ImmunoGen, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2012 September (Form 10-Q)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2012
OR
o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 0-17999
ImmunoGen, Inc.
|
Massachusetts |
|
04-2726691 |
|
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or |
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
830 Winter Street, Waltham, MA 02451
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(781) 895-0600
(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. xYes o No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). x Yes o 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. (Check one):
|
Large accelerated filer x |
|
Accelerated filer o |
|
|
|
|
|
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 Exchange Act). o Yes x No
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Shares of common stock, par value $.01 per share: 84,120,529 shares outstanding as of October 24, 2012.
IMMUNOGEN, INC.
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2012
IMMUNOGEN, INC.
(UNAUDITED)
In thousands, except per share amounts
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
June 30, |
| ||
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
233,614 |
|
$ |
160,938 |
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
853 |
|
129 |
| ||
|
Unbilled revenue |
|
1,446 |
|
1,196 |
| ||
|
Inventory |
|
170 |
|
1,288 |
| ||
|
Restricted cash |
|
319 |
|
319 |
| ||
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
2,419 |
|
2,400 |
| ||
|
Total current assets |
|
238,821 |
|
166,270 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation |
|
11,442 |
|
11,633 |
| ||
|
Long-term restricted cash |
|
2,231 |
|
2,231 |
| ||
|
Other assets |
|
174 |
|
174 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
252,668 |
|
$ |
180,308 |
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
3,216 |
|
$ |
3,395 |
|
|
Accrued compensation |
|
2,436 |
|
4,942 |
| ||
|
Other accrued liabilities |
|
7,421 |
|
4,589 |
| ||
|
Current portion of deferred lease incentive |
|
979 |
|
979 |
| ||
|
Current portion of deferred revenue |
|
1,376 |
|
2,349 |
| ||
|
Total current liabilities |
|
15,428 |
|
16,254 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Deferred lease incentive, net of current portion |
|
6,360 |
|
6,605 |
| ||
|
Deferred revenue, net of current portion |
|
69,769 |
|
69,761 |
| ||
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
3,799 |
|
3,798 |
| ||
|
Total liabilities |
|
95,356 |
|
96,418 |
| ||
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note E) |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Shareholders’ equity: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Preferred stock, $.01 par value; authorized 5,000 shares; no shares issued and outstanding |
|
— |
|
— |
| ||
|
Common stock, $.01 par value; authorized 100,000 shares; issued and outstanding 84,117 and 77,759 shares as of September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012, respectively |
|
841 |
|
778 |
| ||
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
685,619 |
|
587,068 |
| ||
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
(529,148 |
) |
(503,956 |
) | ||
|
Total shareholders’ equity |
|
157,312 |
|
83,890 |
| ||
|
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity |
|
$ |
252,668 |
|
$ |
180,308 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
IMMUNOGEN, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(UNAUDITED)
In thousands, except per share amounts
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||||
|
|
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Research and development support |
|
$ |
1,377 |
|
$ |
1,068 |
|
|
License and milestone fees |
|
933 |
|
1,187 |
| ||
|
Clinical materials revenue |
|
1,781 |
|
281 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Total revenues |
|
4,091 |
|
2,536 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Operating Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Research and development |
|
23,700 |
|
17,161 |
| ||
|
General and administrative |
|
5,639 |
|
4,841 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Total operating expenses |
|
29,339 |
|
22,002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Loss from operations |
|
(25,248 |
) |
(19,466 |
) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
56 |
|
(17 |
) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(25,192 |
) |
$ |
(19,483 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Basic and diluted net loss per common share |
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
83,350 |
|
76,364 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Comprehensive Loss |
|
$ |
(25,192 |
) |
$ |
(19,483 |
) |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
IMMUNOGEN, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(UNAUDITED)
In thousands, except per share amounts
|
|
|
Three Months ended September 30, |
| ||||
|
|
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(25,192 |
) |
$ |
(19,483 |
) |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used for operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
1,174 |
|
1,163 |
| ||
|
Gain on sale/disposal of fixed assets |
|
(17 |
) |
(5 |
) | ||
|
Amortization of deferred lease incentive obligation |
|
(245 |
) |
(244 |
) | ||
|
Loss on forward contracts |
|
2 |
|
44 |
| ||
|
Stock and deferred share unit compensation |
|
3,920 |
|
2,568 |
| ||
|
Deferred rent |
|
(27 |
) |
(27 |
) | ||
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Accounts receivable |
|
(724 |
) |
4,667 |
| ||
|
Unbilled revenue |
|
(250 |
) |
390 |
| ||
|
Inventory |
|
1,118 |
|
(667 |
) | ||
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
(11 |
) |
1,374 |
| ||
|
Restricted cash |
|
— |
|
700 |
| ||
|
Other assets |
|
— |
|
17 |
| ||
|
Accounts payable |
|
(179 |
) |
(363 |
) | ||
|
Accrued compensation |
|
(2,506 |
) |
(2,417 |
) | ||
|
Other accrued liabilities |
|
2,896 |
|
(95 |
) | ||
|
Deferred revenue |
|
(965 |
) |
813 |
| ||
|
Net cash used for operating activities |
|
(21,006 |
) |
(11,565 |
) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Purchases of property and equipment, net |
|
(966 |
) |
(554 |
) | ||
|
Payments from settlement of forward contracts |
|
(46 |
) |
(38 |
) | ||
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
(1,012 |
) |
(592 |
) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Proceeds from common stock issuance, net |
|
94,006 |
|
— |
| ||
|
Proceeds from stock options exercised |
|
688 |
|
716 |
| ||
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
94,694 |
|
716 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
72,676 |
|
(11,441 |
) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning balance |
|
160,938 |
|
191,206 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Cash and cash equivalents, ending balance |
|
$ |
233,614 |
|
$ |
179,765 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
IMMUNOGEN, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
September 30, 2012
A. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements at September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012 and for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 include the accounts of ImmunoGen, Inc., or the Company, and its wholly owned subsidiaries, ImmunoGen Securities Corp. and ImmunoGen Europe Limited. The consolidated financial statements include all of the adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, which management considers necessary for a fair presentation of the Company’s financial position in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. for interim financial information. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in the Company’s annual financial statements have been condensed or omitted. The preparation of interim financial statements requires the use of management’s estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the interim financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenditures during the reported periods. The results of the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results for the entire year. Accordingly, the interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2012.
Subsequent Events
The Company has evaluated all events or transactions that occurred after September 30, 2012 up through the date the Company issued these financial statements. During this period, the Company did not have any material recognizable or unrecognizable subsequent events.
Revenue Recognition
The Company enters into licensing and development agreements with collaborative partners for the development of monoclonal antibody-based anticancer therapeutics. The terms of these agreements contain multiple deliverables which may include (i) licenses, or options to obtain licenses, to the Company’s Targeted Antibody Payload, or TAP, technology, (ii) rights to future technological improvements, (iii) research activities to be performed on behalf of the collaborative partner, (iv) delivery of cytotoxic agents and (v) the manufacture of preclinical or clinical materials for the collaborative partner. Payments to the Company under these agreements may include non-refundable license fees, option fees, exercise fees, payments for research activities, payments for the manufacture of preclinical or clinical materials, payments based upon the achievement of certain milestones and royalties on product sales. The Company follows the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 605-25, “Revenue Recognition — Multiple-Element Arrangements,” and ASC Topic 605-28, “Revenue Recognition — Milestone Method,” in accounting for these agreements. In order to account for these agreements, the Company must identify the deliverables included within the agreement and evaluate which deliverables represent separate units of accounting based on if certain criteria are met, including whether the delivered element has stand-alone value to the collaborator. The consideration received is allocated among the separate units of accounting, and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are applied to each of the separate units.
At September 30, 2012, the Company had the following two types of agreements with the parties identified below:
· Exclusive development and commercialization licenses to use the Company’s TAP technology and/or certain other intellectual property to develop compounds to a single target antigen (referred to herein as single-target licenses, as distinguished from the Company’s right-to-test agreements described elsewhere):
Amgen (two single-target licenses)
Bayer HealthCare (one single-target license)
Biotest (one single-target license)
Roche, through its Genentech unit (five single-target licenses)
Sanofi (license to multiple individual targets)
· Option/research agreement for a defined period of time to secure development and commercialization licenses to use the Company’s TAP technology to develop anticancer compounds to specified targets on established terms (referred to herein as right-to-test agreements):
Amgen
Sanofi
Novartis
Eli Lilly and Company
There are no performance, cancellation, termination or refund provisions in any of the arrangements that contain material financial consequences to the Company.
Exclusive Licenses
The deliverables under an exclusive license agreement generally include the exclusive license to the Company’s TAP technology with respect to a specified antigen target, and may also include deliverables related to rights to future technological improvements, research activities to be performed on behalf of the collaborative partner and the manufacture of preclinical or clinical materials for the collaborative partner.
Generally, exclusive license agreements contain non-refundable terms for payments and, depending on the terms of the agreement, provide that the Company will (i) at the collaborator’s request, provide research services at negotiated prices which are generally consistent with what other third parties would charge, (ii) at the collaborator’s request, manufacture and provide to it preclinical and clinical materials or deliver cytotoxic agents at negotiated prices which are generally consistent with what other third parties would charge, (iii) earn payments upon the achievement of certain milestones and (iv) earn royalty payments, generally until the later of the last applicable patent expiration or 10 to 12 years after product launch. In the case of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), however, the minimum royalty term is 10 years and the maximum royalty term is 12 years on a country-by-country basis. Royalty rates may vary over the royalty term depending on the Company’s intellectual property rights. The Company may provide technical assistance and share any technology improvements with its collaborators during the term of the collaboration agreements. The Company does not directly control when any collaborator will request research or manufacturing services, achieve milestones or become liable for royalty payments. As a result, the Company cannot predict when it will recognize revenues in connection with any of the foregoing.
In determining the units of accounting, management evaluates whether the exclusive license has stand-alone value from the undelivered elements to the collaborative partner based on the consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances for each arrangement. Factors considered in this determination include the research capabilities of the partner and the availability of TAP technology research expertise in the general marketplace. If the Company concludes that the license has stand alone value and therefore will be accounted for as a separate unit of accounting, the Company then determines the estimated selling prices of the license and all other units of accounting based on market conditions, similar arrangements entered into by third parties, and entity-specific factors such as the terms of the Company’s previous collaborative agreements, recent preclinical and clinical testing results of therapeutic products that use the Company’s TAP technology, the Company’s pricing practices and pricing objectives, the likelihood that technological improvements will be made, the likelihood that technological improvements made will be used by the Company’s collaborators and the nature of the research services to be performed on behalf of its collaborators and market rates for similar services.
Upfront payments on single-target licenses are deferred if facts and circumstances dictate that the license does not have stand-alone value. Prior to the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2009-13, “Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables” on July 1, 2010, the Company determined that its licenses lacked stand-alone value and were combined with other elements of the arrangement and any amounts associated with the license were deferred and amortized over a certain period, which the Company refers to as the Company’s period of substantial involvement. The determination of the length of the period over which to defer revenue is subject to judgment and estimation and can have an impact on the amount of revenue recognized in a given period. Historically the Company’s involvement with the development of a collaborator’s product candidate has been significant at the early stages of development, and lessens as it progresses into clinical trials. Also, as a drug candidate gets closer to commencing pivotal testing the Company’s collaborators have sought an alternative site to manufacture the product, as the Company’s facility does not produce pivotal or commercial drug product. Accordingly, the Company generally estimates this period of substantial involvement to begin at the inception of the collaboration agreement and conclude at the end of non-pivotal Phase II testing. The Company believes this period of substantial involvement is, depending on the nature of the license, on average six and one-half years. Quarterly, the
Company reassesses its periods of substantial involvement over which the Company amortizes its upfront license fees and makes adjustments as appropriate. In the event a collaborator elects to discontinue development of a specific product candidate under a single target license, but retains its right to use the Company’s technology to develop an alternative product candidate to the same target or a target substitute, the Company would cease amortization of any remaining portion of the upfront fee until there is substantial preclinical activity on another product candidate and its remaining period of substantial involvement can be estimated. In the event that a single target license were to be terminated, the Company would recognize as revenue any portion of the upfront fee that had not previously been recorded as revenue, but was classified as deferred revenue, at the date of such termination.
Subsequent to the adoption of ASU No. 2009-13, the Company determined that its research licenses lack stand-alone value and are considered for aggregation with the other elements of the arrangement and accounted for as one unit of accounting.
Upfront payments on single-target licenses may be recognized upon delivery of the license if facts and circumstances dictate that the license has stand-alone value from the undelivered elements, which generally include rights to future technological improvements, research services, delivery of cytotoxic agents and the manufacture of preclinical and clinical materials.
The Company recognizes revenue related to research services that represent separate units of accounting as they are performed, as long as there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collection of the related receivable is probable. The Company recognizes revenue related to the rights to future technological improvements over the estimated term of the applicable license.
The Company may also provide cytotoxic agents to its collaborators or produce preclinical and clinical materials at negotiated prices which are generally consistent with what other third parties would charge. The Company recognizes revenue on cytotoxic agents and on preclinical and clinical materials when the materials have passed all quality testing required for collaborator acceptance and title and risk of loss have transferred to the collaborator. Arrangement consideration allocated to the manufacture of preclinical and clinical materials in a multiple-deliverable arrangement is below the Company’s full cost, and the Company’s full cost is not expected to ever be below its contract selling prices for its existing collaborations. During the three months ended September 30, 2012, the difference between the Company’s full cost to manufacture preclinical and clinical materials on behalf of its collaborators as compared to total amounts received from collaborators for the manufacture of preclinical and clinical materials was $755,000. There were no sales of manufactured preclinical or clinical materials during the three months ended September 30, 2011. The majority of the Company’s costs to produce these preclinical and clinical materials are fixed and then allocated to each batch based on the number of batches produced during the period. Therefore, the Company’s costs to produce these materials are significantly impacted by the number of batches produced during the period. The volume of preclinical and clinical materials the Company produces is directly related to the number of clinical trials the Company and its collaborators are preparing for or currently have underway, the speed of enrollment in those trials, the dosage schedule of each clinical trial and the time period such trials last. Accordingly, the volume of preclinical and clinical materials produced, and therefore the Company’s per batch costs to manufacture these preclinical and clinical materials, may vary significantly from period to period.
The Company may also produce research material for potential collaborators under material transfer agreements. Additionally, the Company performs research activities, including developing antibody specific conjugation processes, on behalf of its collaborators and potential collaborators during the early evaluation and preclinical testing stages of drug development. The Company records amounts received for research materials produced or services performed as a component of research and development support revenue. The Company also develops conjugation processes for materials for later stage testing and commercialization for certain collaborators. The Company is compensated at negotiated rates and may receive milestone payments for developing these processes which are recorded as a component of research and development support revenue.
The Company’s license agreements have milestone payments which for reporting purposes are aggregated into three categories: (i) development milestones, (ii) regulatory milestones, and (iii) sales milestones. Development milestones are typically payable when a product candidate initiates or advances into different clinical trial phases. Regulatory milestones are typically payable upon submission for marketing approval with the FDA or other countries’ regulatory authorities or on receipt of actual marketing approvals for the compound or for additional indications. Sales milestones are typically payable when annual sales reach certain levels.
At the inception of each agreement that includes milestone payments, the Company evaluates whether each milestone is substantive and at risk to both parties on the basis of the contingent nature of the milestone. This evaluation includes an assessment of whether (a) the consideration is commensurate with either (1) the entity’s performance to achieve the milestone, or (2) the enhancement of the value of the delivered item(s) as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the entity’s performance to achieve the milestone, (b) the consideration relates solely to past performance and (c) the consideration is reasonable relative to all of the deliverables and payment terms within the arrangement. The Company evaluates factors such as the scientific, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the respective milestone, the level of effort and investment required to achieve the
respective milestone and whether the milestone consideration is reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement in making this assessment.
Non-refundable development and regulatory milestones that are expected to be achieved as a result of the Company’s efforts during the period of substantial involvement are considered substantive and are recognized as revenue upon the achievement of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. Milestones that are not considered substantive because we do not contribute effort to the achievement of such milestones are generally achieved after the period of substantial involvement and are recognized as revenue upon achievement of the milestone, as there are no undelivered elements remaining and no continuing performance obligations, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met.
Right-to-Test Agreements
The Company’s right-to-test agreements provide collaborators the right to (a) test the Company’s TAP technology for a defined period of time through a right-to-test, or research, license, (b) take options, for a defined period of time, to specified targets and (c) upon exercise of those options, secure or “take” licenses to develop and commercialize products for the specified targets on established terms. Under these agreements, fees may be due to the Company (i) at the inception of the arrangement (referred to as “upfront” fees or payments), (ii) upon taking an option with respect to a specific target (referred to as option fees or payments earned, if any, when the option is “taken”), (iii) upon the exercise of a previously taken option to acquire a development and commercialization license(s) (referred to as exercise fees or payments earned, if any, when the development and commercialization license is “taken”), or (iv) some combination of all of these fees.
The accounting for right-to-test agreements is dependent on the nature of the options granted to the collaborative partner. Options are considered substantive if, at the inception of a right-to-test agreement, the Company is at risk as to whether the collaborative partner will choose to exercise the options to secure development and commercialization licenses. Factors that are considered in evaluating whether options are substantive include the overall objective of the arrangement, the benefit the collaborator might obtain from the agreement without exercising the options, the cost to exercise the options relative to the total upfront consideration, and the additional financial commitments or economic penalties imposed on the collaborator as a result of exercising the options.
For right-to-test agreements where the options to secure development and commercialization licenses to the Company’s TAP technology are considered substantive, the Company does not consider the development and commercialization licenses to be a deliverable at the inception of the agreement. For those right-to-test agreements entered into prior to the adoption of ASU No. 2009-13 where the options to secure development and commercialization licenses are considered substantive, the Company has deferred the upfront payments received and recognizes this revenue over the period during which the collaborator could elect to take options for development and commercialization licenses. These periods are specific to each collaboration agreement. If a collaborator takes an option to acquire a development and commercialization license under these agreements, any substantive option fee is deferred and recognized over the life of the option, generally 12 to 18 months. If a collaborator exercises an option and takes a development and commercialization license to a specific target, the Company attributes the exercise fee to the development and commercialization license. Upon exercise of an option to acquire a development and commercialization license, the Company would also attribute any remaining deferred option fee to the development and commercialization license and apply the multiple-element revenue recognition criteria to the development and commercialization license and any other deliverables to determine the appropriate revenue recognition, which will be consistent with the Company’s accounting policy for upfront payments on single-target licenses. In the event a right-to-test agreement were to be terminated, the Company would recognize as revenue any portion of the upfront fee that had not previously been recorded as revenue, but was classified as deferred revenue, at the date of such termination. None of the Company’s right-to-test agreements entered into subsequent to the adoption of ASU No. 2009-13 has been determined to contain substantive options.
For right-to-test agreements where the options to secure development and commercialization licenses to the Company’s TAP technology are not considered substantive, the Company considers the development and commercialization licenses to be a deliverable at the inception of the agreement and applies the multiple-element revenue recognition criteria to determine the appropriate revenue recognition. None of the Company’s right-to-test agreements entered into prior to the adoption of ASU No. 2009-13 has been determined to contain non-substantive options.
The Company does not directly control when any collaborator will exercise its options for development and commercialization licenses. As a result, the Company cannot predict when it will recognize revenues in connection with any of the foregoing.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Fair value is defined under ASC Topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. Valuation techniques used to measure fair value must maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The standard describes a fair value hierarchy to measure fair value which is based on three levels of inputs, of which the first two are considered observable and the last unobservable, as follows:
· Level 1 - Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
· Level 2 - Inputs other than Level 1 that are observable, either directly or indirectly, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
· Level 3 - Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
As of September 30, 2012, the Company held certain assets that are required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. The following table represents the fair value hierarchy for the Company’s financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of September 30, 2012 (in thousands):
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2012 Using |
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
Significant Other |
|
Significant |
| ||||
|
|
|
Total |
|
(Level 1) |
|
(Level 2) |
|
(Level 3) |
| ||||
|
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash |
|
$ |
236,164 |
|
$ |
236,164 |
|
$ |
— |
|
$ |
— |
|
As of June 30, 2012, the Company held certain assets that are required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. The following table represents the fair value hierarchy for the Company’s financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 30, 2012 (in thousands):
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at June 30, 2012 Using |
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
Significant Other |
|
Significant |
| ||||
|
|
|
Total |
|
(Level 1) |
|
(Level 2) |
|
(Level 3) |
| ||||
|
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash |
|
$ |
163,488 |
|
$ |
163,488 |
|
$ |
— |
|
$ |
— |
|
The fair value of the Company’s cash equivalents is based primarily on quoted prices from active markets.
Unbilled Revenue
The majority of the Company’s unbilled revenue at September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012 represents research funding earned prior to those dates based on actual resources utilized under the Company’s agreements with various collaborators.
Inventory
Inventory costs relate to clinical trial materials being manufactured for sale to the Company’s collaborators. Inventory is stated at the lower of cost or market as determined on a first-in, first-out (FIFO) basis.
Inventory at September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012 is summarized below (in thousands):
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
June 30, |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Raw materials |
|
$ |
170 |
|
$ |
129 |
|
|
Work in process |
|
— |
|
1,159 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Total |
|
$ |
170 |
|
$ |
1,288 |
|
Raw materials inventory consists entirely of DM1 or DM4, the Company’s proprietary cell-killing agents, which are included in all TAP product candidates currently in preclinical and clinical testing with the Company’s collaborators. The Company considers more than a twelve month supply of raw materials that is not supported by firm, fixed orders and/or projections from its collaborators to be excess and establishes a reserve to reduce to zero the value of any such excess raw material inventory with a corresponding charge to research and development expense. In accordance with this policy, during the three-month periods ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 the Company recorded $390,000 and $748,000, respectively, of expense related to excess inventory.
Work in process inventory consists of bulk drug substance manufactured for sale to the Company’s collaborators to be used in preclinical and clinical studies. All bulk drug substance is made to order at the request of the collaborators and subject to the terms and conditions of respective supply agreements. As such, no reserve for work in process inventory is required.
Computation of Net Loss per Common Share
Basic and diluted net loss per share is calculated based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. The Company’s common stock equivalents, as calculated in accordance with the treasury-stock method, are shown in the following table (in thousands):
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||
|
|
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
|
|
Options outstanding to purchase common stock |
|
7,960 |
|
7,762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock equivalents under treasury stock method |
|
2,552 |
|
2,743 |
|
The Company’s common stock equivalents have not been included in the net loss per share calculation because their effect is anti-dilutive due to the Company’s net loss position.
Stock-Based Compensation
As of September 30, 2012, the Company is authorized to grant future awards under one employee share-based compensation plan, which is the ImmunoGen, Inc. 2006 Employee, Director and Consultant Equity Incentive Plan, or the 2006 Plan. The 2006 Plan provides for the issuance of Stock Grants, the grant of Options and the grant of Stock-Based Awards for up to 8,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, as well as any shares of common stock that are represented by awards granted under the previous stock option plan, the ImmunoGen, Inc. Restated Stock Option Plan, or the Former Plan, that are forfeited, expire or are cancelled without delivery of shares of common stock; provided, however, that no more than 5,900,000 shares shall be added to the Plan from the Former Plan, pursuant to this provision. Option awards are granted with an exercise price equal to the market price of the Company’s stock at the date of grant. Options vest at various periods of up to four years and may be exercised within ten years of the date of grant.
The stock-based awards are accounted for under ASC Topic 718, “Compensation—Stock Compensation.” Pursuant to Topic 718, the estimated grant date fair value of awards is charged to the statement of operations and comprehensive loss over the requisite service period, which is the vesting period. Such amounts have been reduced by an estimate of forfeitures of all unvested awards. The fair value of each stock option is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the assumptions noted in the following table. As the Company has not paid dividends since inception, nor does it expect to pay any dividends for the foreseeable future, the expected dividend yield assumption is zero. Expected volatility is based exclusively on historical volatility data of the Company’s stock. The expected term of stock options granted is based exclusively on historical data and represents the period of time that stock options granted are expected to be outstanding. The expected term is calculated for and applied to one group of
stock options as the Company does not expect substantially different exercise or post-vesting termination behavior among its option recipients. The risk-free rate of the stock options is based on the U.S. Treasury rate in effect at the time of grant for the expected term of the stock options.
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||
|
|
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
|
|
Dividend |
|
None |
|
None |
|
|
Volatility |
|
60.44% |
|
59.79% |
|
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
0.84% |
|
2.25% |
|
|
Expected life (years) |
|
6.3 |
|
7.1 |
|
Using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, the weighted average grant date fair values of options granted during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 were $8.91 and $9.15 per share, respectively.
Stock compensation expense related to stock options granted under the 2006 Plan was $3.8 million and $2.5 million during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The increase in stock compensation expense from period to period is primarily due to higher stock prices driving higher fair values.
As of September 30, 2012, the estimated fair value of unvested employee awards was $22.5 million, net of estimated forfeitures. The weighted-average remaining vesting period for these awards is approximately two and a half years.
During the three months ended September 30, 2012, holders of options issued under the Company’s equity plans exercised their rights to acquire an aggregate of approximately 108,000 shares of common stock at prices ranging from $2.91 to $15.20 per share. The total proceeds to the Company from these option exercises were approximately $688,000.
Financial Instruments and Concentration of Credit Risk
The Company’s cash equivalents consist principally of money market funds with underlying investments primarily being U.S. Government-issued securities and high quality, short-term commercial paper. All of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents are maintained with three financial institutions in the U.S.
Derivative instruments include a portfolio of short duration foreign currency forward contracts intended to mitigate the risk of exchange fluctuations for existing or anticipated receivable and payable balances denominated in foreign currency. Derivatives are estimated at fair value and classified as other current assets or liabilities. The fair values of these instruments represent the present value of estimated future cash flows under the contracts, which are a function of underlying interest rates, currency rates, related volatility, counterparty creditworthiness and duration of the contracts. Changes in these factors or a combination thereof may affect the fair value of these instruments.
The Company does not designate foreign currency forward contracts as hedges for accounting purposes, and changes in the fair value of these instruments are recognized in earnings during the period of change. Because the Company enters into forward contracts only as an economic hedge, any gain or loss on the underlying foreign-denominated existing or anticipated receivable or payable balance would be offset by the loss or gain on the forward contract. For the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, net losses recognized on forward contracts were $2,000 and $44,000, respectively, and are included in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss as other income (expense), net. As of September 30, 2012, the Company had outstanding forward contracts with notional amounts equivalent to approximately $6.8 million (€5.3 million), all maturing on or before October 7, 2013. As of June 30, 2012, the Company had outstanding forward contracts with notional amounts equivalent to approximately $3.3 million (€2.5 million). The Company does not anticipate using derivative instruments for any purpose other than hedging exchange rate exposure.
Segment Information
During the three months ended September 30, 2012, the Company continued to operate in one reportable business segment which is the business of discovery of monoclonal antibody-based anticancer therapeutics.
The percentages of revenues recognized from significant customers of the Company in the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 are included in the following table:
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||
|
Collaborative Partner: |
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
|
|
Amgen |
|
23% |
|
26% |
|
|
Bayer HealthCare |
|
20% |
|
21% |
|
|
Biogen Idec |
|
—% |
|
11% |
|
|
Biotest |
|
23% |
|
6% |
|
|
Novartis |
|
24% |
|
22% |
|
|
Sanofi |
|
4% |
|
12% |
|
There were no other customers of the Company with significant revenues in the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.
B. Collaborative Agreements
For information related to the Company’s significant collaborative arrangements, please read Note C, Agreements to our consolidated financial statements included within the Company’s 2012 Form 10-K.
C. Capital Stock
2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan
During the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the Company recorded approximately $14,000 and $19,000 in expense reduction, respectively, related to stock units outstanding under the Company’s 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan, or the 2001 Plan. The value of the stock units is adjusted to market value at each reporting period as the redemption amount of stock units for this plan will be paid in cash. No stock units have been issued under the 2001 Plan subsequent to June 30, 2004.
Compensation Policy for Non-Employee Directors
During the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the Company recorded approximately $78,000 and $84,000 in compensation expense, respectively, related to deferred share units issued and outstanding under the Company’s Compensation Policy for Non-Employee Directors. Pursuant to the Compensation Policy for Non-Employee Directors, the redemption amount of deferred share units issued will be paid in shares of common stock of the Company on the date a director ceases to be a member of the Board. Annual retainers vest quarterly over approximately one year from the date of grant, contingent upon the individual remaining a director of ImmunoGen as of each vesting date, and the number of deferred share units awarded is based on the market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the award. All unvested deferred stock awards will automatically vest immediately prior to the occurrence of a change of control.
In addition to the deferred share units, the Non-Employee Directors are also entitled to receive stock option awards having a grant date fair value of $30,000, determined using the Black-Scholes option pricing model measured on the date of grant, which would be the date of the annual meeting of shareholders. These options will vest quarterly over approximately one year from the date of grant. Any new directors will receive a pro-rated award, depending on their date of election to the Board. The directors received a total of 33,187 and 49,688 options in fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, respectively, and the related compensation expense for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 is included in the amounts discussed in the “Stock-Based Compensation” section of footnote A above.
D. Cash and Cash Equivalents
As of September 30, 2012 and June 30, 2012, the Company held $233.6 million and $160.9 million, respectively, in cash, and money market funds consisting principally of U.S. Government-issued securities and high quality, short-term commercial paper which were classified as cash and cash equivalents.
E. Commitments and Contingencies
Leases
Effective July 27, 2007, the Company entered into a lease agreement with Intercontinental Fund III for the rental of approximately 89,000 square feet of laboratory and office space at 830 Winter Street, Waltham, MA. The Company uses this space for its corporate headquarters, research and other operations. The initial term of the lease is for twelve years with an option for the Company to extend the lease for two additional terms of five years. The Company is required to pay certain operating expenses for the leased premises subject to escalation charges for certain expense increases over a base amount. The Company entered into a sublease in December 2009 for 14,100 square feet of this space in Waltham through January 2015, with the sublessee having a conditional option to extend the term for an additional two years.
Effective April 2012, the Company entered into a sublease agreement for the rental of 7,310 square feet of laboratory and office space at 830 Winter Street, Waltham, MA from Histogenics Corporation. The initial term of the sublease is for three years with a conditional option for the Company to extend the lease through October 2017. The Company is required to pay certain operating expenses for the leased premises subject to escalation charges for certain expense increases over a base amount.
At September 30, 2012, the Company also leases a facility consisting of 43,850 square feet in Norwood, MA under an agreement through 2018 with an option to extend the lease for an additional term of five years. The Company is required to pay certain operating expenses for the leased premises subject to escalation charges for certain expense increases over a base amount.
The minimum rental commitments for the Company’s facilities, including real estate taxes and other expenses, for the next five fiscal years and thereafter under the non-cancelable operating lease agreements discussed above are as follows (in thousands):
|
2013 (nine months remaining) |
|
$ |
4,788 |
|
|
2014 |
|
6,473 |
| |
|
2015 |
|
6,587 |
| |
|
2016 |
|
6,352 |
| |
|
2017 |
|
6,418 |
| |
|
Thereafter |
|
16,552 |
| |
|
Total minimum lease payments |
|
$ |
47,170 |
|
|
Total minimum rental payments from sublease |
|
(1,590 |
) | |
|
Total minimum lease payments, net |
|
$ |
45,580 |
|
Collaborative Agreements
The Company is contractually obligated to make potential future success-based regulatory milestone payments in conjunction with certain collaborative agreements. These payments are contingent upon the occurrence of certain future events and, given the nature of these events, it is unclear when, if ever, the Company may be required to pay such amounts. Further, the timing of any future payment is not reasonably estimable. During the current period, the Company’s license agreement with Janssen Biotech was terminated and, accordingly, the Company is no longer obligated to make $41.0 million of potential future success-based milestone and third-party payments under such agreement. As of September 30, 2012, the maximum amount that may be payable in the future under the Company’s current collaborative agreements is approximately $2.0 million.
ITEM 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
OVERVIEW
Since our inception, we have been principally engaged in the development of novel, targeted antibody-based therapeutics for the treatment of cancer using our expertise in cancer biology, monoclonal antibodies, highly potent cytotoxic, or cell-killing, agents, and the design of linkers that enable these agents to remain stably attached to the antibodies while in the blood stream and released in their fully active form after delivery to a cancer cell. An anticancer compound made using our Targeted Antibody Payload, or TAP, technology consists of a monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to an antigen target found on cancer cells with multiple copies of one of our proprietary cell-killing agents attached to the antibody using one of our engineered linkers. Its antibody component enables a TAP compound to bind specifically to cancer cells that express its target antigen, the highly potent cytotoxic agent serves to kill the cancer cell, and the engineered linker controls the release and activation of the cytotoxic agent inside the cancer cell. With some TAP compounds, the antibody component also has anticancer activity of its own. Our TAP technology is designed to enable the creation of highly effective, well-tolerated anticancer product candidates. All of the TAP compounds currently in clinical testing contain either
DM1 or DM4 as the cytotoxic agent. Both DM1 and DM4, collectively DMx, are our proprietary derivatives of a cytotoxic agent called maytansine. We also have expertise in antibodies and cancer biology to develop “naked,” or non-conjugated, antibody anticancer product candidates.
We have used our proprietary TAP technology in conjunction with our in-house antibody expertise to develop our own anticancer product candidates. We have also entered into collaborative agreements that enable companies to use our TAP technology to develop commercial product candidates to specified targets. Under the terms of our collaborative agreements, we are generally entitled to upfront fees, milestone payments and royalties on any commercial product sales. In addition, under certain agreements we are compensated for research and development activities performed at our collaborative partner’s request at negotiated prices which are generally consistent with what other third parties would charge. We are compensated to manufacture preclinical and clinical materials and deliver cytotoxic agent at negotiated prices which are generally consistent with what other third parties would charge. Currently, our collaborative partners are Amgen, Bayer HealthCare, Biotest, Lilly, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi. We expect that substantially all of our revenue for the foreseeable future will result from payments under our collaborative arrangements. Details for our significant agreements can be found in our 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K
To date, we have not generated revenues from commercial product sales and we expect to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future. As of September 30, 2012, we had approximately $233.6 million in cash and cash equivalents compared to $160.9 million in cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2012.
We anticipate that future cash expenditures will be partially offset by collaboration-derived proceeds, including milestone payments, royalties and upfront fees. Accordingly, period-to-period operating results may fluctuate dramatically based upon the timing of receipt of the proceeds. We believe that our established collaboration agreements, while subject to specified milestone achievements, will provide funding to assist us in meeting obligations under our collaborative agreements while also providing funding for the development of internal product candidates and technologies. However, we can give no assurances that such collaborative agreement funding will, in fact, be realized in the time frames we expect, or at all. Should we or our partners not meet some or all of the terms and conditions of our various collaboration agreements, we may be required to pursue additional strategic partners, secure alternative financing arrangements, and/or defer or limit some or all of our research, development and/or clinical projects. However, we cannot provide assurance that any such opportunities presented by additional strategic partners or alternative financing arrangements will be entirely available to us, if at all.
Critical Accounting Policies
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to our collaborative agreements, inventory and stock-based compensation. We base our estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates.
There were no significant changes to our critical accounting policies from those disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Comparison of Three Months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011
Revenues
Our total revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 were $4.1 million and $2.5 million, respectively. The $1.6 million increase in revenues in the three months ended September 30, 2012 from the same period in the prior year is attributable to an increase in research and development support revenue and clinical materials revenue, partially offset by a decrease in license and milestone fees, all of which are discussed below.
Research and development support revenue was $1.4 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 compared with $1.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. These amounts primarily represent research funding earned based on actual resources utilized under our agreements with our collaborators shown in the table below. Also included in research and development support revenue are fees for developing antibody-specific conjugation processes on behalf of our collaborators and potential collaborators during the early evaluation and preclinical testing stages of drug development. The amount of research and development support revenue we earn is directly related to the number of our collaborators and potential collaborators, the stage of development of our collaborators’ product candidates and the resources our collaborators allocate to the development effort. As such,
the amount of research and development support revenue may vary widely from quarter to quarter and year to year. Total revenue recognized from research and development support from each of our collaborative partners in the three-month periods ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 is included in the following table (in thousands):
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
| ||||
|
Research and Development Support |
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
Collaborative Partner: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Amgen |
|
$ |
85 |
|
$ |
340 |
|
|
Bayer HealthCare |
|
— |
|
6 |
| ||
|
Biotest |
|
115 |
|
144 |
| ||
|
Lilly |
|
223 |
|
— |
| ||
|
Novartis |
|
947 |
|
568 |
| ||
|
Sanofi |
|
7 |
|
10 |
| ||
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,377 |
|
$ |
1,068 |
|
Revenues from license and milestone fees for the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased $254,000 to $933,000 million from $1.2 million in the same period ended September 30, 2011. The amount of license and milestone fees we earn is directly related to the number of our collaborators and potential collaborators, the resources our collaborators allocate to the advancement of the product candidates, the number of clinical trials our collaborators conduct and the speed of enrollment and overall success in those trials. As such, the amount of license and milestone fees may vary widely from quarter to quarter and year to year. Total revenue from license and milestone fees recognized from each of our collaborative partners in the three-month periods ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 is included in the following table (in thousands):
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
| ||||
|
License and Milestone Fees |
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
Collaborative Partner: |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
Amgen |
|
$ |
239 |
|
$ |
300 |
|
|
Bayer HealthCare |
|
521 |
|
276 |
| ||
|
Biogen Idec |
|
— |
|
270 |
| ||
|
Biotest |
|
6 |
|
32 |
| ||
|
Centocor |
|
— |
|
14 |
| ||
|
Sanofi |
|
167 |
|
295 |
| ||
|
Total |
|
$ |
933 |
|
$ |
1,187 |
|
Deferred revenue of $71.1 million as of September 30, 2012 primarily represents payments received from our collaborators pursuant to our license agreements, including a $20 million upfront payment received from Lilly during fiscal 2012 and a $45 million upfront payment received from Novartis during fiscal 2011, both of which we have yet to earn pursuant to our revenue recognition policy.
Clinical materials revenue increased $1.5 million in the three months ended September 30, 2012, to $1.8 million from $281,000 in the three months ended September 30, 2011. We are compensated at negotiated prices which are generally consistent with what other third-parties would charge. The amount of clinical materials revenue we earn, and the related cost of clinical materials charged to research and development expense, is directly related to the number of clinical trials our collaborators are preparing or have underway, the speed of enrollment in those trials, the dosage schedule of each clinical trial and the time period, if any, during which patients in the trial receive clinical benefit from the clinical materials, and the supply of clinical-grade material to our collaborators for process development and analytical purposes. As such, the amount of clinical materials revenue and the related cost of clinical materials charged to research and development expense may vary significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year.
Research and Development Expenses
Our research and development expenses relate to (i) research to evaluate new targets and to develop and evaluate new antibodies, linkers and cytotoxic agents, (ii) preclinical testing of our own and, in certain instances, our collaborators’ product candidates, and the cost of our own clinical trials, (iii) development related to clinical and commercial manufacturing processes and (iv) manufacturing operations which also includes raw materials.
Research and development expense for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased $6.5 million to $23.7 million from $17.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. The increase was primarily due to (i) increased antibody development and supply expenses; (ii) increased fill/finish costs; (iii) increased clinical trial costs; (iv) increased cost of clinical materials revenue related to increased orders of such clinical materials from our partners due to timing of supply requirements; and (v) increased salaries and related expenses due primarily to higher stock compensation cost and additional headcount. The number of our research and development personnel increased to 216 as of September 30, 2012 compared to 206 at September 30, 2011. The higher
stock compensation costs in the current period are driven primarily by higher stock prices resulting in higher fair values. A more detailed discussion of research and development expense in the period follows.
We are unable to accurately estimate which potential product candidates, if any, will eventually move into our internal preclinical research program. We are unable to reliably estimate the costs to develop these products as a result of the uncertainties related to discovery research efforts as well as preclinical and clinical testing. Our decision to move a product candidate into the clinical development phase is predicated upon the results of preclinical tests. We cannot accurately predict which, if any, of the discovery stage product candidates will advance from preclinical testing and move into our internal clinical development program. The clinical trial and regulatory approval processes for our product candidates that have advanced or that we intend to advance to clinical testing are lengthy, expensive and uncertain in both timing and outcome. As a result, the pace and timing of the clinical development of our product candidates is highly uncertain and may not ever result in approved products. Completion dates and development costs will vary significantly for each product candidate and are difficult to predict. A variety of factors, many of which are outside our control, could cause or contribute to the prevention or delay of the successful completion of our clinical trials, or delay or prevent our obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. The costs to take a product through clinical trials are dependent upon, among other factors, the clinical indications, the timing, size and design of each clinical trial, the number of patients enrolled in each trial, and the speed at which patients are enrolled and treated. Product candidates may be found to be ineffective or to cause unacceptable side effects during clinical trials, may take longer to progress through clinical trials than anticipated may fail to receive necessary regulatory approvals or may prove impractical to manufacture in commercial quantities at reasonable cost or with acceptable quality.
The lengthy process of securing FDA approvals for new drugs requires the expenditure of substantial resources. Any failure by us to obtain, or any delay in obtaining regulatory approvals would materially adversely affect our product development efforts and our business overall. Accordingly, we cannot currently estimate, with any degree of certainty, the amount of time or money that we will be required to expend in the future on our product candidates prior to their regulatory approval, if such approval is ever granted. As a result of these uncertainties surrounding the timing and outcome of our clinical trials, we are currently unable to estimate when, if ever, our product candidates that have advanced into clinical testing will generate revenues and cash flows.
We do not track our research and development costs by project. Since we use our research and development resources across multiple research and development projects, we manage our research and development expenses within each of the categories listed in the following table and described in more detail below (in thousands):
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
| ||||
|
Research and Development Expense |
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
Research |
|
$ |
4,309 |
|
$ |
4,185 |
|
|
Preclinical and Clinical Testing |
|
6,851 |
|
4,881 |
| ||
|
Process and Product Development |
|
1,962 |
|
1,798 |
| ||
|
Manufacturing Operations |
|
10,578 |
|
6,297 |
| ||
|
Total Research and Development Expense |
|
$ |
23,700 |
|
$ |
17,161 |
|
Research: Research includes expenses associated with activities to identify and evaluate new targets and to develop and evaluate new antibodies, linkers and cytotoxic agents for our products and in support of our collaborators. Such expenses primarily include personnel, contract services, facilities and lab supplies. Research expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased $124,000 compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. This increase is primarily the result of an increase in salaries and related expenses, particularly higher stock compensation cost. We expect research expenses for fiscal 2013 to be slightly higher than fiscal 2012.
Preclinical and Clinical Testing: Preclinical and clinical testing includes expenses related to preclinical testing of our own and, in certain instances, our collaborators’ product candidates, regulatory activities, and the cost of our own clinical trials. Such expenses include personnel, patient enrollment at our clinical testing sites, consultant fees, contract services, and facility expenses. Preclinical and clinical testing expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased $2.0 million to $6.9 million compared to $4.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. This increase is primarily the result of an increase in clinical trial costs due primarily to site expansion and higher patient enrollment for the IMGN901 007 study and increased costs incurred for the IMGN853 trial which was initiated during the second half of fiscal 2012, as well as an increase in salaries and related expenses, including higher stock compensation cost. We expect preclinical and clinical testing expenses for fiscal 2013 to be significantly higher than fiscal 2012 due to increased activities to advance our wholly owned product candidates.
Process and Product Development: Process and product development expenses include costs for development of clinical and commercial manufacturing processes for our own and collaborator compounds. Such expenses include the costs of personnel, contract services and facility expenses. For the three months ended September 30, 2012, total development expenses increased $164,000 compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. This increase is primarily the result of an increase in salaries and related expenses, particularly higher stock compensation cost. We expect process and product development expenses for fiscal 2013 to be slightly higher than fiscal 2012.
Manufacturing Operations: Manufacturing operations expense includes costs to manufacture preclinical and clinical materials for our own and our collaborator’s product candidates, and quality control and quality assurance activities and costs to support the operation and maintenance of our conjugate manufacturing facility. Such expenses include personnel, raw materials for our and our collaborators’ preclinical studies and clinical trials, development costs with contract manufacturing organizations, manufacturing supplies, and facilities expense. For the three months ended September 30, 2012, manufacturing operations expense increased $4.3 million to $10.6 million compared to $6.3 million in the same period last year. The increase in the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 is primarily the result of (i) an increase in antibody development and supply expense driven primarily by our IMGN901 program and an earlier-stage program; (ii) an increase in cost of clinical materials revenue due to increased orders of such clinical materials from our partners due to timing of supply requirements; (iii) an increase in fill/finish costs driven by increased activities performed for our internal programs; (iv) a decrease in overhead utilization absorbed by the manufacture of clinical materials on behalf of our collaborators; and (v) an increase in salaries and related expenses, including higher stock compensation cost. We expect manufacturing operations expense for fiscal 2013 to be significantly higher than fiscal 2012 due primarily to increased third-party costs to produce finished drug product for clinical use.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased $798,000 to $5.6 million compared to $4.8 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. This increase is primarily due to an increase in salaries and related expenses, particularly stock compensation cost. The higher stock compensation cost in the current period is driven primarily by higher stock prices resulting in higher fair values. We expect general and administrative expenses for fiscal 2013 to be slightly higher than fiscal 2012.
Other Income (Expense), net
Other income (expense), net for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 is included in the following table (in thousands):
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
| ||||
|
Other Income (Expense), net |
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
Interest Income |
|
$ |
46 |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
Other Income (Expense), net |
|
10 |
|
(30 |
) | ||
|
Total Other Income (Expense), net |
|
$ |
56 |
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
June 30, |
| ||
|
|
|
2012 |
|
2012 |
| ||
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
| ||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
233,614 |
|
$ |
160,938 |
|
|
Working capital |
|
223,393 |
|
150,016 |
| ||
|
Shareholders’ equity |
|
157,312 |
|
83,890 |
| ||
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
| ||||
|
|
|
2012 |
|
2011 |
| ||
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
| ||||
|
Cash used for operating activities |
|
$ |
(21,006 |
) |
$ |
(11,565 |
) |
|
Cash used for investing activities |
|
(1,012 |
) |
(592 |
) | ||
|
Cash provided by financing activities |
|
94,694 |
|
716 |
| ||
Cash Flows
We require cash to fund our operating expenses, including the advancement of our own clinical programs, and to make capital expenditures. Historically, we have funded our cash requirements primarily through equity financings in public markets and payments from our collaborators, including equity investments, license fees, milestones and research funding. As of September 30, 2012, we had approximately $233.6 million in cash and cash equivalents. Net cash used for operations was $21.0 million and $11.6 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The principal use of cash in operating activities for all periods presented was to fund our net loss.
Net cash used for investing activities was $1.0 million and $592,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and primarily represents cash outflows for capital expenditures. Capital expenditures, primarily for the purchase of new equipment and leasehold improvements, were $966,000 and $554,000 for the three-month periods ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $94.7 million and $716,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, which represents proceeds from the exercise of approximately 108,000 and 141,000 stock options, respectively. Also, pursuant to a public offering in the current period, we issued and sold 6,250,000 shares of our common stock resulting in net proceeds of $94.0 million.
We anticipate that our current capital resources and expected future collaborator payments under existing collaborations will enable us to meet our operational expenses and capital expenditures through fiscal year 2015. However, we cannot provide assurance that such future collaborative agreement funding will, in fact, be received. Should we or our partners not meet some or all of the terms and conditions of our various collaboration agreements, we may be required to pursue additional strategic partners, secure alternative financing arrangements, and/or defer or limit some or all of our research, development and/or clinical projects.
Contractual Obligations
We are contractually obligated to make potential future success-based regulatory milestone payments in conjunction with certain collaborative agreements. These payments are contingent upon the occurrence of certain future events and, given the nature of these events, it is unclear when, if ever, we may be required to pay such amounts. Further, the timing of any future payment is not reasonably estimable. During the current period, our license agreement with Janssen Biotech was terminated and, accordingly, we are no longer obligated to make $41.0 million of potential future success-based milestone and third-party payments under such agreement. As of September 30, 2012, the maximum amount that may be payable in the future under our current collaborative agreements is approximately $2.0 million.
There have been no other material changes to our contractual obligations during the current period from those disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012.
Forward-Looking Statements
This quarterly report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements relate to analyses and other information which are based on forecasts of future results and estimates of amounts that are not yet determinable. There are a number of factors that could cause actual events or results to be significantly different from those described in the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements might include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following subjects:
· future products revenues, expenses, liquidity and cash needs;
· anticipated agreements with collaboration partners;
· anticipated clinical trial timelines or results;
· anticipated research and product development results;
· projected regulatory timelines;
· descriptions of plans or objectives of management for future operations, products or services;
· forecasts of future economic performance; and
· descriptions or assumptions underlying or relating to any of the above items.
Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate to historical or current facts. They use words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “opportunity,” “plan,” “potential,” “believe” or words of similar meaning. They may also use words such as “will,” “would,” “should,” “could” or “may”. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this report. You should review carefully the risks and uncertainties identified in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including the cautionary information set forth under Part II, Item 1A., Risk Factors, and our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2012. We may not revise these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this report or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
None.
ITEM 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk
Our market risks, and the ways we manage them, are summarized in Part II, Item 7A, “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012. Since then there have been no material changes to our market risks or to our management of such risks.
ITEM 4. Controls and Procedures
(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The Company’s management, with the participation of its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Based on such evaluation, the Company’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were adequate and effective.
(b) Changes in Internal Controls
There have not been any changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended September 30, 2012 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
You should carefully review and consider the information regarding certain factors that could materially affect our business, financial condition or future results set forth under Item 1A. (Risk Factors) in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012. There have been no material changes from the factors disclosed in our 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K, although we may disclose changes to such factors or disclose additional factors from time to time in our future filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
|
31.1 |
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
31.2 |
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32† |
|
Certifications of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
101.INS |
|
XBRL Instance Document |
|
101.SCH |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema |
|
101.CAL |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase |
|
101.DEF |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase |
|
101.LAB |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase |
|
101.PRE |
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase |
† Furnished, not filed.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
ImmunoGen, Inc. | |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: October 31, 2012 |
By: |
/s/ Daniel M. Junius |
|
|
|
Daniel M. Junius |
|
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: October 31, 2012 |
By: |
/s/ Gregory D. Perry |
|
|
|
Gregory D. Perry |
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |