic melanoma. This study is being conducted under the sponsorship of Providence Portland Medical Center’s Earle A. Chiles Research Institute (EACRI). A study with Keytruda and GRMD-02 is conducted by EACRI is expected to begin enrolling by April 2016.

We believe the mechanism of action for GR-MD-02 is based upon interaction with, and inhibition of, galectin proteins, particularly galectin-3, which are expressed at high levels in certain pathological states including inflammation, fibrosis and cancer. While GR-MD-02 is capable of binding to multiple galectin proteins, we believe that it has the greatest affinity for galectin-3, the most prominent galectin implicated in pathological processes. Blocking galectin in cancer and liver fibrosis has specific salutary effects on the disease process, as discussed below.

Psoriasis. During our Phase 1 NASH fibrosis trial with GR-MD-02, a clinical effect on plaque psoriasis was observed in a NASH patient who also had this disease. This patient had marked improvement in her psoriasis, with improvement beginning after the third infusion. She reported that her psoriasis was “completely gone” and her skin was “normal” after the fourth infusion. Her skin remained normal for 17 months after the final infusion of study drug. The patient is convinced that the improvement in her psoriasis is related to the study drug.

This serendipitous finding, combined with galectin-3 protein being markedly upregulated in the capillary epithelia (small blood vessels) of the psoriatic dermis (plaque lesions), led to a phase 2a trial in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. GR-MD-02 inhibition of galectin-3 may attenuate capillary changes in the psoriatic dermis and inflammatory recruitment, perhaps explaining the improvements observed in the NASH fibrosis trial patient. In this open-label, unblinded trial (no placebo, all patients knowingly receive active drug), 10 patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis are administered GR-MD-02 every two weeks for 12 weeks. We anticipate top line data for this trial by the end of the third quarter of 2016.

14

Table of Contents

Results of Operations

Three Months Ended March 31, 2016 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2015

Research and Development Expense.

We generally categorize research and development expenses as either direct external expenses, comprised of amounts paid to third party vendors for services, or all other research and development expenses, comprised of employee payroll and general overhead allocable to research and development. We consider a clinical program to have begun upon acceptance by the FDA, or similar agency outside of the United States, to commence a clinical trial in humans, at which time we begin tracking expenditures by the product candidate. Clinical program expenses comprise payments to vendors related to preparation for, and conduct of, all phases of the clinical trial, including costs for drug manufacture, patient dosing and monitoring, data collection and management, oversight of the trials and reports of results. Pre-clinical expenses comprise all research and development amounts incurred before human trials begin, including payments to vendors for services related to product experiments and discovery, toxicology, pharmacology, metabolism and efficacy studies, as well as manufacturing process development for a drug candidate.

We have two product candidates, GR-MD-02 and GM-CT-01; however only GR-MD-02 is in active development. We filed for an IND for GR-MD-02 in January 2013 and in February 2013 we entered into an agreement with CTI to conduct a Phase 1 clinical trial of GR-MD-02. In March 2013, the FDA indicated we could proceed with a Phase 1 human clinical trial of GR-MD-02, and we began enrolling patients in the third quarter of 2013. In January 2014, we completed the enrollment of the first cohort of patients in the Phase 1 trial with no serious adverse events being reported. We reported initial safety and tolerability results from the first cohort of patients on March 31, 2014. The second cohort of this Phase 1 trial began and enrollment was completed in April 2014. In July 2014, we reported the results from the second cohort of patients. Enrollment of the third cohort of Phase 1 began in July 2014 with interim results presented in November 2014 with the final report on cohort 3 presented in January 2015. The results of the Phase 1 study demonstrate that (i) GR-MD-02 was safe and well tolerated by patients with advanced NASH liver fibrosis after IV administration of four doses of 2 mg/kg, 4 mg/kg and 8mg/kg lean body weight, (ii) Pharmacokinetics revealed drug exposure in humans at the 8 mg/kg dose that was equivalent to the upper range of the targeted therapeutic dose determined from effective doses in NASH animal models, (iii) Disease Serum Marker Effect showed there was a statistically significant, dose-dependent reduction in FibroTest ^® scores due to a statistically significant reduction in alpha-2 macroglobulin (A2M) serum levels, and (iv) Liver Stiffness Effect, as measured by FibroScan ^® showed that there was a signal of reduced liver stiffness in patients receiving GR-MD-02. The reduction seen in A2M does not necessarily mean fibrosis got better in this short study, but does suggest changes in the fibrogenic process that might lead to an improvement in fibrosis with longer-term therapy. These Phase 1 results in NASH patients with advanced fibrosis provide a firm foundation for entry into a Phase 2 development program.

The Company held an “End of Phase 1 meeting” with the FDA and, amongst other things, received guidance on the primary endpoints for a Phase 2 trial. In Phase 2 we are exploring two indications, NASH cirrhosis and NASH with advanced fibrosis. The NASH-CX trial is designed to target a patient population with cirrhosis due to NASH. The study endpoints will include those that are closely associated with outcomes in patients with cirrhosis with the primary endpoint: chosen as hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). HVPG is reflective of portal pressure and portal hypertension is responsible for most of the complications resulting from cirrhosis; a reduction in HVPG is associated with a reduction in complications of cirrhosis and reduced mortality. Planned secondary endpoints include: morphometric analysis of collagen on liver biopsies, a change in histopathological stage, and other secondary endpoints will include non-invasive tests to evaluate for correlation with HVPG and liver collagen. We have awarded the contract for the NASH-CX trial to a CRO, PPD Development, L.P., and enrollment began in June 2015 to assess the efficacy of GR-MD-02 in patients with NASH cirrhosis. On March 11, 2016, we entered into a Project Addendum Modification with PPD Development, L.P. (“PPD”) amending our Project Addendum to Master Services Agreement for clinical management services, which we entered into on March 6, 2015.

15

Table of Contents

The timing of initial results from the NASH-CX are dependent upon the rate of patient enrollment, amongst other factors, but we anticipate top line results around the end of 2017. In the indication of NASH with advanced fibrosis, we are conducting a single site, placebo controlled, randomized clinical trial (NASH-FX) to evaluate 4 months of treatment on patients with stage 3 bridging fibrosis. This trial was initiated in the third quarter of 2015 with top line results expected to be available around the end of the third quarter of 2016. Our Phase 2 clinical program is designed to position the Company for a strong Phase 3 clinical trial program.

Additionally, during the Phase 1 clinical trial, there appeared to be a potential beneficial effect on at least one patient’s moderate to severe psoriasis. As a result, we are conducting a single site, 10 patient, open label clinical trial with GR-MD-02 to determine whether more extensive studies in this indication are warranted. Enrollment of patients in this trial began in January 2016.

An open label drug-drug interaction study was completed with GR-MD-02 and it showed that with 8 mg/kg dose of GR-MD-02 and 2 mg/kg dose of midazolam there was no drug-drug interaction and no serious adverse events or drug-related adverse events were observed. This study was required by the FDA and the primary objective was to determine if single or multiple intravenous (IV) doses of GR-MD-02 affect the pharmacokinetics (PK) of midazolam. The secondary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of GR-MD-02 when administered concomitantly with midazolam. The lack of a drug interaction in this study enables Galectin to expand the number of patients eligible for its Phase 2 clinical trial. In addition, should GR-MD-02 be approved for marketing, the success of this study supports a broader patient population for the drug label.

Based on guidance from FDA and in furtherance of its understanding of the GR-MD-02 molecule, we continue to enhance its chemistry, manufacturing and control procedures on GR-MD-02 active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) as well as on the finished, sterile, pharmaceutical dosage form. Various state of the art and cutting-edge analytical technologies are being utilized, for example, to characterize and quantify the backbone vs. side-chain constituents and their quantitation, use of sophisticated linkage analysis with 2-D NMR to provide both qualitative and quantitative information on the proportion of oligomers, degree of methylation, as well as other monoclonal specific antibody techniques to map GR oligomer integrity and distribution. The Company has also characterized how the GR molecule behaves under conditions of forced degradation

16

Table of Contents

Our research and development expenses were as follows:

Clinical programs expenses increased primarily due to costs related to our Phase 2 clinical trials during the three months ended March 31, 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015. As we continue our Phase 2 trials, we expect our clinical activities costs will increase and may fluctuate from quarter to quarter as the trials progress. Pre-clinical activities decreased primarily because we have completed pre-clinical work directly related to our Phase 2 clinical trial program. Other research and development expense increased primarily due to the hiring of our executive director of clinical development in June 2015.

Both the time required and costs we may incur in order to commercialize a drug candidate that would result in material net cash inflow are subject to numerous variables, and therefore we are unable at this stage of our development to forecast useful estimates. Variables that make estimates difficult include the number of clinical trials we may undertake, the number of patients needed to participate in the clinical trial, patient recruitment uncertainties, trial results as to the safety and efficacy of our product, and uncertainties as to the regulatory agency response to our trial data prior to receipt of marketing approval. Moreover, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may suspend clinical trials if we or an agency believes patients in the trial are subject to unacceptable risks, or find deficiencies in the conduct of the clinical trial. Delays or rejections may also occur if governmental regulation or policy changes during our clinical trials or in the course of review of our clinical data. Due to these uncertainties, accurate and meaningful estimates of the ultimate cost to bring a product to market, the timing of costs and completion of our program and the period during which material net cash inflows will commence are unavailable at this time.

General and Administrative Expense.

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries including stock based compensation, legal and accounting fees, insurance, investor relations, business development and other office related expenses. The primary reason for the increase in general and administrative expenses for the three-months ended March 31, 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015 is due to recording of severance of $300,000, acceleration of non-cash, stock-based compensation expense of $578,000 related to the termination of the Company’s executive chairman in January 2016.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since our inception on July 10, 2000, we have financed our operations from proceeds of public and private offerings of debt and equity. As of March 31, 2016, we raised a net total of $122.5 million from these offerings. We have operated at a loss since our inception and have had no significant revenues. We anticipate that losses will continue for the foreseeable future. At March 31, 2016, we had $22.4 million of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents available to fund future operations. We believe that with the cash on hand at March 31, 2016, there is sufficient cash to fund currently planned operations through March 31, 2017. Our ability to fund operations after our current cash resources are exhausted depends on our ability to obtain additional financing or achieve profitable operations, as to which no assurances can be given. Accordingly, based on the forecasts and estimates underlying our current operating plan, the financial statements do not currently include any adjustments that might be necessary if we are unable to continue as a going concern.

17

Table of Contents

Net cash used in operations decreased by $821,000 to $3,490,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2016, as compared to $4,311,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2015. Cash operating expenses decreased principally just due to timing of payments for research and development activities related to our clinical trial activity with GR-MD-02.

Net cash provided by financing activities the three months ended March 31, 2015, of $4,532,000 represents net proceeds from the sale of common stock.

Other.

We have engaged outside vendors for certain services associated with our clinical trials. These services are generally available from several providers and, accordingly, our arrangements are typically cancellable on 30 days notice.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have not created, and are not a party to, any special-purpose or off-balance sheet entities for the purpose of raising capital, incurring debt or operating parts of our business that are not consolidated into our financial statements. We do not have any arrangements or relationships with entities that are not consolidated into our financial statements that are reasonably likely to materially affect our liquidity or the availability of capital resources.

Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The preparation of condensed consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to intangible assets, accrued expenses, stock-based compensation, contingencies and litigation. We base our estimates on historical experience, terms of existing contracts, our observance of trends in the industry, information available from other outside sources and on various other factors that we believe to be appropriate under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Critical accounting policies are those policies that affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in preparation of our consolidated financial statements. We believe our critical accounting policies include our policies regarding stock-based compensation, accrued expenses and income taxes. For a more detailed discussion of our critical accounting policies, please refer to our 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Market risk represents the risk of loss that may impact our financial position, operating results or cash flows due to changes in the U.S. interest rates. The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve cash until it is required to fund operations. To minimize risk, we maintain our portfolio of cash and cash equivalents in operating bank accounts and money market funds. Since our investments are short-term in duration, we believe that we are not subject to any material market risk exposure.

Our management, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) and concluded that, as of March 31, 2016, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a reasonable assurance level. During the quarter ended March 31, 2016, no change in our internal control over financial reporting has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

18

Table of Contents

PART II — OTHER INFORMATION

None except as discussed in Note 8 to our condensed consolidated financial statements included in this report.

The information set forth in this report should be read in conjunction with the risk factors set forth in Item 1A, “Risk Factors,” of Part I of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, which could materially impact our business, financial condition or future results.

None

None

Not Applicable

On May 6, 2016, the Company entered into an employment agreement with Dr. Traber (the “Employment Agreement”) for a three year term beginning May 6, 2016. Upon expiration of that term, the Employment Agreement provides that Dr. Traber’s employment with the Company will continue indefinitely for additional one-year terms unless either party provides at least three months’ notice that the employment will not continue beyond the end of the then current term. The Employment Agreement supersedes the prior employment agreement between the Company and Dr. Traber (which was executed on March 7, 2011).

The Employment Agreement provides that Dr. Traber will continue to serve as the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer during the term thereof. In addition, unless Dr. Traber appoints (subject to any required approval of the Company’s board of directors (the “Board”)) an individual other than himself as Chief Medical Officer, he will continue to serve in that role as well.

The Employment Agreement provides for an initial annual salary in the amount of $512,500, which may be adjusted by the Board in subsequent years based on annual industry surveys of executive compensation in comparable companies. In addition to his salary, Dr. Traber is entitled to (i) an annual performance bonus (which, upon achieving target performance, would equal 50% of his base salary for the applicable year), (ii) an annual equity or equity-based grant in a form and amount determined by the Board, (iii) participate in incentive, retirement, profit-sharing, life, medical, disability and other plans generally available to senior executives of the Company, (iv) up to four weeks vacation, (v) $2,000,000 life insurance coverage and long-term disability insurance at the Company’s expense, and (vi) coverage under certain liability insurance policies maintained by the Company.

If his employment is terminated (i) by the Company without Cause (as defined in the Employment Agreement), or (ii) by Dr. Traber for Good Reason (as defined in the Employment Agreement), the Employment Agreement provides that, subject to his execution of a release of claims against the Company, Dr. Traber will receive (A) severance benefits equal to one year of his then current base salary (paid over time, but subject to Dr. Traber’s ability to request a lump-sum payment if such election does not otherwise violate Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amend (the “Code”)), (B) any bonus for the year prior to termination to the extent not otherwise paid prior to such termination, (C) a prorated bonus for the year of termination, (D) COBRA coverage at a reduced premium (or a cash payment in lieu of such reduced-cost coverage) for the two-year period following termination, (E) immediate vesting of all unvested options held by Dr. Traber at the time of his termination, and (F) an extension of the post-termination exercise period of all of his options until the date such options would have otherwise expired if he remained employed by the Company.

The Employment Agreement provides that during its term Dr. Traber will not engage in any business competitive with the Company, whether as employee, consultant, agent, principal, officer, director, shareholder or otherwise. Following employment, the Employment Agreement provides that Dr. Traber will not (i) accept business from the Company’s customers or accounts relating to “competing products” or services of the Company for a period of 12 months, or (ii) render services to any “competing organization” (as such quoted terms are defined in the Employment Agreement) for a period of six months. The Employment Agreement also contains provisions binding Dr. Traber with respect to (A) protection of the Company’s confidential information; (B) requirements to disclose and assign inventions or other intellectual property to the Company; (C) non-solicitation of the Company’s executives, or persons with whom the Company has a business relationship such as investors, suppliers and customers; and (D) advance review and approval of all writings he proposes to publish.

The Employment Agreement states that, other than as set forth above in respect of vesting and expiration following termination of Dr. Traber’s employment by the Company without Cause or by Dr. Traber for Good Reason, the outstanding options that are held by Dr. Traber will remain outstanding pursuant to the agreements governing any such options.

The Employment Agreement provides that, in the event Dr. Traber becomes eligible to receive compensation that would be subject to an excise tax pursuant to Code Section 4999, then, to the extent it would leave Dr. Traber in a better net after-tax position, such payments will be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid said excise tax.

The foregoing description of the Employment Agreement is not complete and is qualified in its entirety by the full text of the agreement, a copy of which is filed as Exhibit 10.1 to this report and incorporated herein by reference.

19

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements 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 May 10, 2016.

20