Revance Therapeutics, Inc. - Annual Report: 2013 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013

or

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File No. 001-36297

Revance Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

7555 Gateway Boulevard

Newark, California 94560

(510) 742-3400

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

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

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    Yes  x    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):

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

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on February 6, 2014, based upon the closing price of $26.85 as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market, was approximately $271,428,503. Excludes 8,542,685 shares of the registrant’s common stock held by current executive officers, directors, and stockholders that the registrant has concluded are affiliates of the registrant. The registrant has elected to use February 6, 2014 as the calculation date, which was the initial trading date of the registrant’s common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market, since on June 30, 2013 (the last business day of the registrant’s second fiscal quarter), the registrant was a privately-held concern.

On March 28, 2014, 18,651,754 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $0.001 par value, were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

“Revance Therapeutics,” the Revance logos and other trademarks or service marks of Revance appearing in this annual report on Form 10-K are the property of Revance. This Form 10-K contains additional trade names, trademarks and service marks of others, which are the property of their respective owners. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other companies.

Table of Contents

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or Form 10-K, contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, which are subject to the “safe harbor” created by that section. The forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K are contained principally under “Item 1. Business,” “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the following words: “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “project,” “potential,” “continue,” “ongoing” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. These statements involve risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Form 10-K, we caution you that these statements are based on a combination of facts and factors currently known by us and our projections of the future, about which we cannot be certain. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning the following:

Table of Contents

In addition, you should refer to “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K for a discussion of these and other important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. Also, forward-looking statements represent our estimates and assumptions only as of the date of this Form 10-K. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

Table of Contents

PART I

Overview

We are a clinical stage specialty biopharmaceutical company focused on the development, manufacturing and commercialization of novel botulinum toxin products for multiple aesthetic and therapeutic applications. Botulinum toxin is a well-characterized protein currently used in numerous aesthetic and therapeutic indications and represents a multi-billion dollar market in the United States and other countries. All currently approved and commercially available botulinum toxin products are administered by injection. Our lead product candidate, RT001, is a topical formulation of botulinum toxin type A, which we believe has significant advantages over existing injectable products and could significantly expand the botulinum toxin market beyond existing users. Our second product candidate, RT002, is a novel injectable formulation of botulinum toxin type A designed to be more targeted and longer lasting than currently available botulinum toxin injectable products. Both of our product candidates combine our purified botulinum toxin with our proprietary TransMTS^® peptide delivery system. We own the worldwide rights to both of our product candidates.

We are evaluating RT001 in a broad clinical program that includes aesthetic indications such as lateral canthal lines, the wrinkles around the eyes which are commonly referred to as crow’s feet lines, and therapeutic indications such as hyperhidrosis, or excessive sweating, migraine headache and allergic rhinitis, or inflammation of the mucous membrane inside the nose. RT001 is currently in a Phase 3 clinical development program in the United States for the treatment of crow’s feet lines and has the potential to be the first approved non-injectable botulinum toxin product. RT001’s primary advantages include painless topical administration, ease of use and limited dependence on administration technique by physicians and medical staff. These advantages should improve the experience of patients undergoing botulinum toxin procedures and make RT001 more suitable for many more indications than currently approved injectable botulinum toxin products.

The first indications we are pursuing are in the field of dermatology. According to Global Data, the largest use for botulinum toxins is in aesthetic dermatology, which was estimated to generate approximately $1.4 billion in worldwide sales in 2013. If approved, we believe RT001 can expand the overall botulinum toxin aesthetic market by appealing to new patients who would prefer a needle-free approach to treatment. The aesthetic dermatology market is attractive because we believe that patients in this market tend to be open to trying new products and are willing to pay for aesthetic procedures out of pocket, reducing reliance on reimbursement. We are focused on this market not only because of its size and growth potential but also because, in the United States and Europe, this market can be easily accessed by a small specialty sales force and distributor network.

We are in a Phase 3 clinical development program of RT001 in North America for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, and we plan to initiate an additional Phase 3 clinical trial in Europe in 2015. We are initiating an open label Phase 3 safety clinical trial for RT001 in the first half of 2014. We expect to receive primary efficacy data from a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial of RT001 in the second half of 2014. We plan to complete the Phase 3 program for the treatment of crow’s feet lines and file for regulatory approvals in the United States and Europe in 2016. To date, we have conducted thirteen clinical trials for RT001, with a total of over 1,400 subjects, for the treatment of crow’s feet lines. In our Phase 2 clinical trials, RT001 has demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction in crow’s feet lines that is visible to both physicians and patients. These and other studies have also indicated that RT001 is well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to study drug or study treatment procedures or other safety concerns.

We are also developing RT001 for therapeutic applications where botulinum toxin has shown efficacy and that are particularly well suited for needle-free treatments. We have successfully completed initial Phase 2 clinical trials for the treatment of primary axillary, or underarm, hyperhidrosis, and for the prevention of migraine headache. We expect to initiate additional clinical trials for the development of RT001 for these and other indications.

1

Table of Contents

In addition to our topical product candidate, we are developing an injectable formulation of botulinum toxin type A, which we refer to as RT002, for indications where deeper delivery of the botulinum toxin is required and a longer lasting effect is desired. We believe RT002 can provide more targeted delivery of botulinum toxin to intended treatment sites while reducing the unwanted spread of botulinum toxin to adjacent areas. We believe that this delivery, enabled by our proprietary peptide technology, permits safe administration of higher doses of botulinum toxin and can result in longer lasting effect. We have demonstrated these properties in preclinical studies and are currently testing RT002 in a four-cohort, dose escalating, open label Phase 1/2 clinical trial outside of the United States for the treatment of glabellar lines, the vertical lines between the eyebrows and above the nose. Initial data from this clinical trial indicated that RT002 is safe and efficacious at all four doses. We anticipate reporting duration data from this trial in the first half of 2014. Based upon the data analyzed, we plan to further develop RT002 for the treatment of glabellar lines by initiating a Phase 2 clinical trial in 2014. In addition, we plan to study RT002 in therapeutic indications already approved for botulinum toxin, such as movement disorders and overactive bladder. These indications require deeper delivery of the botulinum toxin and are likely to be better served by injectable delivery of RT002.

The Botulinum Toxin Market

Botulinum toxin is a protein and neurotoxin produced by Clostridium botulinum. Since 1989 botulinum toxin in an injectable dose form has been used to treat a variety of aesthetic and therapeutic indications in the United States. Botulinum toxin has been approved for a variety of therapeutic indications including blepharospasm, or uncontrolled blinking, and strabismus, or crossed eyes, associated with neurological movement disorders, facial wrinkles, hyperhidrosis, migraine headache and, most recently, overactive bladder conditions. In the United States, botulinum toxin has been approved to treat two aesthetic indications, glabellar lines and lateral canthal lines, although we believe that botulinum toxin is widely used for other aesthetic indications. Only three products, Allergan’s Botox^®, Ipsen and Valeant’s Dysport^®, and Merz’s Xeomin^®, each of which is delivered in an injectable form, have been approved for the treatment of glabellar lines in the United States.

According to GIA, the worldwide injectable botulinum toxin market has grown from $1.1 billion in 2004 to over $2.4 billion in 2012. These growth rates do not include additional market-expansion that might result from the development of botulinum toxin in a topical dose form. We expect continued growth of the botulinum toxin market to be driven by new indications and new geographies. According to the FDA, there are over 100 active clinical trials for a wide range of uses of botulinum toxin, with more than one-third of these identified as being in Phase 3 clinical development. While we are unaware of any clinical trials for potentially competitive topical products that may reach the market before RT001, it is possible that clinical trials for such potentially competitive topical products have occurred or are occurring.

Limitations of Current Injectable Products

We believe that, despite historical growth and anticipated continued rapid growth, the growth of the injectable botulinum toxin market will be hampered by several factors:

2

Table of Contents

As a result, we believe the botulinum toxin market could expand beyond the current patient base with the introduction of a topical formulation such as RT001. Based on our market research, a topical treatment would address key consumer barriers for injectable botulinum toxin products. We believe that a topical treatment could expand the use of botulinum toxin to a wider range of physicians and allow those physicians who currently perform botulinum toxin procedures to do so on a larger number of patients. Additionally, our research indicates that a topical treatment can improve the profitability of physicians’ practices by increasing the number of procedures per patient.

The Opportunity for Botulinum Toxins for Aesthetic Indications

Today’s culture places significant value on physical appearance, leading to widespread adoption of anti-aging and aesthetic treatments. The aesthetic market has grown dramatically in the United States, driven by a large population of consumers who are looking to delay signs of aging and improve general appearance. In 2012, consumers spent almost $11.0 billion on over 10.1 million physician-administered surgical and non-surgical aesthetic procedures in the United States, according to American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, or ASAPS, annual statistics. A strong consumer preference for non-surgical options and the increasing availability of effective alternatives have prompted adoption of non-surgical aesthetic procedures by a broader patient population. These trends have made non-surgical procedures the primary driver of growth in the aesthetic medicine market, accounting for 83% of the total number of procedures performed in 2012.

Injectable botulinum toxin treatments are the single largest cosmetic procedure in the United States and the rest of the world. According to GlobalData, in 2012 clinicians spent an estimated $1.3 billion globally on injectable botulinum toxin for aesthetic procedures and such spending is expected to grow at a compounded annual growth rate of 14% from 2011 through 2018.

Despite the fact that, according to ASAPS annual statistics, injectable botulinum toxin treatments have almost doubled in the past ten years, a significant number of consumers who have received other cosmetic procedures, such as laser resurfacing and chemical peels, have resisted trying an injectable botulinum toxin treatment.

We commissioned consumer-market research in 2012 to test the RT001 product concept. As part of this research, a third party surveyed 630 women who were 30 years old or older with household income of $50,000 or higher and who would consider aesthetic treatments. We believe these consumers were representative of the 27 million women in the United States who fit this demographic profile. The participants were recruited and interviewed online. Based on the data collected:

3

Table of Contents

According to this research, the three key barriers to entry cited by consumers are:

We commissioned two additional studies in 2009 using the same third party to gauge physician and consumer interest in the RT001 product concept. The first was among 201 physicians across the range of aesthetic specialties and with varying level of cosmetic revenue. The data showed that 82% of these practitioners were either extremely or very interested in using RT001 in their practices. This data was consistent across specialties (79% among dermatologists; 88% among plastic surgeons) and the range of practice revenue dedicated to aesthetic procedures. Additionally, this study showed that 20% of the patients in these offices had received injectable botulinum toxin procedures and that these physicians would recommend RT001 to 43% of their patients. The second study was among consumers with a focus on users of injectable botulinum toxin products. Among these consumers, 80% said that they were either extremely or very interested in using RT001. Importantly, two-thirds of these consumers said they would add RT001 to their current injectable treatment regimen, suggesting incremental usage.

Based on feedback from key opinion leaders across multiple aesthetic specialties, we believe consumers will find a longer lasting, more targeted injectable botulinum toxin product preferable to those currently available.

The Opportunity for Botulinum Toxins for Therapeutic Indications

While currently approved botulinum toxin products may be better known for their aesthetic applications, according to GIA, the fastest-growing segment of the botulinum toxin market in the United States and Europe is actually for therapeutic indications. This growth has been driven largely by the approval of botulinum toxin products in new indications such as preventive treatment of migraine headache in 2010 and overactive bladder in 2011. Botulinum toxin’s ability to affect neuromuscular junctions, muscle activity or the release of neuropeptides, neurotransmitters and neuromediators in a controlled manner has enabled it to be developed and used in a wide range of therapeutic indications. Botulinum toxin products in their injectable form have been approved for multiple therapeutic indications including:

In addition to these approved therapeutic indications, botulinum toxin products are being evaluated in clinical trials in multiple other therapeutic indications including acne, rosacea, skin and wound healing, scar reduction, hair loss treatments, plantar fasciitis and several muscular-skeletal conditions.

While botulinum toxin products have been very effective in the treatment of many conditions, there are limitations to the use of the currently approved products in their injectable form. For example, in the case of hyperhidrosis, injectable botulinum toxin products require up to 30 injections in the underarms, an area that is particularly sensitive to pain, and a procedure that is reimbursed to physicians at a low rate relative to the time required to perform the procedure. As a result, the use of Botox^®, which is the only injectable botulinum toxin product currently approved for hyperhidrosis, has been limited. In the case of chronic migraine headache, injectable botulinum toxin products require as many as 31 injections in different parts of the head and neck.

4

Table of Contents

As a result of the pain associated with injections and other limitations associated with injectable botulinum toxin products, we believe that there is a significant need for a painless, topically administered and highly effective botulinum toxin. We also believe that there is an opportunity to develop and seek approval for a botulinum toxin product in therapeutic indications, such as allergic rhinitis, where there are currently no approved botulinum toxin products.

Our Product Candidates

We are developing two proprietary product candidates containing botulinum toxin type A as the active drug ingredient. RT001, our lead product candidate, is a topical gel formulation of botulinum toxin type A. RT001 is applied to the skin and uses our proprietary TransMTS^® peptide technology to enable delivery of botulinum toxin across the skin, eliminating the need for injections. RT002 is our injectable formulation of botulinum toxin type A, also using our proprietary peptide technology, which we believe can result in longer lasting effect. Unlike currently available injectable botulinum toxin products, neither formulation of our product candidates contains albumin or any other animal or human-derived materials. We believe this reduces the risk of the transmission of certain viral diseases. We plan to develop these two product candidates for multiple aesthetic and therapeutic applications. Our initial focus is to develop and commercialize RT001 for indications where topical application provides a meaningful advantage over injectable treatment.

RT001 — Our Topical Formulation of Botulinum Toxin

RT001, our lead product candidate, is a topical gel formulation of botulinum toxin type A in a proprietary single-use administration apparatus. The botulinum toxin in RT001 blocks neuromuscular transmission by binding to acceptor sites on motor or sympathetic nerve terminals, entering the nerve terminals and inhibiting the release of specific neurotransmitters. For example, when applied topically around the eye, RT001 produces partial interruption of the nerve connection to the orbicularis oculi muscle resulting in a localized reduction in muscle activity and improvement in crow’s feet lines and may offer improvement in skin texture and luminosity of the skin. When applied topically for the treatment of hyperhidrosis, RT001 produces temporary interruption of the nerve connection to the sweat and eccrine glands resulting in local reduction in sweating. When applied topically for the prevention of migraine headache, we believe that RT001 inhibits release of neuropeptides and other neurotransmitters relevant to migraine pain and in our Phase 1/2 clinical trial showed a reduction in both the frequency and intensity of migraine headache following a single treatment with RT001.

RT001 is applied to the skin and uses our proprietary TransMTS^® technology consisting of a proprietary peptide, to enable delivery of botulinum toxin across the skin, eliminating the need for injections. We plan to supply RT001 in a single-use apparatus for reconstitution and administration that contains a vial of lyophilized, or freeze-dried, drug product and a vial of diluent for reconstitution. When the contents of these vials are

5

Table of Contents

combined, all within the single-use apparatus, the diluent reconstitutes the freeze-dried drug product back to its original form to allow administration. RT001 is administered as a gel and spread over the treatment area with a gloved finger, where it remains for 30 minutes. The application process is a simple procedure which requires minimal time to prepare and can be applied by either physician or medical staff. The gel is then removed by a series of gentle cleansing wipes, deactivated and disposed.

The development of RT001 in the United States has been conducted under an IND filed with the FDA in 2008. This IND covers the treatment of crow’s feet lines and primary underarm hyperhidrosis. A second IND for prevention of migraine headache was filed in October 2012. Clinical development in other territories, including Mexico, Canada, Europe, Singapore and Australia, is conducted under applicable national clinical trial applications.

Our global strategy is to support regulatory and marketing applications in the United States, Europe, Canada, Mexico and Latin America. We plan to submit our initial U.S. filing, a Biologics License Application, or BLA, for the treatment of crow’s feet lines in 2016 to the FDA.

We intend to file a European Union Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, in 2016. We also plan to submit marketing applications, on our own or through partners, in key Asian countries, Mexico and Canada. We anticipate that approval in Mexico will support other Latin American approvals.

Crow’s Feet Lines — Our Lead Indication for RT001

Crow’s feet lines are skin wrinkles in the outer corner of the eye area, which are commonly caused by aging. Consumers in general, and women in particular, believe that the eye area is the first place where they notice the signs of aging. Consumers also believe that the perception of aging is affected by the quality of the skin. A large segment of the anti-aging topical cosmeceutical market is targeted towards improvement in skin texture and luminosity of the skin in the eye area. Despite the fact that until September 2013 there were no botulinum toxin products approved for crow’s feet lines, we believe that there has been significant use of botulinum toxin for this indication given the desire of consumers to address the condition.

We believe that RT001 provides the following benefits to patients for treatment of crow’s feet lines, as compared to traditional botulinum toxin treatments that are administered by injection:

We believe that RT001 provides the following benefits to physicians:

6

Table of Contents

Development of RT001 for Treatment of Crow’s Feet Lines

We have conducted thirteen clinical trials, with a total of over 1,400 subjects, for the treatment of crow’s feet lines and are currently in Phase 3 clinical development in the United States.

Phase 3 Clinical Trials. Based on our discussions with the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory authorities, we believe that the investigational plan outlined below for the RT001 Phase 3 program will support approval of RT001 in the United States, Canada and European Union for the treatment of moderate to severe crow’s feet lines.

7

Table of Contents

RT001 Global Phase 3 Program for Crow’s Feet Lines

After completing our Phase 2b clinical trials, we modified the formulation of the RT001 diluent by adding two ingredients to improve its stability. We then conducted a Phase 3 clinical trial with this new diluent formulation to evaluate efficacy and safety of RT001. Data generated from this clinical trial were inconsistent with the data from our previous three Phase 2b clinical trials for the treatment of crow’s feet lines. Specifically, we observed no improvement from baseline in either the placebo or RT001 group. Based upon a thorough analysis of possible causes, we determined that the addition of the two ingredients to the diluent was the likely cause of the loss of efficacy in our Phase 3 clinical trial. We have since obtained stability data to confirm that the Phase 2b formulation has adequate commercial stability.

Subsequently, we returned to the original diluent formulation used in our Phase 2b clinical trials and initiated CL035, a two-cohort Phase 2 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial to confirm efficacy. The first cohort included 42 patients. In this first cohort, we observed improvements in wrinkle severity at rest from the base line comparable to that observed in our previous Phase 2b clinical trials. However, we identified a randomization error, whereby a subset of patients received RT001 instead of placebo, and vice versa. After correcting this randomization error, the overall results showed statistical significance, consistent with our Phase 2 clinical trials.

We conducted a second cohort of CL035 to confirm that the data observed in the first cohort was consistent absent the randomization error, and to expand the number of patients included in the trial in an effort to achieve statistical significance in the other endpoints measured. This second cohort included 40 patients, bringing the total size of the combined study to 82.

The second cohort of CL035 separately supported statistical trends shown in the randomization-corrected data generated from the first cohort. The second cohort p-values for the clinical endpoints were as follows: the Investigator Global Assessment, or IGA (Rest) ³ 2-point, p=0.13; IGA (Rest) ³ 1-point, p=0.019; the Patient Severity Assessment, or PSA ³ 2-point, p=0.53; IGA (Smile) ³ 1-point, p=0.002; and IGA (Smile) ³ 2-point, p=ns.

The CL035 trial confirmed that a single treatment of RT001 with the diluent formulation used in Phase 2b studies had a statistically and numerically significant treatment effect compared to placebo at rest and at smile at week 4. The magnitude of improvement in wrinkle severity from baseline seen in our CL035 study is comparable to the data generated from our CL017 and CL024 Phase 2b studies.

We plan to initiate a long-term open label Phase 3 safety clinical trial in 2014. This clinical trial is designed to evaluate the long-term safety of multiple treatment cycles with repeat-dosing when subjects revert to moderate or severe crow’s feet lines at intervals of not less than 90 days. This trial will allow up to two years of treatment with up to four exposures per year. This long-term safety trial will evaluate late-onset adverse events and rare events as well as the safety of repeat-doses over multiple cycles.

8

Table of Contents

The two U.S. pivotal trials will utilize the same study design and evaluate efficacy and safety of RT001 after single administration compared to placebo, with follow-up for approximately 150 days to evaluate duration of response. A third pivotal clinical trial will be conducted in the European Union to support European Union marketing applications. The European trial will evaluate efficacy and safety of RT001 after single administration compared to placebo with a three month follow-up for safety.

We have designed the long-term clinical trials to support a safety database adequate for both domestic and international marketing applications, and will continue to conduct clinical trials with periodic, thorough analyses of benefits and risks. The number of subjects proposed for safety studies may be substantially higher than the anticipated number of subjects needed to demonstrate efficacy. Therefore, we anticipate studying more than 2,000 subjects at dosage levels intended for commercial use, with at least 1,800 subjects with duration of six months at the time of BLA submission. The majority of the 1,800 subjects will have received multiple courses of treatment. Additionally, we anticipate at least 300 subjects with duration of twelve months to receive three to four treatment cycles at the time of our BLA submission.

Additionally, concurrent with our Phase 3 program, we will conduct a Phase 1, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, using the same commercial formulation and delivery apparatus of RT001 for use in the Phase 3 clinical trials, to determine the irritation and sensitizing potential of RT001 in 200 volunteers utilizing a repeat exposure test design.

Assuming successful completion of our Phase 3 clinical trials, we plan to file marketing applications in the United States, European Union and Canada. We plan to submit our U.S. BLA and our European MAA in 2016. We anticipate that approval in the United States and the European Union would then support approvals in Latin America such as Brazil and certain other territories in Asia.

European Union Agency Interactions. We requested scientific guidance from the EMA on the development of RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines and the proposed Phase 3 program in March 2012. The EMA scientific guidance for the crow’s feet lines Phase 3 program was completed following a meeting with the EMA in August 2012. The EMA provided comments on Quality, Nonclinical and Clinical programs. Overall, the EMA agreed with the proposed programs and provided details and suggestions to be considered for our marketing application. We have taken the EMA comments into consideration in the Phase 3 program and will provide data to support the various requests in the marketing application.

End-of-Phase 2. After our Phase 2 clinical trials, we used the FDA’s Formal Dispute Resolution process and obtained written confirmation in May 2012 from the FDA that we had achieved End-of-Phase 2 and that our proposed indication, primary endpoint assessment and primary endpoint measurement were acceptable for Phase 3 clinical trials. We have incorporated the FDA’s comments during this process into our Phase 3 program. Specifically, the primary efficacy assessments are being conducted at rest and additional assessments are being obtained at smile.

Phase 2b Clinical Trials. We have conducted three Phase 2b clinical trials of RT001 to evaluate a 25 ng/mL dose of botulinum toxin. Two of these trials, CL024 and CL017, were double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and enrolled a total of 270 subjects.

CL024 evaluated a single administration of RT001 compared to placebo for the treatment of moderate to severe crow’s feet lines. Subjects were treated with either RT001 or placebo at baseline and evaluated at regular intervals up to 20 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite endpoint based upon the Investigator Global Assessment of Lateral Canthal Lines, or IGA-LCL, severity assessment and the Patient Severity Assessment, or PSA, at week four. Responders were defined as having at least two-point improvement in both IGA-LCL severity and PSA from baseline. The trial results confirmed that RT001 had a statistical and numerical treatment effect compared to placebo at week four.

9

Table of Contents

CL017 evaluated a single dose of RT001 against three comparator groups for the treatment of moderate to severe crow’s feet lines. Subjects were randomized at baseline to receive one of four treatments: RT001, peptide alone, toxin alone or placebo. The primary analysis was to first demonstrate that the treatment effect of the peptide alone and toxin alone groups was similar to that of the placebo at week four based on the IGA-LCL severity scale. A responder was defined as a subject with at least a two-point improvement in both crow’s feet lines areas based on IGA-LCL severity scale. RT001 demonstrated superior efficacy both statistically and clinically compared to the combined other three groups as well as the individual comparisons to the other three groups for all efficacy endpoints. Furthermore, there were no clinically meaningful or significant differences in safety assessments observed between RT001 and each of the other three groups.

Both the IGA-LCL and PSA scales are scoring criteria widely used to measure the effectiveness of aesthetic therapies. The IGA-LCL scale is used by the clinicians and the PSA scale is used by the patients. For the patient to be considered a treatment responder or treatment success, the patient needed to have at least two-point improvement from baseline measured using both IGA-LCL and PSA. Therefore, both the clinician and the patient needed to see improvement by at least two points on the scales for the patient to be considered a treatment success. This demonstrates that the treatment success criteria were very stringent in Phase 2b clinical studies designed to evaluate the efficacy of treatment. The treatment responses across distinct clinical trials and endpoints were high and consistent, demonstrating not only the robustness of the treatment effect but also that all the physician and patient scales employed measure similar concepts. Additionally, the low placebo rates observed across all scales and endpoints confirms that the scales and endpoints are not overly sensitive.

The vast majority of the adverse events were mild, transient and not related to the trial procedure or the study drug. There were no notable differences compared to the comparator groups and no subjects discontinued from the trial date due to adverse events. Adverse events included brow elevation, headache, infections, eye irritation and skin reactions. There was no evidence of the regional spread of botulinum toxin based on nerve and local muscle strength evaluations. There were no serious adverse events or systemic safety concerns related to the study drug or treatment procedures or evidence of any systemic exposure based on clinical laboratory results and related evaluations. There was no evidence that adverse event rates were trending higher as we escalated the dose.

Study investigators evaluated each adverse event from each clinical trial and determined if it was related to the trial procedure, the study drug or other cause. Our study investigators were selected based on their experience and knowledge of botulinum toxin, including use of marketed botulinum toxin products routinely in their practice. These study investigators made their determinations by evaluating the nature of the adverse event (including the timing of the event relative to the time of the drug application, and severity and duration of the adverse event), the physical status of the patient during that adverse event and the medical history of the patient.

CL025 was a multi-center, open label, safety study evaluating the safety profile of repeat treatment of moderate to severe crow’s feet lines using a 25ng/mL dose of RT001 topical gel. Forty patients were enrolled in this clinical trial. Study patients received the first treatment at day zero and a second treatment at week four. The label will require patients to wait for twelve weeks before receiving a second dose, and therefore the repeat dose for this study was at an accelerated frequency. This clinical trial showed no differences in frequency, type or severity of adverse events observed after the second dose versus a single dose. It demonstrated that two sequential applications of RT001 were safe and well tolerated, even at an accelerated frequency.

RT001 Safety

Clinical Program. We have completed thirteen clinical trials, with a total of over 1,400 subjects, for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, of which 1,031 subjects have received doses of RT001 containing 1.1 to 25 ng/mL of botulinum toxin per subject and peptide exposures up to 30 mcg/mL per subject. Repeat doses of RT001 have been administered in the Phase 2 trials and the Phase 1 trial with cumulative exposures up to 50 ng per subject. RT001 was shown to be safe, with statistically significant and clinically meaningful results in these Phase 1 and Phase 2 trials. In all concentrations of peptide and botulinum toxin studied, RT001 was well tolerated with no

10

Table of Contents

serious adverse events related to study drug or study treatment procedures or safety concerns. In particular, there were no systemic or local safety concerns at the site of application or evidence of spread and no significant differences in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events.

Nonclinical Program. In accordance with international guidelines and in consultation with the FDA, we have also conducted a broad nonclinical development program for RT001. The program included preclinical efficacy, safety bioavailability and single and repeat dose toxicity studies of RT001, including chronic studies of up to nine months duration. Genotoxicity, local tolerance and formulation bridging studies were also conducted, along with reproductive toxicity testing. Together, these studies supported the clinical development and anticipated future safety labeling of RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines.

Development of RT001 for Treatment of Hyperhidrosis

According to published medical articles, hyperhidrosis affects an estimated eight million people in the United States, one million of whom have severe hyperhidrosis. Prevalence in the United States is slightly higher among men than women, but women are more likely to take action to have the condition treated. Only 38% of those affected by hyperhidrosis seek treatment. A 2004 survey by the International Hyperhidrosis Society provides a breakdown of currently available treatments and percentage of respondents that use each of the following to treat their hyperhidrosis symptoms:

Injectable botulinum toxin is among the currently available treatments for hyperhidrosis. Allergan’s Botox^® was approved in 2004 for underarm hyperhidrosis and remains the only botulinum toxin approved for the treatment of hyperhidrosis. However, the treatment requires up to 30 injections in the underarms. Having a topical solution could encourage more patients to seek treatment without having to suffer the pain of numerous injections. From the physicians’ standpoint, injections are very time-consuming and reimbursement for the procedure is low. RT001 could significantly decrease the physician time and effort necessary for the procedure and potentially make the procedure more profitable for a physician’s practice.

We also believe that the appeal of RT001 may go beyond the estimated eight million hyperhidrosis sufferers and appeal to the one-third of all U.S. adults who believe they have too much underarm sweat. According to a 2008 survey by the International Hyperhidrosis Society, 60% of all U.S. adults reported that they would be “embarrassed” or “very embarrassed” by visible underarm sweat stains, and 70% of those U.S. adults who believe they have too much underarm sweat took steps to hide their condition.

Primary underarm hyperhidrosis affects over one million individuals in the United States alone and similar proportions globally. This condition has a negative impact on the overall quality of life of patients due to the debilitating psychosocial and emotional consequences of excessive sweating as well as significant medical dermatologic impact. Injected delivery of botulinum toxin has been validated as a therapeutically effective pharmaceutical agent for the treatment of hyperhidrosis. However, the injected treatment has not been widely embraced by hyperhidrosis patients because of significant pain and trauma associated with the large number of required injections.

Data from our initial Phase 2 dose escalation hyperhidrosis clinical trial suggest the feasibility of treating primary underarm hyperhidrosis with RT001. As the dose of RT001 increased, patients showed reduced sweating

11

Table of Contents

and improvement in their self-assessed sweating severity. To test for sweat production, the skin was first treated with iodine solution that is allowed to dry, and then followed by dusting of corn starch and sweat assessment period of ten minutes. The occurrence of sweat causes the starch and iodine to dissolve permitting their reaction to form the dark staining pattern observed. Reduction in the dark staining intensity signals a reduction in sweat.

This initial Phase 2 clinical trial was a double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled multi-center study evaluating the safety, tolerability and efficacy of using RT001 to treat primary underarm hyperhidrosis in adults. This clinical trial was designed to enroll 36 subjects, with twelve subjects in each dosing group, or cohort. The safety of each cohort was evaluated by an independent data safety committee prior to escalating the dose to the next level. Subjects were randomized to receive a single treatment of RT001 or placebo in each cohort. After receiving the treatment, the patients were followed for 28 days in the clinical trial.

Based on data generated from clinical trials to date, we plan to initiate additional clinical trials for the treatment of hyperhidrosis with RT001. These future trials will evaluate the efficacy of a higher dose of 25 ng/mL or more as compared to placebo and permit evaluation of the RT001 dose response to treatment of signs and symptoms of primary underarm hyperhidrosis. These trials will assess the quality of life measure Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale and the change in production of underarm sweat by gravimetric measurement and Investigator Global Assessment of Minor’s Iodine Starch Testing for underarm sweating. This Phase 2 study will establish whether this new botulinum toxin dose is adequate or whether further dose escalation in this clinical indication is needed prior to definitive safety and efficacy testing.

Development of RT001 for Prevention of Migraine Headache

Migraine headache is a central nervous system disorder characterized by moderate-to-severe headache and often includes additional symptoms such as nausea and vomiting. The global market for treatment of migraine headache was estimated to be $3.8 billion in 2009. Migraine headache affects 36 million people in the United States, 14 million of whom suffer from chronic migraine headache. In the United States, this debilitating condition results in 113 million lost workdays and costs employers $13.0 billion each year, according to the Migraine Research Foundation. Injected delivery of botulinum toxin has been validated as a therapeutically effective pharmaceutical agent for the preventive treatment of migraine headache. Botox^® was approved for the treatment of chronic migraine headache in 2010. However, the treatment requires up to 31 injections in a patient’s head and neck and may have significant side effects, including the potential for injected botulinum toxin to diffuse to neighboring sites causing muscle weakness and pain, sometimes even triggering migraine headache attacks.

We have generated preliminary data that supports the feasibility of treating chronic migraine headache with topical application of RT001. In our initial Phase 2 clinical trial, RT001 was shown to be effective for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine headache. In this trial, RT001 was applied topically to five areas on the head, left on for 30 minutes and removed by a series of cleansing wipes. This trial, which uses a 25 ng/mL dose, demonstrated statistically significant improvement (43.8% for RT001 versus 10.5% for placebo) of the composite endpoint of a Headache Impact Test-6, or HIT-6, score, number of migraines and migraine intensity.

For our next Phase 2 clinical trial, we plan to enroll and treat 90 human subjects with migraine headache using RT001 in a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled dose-ranging clinical trial design. This trial will provide new information on the treatment of subjects suffering migraine headache with RT001 including the reduction of headache frequency and severity and change in quality of life as reflected by a HIT-6 score and further characterize the dose-response relationship of RT001 in migraine headache to identify the optimal dose to be carried forward into later stage clinical trials.

12

Table of Contents

RT001 for Treatment of Other Indications

Based on the results of our current preclinical studies and clinical trials, we will determine further development of other indications for RT001, such as:

RT002 — Our Injectable Formulation of Botulinum Toxin

In addition to our topical product candidate, we are developing an injectable formulation of botulinum toxin type A, which we refer to as RT002, for indications where deeper delivery of the botulinum toxin is required and a longer lasting effect is desired. We believe RT002 can provide more targeted delivery of botulinum toxin to intended treatment sites while reducing the unwanted spread of botulinum toxin to adjacent areas. We believe this could permit longer lasting effect and safe administration of botulinum toxin, even in a higher targeted doses. These properties, longer lasting effect and less spread of RT002, have been demonstrated in preclinical studies and are currently being tested in the four-cohort Phase 1/2 clinical dose escalation trial outside the United States for improvement of glabellar lines. Initial data from the first four cohorts, which included an aggregate of 48 patients, indicates that RT002 is safe and efficacious. This data showed that 98% of the study patients achieved 1-point improvement, 67% achieved 2-point improvement and 94% achieved “none” or “mild” scores on the Glabellar Lines Severity Scale. Based upon the data analyzed, we plan to further develop RT002 for the treatment of glabellar lines by initiating a Phase 2 clinical trial in 2014. In addition, we plan to study RT002 in therapeutic indications already approved for botulinum toxin, such as movement disorders and overactive bladder. These indications require deeper delivery of the botulinum toxin and are likely to be better served by injectable delivery of RT002.

Our Technology

Our Proprietary TransMTS^® Technology Platform

Our TransMTS^® peptide technology serves different purposes depending on whether it is used in a topical formulation, such as in RT001, or in an injectable formulation, such as in RT002. In a topical formulation, the TransMTS^® peptide technology enables transmembrane delivery of large macromolecules, such as our botulinum toxin type A, to the targeted tissue and eliminates the need for injections or other invasive procedures. In an

13

Table of Contents

injectable formulation, the TransMTS^® peptide technology restricts the active macromolecule to the target site and reduces unwanted spread to other neighboring tissues.

The TransMTS^® proprietary peptides are single, straight-chain, peptides which have two distinct types of domains:

We believe our TransMTS^® peptide technology could be applied to a range of active ingredient molecules. We have begun to leverage our TransMTS^® platform to develop additional products through partnering arrangements and may use our technology platform to develop additional proprietary products.

Our Proprietary Botulinum Toxin-Peptide Complex

Our proprietary botulinum toxin-peptide complex has two components that contribute to overall activity. First, our TransMTS^® peptide provides the mechanism of delivery across the skin and restricts the toxin molecule to the target site. Second, the botulinum toxin type A provides the mechanism of pharmacologic action and is responsible for the drug effects demonstrated in our clinical trials.

RT001 Botulinum Toxin-Peptide Complex

In RT001, our proprietary peptide, RTP004, carries and releases botulinum toxin to a defined depth of penetration targeting the mid-dermis, which is an appropriate depth of skin penetration for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, hyperhidrosis, migraine headache, pain syndromes and other conditions.

Our nonclinical and clinical data show that the absorption enhancer peptide is necessary for the botulinum toxin to cross the skin and have pharmacologic effect. Our data also show that the peptide alone does not have pharmacologic action and that the botulinum toxin molecule without the peptide cannot cross the skin to achieve its effect.

RT001 is applied to the skin as a clear gel. The gel is temperature-triggered so that it is liquid at ambient temperature and forms a gel as it warms upon contact with the skin. RT001 quickly reaches a viscosity sufficient to remain in place in the defined treatment area.

RT001 Mechanism for Delivery of Botulinum Toxin

The absorption enhancer peptide has two pathways for the delivery of the botulinum toxin. The first pathway is energy independent and can occur in non-living cells, such as the stratum corneum, which is the outermost layer of the skin. This pathway allows the molecule to bind and traverse the stratum corneum via lipid rafting where the molecule “shuttles” across the surface of the lipid layers in a process called “lipid rafting.”

The second pathway is energy dependent and can only occur across living cells. It is an active process where transcytosis, the process by which molecules are transported across the interior of a cell, takes the molecule from one side of the cell to another. The peptide triggers the cell to fold around the peptide, carrying the target molecule with it. This pathway releases RT001 on either side of the cell. When returned to the original side, no net change occurs; but when returned to the opposite side, the contents have crossed the cell. The result is a net flow of RT001 from high to low concentration across the cells.

14

Table of Contents

Administration of RT001 on the Skin

The proprietary apparatus for delivering RT001 to multiple locations was developed to provide for simple storage, reconstitution and ease of applying RT001 to the skin with minimal training.

Botulinum toxin is not stable in liquid form; therefore it must be lyophilized, or freeze-dried, for refrigerated storage and distribution. Injectable botulinum toxin products are distributed as lyophilized powders in sealed vials. Before they can be injected into a patient, the products must be reconstituted by a trained healthcare provider by drawing a precisely measured volume of saline solution into a syringe through a needle, and then transferring it into the botulinum toxin vial through the needle.

We designed our proprietary apparatus in collaboration with Duoject Medical Systems, Inc., or Duoject, a supplier of medical devices and provider of design and development services, with over 25 years of developing medical devices for drug reconstitution and delivery. The design of our apparatus has several features focused on safety and ease-of-use, and is covered by pending patents.

We plan to only supply RT001 within this reconstitution, activation and application, or RAA, device. This single-use administration apparatus contains a vial of our lyophilized drug product and a vial of diluent for reconstitution. The vial of drug product is protected within the RAA device to reduce potential for misuse as an injectable, and to eliminate the potential for needle stick injuries as could occur when reconstituting currently available injectable botulinum toxin products. The pre-filled amounts of drug product and diluent ensure accurate preparation of the intended concentration and dosage for treatment. We believe this will eliminate confusion that is associated with the preparation of injectable botulinum toxin products.

Once reconstituted, the RAA device allows for storage of the dose within the RAA device for up to eight hours, and then provides a means to easily administer the dose of RT001. RT001 is spread over the treatment area with a gloved finger, where it remains in place for 30 minutes and is then removed by a series of gentle cleansing wipes, deactivated and disposed. The entire application process is a simple procedure which requires minimal time to prepare and apply by physician or medical staff.

RT002 Mechanism of Action

RT002 utilizes our proprietary botulinum toxin-peptide complex in a saline-based formulation. In RT002, the RTP004 peptide interacts with both extracellular structures and cell surface receptors in the targeted muscle. This interaction restricts the toxin molecule to the target site and reduces unwanted spread to other neighboring muscles. We believe that by limiting the spread of RT002 to neighboring muscles, RT002 is likely to be tolerated at higher doses than Botox^®. Additionally, at doses where the spread of Botox^® and RT002 were compared, RT002 appeared to be more targeted with longer duration in our preclinical studies. Nonclinical and clinical data taken together suggest that RT002 may provide longer duration of effect at the target muscle and reduce spread to untargeted muscles.

Our Strategy

Our objective is to be a leading provider of botulinum toxin products across multiple aesthetic and therapeutic indications in both topical and injectable dose forms and to expand the market for botulinum toxin products. To achieve this objective, we plan to develop and commercialize two proprietary, patent-protected product candidates: RT001, our topical botulinum toxin, and RT002, our injectable botulinum toxin.

Key elements of our strategy are:

15

Table of Contents

16

Table of Contents

Manufacturing and Operations

We have established capabilities for the production of botulinum toxin type A, including bulk drug substance and both topical and injectable finished drug product. Botulinum toxin is regulated as a Select Agent under authority of the CDC and as such requires that we perform our operations in compliance with CDC regulations. We have invested in constructing the appropriate facilities to accommodate our production activities and are in good standing under our Select Agent license. We have assembled a team of experienced individuals in the technical disciplines of chemistry, biology and engineering and have appropriately equipped laboratory space to support ongoing research and development efforts in our botulinum toxin product development platform. We have the ability to manufacture our own botulinum toxin product to support our Phase 3 clinical trials and eventually, our commercial production. We believe that having direct control over our manufacturing processes, from drug substance to finished product, will enable us to develop additional pharmaceutical product configurations effectively and with a competitive cost structure.

We manufacture and perform testing for both bulk drug substance and finished dose forms of drug product to support our topical RT001 product candidate and our injectable RT002 product candidate. The additional components required for our topical RT001 dose form, the peptide, diluent and delivery apparatus, are all manufactured by third parties under contract with us. See the section entitled “Outsourced Components” below for additional information.

Drug Substance

The manufacture of the drug substance for RT001 and RT002 is based on microbial fermentation followed by product recovery and purification steps. The process is entirely free of animal and human-derived materials and depends on standard raw materials available commercially. The process is already scaled to support all future commercial demands. Bulk drug substance is stable when stored for extended periods, which allows us to establish reserves of drug substance and allows periodic drug substance production to replenish inventories as needed.

Drug Product

Manufacture of topical and injectable dose forms to support RT001 and RT002 is currently performed at our pilot fill-finish facility. The manufacturing process consists of bulk compounding, liquid fill and freeze-drying to support acceptable shelf-life duration. We are building a larger capacity fill-finish line dedicated to the topical non-aseptic dose form which will be installed and validated to support our regulatory license applications and future commercial demand for RT001. Further scale-up of RT002 drug product manufacturing will be performed to meet anticipated commercial demand. The RT001 botulinum toxin and diluent has shown stability to date that will support commercial launch.

Outsourced Components

We contract with third parties for the manufacture of the additional components required for RT001 topical dose form, which includes the acquisition of botulinum toxin type A from List Biological Laboratories, Inc., or List Laboratories, and the manufacture of bulk peptide through American Peptide Company, Inc., or American Peptide, diluent through Hospira Worldwide, Inc., or Hospira, and our delivery apparatus through Duoject.

Our agreement with List Laboratories, a developer of botulinum toxin, includes certain milestone payments related to the clinical development of our botulinum toxin products and the toxin manufacturing process. There is a royalty with an effective rate ranging from low-to-mid single-digit percentages of future sales of botulinum toxin. Our agreement with List Laboratories will remain in effect until expiration of our royalty obligations and may be terminated earlier on mutual agreement or because of a material breach by either party.

Our agreement with Hospira includes product development services and manufacture and supply services and requires that we provide Hospira with advance forecasts of our product needs. This agreement also includes

17

Table of Contents

minimum purchase requirements once we have commercialized our products. Our agreement with Hospira will remain in effect for seven years, subject to extensions, after we commercialize our products and may be terminated earlier by either party following advance notice and good faith consultation.

Our agreement with Duoject includes development work and manufacture and supply services. This agreement also includes a royalty of less than one percent of future sales of products which include the delivery apparatus, in the event we do not use Duoject to manufacture the delivery apparatus. Our agreement with Duoject will remain in effect until the later of April 30, 2020 or the expiration of the last patent issued to us for the delivery apparatus and may be terminated earlier because of a material breach by either party.

Our agreement with American Peptide includes development, manufacture and supply of peptide in accordance with certain specifications. This agreement also includes certain quality control and inspection provisions through which we can ensure the satisfactory quality of our peptide. Our agreement with American Peptide will remain in effect until May 20, 2020 and may be terminated earlier by either party following advance notice or a material breach by either party.

Competition

We expect to enter highly competitive pharmaceutical and medical device markets. Successful competitors in the pharmaceutical and medical device markets have the ability to effectively discover, develop, test and obtain regulatory approvals for products, as well as the ability to effectively commercialize, market and promote approved products, including communicating the effectiveness, safety and value of products to actual and prospective customers and medical staff. Numerous companies are engaged in the development, manufacture and marketing of health care products competitive with those that we are developing. While we are unaware of any potentially competitive topical products that may reach the market before RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, it is possible that such a potentially competitive topical product is being developed.

Many of our competitors have substantially greater manufacturing, financial, research and development, personnel and marketing resources than we do. Our competitors may also have more experience and expertise in obtaining marketing approvals from the FDA and other regulatory authorities. In addition to product development, testing, approval and promotion, other competitive factors in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries include industry consolidation, product quality and price, product technology, reputation, customer service and access to technical information. As a result, our competitors may be able to develop competing or superior technologies and processes, and compete more aggressively and sustain that competition over a longer period of time than we could. Our technologies and products may be rendered obsolete or uneconomical by technological advances or entirely different approaches developed by one or more of our competitors. As more companies develop new intellectual property in our markets, the possibility of a competitor acquiring patent or other rights that may limit our products or potential products increases, which could lead to litigation.

Upon marketing approval, the first expected use of our products will be in aesthetic medicine, followed by potential use to treat excessive sweating, migraine headache and other conditions. The technologies with which we expect to compete directly are injectable and topical neuromodulators, and to a lesser extent, dermal fillers.

Injectable and Topical Neuromodulators

Our primary competitors in the pharmaceutical market are companies offering injectable dose forms of botulinum toxin, including:

18

Table of Contents

We are aware of competing neuromodulators currently being developed and commercialized in Asia, South America and other markets. These lightly regulated markets may not require adherence to the FDA’s cGMPs or the regulatory requirements of the European Medicines Agency or other regulatory agencies in countries that are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. While these products are unlikely to meet stringent U.S. regulatory standards, the companies operating in these markets may be able to produce products at a lower cost than United States and European manufacturers. In addition to the injectable botulinum toxin dose forms, we are aware that other companies are developing topical neuromodulators for cosmetic and therapeutics indications and are conducting clinical trials for acne and facial aesthetic and hyperhidrosis.

Aesthetic Medicine

We anticipate that the first use of our products will be in the professional facial aesthetic medicine market which includes neurotoxins and dermal fillers, as well as polymer-based injectables. These and other products experience indirect competition from procedures, such as laser treatments, face lifts, chemical peels, fat injections and cold therapy. In the United States, dermal filler products, including Allergan’s Juvéderm^® Ultra and Ultra Plus, compete with Valeant’s products Restylane^® and Perlane™. In 2010, the FDA approved Allergan’s Juvéderm^® Ultra XC and Ultra Plus XC products containing lidocaine as well as new formulations of Restylane^® and Perlane™ also containing lidocaine and Restylane^® without lidocaine for lips. Additional competitors in the filler category include Radiesse^®, a calcium hydroxylapatite from BioForm, which was acquired by Merz in 2010, Sculptra^® from Valeant Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Belotero Balance^® from Merz. Internationally, competitive products include Q-Med’s range of Restylane^® and Perlane™ products, as well as products from Anteis, Filoraga, Teoxane, Valeant Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and a large number of other hyaluronic acid, bioceramic, protein and other polymer-based dermal fillers.

Sales and Marketing

We currently have limited marketing capabilities and no sales organization. Assuming successful completion of clinical trials and receipt of marketing approval for RT001 for treatment of crow’s feet lines by the

19

Table of Contents

FDA, we plan to launch RT001 in the United States with our own sales force and commercial organization. Specifically, we would access the U.S. market through a focused, specialized sales force that targets the core physicians (dermatologists, plastic surgeons, facial plastic surgeons and oculo-plastic surgeons) who perform the majority of the cosmetic procedures. Assuming approval to market in the United States, we will focus our initial marketing of RT001 and RT002 on these core specialties.

After European approval to market, we anticipate marketing RT001 and RT002 through either our own commercial infrastructure or a combination of our own infrastructure and that of our possible future partners. For future uses of RT001 and RT002 outside of aesthetic medicine, we are evaluating launching on our own or through partner relationships.

Strategic Partnering

We plan to focus our efforts on developing and commercializing RT001 and RT002 in North America. We intend to seek partners to fund development of our products outside of dermatology and outside of North America to maximize the commercial potential of our product candidates and delivery technology.

We also plan to leverage our TransMTS^® technology platform outside of our core focus in botulinum toxin by partnering with other companies. For example, in June 2013 we entered into an exclusive technology evaluation agreement with the Procter and Gamble Company to co-develop a peptide and explore applications of the TransMTS^® delivery technology in two classes of over-the-counter cosmetic compounds. If successful, this partnership would enable us to receive royalty revenue.

Intellectual Property

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection for our drug candidates, novel biological discoveries, and drug development technology and other know-how, to operate without infringing on the proprietary or intellectual property rights of others and to prevent others from infringing our proprietary and intellectual property rights. We seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing U.S. and foreign patent applications related to our proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We also rely on know-how, copyright, trademarks and trade secret laws, continuing technological innovation and potential in-licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position. Such protection is also maintained using confidential disclosure agreements. Protection of our technologies is important for us to offer our customers proprietary services and products unavailable from our competitors, and to exclude our competitors from practicing technology that we have developed. If competitors in our industry have access to the same technology, our competitive position may be adversely affected.

It is possible that our current patents, or patents which we may later acquire, may be successfully challenged or invalidated in whole or in part. It is also possible that we may not obtain issued patents from our pending patent applications or other inventions we seek to protect. Due to uncertainties inherent in prosecuting patent applications, sometimes patent applications are rejected and we subsequently abandon them. It is also possible that we may develop proprietary products or technologies in the future that are not patentable or that the patents of others will limit or altogether preclude our ability to do business. In addition, any patent issued to us may provide us with little or no competitive advantage, in which case we may abandon such patent or license it to another entity. For more information, please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors — Risks Related to our Intellectual Property.”

As of March 5, 2014, we held approximately 78 issued patents and approximately 148 pending patent applications, including foreign counterparts of U.S. patents and applications. Ten of our patents are issued in the United States, with the rest issued in Australia, Canada, China, various countries in Europe, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore and South Africa. In addition, we have pending patent applications in the United States as well as in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe, Hong Kong, Israel, India,

20

Table of Contents

Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore and Taiwan. The earliest that any of our patents will expire is July 20, 2021 for U.S. Patent No. 7,807,780. Because approval for RT001 is still pending before the FDA, one of these patents, or a later granted Revance patent, may be eligible for a patent term extension of up to five years, provided the total period of market exclusivity based on the extended patent does not exceed 14 years. For more information, please see “Business — Government Regulation — U.S. Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity.”

We will continue to pursue additional patent protection as well as take appropriate measures to obtain and maintain proprietary protection for our innovative technologies.

Our registered and pending U.S. trademarks include REVANCE^®, TRANSMTS^®, MOTISTE, XOTIKIS and JANTYNG.

Government Regulation

Product Approval Process in the United States

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs and biologic products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, its implementing regulations, and other laws, including, in the case of biologics, the Public Health Service Act. Our product candidates, RT001 and RT002, are subject to regulation by the FDA as a biologic. Biologics require the submission of a BLA to the FDA and approval of the BLA by the FDA before marketing in the United States.

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals for commercial sale and distribution and the subsequent compliance with applicable federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U. S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, license suspension or revocation, withdrawal of an approval, imposition of a clinical hold on clinical trials, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties. The process required by the FDA before a biologic may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

21

Table of Contents

Preclinical Studies

Before testing any compounds with potential therapeutic value in humans, the product candidate enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, stability and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential toxicity and activity of the product candidate. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs. The sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the clinical trial, including concerns that human research subjects will be exposed to unreasonable health risks. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance, or for other reasons.

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials involve the administration of the product candidate to human patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the clinical trial sponsor’s control. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety and effectiveness. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCPs. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of clinical trial participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the form and content of the informed consent that must be signed by each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

22

Table of Contents

IND sponsors may dispute FDA decisions concerning clinical development. For example, we engaged in the Formal Dispute Resolution process with the FDA for the proposed indication, primary endpoint assessment and primary endpoint measurement of RT001 for crow’s feet lines. In May 2012, we received a determination that the End-of-Phase 2 had been reached for the indication of lateral canthal lines.

Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication to further assess the biologic’s safety and effectiveness after BLA approval. Phase 4 trials can be initiated by the drug sponsor or as a condition of BLA approval by the FDA.

Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA and written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events or any finding from tests in laboratory animals that suggests a significant risk for human subjects.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the biologic and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final biologic product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

U.S. Review and Approval Processes

The results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests, proposed labeling and other relevant information are submitted to the FDA in the form of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more specified indications. The submission of a BLA is subject to the payment of substantial user fees.

Once the FDA receives a BLA, it has 60 days to review the BLA to determine if it is substantially complete and the data is readable, before it accepts the BLA for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the BLA. Under the goals and policies agreed to by the FDA under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA has twelve months from submission in which to complete its initial review of a standard BLA and make a decision on the application, and eight months from submission for a priority BLA, and such deadline is referred to as the PDUFA date. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA dates for either standard or priority BLAs. The review process and the PDUFA date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the BLA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission within the last three months before the PDUFA date.

After the BLA submission is accepted for filing, the FDA reviews the BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product is safe and effective for its intended use, and whether the product is being manufactured in accordance with cGMP to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity. The FDA may refer applications for novel drug or biological products or drug or biological products which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. During the approval process, the FDA also will determine whether a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies, or REMS, is necessary to assure the safe use of the product. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the BLA must submit a proposed REMS; the FDA will not approve the BLA without an approved REMS, if required. A REMS can substantially increase the costs of obtaining approval.

23

Table of Contents

Before approving a BLA, the FDA can inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the BLA unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure that the clinical trials were conducted in compliance with GCP requirements. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional clinical testing or information before a BLA can be approved.

The FDA will issue a complete response letter if the agency decides not to approve the BLA. The complete response letter describes all of the specific deficiencies in the BLA identified by the FDA. The deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical trials. Additionally, the complete response letter may include recommended actions that the applicant might take to place the application in a condition for approval. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application.

If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. In addition, the FDA may require post marketing studies, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 testing, which involves clinical trials designed to further assess drug safety and effectiveness and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized. After approval, certain changes to the approved biologic, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes or additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval. Depending on the nature of the change proposed, a BLA supplement must be filed and approved before the change may be implemented. For many proposed post-approval changes to a BLA, the FDA has up to 180 days to review the application. As with new BLAs, the review process is often significantly extended by the FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any biologic products for which we or our collaborators receive FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements, which include, among others, restrictions on direct-to-consumer advertising, promoting biologics for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling, known as “off-label use,” industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of biologics, and although physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such off-label uses. Failure to comply with these or other FDA requirements can subject a manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory action, such as warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, seizure of product, injunctive action, mandated corrective advertising or communications with healthcare professionals, possible civil or criminal penalties or other negative consequences, including adverse publicity.

We currently manufacture our own clinical drug supplies to support both of our product candidates and plan to do so on a commercial scale if our product candidates are approved. In addition, we also contract with third party manufacturers for certain components necessary to produce our lead product candidate in clinical quantities and expect to continue to do so to support commercial scale production if our lead product candidate is approved. Our future collaborators may also utilize third parties for some or all of a product we are developing with such

24

Table of Contents

collaborator. We and our third party manufacturers are required to comply with applicable FDA manufacturing requirements contained in the FDA’s cGMP regulations. cGMP regulations require among other things, quality control and quality assurance as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation. Drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved biologics are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

U.S. Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of the FDA approval of our biologic product candidate, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of a BLA plus the time between the submission date of a BLA and the approval of that application. Only one patent applicable to an approved product is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we may intend to apply for restoration of patent term for one of our currently owned or licensed patents to add patent life beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant BLA.

Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can also delay the submission or the approval of certain applications of other companies seeking to reference another company’s BLA. Specifically, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, established an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biological products. The new abbreviated regulatory pathway establishes legal authority for the FDA to review and approve biosimilar biologics, including the possible designation of a biosimilar as “interchangeable” based on their similarity to existing brand product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product cannot be approved by the FDA until twelve years after the original branded product was approved under a BLA. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator BLA holder. The BPCIA is complex and is only beginning to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation and meaning are subject to uncertainty.

Product Approval Process Outside the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing manufacturing, clinical trials, commercial sales and distribution of our future products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product candidate, we must obtain approval of the product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before commencing clinical trials or marketing in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country.

Under European Union regulatory systems, marketing authorizations may be submitted either under a centralized, decentralized or mutual recognition procedure. The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single marketing authorization that is valid for all European Union member states. The decentralized procedure includes selecting one “reference member state,” or RMS, and submitting to more than one member state at the same time. The RMS National Competent Authority conducts a detailed review and prepares an assessment

25

Table of Contents

report, to which concerned member states provide comment. The mutual recognition procedure provides for mutual recognition of national approval decisions. Under this procedure, the holder of a national marketing authorization may submit an application to the remaining member states post-initial approval. Within 90 days of receiving the applications and assessment report, each member state must decide whether to recognize approval.

Federal and State Fraud and Abuse and Data Privacy and Security Laws and Regulations

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, federal and state fraud and abuse laws restrict certain business practices in the biopharmaceutical industry. These laws include anti-kickback and false claims statutes. We will be subject to these laws and regulations once we begin to directly commercialize our products.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce, or in return for, purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value, including for example, gifts, discounts, the furnishing of supplies or equipment, credit arrangements, payments of cash, waivers of payment, ownership interests and providing anything at less than its fair market value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand prescribers, purchasers and formulary managers on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for statutory exemptions or safe harbor protection. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the statute has been violated. The reach of the Anti-Kickback Statute was also broadened by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, PPACA, which, among other things, amends the intent requirement of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Pursuant to the statutory amendment, a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, PPACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act or the civil monetary penalties statute, which imposes penalties against any person who is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal health program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

The federal False Claims Act prohibits any person from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government or knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. As a result of a modification made by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, a claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. Recently, several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses. The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third party payors and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services. Also, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor.

26

Table of Contents

In addition, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to “business associates,” those independent contractors or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of available statutory and regulatory exemptions, it is possible that some of our business activities now and in the future could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including criminal and significant civil monetary penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion of products from reimbursement under government programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. To the extent that any of our products are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws and implementation of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or transfers of value to healthcare professionals.

Environment, Health and Safety

We are voluntarily assessing and publicly reporting our greenhouse gas emissions and water usage, and have begun to take action to reduce such emissions and usage. For example we have established employee commuter programs, evaluated the energy efficiency of our buildings and installed low-flow water fixtures. Various laws and regulations have been implemented or are under consideration to mitigate the effects of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions. For example, the California Air Resources Board is in the process of drafting regulations to meet state emissions targets. Based on current information and subject to the finalization of the proposed regulations, we believe that our primary risk related to climate change is the risk of increased energy costs. However, because we are not an energy intensive business, we do not anticipate being subject to a cap and trade system or any other mitigation measures that would likely be material to our capital expenditures, results of operations or competitive position.

We are also subject to other federal, state and local regulations regarding workplace safety and protection of the environment. We use hazardous materials, chemicals, viruses and various radioactive compounds in our research and development activities and cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. Certain misuse or accidents involving these materials could lead to significant litigation, fines and penalties. We have implemented proactive programs to reduce and minimize the risk of hazardous materials incidents.

Research and Development

Conducting research and development is central to our business model. We have invested and expect to continue to invest significant time and capital in our research and development operations. Our research and development expenses were $27.8 million and $32.7 million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. We plan to increase our research and development expenses for the foreseeable future to complete one Phase 3 clinical pivotal trial in the United States, continue a long-term safety clinical trial and other

27

Table of Contents

associated programs relating to RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, and to initiate our first Phase 2 clinical trial and associated programs related to RT002 for the treatment of glabellar lines.

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, we had 62 full-time employees and 13 contractors for a total of 75 full-time equivalents. Of these employees and contractors, 48 employees and 6 contractors were engaged in research and development and 14 employees and 7 contractors were engaged in business development, finance, legal, human resources, facilities, information technology and general management and administration activities. We plan to continue to expand our research and development activities. To support this growth, we will need to expand managerial, research and development, operations, finance and other functions. None of our employees are represented by a labor union, and we consider our employee relations to be good.

Other Information

We were incorporated in Delaware on August 10, 1999 under the name Essentia Biosystems, Inc. We commenced operations in June 2002 and, in April 2005, changed our name to Revance Therapeutics, Inc. Our principal executive offices are located at 7555 Gateway Boulevard, Newark, California 94560, and our telephone number is (510) 742-3400. Our website address is http://www.revance.com. The information contained in, or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of this Form 10-K.

We file electronically with the SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act . We make available on our website at www.revance.com (under “Investors-Financials & Filings”), free of charge, copies of these reports as soon as reasonably practicable after filing these reports with, or furnishing them to, the SEC.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as all other information included in this Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements, the notes thereto and the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” before you decide to purchase shares of our common stock. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results could be materially harmed. As a result, the trading price of our common stock could decline and you could lose all or part of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations and stock price.

Risks Related to Our Business and Strategy

We are substantially dependent on the clinical and commercial success of our product candidates, primarily our lead product candidate RT001, which is in Phase 3 clinical development, and our second product candidate RT002, which is expected to enter into Phase 2 clinical development.

To date, we have invested most of our efforts and financial resources in the research and development of RT001, a topical formulation of botulinum toxin, which is currently our lead product candidate. In particular, we have completed thirteen clinical trials and are in Phase 3 clinical development in the United States for RT001. We have also invested, to a lesser extent, in the research and development of an injectable form of botulinum toxin, RT002, which is expected to enter into Phase 2 clinical development in 2014. Our near-term prospects, including our ability to finance our company and generate revenue, will depend heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of RT001 and, to a lesser extent, RT002, as well as any

28

Table of Contents

future product candidates. The clinical and commercial success of our product candidates will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

If we do not achieve one or more of these factors, many of which are beyond our control, in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able to generate sufficient revenue through the sale of RT001, RT002 or any future product candidate to continue our business.

29

Table of Contents

We may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for RT001, RT002 or future product candidates under applicable regulatory requirements. The denial or delay of any such approval would delay commercialization and have a material adverse effect on our potential to generate revenue, our business and our results of operations.

To gain approval to market a biologic product such as RT001 and RT002, we must provide the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities with clinical data that adequately demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of the product for the intended indication applied for in a Biologics License Application, or BLA, or other respective regulatory filing. The development of biologic products is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage of any of our clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry, including biotechnology companies, have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, including in Phase 3 development, even after promising results in earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, findings made while clinical trials were underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events. Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and the results of clinical trials by other parties may not be indicative of the results in trials we may conduct. In particular, we have conducted three positive Phase 2b clinical trials of RT001, in which RT001 met the primary efficacy and all secondary endpoints. However, we have conducted one Phase 3 clinical efficacy trial using a modified diluent formulation, the results of which were inconsistent with our previous Phase 2b clinical trials and which did not show improvement from baseline in either the placebo or RT001 group.

Our lead product candidate, RT001, is currently in Phase 3 clinical development, and our business currently depends substantially on its successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization. We currently have no drug or biologic products approved for sale, and we may never obtain regulatory approval to commercialize RT001. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of drug and biologic products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries, and such regulations differ from country to country. We are not permitted to market RT001 in the United States until we receive approval of a BLA from the FDA. We are also not permitted to market RT001 in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from the regulatory authorities of such countries.

The FDA or any foreign regulatory bodies can delay, limit or deny approval of our product candidates, including RT001, for many reasons, including:

30

Table of Contents

Of the large number of drugs, including biologics, in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA or other regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. We are not conducting our U.S. Phase 3 clinical trials for RT001 under a Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA. In the absence of an agreed SPA, there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree with our Phase 3 clinical trial protocol.

Further, after our Phase 2 clinical trials, we used the FDA’s Formal Dispute Resolution process to obtain confirmation from the FDA that our proposed indication, primary endpoint assessment and primary endpoint measurement were acceptable for continued clinical trials. While the FDA provided written confirmation that our proposed indication, primary endpoint assessment and primary endpoint measurement were acceptable for Phase 3 clinical trials, the FDA has not confirmed that our proposed indication, primary endpoint assessment and primary endpoint measurement are acceptable for regulatory approval. Further, while we did obtain written confirmation with respect to these aspects of our Phase 3 clinical trial designs, there is no assurance that the FDA will approve our BLA for RT001, will agree that the benefits of RT001 outweigh its risks or will not raise new concerns regarding our clinical trial designs.

Even if we eventually complete clinical testing and receive approval of any regulatory filing for RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory agency may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional post-approval clinical trials. The FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory agency also may approve RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested, and the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory agency may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval for any of our product candidates and RT001, in particular, would delay or prevent commercialization of RT001 and would materially adversely impact our business, results of operations and prospects.

We will require substantial additional financing to achieve our goals, and a failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development, other operations or commercialization efforts.

Since our inception, most of our resources have been dedicated to the preclinical and clinical development of our lead product candidate, RT001. In particular, our U.S. Phase 3 clinical program for RT001 will require substantial funds to complete. We have recorded net losses of $52.4 million, $58.3 million and $44.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, had an accumulated deficit during our development stage through December 31, 2013 of $195.9 million and had a working capital deficit of $42.7 million as of December 31, 2013. We have funded our operations primarily through the sale and issuance of convertible preferred stock, notes payable and convertible notes. As of December 31, 2013, we had capital resources consisting of cash and cash equivalents of $3.9 million. On February 6, 2014, we sold 6,900,000 shares of common stock at $16 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $102.7 million in our initial public offering, or IPO. We believe that we will continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future for the clinical development of RT001, RT002 and development of any other indications and product candidates we may choose to pursue. These expenditures will include costs associated with research and development, conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, and manufacturing and supply as well as marketing and selling any products approved for sale. In addition, other unanticipated costs may arise. Because the outcome of any clinical trial is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of RT001, RT002 and any future product candidates.

We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents, including the net proceeds from our IPO, and existing credit facility will allow us to fund our operating plan through at least the next 15 months. However, our operating plan may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional capital sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings or other sources, such as strategic collaborations. Such financings may result in dilution to stockholders, imposition of debt covenants and repayment obligations or other restrictions that may affect our business. In addition, we may seek additional

31

Table of Contents

capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans.

Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including:

Additional capital may not be available when we need them, on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis, we may be required to:

If we raise additional capital through marketing and distribution arrangements or other collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish certain valuable rights to our product candidates, technologies, future revenue streams or research programs or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we raise additional capital through public or private equity offerings, the ownership interest of our existing stockholders will be diluted and the terms of any new equity securities may have a preference over our common stock. If we raise additional capital through debt financing, we may be subject to covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt or making capital expenditures or specified financial ratios, any of which could restrict our ability to commercialize our product candidates or operate as a business.

32

Table of Contents

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may fail to achieve the broad degree of physician adoption and use necessary for commercial success.

The commercial success of RT001, RT002 and any future product candidates, if approved, will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by physicians for approved indications, including, in the case of RT001, the treatment of lateral canthal lines, or crow’s feet lines, hyperhidrosis and other aesthetic and therapeutic indications that we may seek to pursue. The degree and rate of physician adoption of RT001, RT002 and any future product candidates, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, including:

If RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates are approved for use but fail to achieve the broad degree of physician adoption necessary for commercial success, our operating results and financial condition will be adversely affected.

Our product candidates, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to effectively compete may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration and expansion.

We expect to enter highly competitive pharmaceutical and medical device markets. Successful competitors in the pharmaceutical and medical device markets have the ability to effectively discover, obtain patents, develop, test and obtain regulatory approvals for products, as well as the ability to effectively commercialize, market and promote approved products, including communicating the effectiveness, safety and value of products to actual and prospective customers and medical staff. Numerous companies are engaged in the development, patenting, manufacture and marketing of health care products competitive with those that we are developing. Many of these potential competitors are large, experienced companies that enjoy significant competitive advantages, such as substantially greater financial, research and development, manufacturing, personnel and marketing resources, greater brand recognition and more experience and expertise in obtaining marketing approvals from the FDA and other regulatory authorities.

Upon marketing approval, the first expected use of our products will be in aesthetic medicine. The aesthetic product market, and the facial aesthetic market in particular, is highly competitive and dynamic, and is characterized by rapid and substantial technological development and product innovations. This market is also characterized by competitors obtaining patents to protect what they consider to be their intellectual property. We are seeking regulatory approval of RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines. We anticipate that RT001, if approved, will face significant competition from other facial aesthetic products, including injectable botulinum toxins and dermal fillers. If approved, RT001 may also compete with unapproved and off-label treatments. To compete successfully in the aesthetic market, we will have to demonstrate that the reduction of crow’s feet lines with RT001 is a worthwhile aesthetic treatment and is a superior alternative to existing therapies. Competing in the aesthetic market could result in price-cutting, reduced profit margins and limited market share, any of which would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Due to less stringent regulatory requirements, there are many more aesthetic products and procedures available for use in international markets than are approved for use in the United States. There are also fewer

33

Table of Contents

limitations on the claims that our competitors in international markets can make about the effectiveness of their products and the manner in which they can market them. As a result, we face more competition in these markets than in the United States.

We currently make our clinical drug products exclusively in one manufacturing facility and plan to utilize this facility in the future to support commercial production if our product candidates are approved. If this or any future facility or our equipment were damaged or destroyed, or if we experience a significant disruption in our operations for any reason, our ability to continue to operate our business would be materially harmed.

We currently manufacture our own clinical drug products to support both RT001 and RT002 exclusively in a single manufacturing and laboratory facility and plan to utilize this facility in the future to support commercial production if our product candidates are approved. If this or any future facility were to be damaged, destroyed or otherwise unable to operate, whether due to earthquakes, fire, floods, hurricanes, storms, tornadoes, other natural disasters, employee malfeasance, terrorist acts, power outages or otherwise, or if performance of our manufacturing facility is disrupted for any other reason, such an event could delay our clinical trials or, if our product candidates are approved, jeopardize our ability to manufacture our products as promptly as our customers expect or possibly at all. If we experience delays in achieving our development objectives, or if we are unable to manufacture an approved product within a timeframe that meets our customers’ expectations, our business, prospects, financial results and reputation could be materially harmed.

Currently, we maintain insurance coverage totaling $13.7 million against damage to our property and equipment, $2.0 million in general liability coverage, a $9.0 million umbrella policy, and an additional $30.0 million to cover business interruption and research and development restoration expenses, subject to deductibles and other limitations. If we have underestimated our insurance needs with respect to an interruption, or if an interruption is not subject to coverage under our insurance policies, we may not be able to cover our losses.

We have a limited operating history and have incurred significant losses since our inception and we anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future. We have only two product candidates in clinical trials and no commercial sales, which, together with our limited operating history, make it difficult to assess our future viability.

We are a clinical stage specialty biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We are not profitable and have incurred losses in each year since we commenced operations in 2002. We have only a limited operating history upon which you can evaluate our business and prospects. In addition, we have limited experience and have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome many of the risks and uncertainties frequently encountered by companies in new and rapidly evolving fields, particularly in the biopharmaceutical industry. To date, we have not obtained any regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates or generated any revenue from product sales relating to RT001 or RT002. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing clinical trials and operations. We have recorded net losses of $52.4 million, $58.3 million and $44.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, had an accumulated deficit during our development stage through December 31, 2013 of $195.9 million and had a working capital deficit of $42.7 million as of December 31, 2013.

In February 2014, the Company closed its IPO, resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $110 million. The net proceeds from the sale of the shares, after deducting the underwriters’ discount but before expenses related to the IPO are approximately $102.7 million. Our capital requirements to implement our business strategy are substantial, including our capital requirements to develop and commercialize RT001 and RT002. We believe that our currently available capital is sufficient to fund our operations through at least the next 15 months. Given our desired clinical development plans for the next 12 months, our financial statements do not reflect an

34

Table of Contents

uncertainty about our ability to continue as a going concern. Accordingly, the financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts and classification of liabilities should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.

We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase as we continue our development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, RT001 and RT002, and begin to commercialize RT001. Our ability to achieve revenue and profitability is dependent on our ability to complete the development of our product candidates, obtain necessary regulatory approvals and successfully manufacture, market and commercialize our products. Even if we achieve profitability in the future, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and our ability to raise capital and continue operations.

Even if RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates obtain regulatory approval, they may never achieve market acceptance or commercial success.

Even if we obtain FDA or other regulatory approvals, RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates may not achieve market acceptance among physicians and patients, and may not be commercially successful.

The degree and rate of market acceptance of RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates for which we receive approval depends on a number of factors, including:

Any failure by our product candidates that obtain regulatory approval to achieve market acceptance or commercial success would materially adversely affect our results of operations and delay, prevent or limit our ability to generate revenue and continue our business.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Furthermore, we rely on contract research organizations, or CROs, and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials. While we have agreements governing the committed activities of our CROs, we have limited influence over their actual performance. A failure of one or more of our clinical trials can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. For example, the positive results

35

Table of Contents

generated to date in clinical trials for RT001 do not ensure that later clinical trials, including our Phase 3 clinical trials for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, will demonstrate similar results. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. In particular, we have conducted three positive Phase 2b clinical trials of RT001, in which RT001 met the primary efficacy and all secondary endpoints. However, we have conducted one Phase 3 clinical efficacy trial using a modified diluent formulation, the results of which were inconsistent with our previous Phase 2b clinical trials and which did not show improvement from baseline in either the placebo or RT001 group. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier clinical trials, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Even if our clinical trials are completed, the results may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

We have in the past and may in the future experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials, and we do not know whether future clinical trials, if any, will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll an adequate number of patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed or aborted for a variety of reasons, including delay or failure to:

Patient enrollment is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials and is affected by many factors, including the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs or treatments that may be approved for the indications we are investigating.

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the data safety monitoring board, for such trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will

36

Table of Contents

increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

We have no experience manufacturing our product candidates at full commercial scale. If our product candidates are approved, we will face certain risks associated with scaling up our manufacturing capabilities to support commercial production.

We have developed an integrated manufacturing, research and development facility located at our corporate headquarters. We manufacture drug substance and finished dose forms of drug product at this facility that we use for research and development purposes and for clinical trials of our product candidates. We do not have experience in manufacturing our product candidates at commercial scale. To meet our strategic objectives, which contemplate internally manufacturing a significant portion of our drug substance and finished dose form at full commercial scale, if our product candidates are approved, we may need to expand our manufacturing facilities, add manufacturing personnel and ensure that validated processes are consistently implemented in our facilities. For example, we are building a larger capacity fill-finish line dedicated to our topical non-aseptic dose form, which we expect will be installed in 2014 and validated in 2015 to support our regulatory license applications and future commercial demand for RT001, if approved. In addition, we expect to further scale up our RT002 drug product manufacture according to established demand. The upgrade and expansion of our facilities will require additional regulatory approvals. In addition, it will be costly and time-consuming to expand our facilities and recruit necessary additional personnel. If we are unable to expand our manufacturing facilities in compliance with regulatory requirements or to hire additional necessary manufacturing personnel, we may encounter delays or additional costs in achieving our research, development and commercialization objectives, including in obtaining regulatory approvals of our product candidates, which could materially damage our business and financial position.

We currently contract with third party manufacturers for certain components necessary to produce RT001 for clinical trials and expect to continue to do so to support commercial scale production if RT001 is approved. This increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of RT001 or such quantities at an acceptable cost, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

We currently rely on third party manufacturers for certain components necessary to produce RT001 for our clinical trials, including the bulk peptide, diluent and the delivery apparatus and expect to continue to rely on these or other manufacturers to support our commercial requirements if RT001 is approved. Some of our contracts with our manufacturers contain minimum order and pricing provisions and provide for early termination based on regulatory approval milestones.

Reliance on third party manufacturers entails additional risks, including reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance, the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party, and the possible termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us. In addition, third party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP or Quality System Regulation, or QSR, or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States. Our failure, or the failure of our third party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of RT001 or any other product candidates or products that we may develop. Any failure or refusal to supply the components for RT001 or any other product candidates or products that we may develop could delay, prevent or impair our clinical development or commercialization efforts.

37

Table of Contents

We depend on single-source suppliers for the raw materials necessary to produce our product candidates. The loss of these suppliers, or their failure to supply us with these raw materials, would materially and adversely affect our business.

We and our manufacturers purchase the materials necessary to produce RT001 and RT002 for our clinical trials from single-source third party suppliers. There are a limited number of suppliers for the raw materials that we use to manufacture our product candidates and we may need to assess alternate suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials, and if approved, ultimately for commercial sale. In particular, we outsource the manufacture of bulk peptide through American Peptide Company, Inc., the diluent through Hospira Worldwide, Inc. and our delivery apparatus through Duoject Medical Systems, Inc. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of raw materials by our manufacturers. Although we generally do not begin a clinical trial unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete the clinical trial, any significant delay in the supply of RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, or the raw material components thereof, for an ongoing clinical trial due to the need to replace a third party supplier could considerably delay completion of our clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates. If we or our manufacturers are unable to purchase these raw materials on acceptable terms, at sufficient quality levels, or in adequate quantities, if at all, the development of RT001, RT002 and any future product candidates, or the commercial launch of any approved products, would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply, which would impair our ability to meet our development objectives for our product candidates or generate revenues from the sale of any approved products.

Furthermore, if there is a disruption to our or our third party suppliers’ relevant operations, we will have no other means of producing RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates until they restore the affected facilities or we or they procure alternative facilities. Additionally, any damage to or destruction of our or our third party or suppliers’ facilities or equipment may significantly impair our ability to manufacture our product candidates on a timely basis.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by earthquakes or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our corporate headquarters and other facilities, including our sole manufacturing facility, are located in the San Francisco Bay Area, which in the past has experienced severe earthquakes. We do not carry earthquake insurance. Earthquakes or other natural disasters could severely disrupt our operations, and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as our manufacturing facility, enterprise financial systems or manufacturing resource planning and enterprise quality systems, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. In particular, because we manufacture botulinum toxin in our facilities, we would be required to obtain further clearance and approval by state, federal or other applicable authorities to continue or resume manufacturing activities. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans we have in place currently are limited and may not be adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of our disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are geographically concentrated and operating from single sites, increasing their vulnerability to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our business.

38

Table of Contents

We rely on third parties and consultants to conduct all our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties or consultants do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates.

We do not have the ability to independently conduct preclinical studies or clinical trials. We rely on medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories, collaborative partners and other third parties, such as CROs, to conduct clinical trials on our product candidates. The third parties with whom we contract for execution of our clinical trials play a significant role in the conduct of these trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. However, these third parties are not our employees, and except for contractual duties and obligations, we have limited ability to control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs. Although we rely on these third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its investigational plan and protocol. Moreover, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as current good clinical practices, or GCPs, for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate, and that the trial subjects are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials. We also rely on consultants to assist in the execution, including data collection and analysis, of our clinical trials.

In addition, the execution of preclinical studies and clinical trials, and the subsequent compilation and analysis of the data produced, requires coordination among various parties. In order for these functions to be carried out effectively and efficiently, it is imperative that these parties communicate and coordinate with one another. Moreover, these third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, some of which may compete with us. These third parties may terminate their agreements with us upon as little as 30 days’ prior written notice of a material breach by us that is not cured within 30 days. Many of these agreements may also be terminated by such third parties under certain other circumstances, including our insolvency or our failure to comply with applicable laws. In general, these agreements require such third parties to reasonably cooperate with us at our expense for an orderly winding down of services of such third parties under the agreements. If the third parties or consultants conducting our clinical trials do not perform their contractual duties or obligations, experience work stoppages, do not meet expected deadlines, terminate their agreements with us or need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical trial protocols or GCPs, or for any other reason, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials or enter into new arrangements with alternative third parties, which could be difficult, costly or impossible, and our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated or may need to be repeated. If any of the foregoing were to occur, we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, regulatory approval for and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize the product candidate being tested in such trials.

Our ability to market RT001, if approved, will be limited to use for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, and if we want to expand the indications for which we may market RT001, we will need to obtain additional regulatory approvals, which may not be granted.

We are currently seeking regulatory approval for RT001 in the United States and Europe for the treatment of crow’s feet lines. If RT001 is approved, the applicable regulatory agency will restrict our ability to market or advertise RT001 for other indications, which could limit physician and patient adoption. We may attempt to develop, promote and commercialize new treatment indications and protocols for RT001 in the future, but we cannot predict when or if we will receive the clearances required to do so. In addition, we would be required to conduct additional clinical trials or studies to support approvals for additional indications, which would be time consuming and expensive, and may produce results that do not support regulatory approvals. If we do not obtain additional regulatory approvals, our ability to expand our business will be limited.

39

Table of Contents

If RT001 and/or RT002 is approved for marketing, and we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses, or if physicians misuse our products or use our products off-label, we may become subject to prohibitions on the sale or marketing of our products, significant fines, penalties, and sanctions, product liability claims, and our image and reputation within the industry and marketplace could be harmed.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the marketing and promotional claims that are made about drug products, such as RT001 and RT002, if approved. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses or indications that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. For example, if we receive marketing approval for RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, the first indication we are pursuing, we cannot prevent physicians from using our RT001 products on their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label, potentially including for the treatment of other aesthetic or therapeutic indications. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may receive warning letters and become subject to significant liability, which would materially harm our business. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. If we become the target of such an investigation or prosecution based on our marketing and promotional practices, we could face similar sanctions, which would materially harm our business. In addition, management’s attention could be diverted from our business operations, significant legal expenses could be incurred, and our reputation could be damaged. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we are deemed by the FDA to have engaged in the promotion of our products for off-label use, we could be subject to FDA prohibitions on the sale or marketing of our products or significant fines and penalties, and the imposition of these sanctions could also affect our reputation and position within the industry.

Physicians may also misuse our products or use improper techniques, potentially leading to adverse results, side effects or injury, which may lead to product liability claims. If our products are misused or used with improper technique, we may become subject to costly litigation by our customers or their patients. Product liability claims could divert management’s attention from our core business, be expensive to defend, and result in sizable damage awards against us that may not be covered by insurance. Furthermore, the use of our products for indications other than those cleared by the FDA may not effectively treat such conditions, which could harm our reputation in the marketplace among physicians and patients.

Any of these events could harm our business and results of operations and cause our stock price to decline.

Even if RT001 is approved for commercialization, if there is not sufficient patient demand for RT001 procedures, our financial results and future prospects will be harmed.

Treatment of crow’s feet lines with RT001, our lead product candidate, is an elective procedure, the cost of which must be borne by the patient, and we do not expect it to be reimbursable through government or private health insurance. The decision by a patient to elect to undergo treatment with RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines or other aesthetic indications we may pursue may be influenced by a number of factors, including:

40

Table of Contents

Our business, financial results and future prospects will be materially harmed if we cannot generate sufficient demand for RT001, or for RT002 or any other future product candidate, once approved.

We currently have limited marketing capabilities and no sales organization. If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities on our own or through third parties, we will be unable to successfully commercialize RT001, RT002 or any other future product candidates, if approved, or generate product revenue.

We currently have limited marketing capabilities and no sales organization. To commercialize RT001, RT002 or any other future product candidates, if approved, in the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions we seek to enter, we must build our marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services, and we may not be successful in doing so. If RT001 receives regulatory approval, we expect to market RT001 in the United States through an internal specialized sales force and in Europe through either our internal sales force or a combination of our internal sales force and distributors, which will be expensive and time consuming. We have no prior experience in the marketing, sale and distribution of pharmaceutical products and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. We may choose to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates. If we are not successful in commercializing RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, either on our own or through collaborations with one or more third parties, our future product revenue will suffer and we would incur significant additional losses.

To establish our sales and marketing infrastructure and expand our manufacturing capabilities, we will need to increase the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.

As of December 31, 2013, we had 62 full-time employees. We will need to continue to expand our managerial, operational, finance and other resources to manage our operations and clinical trials, continue our development activities and commercialize RT001 or any other product candidates, if approved. Our management and personnel, systems and facilities currently in place may not be adequate to support this future growth. Our need to effectively execute our growth strategy requires that we:

Due to our limited financial resources and our limited experience in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The physical expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our development and strategic objectives, or disrupt our operations.

41

Table of Contents

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of any future products we develop.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our products. Even a successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Our inability to obtain and maintain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost and scope of coverage to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of RT001 or any future products we develop. We currently carry product liability insurance covering our clinical trials in the amount of $1.0 million in the aggregate. Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies also have various exclusions and deductibles, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts. Moreover, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses. If and when we obtain approval for marketing RT001, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of RT001; however, we may be unable to obtain this liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms.

If we fail to attract and keep senior management and key scientific personnel, we may be unable to successfully develop RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, conduct our clinical trials and commercialize RT001, RT002 or any future products we develop.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management, clinical and scientific personnel. We believe that our future success is highly dependent upon the contributions of our senior management, particularly our President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as our senior scientists and other members of our senior management team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of RT001, RT002 or any future products we develop.

42

Table of Contents

Although we have not historically experienced unique difficulties attracting and retaining qualified employees, we could experience such problems in the future. For example, competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and pharmaceuticals field is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required by our industry. We will need to hire additional personnel as we expand our clinical development and commercial activities. We may not be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, to the extent we hire personnel from competitors, we may be subject to allegations that they have been improperly solicited or that they have divulged proprietary or other confidential information, or that their former employers own their research output.

If we are not successful in discovering, developing, acquiring and commercializing additional product candidates, our ability to expand our business and achieve our strategic objectives would be impaired.

Although a substantial amount of our effort will focus on the continued clinical testing and potential approval of RT001 and RT002, a key element of our strategy is to discover, develop and commercialize a portfolio of botulinum toxin products to serve both the aesthetic and therapeutic markets. We are seeking to do so through our internal research programs and may explore strategic collaborations for the development or acquisition of new products. While our two product candidates, RT001 and RT002, are each in the clinical development stage, all of our other potential product candidates remain in the discovery stage. Research programs to identify product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources, whether or not any product candidates are ultimately identified. Our research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for many reasons, including the following:

If we fail to develop and successfully commercialize other product candidates, our business and future prospects may be harmed and our business will be more vulnerable to any problems that we encounter in developing and commercializing RT001 and RT002.

We will incur significant increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives. We may fail to comply with the rules that apply to public companies, including Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which could result in sanctions or other penalties that would harm our business.

As a public company in the United States, we will be required, pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404, to furnish a report by management on, among other things, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. We expect that our first report on compliance with Section 404 will be in connection with our consolidated financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2014.

43

Table of Contents

The controls and other procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, is disclosed accurately and is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms. We are in the early stages of conforming our internal control procedures to the requirements of Section 404 and we may not be able to complete our evaluation, testing and any required remediation needed to comply with Section 404 in a timely fashion. Our independent registered public accounting firm was not engaged to perform an audit of our internal control over financial reporting for the year ended December 31, 2013 or for any other period. Accordingly, no such opinion was expressed. Even if we develop effective controls, these new controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or the degree of compliance with these policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Even after we develop these new procedures, material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting may be discovered. To fully comply with Section 404, we will need to retain additional employees to supplement our current finance staff, and we may not be able to do so in a timely manner, or at all. In addition, in the process of evaluating our internal control over financial reporting, we expect that certain of our internal control practices will need to be updated to comply with the requirements of Section 404 and the regulations promulgated thereunder, and we may not be able to do so on a timely basis, or at all. In the event that we are not able to demonstrate compliance with Section 404 in a timely manner, or are unable to produce timely or accurate consolidated financial statements, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, such as the SEC or the stock exchange on which our stock is listed, and investors may lose confidence in our operating results and the price of our common stock could decline. Furthermore, if we are unable to certify that our internal control over financial reporting is effective and in compliance with Section 404, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, such as the SEC or stock exchanges, and we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could hurt our business, the price of our common stock and our ability to access the capital markets.

Our business involves the use of hazardous materials and we and our third party manufacturers and suppliers must comply with environmental laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we do business.

Our research and development and manufacturing activities and our third party manufacturers’ and suppliers’ activities involve the controlled storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials owned by us, including botulinum toxin type A, a key component of our product candidates, and other hazardous compounds. We and our manufacturers and suppliers are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. We are licensed with the Centers for Disease Control and Detection, or CDC, and with the California Department of Health, Food and Drug Branch for use of botulinum toxin and to manufacture both the active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, and the finished product in topical and injectable dose forms. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at our and our manufacturers’ facilities pending their use and disposal. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination, which could cause an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. Although we believe that the safety procedures utilized by us and our third party manufacturers for handling and disposing of these materials generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, we cannot guarantee that this is the case or eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In such an event, we may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed our resources and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of our future compliance.

44

Table of Contents

We may use third party collaborators to help us develop, validate or commercialize any new products, and our ability to commercialize such products could be impaired or delayed if these collaborations are unsuccessful.

We may license or selectively pursue strategic collaborations for the development, validation and commercialization of RT001, RT002 and any future product candidates. In any third party collaboration, we would be dependent upon the success of the collaborators in performing their responsibilities and their continued cooperation. Our collaborators may not cooperate with us or perform their obligations under our agreements with them. We cannot control the amount and timing of our collaborators’ resources that will be devoted to performing their responsibilities under our agreements with them. Our collaborators may choose to pursue alternative technologies in preference to those being developed in collaboration with us. The development, validation and commercialization of our product candidates will be delayed if collaborators fail to conduct their responsibilities in a timely manner or in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements or if they breach or terminate their collaboration agreements with us. Disputes with our collaborators could also impair our reputation or result in development delays, decreased revenues and litigation expenses.

If we fail to comply with the covenants and other obligations under our credit facilities, the lenders may be able to accelerate amounts owed under the facilities and may foreclose upon the assets securing our obligations.

In September 2011, we entered into a credit facility with Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., or Hercules. The facility, or the Hercules Facility, consists of $22.0 million in a term loan from Hercules. The balance of the term loan as of December 31, 2013 was $11.0 million and is payable in monthly installments of principal and interest through March 1, 2015. Borrowings under our credit facility are secured by substantially all of our tangible assets. The covenants set forth in the loan and security agreement require, among other things, that we seek consent from Hercules prior to certain corporate changes and provide certain unaudited financial information within 30 days after the end of each month. If we fail to comply with the covenants and our other obligations under the credit facility, Hercules would be able to accelerate the required repayment of amounts due under the loan agreement and, if they are not repaid, could foreclose upon our assets securing our obligations under the credit facility.

In December 2013, we entered into a $10.8 million loan and lease agreement with Essex Capital Corporation, or Essex Capital. Borrowings under this facility, or the Essex Capital Facility, are secured by substantially all of our tangible assets, excluding intellectual property. The covenants set forth in the Essex Capital Facility require, among other things, that we seek consent from Essex Capital prior to certain corporate events, including the incurrence of additional secured indebtedness or additional liens. If we fail to comply with the covenants and our other obligations under the Essex Capital Facility, Essex Capital would be able to accelerate the required repayment of amounts due under the Essex Capital Facility and, if they are not repaid, could foreclose upon our assets securing our obligations under the Essex Capital Facility, subject to limitations set forth in a subordination agreement between Essex Capital and Hercules.

Unfavorable global economic conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy and in the global financial markets. Furthermore, the market for aesthetic medical procedures may be particularly vulnerable to unfavorable economic conditions. We do not expect RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines to be reimbursed by any government or third party payor and, as a result, demand for this product will be tied to discretionary spending levels of our targeted patient population. The recent global financial crisis caused extreme volatility and disruptions in the capital and credit markets. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including weakened demand for RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, if approved, and our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. This is particularly true in Europe, which is undergoing a continued severe economic crisis. A weak or declining

45

Table of Contents

economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause our customers to delay making payments for our services. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If our efforts to protect our intellectual property related to RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates are not adequate, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to RT001, RT002 and our development programs. Any disclosure to or misappropriation by third parties of our confidential proprietary information could enable competitors to quickly duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, eroding our competitive position in our market.

The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. This uncertainty includes changes to the patent laws through either legislative action to change statutory patent law or court action that may reinterpret existing law in ways affecting the scope or validity of issued patents. The patent applications that we own or license may fail to result in issued patents in the United States or foreign countries. Competitors in the field of cosmetics and botulinum toxin have created a substantial amount of prior art, including scientific publications, patents and patent applications. Our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between our technology and the prior art allow our technology to be patentable over the prior art. Even if the patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope of such issued patents or any other issued patents we own or license, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. For example, patents granted by the European Patent Office may be opposed by any person within nine months from the publication of their grant. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property or prevent others from designing around our claims. In addition, recent changes to the patent laws of the United States provide additional procedures for third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents based on patent applications filed after March 15, 2013. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patents and patent applications we hold or pursue with respect to RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates is challenged, then it could threaten our ability to commercialize RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, and could threaten our ability to prevent competitive products from being marketed. Further, if we encounter delays in our clinical trials, the period of time during which we could market RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates under patent protection would be reduced. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing, we cannot be certain that we were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our patents or patent applications. Furthermore, for applications filed before March 16, 2013, or patents issuing from such applications, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third party, or instituted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications and patents. As of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first-to-file” system for deciding which party should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications are filed by different parties claiming the same invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by the third party.

The change to “first-to-file” from “first-to-invent” is one of the changes to the patent laws of the United States resulting from the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act signed into law on September 16, 2011. Among some of the other changes to the patent laws are changes that limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and providing opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in

46

Table of Contents

United States federal court necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action.

Even where laws provide protection, costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights, and the outcome of such litigation would be uncertain. Moreover, any actions we may bring to enforce our intellectual property against our competitors could provoke them to bring counterclaims against us, and some of our competitors have substantially greater intellectual property portfolios than we have.

We also rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that may not be patentable, processes for which patents may be difficult to obtain or enforce and any other elements of our product development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents.

In an effort to protect our trade secrets and other confidential information, we require our employees, consultants, collaborators and advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of their relationships with us. These agreements require that all confidential information developed by the individual or made known to the individual by us during the course of the individual’s relationship with us be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties. These agreements, however, may not provide us with adequate protection against improper use or disclosure of confidential information, and these agreements may be breached. Adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our confidential information. A breach of confidentiality could significantly affect our competitive position. In addition, in some situations, these agreements may conflict with, or be subject to, the rights of third parties with whom our employees, consultants, collaborators or advisors have previous employment or consulting relationships. To the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use any intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in any related or resulting know-how and inventions. Also, others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets and other confidential information.

If we infringe or are alleged to infringe intellectual property rights of third parties, our business could be harmed.

Our research, development and commercialization activities may infringe or otherwise violate or be claimed to infringe or otherwise violate patents owned or controlled by other parties. Competitors in the field of cosmetics and botulinum toxin have developed large portfolios of patents and patent applications in fields relating to our business. For example, there are patents held by third parties that relate to the treatment with botulinum toxin-based products for indications we are currently developing. There may also be patent applications that have been filed but not published that, when issued as patents, could be asserted against us. These third parties could bring claims against us that would cause us to incur substantial expenses and, if successful against us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if a patent infringement suit were brought against us, we could be forced to stop or delay research, development, manufacturing or sales of the product or product candidate that is the subject of the suit.

As a result of patent infringement claims, or to avoid potential claims, we may choose or be required to seek licenses from third parties. These licenses may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us might be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened patent infringement claims, we are unable to enter into licenses on acceptable terms.

47

Table of Contents

There has been substantial litigation and other proceedings regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical industry. In addition to infringement claims against us, we may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including interference, derivation or post-grant proceedings declared or granted by the USPTO and similar proceedings in foreign countries, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current or future products. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could impair our ability to compete in the marketplace. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive and time consuming.

Competitors may infringe our intellectual property, including our patents or the patents of our licensors. As a result, we may be required to file infringement claims to stop third party infringement or unauthorized use. This can be expensive, particularly for a company of our size, and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover its technology or that the factors necessary to grant an injunction against an infringer are not satisfied.

An adverse determination of any litigation or other proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing.

Interference, derivation or other proceedings brought at the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority or patentability of inventions with respect to our patent applications or those of our licensors or collaborators. Litigation or USPTO proceedings brought by us may fail or may be invoked against us by third parties. Even if we are successful, domestic or foreign litigation or USPTO or foreign patent office proceedings may result in substantial costs and distraction to our management. We may not be able, alone or with our licensors or collaborators, to prevent misappropriation of our proprietary rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect such rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or proceedings. In addition, during the course of this kind of litigation or proceedings, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments or public access to related documents. If investors perceive these results to be negative, the market price for our common stock could be significantly harmed.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States and in some cases may even force us to grant a compulsory license to competitors or other third parties. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

48

Table of Contents

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

In addition, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in domestic and foreign intellectual property laws.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Our business and products are subject to extensive government regulation.

We are subject to extensive, complex, costly and evolving regulation by federal and state governmental authorities in the United States, principally by the FDA, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, and foreign regulatory authorities. Failure to comply with all applicable regulatory requirements, including those promulgated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FFDCA, the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, and Controlled Substances Act, may subject us to operating restrictions and criminal prosecution, monetary penalties and other disciplinary actions, including, sanctions, warning letters, product seizures, recalls, fines, injunctions, suspension, revocation of approvals, or exclusion from future participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

After our products receive regulatory approval or clearance, we, and our direct and indirect suppliers, remain subject to the periodic inspection of our plants and facilities, review of production processes, and testing of our products to confirm that we are in compliance with all applicable regulations. Adverse findings during regulatory inspections may result in the implementation of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies, or REMS, programs, completion of government mandated clinical trials, and government enforcement action relating to labeling, advertising, marketing and promotion, as well as regulations governing manufacturing controls noted above.

The regulatory approval process is highly uncertain and we may not obtain regulatory approval for the commercialization of RT001 or any future product candidates.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, selling, import, export, marketing and distribution of drug and biologic products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries, which regulations differ from country to country. Neither we nor any collaboration partner is permitted to market RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates in the United States until we receive approval of a BLA from the FDA. We have not submitted an application or obtained marketing approval for RT001 anywhere in the world. Obtaining regulatory approval of a BLA can be a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process. In addition, failure to comply with FDA and other applicable United States and foreign regulatory requirements may subject us to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions or other actions, including:

49

Table of Contents

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States or abroad, we or our collaborators must demonstrate with substantial evidence from well controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA or other foreign regulatory agencies, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from preclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we and our collaborator believe the preclinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. Administering product candidates to humans may produce undesirable side effects, which could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and result in the FDA or other regulatory authorities denying approval of a product candidate for any or all targeted indications.

Regulatory approval of a BLA or BLA supplement is not guaranteed, and the approval process is expensive and may take several years. The FDA also has substantial discretion in the approval process. Despite the time and expense expended, failure can occur at any stage, and we could encounter problems that cause us to abandon or repeat clinical trials, or perform additional preclinical studies and clinical trials. The number of preclinical studies and clinical trials that will be required for FDA approval varies depending on the product candidate, the disease or condition that the product candidate is designed to address and the regulations applicable to any particular product candidate. The FDA can delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons, including the following:

If RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy in clinical trials or do not gain approval, our business and results of operations will be materially and adversely harmed.

Even if we receive regulatory approval for RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense, limit or delay regulatory approval and subject us to penalties if we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements.

Once regulatory approval has been granted, RT001, RT002, or any approved product will be subject to continual regulatory review by the FDA and/or non-U.S. regulatory authorities. Additionally, any product candidates, if approved, will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements, including labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.

Any regulatory approvals that we or our collaborators receive for RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indications for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. In addition, if the applicable regulatory agency approves RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, the manufacturing

50

Table of Contents

processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMP and GCP for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

Our ongoing regulatory requirements may also change from time to time, potentially harming or making costlier our commercialization efforts. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or other countries. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

If we fail to obtain regulatory approvals in foreign jurisdictions for RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates, we will be unable to market our products outside of the United States.

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing manufacturing, clinical trials, commercial sales and distribution of our future products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product candidate, we must obtain approval of the product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before commencing clinical trials or marketing in those countries. The approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional clinical testing, and the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one or more foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. We may not be able to file for regulatory approvals or to do so on a timely basis, and even if we do file, we may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize our products in markets outside of the United States.

If approved, RT001, RT002 or any future products may cause or contribute to adverse medical events that we are required to report to regulatory agencies and if we fail to do so, we could be subject to sanctions that would materially harm our business.

Some participants in our clinical trials have reported adverse events after being treated with RT001. If we are successful in commercializing RT001 or any other products, FDA and foreign regulatory agency regulations require that we report certain information about adverse medical events if those products may have caused or contributed to those adverse events. The timing of our obligation to report would be triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report adverse events we become aware of within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to appreciate that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that

51

Table of Contents

is unexpected or removed in time from the use of our products. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or a foreign regulatory agency could take action including criminal prosecution, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, seizure of our products, or delay in approval or clearance of future products.

We may in the future be subject to various U.S. federal and state laws pertaining to health care fraud and abuse, including anti-kickback, self-referral, false claims and fraud laws, and any violations by us of such laws could result in fines or other penalties.

While we do not expect that RT001, if approved for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, will subject us to the various U.S. federal and state laws intended to prevent health care fraud and abuse, we may in the future become subject to such laws. The federal anti-kickback statute prohibits the offer, receipt, or payment of remuneration in exchange for or to induce the referral of patients or the use of products or services that would be paid for in whole or part by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care programs. Remuneration has been broadly defined to include anything of value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced price items and services. Many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs as well as private payors. Violations of the anti-kickback laws can result in exclusion from federal health care programs and substantial civil and criminal penalties.

The federal False Claims Act, or FCA, imposes liability on persons who, among other things, present or cause to be presented false or fraudulent claims for payment by a federal health care program. The FCA has been used to prosecute persons submitting claims for payment that are inaccurate or fraudulent, that are for services not provided as claimed, or for services that are not medically necessary. The FCA includes a whistleblower provision that allows individuals to bring actions on behalf of the federal government and share a portion of the recovery of successful claims. If our marketing or other arrangements were determined to violate anti-kickback or related laws, including the FCA, then our revenues could be adversely affected, which would likely harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

State and federal authorities have aggressively targeted medical technology companies for alleged violations of these anti-fraud statutes, based on improper research or consulting contracts with doctors, certain marketing arrangements that rely on volume-based pricing, off-label marketing schemes, and other improper promotional practices. Companies targeted in such prosecutions have paid substantial fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars or more, have been forced to implement extensive corrective action plans, and have often become subject to consent decrees severely restricting the manner in which they conduct their business. If we become the target of such an investigation or prosecution based on our contractual relationships with providers or institutions, or our marketing and promotional practices, we could face similar sanctions, which would materially harm our business.

Also, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We cannot assure you that our internal control policies and procedures will protect us from reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees, future distributors, partners, collaborators or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could result in fines, penalties or prosecution and have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and reputation.

Legislative or regulatory healthcare reforms in the United States may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory clearance or approval of RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates and to produce, market, and distribute our products after clearance or approval is obtained.

From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the regulatory clearance or approval, manufacture, and marketing of regulated products or the reimbursement thereof. In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or

52

Table of Contents

reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of RT001, RT002 or any future product candidates. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require:

Each of these would likely entail substantial time and cost and could materially harm our business and our financial results. In addition, delays in receipt of or failure to receive regulatory clearances or approvals for any future products would harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Risks Related to the Ownership of Our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock is likely to be volatile.

Prior to our IPO, there has been no public market for our common stock. An active trading market for our shares may never develop or, if developed, may not be sustained. Moreover, our stock price is likely to be volatile. The stock market in general and the market for pharmaceutical companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including:

53

Table of Contents

In addition, in the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

As a smaller company, it may be difficult for us to attract the interest of equity research analysts. A lack of research coverage may adversely affect the liquidity of and market price of our common stock. To the extent we obtain equity research analyst coverage, we will not have any control of the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of our company, or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public markets, or the perception that such sales might occur, could cause the market price of our common stock to drop significantly, even if our business is doing well.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly.

Substantially all of our existing stockholders are subject to lock-up agreements with the underwriters of our IPO that restrict the stockholders’ ability to transfer shares of our common stock for at least 180 days from the date of our IPO. The lock-up agreements limit the number of shares of common stock that may be sold immediately following the public offering. Subject to certain limitations, approximately 11,879,893 shares will become eligible for sale upon expiration of the lock-up period. In addition, shares issued or issuable upon exercise of options and warrants vested as of the expiration of the lock-up period will be eligible for sale at that time. Sales of stock by these stockholders could have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

Certain holders of approximately 10,114,701 shares of our common stock, including shares issuable upon the exercise of outstanding warrants, are entitled to certain rights with respect to the registration of their shares under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, subject to the 180-day lock-up arrangement described above. Registration of these shares under the Securities Act would result in the shares becoming freely tradable without restriction under the Securities Act, except for shares held by our affiliates as defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. Any sales of securities by these stockholders could have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

Provisions in our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage takeover attempts and lead to management entrenchment, and the market price of our common stock may be lower as a result.

Certain provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may make it difficult for a third party to acquire, or attempt to acquire, control of our company, even if a change in control was considered favorable by you and other stockholders. For example, our board of directors has the authority to issue up to 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock. Our board of directors can fix the price, rights,

54

Table of Contents

preferences, privileges, and restrictions of the preferred stock without any further vote or action by our stockholders. The issuance of shares of preferred stock may delay or prevent a change in control transaction. As a result, the market price of our common stock and the voting and other rights of our stockholders may be adversely affected. An issuance of shares of preferred stock may result in the loss of voting control to other stockholders.

Our charter documents also contain other provisions that could have an anti-takeover effect, including:

In addition, we are subject to the anti-takeover provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which regulates corporate acquisitions. These provisions could discourage potential acquisition proposals and could delay or prevent a change in control transaction. They could also have the effect of discouraging others from making tender offers for our common stock, including transactions that may be in your best interests. These provisions may also prevent changes in our management or limit the price that certain investors are willing to pay for our stock.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation also provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders.

Insiders have substantial control over us, which could limit your ability to influence the outcome of key transactions, including a change of control.

As of March 15, 2014, our directors, executive officers and each of our stockholders who own greater than 5% of our outstanding common stock and their affiliates, in the aggregate, owned approximately 52.3% of the outstanding shares of our common stock. As a result, these stockholders, if acting together, would be able to influence or control matters requiring approval by our stockholders, including the election of directors and the approval of mergers, acquisitions or other extraordinary transactions. They may have interests that differ from yours and may vote in a way with which you disagree and that may be adverse to your interests. This concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying, preventing or deterring a change of control of our company, could deprive our stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their common stock as part of a sale of our company and might affect the market price of our common stock.

Claims for indemnification by our directors and officers may reduce our available funds to satisfy successful third party claims against us and may reduce the amount of money available to us.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws provide that we will indemnify our directors and officers, in each case to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law.

55

Table of Contents

In addition, as permitted by Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated bylaws and our indemnification agreements that we have entered into with our directors and officers provide that:

Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gains.

We have not declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock to date. We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. In addition, the terms of any existing or future debt agreements may preclude us from paying dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

We incur costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies in the United States, which may adversely affect our operating results.

As a public company listed in the United States, we incur significant additional legal, accounting and other expenses. In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including regulations implemented by the SEC and the NASDAQ Stock Market, have increased our legal and financial compliance costs and have made some activities more time consuming. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. We intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If notwithstanding our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards, we fail to comply, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.

Failure to comply with these rules might also make it more difficult for us to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we might be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these events could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, on committees of our board of directors or as members of senior management.

56

Table of Contents

We are an “emerging growth company,” and if we decide to comply only with reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our common stock could be less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act and, for as long as we continue to be an “emerging growth company,” we may choose to take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to other public companies but not to “emerging growth companies,” including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earlier of (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the closing of our IPO, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenues of over $1.0 billion or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30th, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive if we choose to rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result of any choices to reduce future disclosure, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies that become public can delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves of this exemption from new or revised accounting standards and, therefore, we will be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

None.

Our headquarters is located in Newark, California, where we occupy approximately 90,000 square feet of office, laboratory and manufacturing space. The current term of our lease expires in January 2025. We have an option to extend the lease for two additional terms of seven years, which would extend our lease through January 2039. We believe that our current facilities are adequate for our needs and for the immediate future and that, should it be needed, additional space can be leased to accommodate any future growth.

From time to time, we may be involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of our operations. We are not currently involved in any known legal proceedings. We may, however, be involved in material legal proceedings in the future. Such matters are subject to uncertainty and there can be no assurance that such legal proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Not applicable.

57

Table of Contents

PART II

Our common stock has been trading on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “RVNC” since our IPO on February 6, 2014. Prior to this date, there was no public market for our common stock. On March 26, 2014, the closing price of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market was $30.82 per share.

Holders of Records

As of March 26, 2014, there were approximately 103 holders of record of our common stock.

Dividend Policy

We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any determination to pay dividends in the future will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will be dependent on a number of factors, including our earnings, capital requirements, overall financial conditions, business prospects, contractual restrictions and other factors our board of directors may deem relevant. Our loan and security agreement with Hercules prohibits the payment of dividends.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

In 2013, we have made sales of unregistered securities as described below. Share amounts have been retroactively adjusted to give effect to a reverse stock split of 1 -for- 15 of our stock effected on February 3, 2014.

(1) We granted stock options under our 2012 Equity Incentive Plan to purchase an aggregate of 992,213 shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging between $8.70 and $9.15 per share to a total of 23 employees, directors and consultants. Of these, stock options to purchase an aggregate of 50,100 shares have been cancelled without being exercised, and 942,113 shares remain outstanding.

(2) We issued and sold an aggregate of 4,281 shares of our common stock to employees, directors and consultants at the exercise price of $2.55 per share upon the exercise of stock options granted under our 2002 Equity Incentive Plan.

(3) On March 29, 2013, all outstanding convertible promissory notes in the aggregate amount of $63,319,658.48 that were issued between January 24, 2011 and December 6, 2012 were exchanged for 4,748,468 shares of our Series E-4 convertible preferred stock. Between October 2013 and December 2013, in connection with a convertible note financing, we issued convertible promissory notes to 26 accredited investors for an aggregate principal amount of $19.40 million. Upon the closing of our IPO, these convertible promissory notes were converted into 1,348,847 shares of our common stock.

(4) In connection with the Series E-5 Preferred Stock financing, which closed on March 29, 2013, we issued and sold common stock warrants exercisable for an aggregate of 545,492 shares of our common stock, at exercise price of $0.15 per share. Common stock warrants exercisable for 220 shares, 6,246 shares, 5,215 shares,

58

Table of Contents

3,344 shares, 6,688 and 30,768 shares were exercised on March 7, 2013, May 1, 2013, May 30, 2013, June 3, 2013, June 7, 2013 and December 16, 2013, respectively. In addition, warrants to purchase 5,078 shares of our Series C-2 convertible preferred stock became exercisable for 5,078 shares of our Series E-2 convertible preferred stock, warrants to purchase 3,623 shares of our Series C-3 convertible preferred stock became exercisable for 3,623 shares of our Series E-2 convertible preferred stock, warrants to purchase 14,316 shares of our Series D convertible preferred stock became exercisable for 30,338 shares of our Series E-3 convertible preferred stock, warrants to purchase 19,774 shares of our Series D convertible preferred stock became exercisable for 88,292 shares of our Series E-4 convertible preferred stock, and warrants to purchase 17,977 shares of our Series D convertible preferred stock became exercisable for 53,511 shares of our Series E-5 convertible preferred stock, each pursuant to the terms of such warrants in connection with the closing of our Series E preferred stock financing on March 29, 2013. In connection with a convertible note financing in 2013, we issued and sold warrants to purchase an aggregate of $5.40 million of our common stock to 26 accredited investors at an exercise price of $0.15 per share. All of these common warrants were automatically net exercised into 405,594 shares of our common stock immediately prior to the closing of our IPO.

(5) In connection with the closing of our Series E preferred stock financing on March 29, 2013, 387,241 shares of our Series E-1 convertible preferred stock were issued in exchange for all shares of our Series A, Series B-1 and Series B-2 preferred stock then outstanding on a 1 to 1 basis, 585,559 shares of our Series E-2 convertible preferred stock were issued in exchange for all shares of our Series C-1 and Series C-2 preferred stock then outstanding on a 1 to 1 basis, and 1,150,341 shares of our Series E-3 convertible preferred stock were issued in exchange for all shares of our Series D preferred stock then outstanding on a 2.119 to 1 basis.

(6) Between February 5, 2013 and May 28, 2013, we issued an aggregate of 1,818,390 shares of our Series E-5 convertible preferred stock to 38 accredited investors at a per share price of $22.425, for aggregate consideration of $40,777,782.

Unless otherwise stated, the sales of the above securities were deemed to be exempt from registration under the Securities Act in reliance upon Section 4(2) of the Securities Act, or Regulation D promulgated thereunder, or Rule 701 promulgated under Section 3(b) of the Securities Act as transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering or pursuant to benefit plans and contracts relating to compensation as provided under Rule 701. The recipients of the securities in each of these transactions represented their intentions to acquire the securities for investment only and not with a view to or for sale in connection with any distribution thereof and appropriate legends were placed upon the stock certificates issued in these transactions.

Use of Proceeds

On February 5, 2014, our registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-193154) was declared effective for our IPO, pursuant to which we sold 6,900,000 shares of common stock at a public offering price of $16.00 per share for an aggregate offering price of $110.4 million. Cowen and Company, LLC and Piper Jaffray & Co. acted as joint book-running manager and BMO Capital Markets Corp. acted as lead manager for the offering.

As a result of the IPO, we received net proceeds of $102.7 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering expenses totaling $7.7 million. None of the expenses associated with the IPO were paid to directors, officers or persons owning ten percent or more of our common stock or to their associates, or to our affiliates.

There has been no material change in the planned use of proceeds from our IPO as described in our final prospectus filed with the SEC pursuant to Rule 424(b) on February 6, 2014.

59

Table of Contents

The information set forth below for the three years ended December 31, 2013 is not necessarily indicative of results of future operations, and should be read in conjunction with Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and the consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included in Item 8, Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, of this Form 10-K to fully understand the factors that may affect the comparability of the information presented below.

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

(In thousands, except per share data)

60

Table of Contents

The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) is intended to help the reader understand our results of operations and financial condition. MD&A is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, our audited Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements and other disclosures included in this Annual Report on this Form 10-K (including the disclosures under “Item 1A. Risk Factors”). Our Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and are presented in U.S. dollars.

Overview

We are a clinical stage specialty biopharmaceutical company focused on the development, manufacturing and commercialization of novel botulinum toxin products for multiple aesthetic and therapeutic applications. Botulinum toxin is a well-characterized protein currently used in numerous aesthetic and therapeutic indications and represents a multi-billion dollar market in the United States and other countries. All currently approved and commercially available botulinum toxin products are administered by injection. Our lead product candidate, RT001, is a topical formulation of botulinum toxin type A, which we believe has significant advantages over existing injectable products and could significantly expand the botulinum toxin market beyond existing users. Our second product candidate, RT002, is a novel injectable formulation of botulinum toxin type A designed to be more targeted and longer lasting than currently available botulinum toxin injectable products. Both of our product candidates combine our purified botulinum toxin with our proprietary TransMTS^® peptide delivery system.

We are evaluating RT001 in a broad clinical program that includes aesthetic indications such as lateral canthal lines, the wrinkles around the eyes which are commonly referred to as crow’s feet lines, and therapeutic indications such as hyperhidrosis, or excessive sweating, migraine headache and allergic rhinitis, or inflammation of the mucous membrane inside the nose.

We are in a Phase 3 clinical development program of RT001 in North America for the treatment of crow’s feet lines, and we plan to initiate an additional Phase 3 clinical trial in Europe in 2015. We plan to initiate a Phase 3 open label safety study for RT001 in the first half of 2014. We expect to receive primary efficacy data from a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial of RT001 in the second half of 2014. To date, we have conducted thirteen clinical trials for RT001, with a total of over 1,400 subjects for the treatment of crow’s feet lines. In these Phase 2 clinical trials, RT001 has demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction in crow’s feet lines. These and other studies have also indicated that RT001 is well tolerated with no serious adverse events related to study drug or study treatment procedures or other safety concerns. RT001 is our lead product candidate in clinical development and we are substantially dependent on its regulatory approval and successful commercialization.

Since commencing operations in 2002, we have devoted substantially all our efforts identifying and developing product candidates for the aesthetic and therapeutic markets, recruiting personnel and raising capital. We have devoted predominantly all of our resources to the preclinical and clinical development of, and manufacturing capabilities for, RT001 and RT002. We have retained all rights to develop and commercialize RT001 and RT002 worldwide. We have not filed for approval with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, for the commercialization of RT001 and we have not generated any revenue from product sales for RT001. Through December 31, 2013, we have funded substantially all of our operations through the sale and issuance of our preferred stock, venture debt and convertible debt. In the year ended December 31, 2013, we raised proceeds in the aggregate amount of $40.8 million through the sale of shares of our Series E convertible preferred stock. We also raised $23.65 million through the issuance of convertible notes and common stock warrants in the fourth quarter of 2013 and in January 2014. On February 6, 2014, we sold 6,900,000 shares of common stock at $16 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $102.7 million in our IPO.

61

Table of Contents

We have never been profitable and, as of December 31, 2013, had an accumulated deficit of $195.9 million. We incurred net losses of $52.4 million, $58.3 million and $44.9 million in the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, we had cash and cash equivalents of $3.9 million. We expect to continue to incur net operating losses for at least the next several years as we advance RT001 and RT002 through clinical development, seek regulatory approval, prepare for and, if approved, proceed to commercialization. We have the ability to manufacture our own botulinum toxin type A product to support our clinical trials and eventually a substantial portion of our commercial production. Additionally, we currently utilize third-party clinical research organizations, or CROs, to carry out our clinical development and we do not yet have a sales organization. We will need substantial additional funding to support our operating activities, especially as we approach anticipated regulatory approval in the United States and other territories and begin to establish our sales capabilities. Adequate funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Our failure to obtain sufficient funds on acceptable terms when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Medicis Settlement

In October 2012, we entered into a settlement and termination agreement with Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation, or Medicis, through which we reacquired from Medicis rights in all territories for RT001 and RT002. The agreement terminated our license agreement with Medicis and requires that we make payments to them of up to $25.0 million, comprised of (i) an upfront payment of $7.0 million, which we made in November 2012, (ii) payments of $14.0 million from a portion of specified types of cash proceeds received by us, an aggregate of $6.9 million of which we paid in April and May 2013 and $7.1 million in February 2014, and (iii) a payment of $4.0 million upon the achievement of specified regulatory milestones. The Medicis settlement also impacted our deferred revenue, research and development expenses, our stockholders’ deficit and liabilities due to derivatives derived from the settlement payments, which are discussed below and in Note 4 of our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Results of Operations

Revenue

During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, we recognized revenue primarily from license and royalty agreements and from the sale of products. We did not have any product revenue during the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 and we recognized only a limited amount of product revenue during the year ended December 31, 2011 of which all was derived from the promotion and sale of Relastin, an over-the-counter skincare product that does not incorporate any of our technology related to RT001 or RT002.

We recognized royalty revenue during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 related to the Relastin asset purchase and royalty agreement and we did not recognize any royalty revenue during the year ended December 31, 2011. The Relastin royalty agreement provides for minimum royalty payment of $0.3 million per year, to be paid quarterly for up to 15 years from the execution date. The royalty agreement also provided for one-time payments upon achievement of certain milestones. In the year ended December 31, 2013, we received a one-time milestone payment of $150,000. The acquirer may terminate the royalty agreement with 90 days’ notice as of December 31, 2013 with the rights to the Relastin product line reverting back to us. We do not currently have any plans for the future of Relastin as our focus has been primarily on the development of RT001 and RT002.

Our license revenue has historically been derived through nonrefundable technology license fees for our RT001 and RT002 product candidates. During the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, our license revenue was derived from an arrangement with Medicis whereby, prior to our settlement with them, we had granted them specified rights to RT002 in return for an upfront payment. The upfront payment was deferred and recognized over the estimated performance period; however, we did not recognize any license revenue from the agreement with Medicis during the year ended December 31, 2013 as the prior license agreement was discontinued as part

62

Table of Contents

of the Medicis legal settlement in October 2012. In the year ended December 31, 2013, we recognized license revenue of $0.2 million pursuant to an exclusive technology evaluation agreement in June 2013 whereby we received an upfront payment in the amount of $0.3 million, which was initially recorded as deferred revenue and is being recognized over the estimated performance period.

Costs and Operating Expenses

Our cost and operating expenses consist of cost of revenue, research and development expenses and sales, general and administrative expenses. Our cost of revenue has not been significant to date. As for our operating expenses, the largest component is our personnel costs which consist primarily of wages, benefits and bonuses as well as the related stock-based compensation. We expect costs to continue to increase in absolute dollars as we hire new employees to continue to grow our business and we expect clinical trial and other expenses paid to third parties to increase as we complete development of RT001, RT002 or any other product candidates.

Research and Development Expenses

We recognize research and development expenses as they are incurred. Since our inception, we have focused on our clinical development programs and the related research and development. Our research and development expenses consist primarily of:

We expense both internal and external research and development expenses as they are incurred. We have been developing RT001 and RT002 since 2002 and we typically use our employees, consultants and infrastructure resources across both programs.

For the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, costs associated with our manufacturing, quality and regulatory efforts for both RT001 and RT002 development have been our largest research and development related expenses, totaling $20.3 million, or 73.0%, $30.3 million, or 92.6% and $21.9 million, or 96.33%, of research and development expenses in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. These costs do not include clinical costs associated with the development of RT001 and RT002. We believe that the strict allocation of costs by product candidate would not be meaningful. As such, we generally do not track these costs by product candidate.

63

Table of Contents

Clinical costs associated with the development of RT001 and RT002, including clinical trials of RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines and clinical trials of RT002 for the improvement of glabellar lines, totaled $7.5 million, or 27.0%, $2.4 million, or 7.33% and $0.9 million, or 4.0% of research and development expenses in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Clinical costs associated with the development of RT002 have been insignificant to date.

Our research and development expenditures are subject to numerous uncertainties primarily related to the timing and cost needed to complete our respective projects. Further, the development timelines, the probability of success and development expenses can differ materially from expectations and the completion of clinical trials may take several years or more depending on the type, complexity, novelty and intended use of a product candidate. Accordingly, the cost of clinical trials may vary significantly over the life of a project as a result of differences arising during clinical development. We expect our research and development expenses to increase as we continue our Phase 3 clinical development of RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines or if the FDA requires us to do additional clinical trials for its approval and as we enter into clinical trials for RT001 for hyperhidrosis and other indications and for RT002.

Sales, General and Administrative Expenses

Sales, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of personnel costs, including stock-based compensation, for employees in our commercial, administration, finance and business development functions. Other significant expenses include professional fees for accounting and legal services, including legal services associated with obtaining and maintaining patents. We expect that our sales, general and administrative expenses will increase with the continued development of, and if approved, the commercialization of RT001 and as we operate as a public company.

Other Income (Expense)

Other income (expense) is comprised of interest income, interest expense, changes in fair value of derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes, changes in fair value of derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement, changes in fair value of convertible preferred stock warrant liability and other income (expense), net.

Interest Income

Interest income consists primarily of interest income earned on our cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities balances. We expect interest income to vary each reporting period depending on our average cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities balances during the period and market interest rates. To date, our interest income has not been significant in any individual period.

Interest Expense

Interest expense primarily consists of the interest charges associated with our convertible notes, notes payable and capital lease obligations. Notes payable under our term loan agreement with Hercules bears interest at a rate which is the greater of (i) 9.85% per annum or (ii) 9.85% per annum plus the difference of the prime rate less 3.25%. The interest charge on our convertible notes and capital lease obligations is fixed at the inception of the related transaction based on the incremental borrowing rate in effect on such date. Our interest expense also includes cash and non-cash components with the non-cash components consisting of (i) interest recognized from the amortization of debt issuance costs which are generally derived from cash payments related to the issuance of our convertible notes and our notes payable and which are capitalized on our balance sheets, (ii) interest recognized from the amortization of debt discounts derived from the issuance of warrants and derivatives issued in conjunction with our outstanding convertible notes which are also capitalized on our balance sheets and (iii) interest recognized on our convertible notes which was not paid and was instead converted into shares of our convertible preferred stock.

64

Table of Contents

In March 2013, all of our then-outstanding convertible notes converted into shares of convertible preferred stock and, as a result, we expect our interest expense to substantially decrease. However, this decrease was partially offset by new interest expense resulting from the issuance of $23.65 million in convertible notes in the fourth quarter of 2013 and January 2014, or the “2013 Notes”, and the Essex Capital Facility. The then-outstanding principal amount balance and any accrued interest through October 7, 2014 on the 2013 Notes converted into 1,637,846 shares of common stock upon our IPO in February 2014. See Note 19 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Change in Fair Value of Derivative Liabilities Associated with 2011 Notes

Our derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes are classified as liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets and are remeasured to fair value at each balance sheet date with the corresponding gain or loss from the adjustment recorded in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss. In March 2013, all of our then-outstanding convertible notes, to which these derivative liabilities relate, converted into shares of convertible preferred stock and, as a result, these derivative liabilities were settled and will no longer require periodic fair value remeasurements. However, we recorded the changes in fair value of derivative liabilities associated with the 2013 Notes, which will require remeasurement at each balance sheet date until the notes mature or settle prior to maturity. We recorded the derivative liabilities as a debt discount that we will amortize using the effective interest method over the term of the notes. See Note 5 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Change in Fair Value of Derivative Liabilities Associated with the Medicis Settlement

Our outstanding derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement are classified as liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet. These liabilities will be reduced as the related payments are made under the settlement agreement and the remaining liabilities will be subsequently remeasured to fair value at each balance sheet date with the corresponding gain or loss from the adjustment recorded in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss. Upon the completion of our IPO in February 2014, we paid Medicis $7.1 million in settlement of our remaining obligation under the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement of the October 2012 Medicis settlement. See “— Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 — Other Income (Expense).” We will continue to record adjustments to the fair value of the Medicis settlement derivative liabilities until the Product Approval Payment has been paid.

Change in Fair Value of Common Stock Warrant Liability

Common stock warrants issued in connection with the 2013 Notes were classified as liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet and require remeasurement at each balance sheet date. We recorded these warrant liabilities as a debt discount that we will amortize using the effective interest method over the term of the 2013 Notes. Upon the completion of our IPO, these common stock warrants liabilities were remeasured to fair value and settled in conjunction with the cashless net exercise of these warrants. See Note 5 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

In February 2014, upon the completion of our IPO, the outstanding principal amount balance and any accrued interest on the 2013 Notes converted into common stock. Accordingly, the common stock warrants were net exercised. See Note 19 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Change in Fair Value of Convertible Preferred Stock Warrant Liability

Our outstanding convertible preferred stock warrants are classified as liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets at fair value as they are contingently redeemable because they may obligate us to transfer assets to the

65

Table of Contents

holders at a future date under certain circumstances, such as a deemed liquidation event. The convertible preferred stock warrants are remeasured to fair value at each balance sheet date with the corresponding gain or loss from the adjustment recorded in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

In February 2014, in connection with our IPO, warrants to purchase 22,856 shares of convertible preferred stocks were redeemed by us in cash upon the exercise of the warrants’ put option by the warrant holders, and the remaining warrants to purchase 161,630 shares of convertible preferred stocks were converted to warrants to purchase 161,630 shares of common stock, upon completion of our IPO in February 2014. See Note 19 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Other Income (Expense), net

Other income (expense), net is comprised of miscellaneous tax and other expense items.

Income Taxes

Since inception, we have incurred net losses and have not recorded any U.S. federal or state income tax and the tax benefits of our operating losses have been fully offset by valuation allowances.

Results of Operations

The following tables provide our consolidated statements of operations data for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 which was derived from our audited consolidated financial statements as included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

66

Table of Contents

Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2013 and 2012

The following table presents our revenue for the periods indicated and related changes from the prior period:

Revenue

Our total revenue decreased by $0.1 million, or 14%, to $0.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 from $0.7 million during year ended December 31, 2012 primarily due to decrease in licensing revenue of $0.3 million, offset by an increase in royalty revenue of $0.2 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, we entered into the Relastin asset purchase agreement for the sale of the Relastin product line. The Relastin asset purchase and royalty agreement provides that we will receive royalties on future sales of Relastin with a minimum royalty payment of $0.3 million per year, to be paid quarterly for up to 15 years from the execution date. However, the acquirer may terminate the royalty agreement with 90 days’ notice as of December 31, 2013 with the product rights to the Relastin product line reverting to us. We recognized the annual minimum royalty payment on a pro rata basis in the amount of $0.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 as set forth in the Relastin asset purchase agreement. Under the Relastin asset purchase agreement, we also recognized $150,000 in revenue in the year ended December 31, 2013 for achievement of a one-time milestone. With the divestment of Relastin, our primary focus has been on the development of RT001 and RT002.

Our license revenue decreased to $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 from $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease was due to the termination of a license agreement for RT002 as a result of the Medicis settlement in October 2012. This decrease was partially offset by $0.2 million of revenue recognized pursuant to an exclusive technology evaluation agreement whereby we received an upfront payment in the amount of $0.3 million which was initially recorded as deferred revenue and is being recognized over the estimated performance period. Prior to the termination of the Medicis license agreement, we were recognizing license revenue of $0.5 million per year through the amortization of an upfront payment made by Medicis during the year ended December 31, 2009, which was initially recorded as deferred revenue. As a result of the termination of the Medicis license agreement, we will no longer recognize any license revenue from the 2009 Medicis license agreement for RT002.

67

Table of Contents

Operating Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses decreased by $4.9 million, or 15%, to $27.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 from $32.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. Our research and development expenses fluctuate as projects transition from one development phase to the next. Depending on the stage of completion and level of effort related to each development phase undertaken, we may reflect variations in our research and development expense. Our overall research and development expenses decreased by $4.9 million primarily due to one-time costs incurred in connection with the reacquisition of the RT001 and RT002 technology rights from Medicis in October 2012, offset by increased clinical research organization (CRO) costs.

Sales, General and Administrative Expenses

Sales, general and administrative expenses decreased by $0.2 million, or 2%, to $11.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 from $11.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. The change was primarily attributable to a decrease in professional fees relating to the Medicis litigation during the year ended December 31, 2012.

Other Income (Expense)

Our interest expense decreased by $13.8 million, or 48%, to $15.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 from $29.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 primarily due to the conversion of the then-outstanding convertible notes into Series E-4 convertible preferred stock in March 2013. We incurred interest charges, including amortization of the related debt discount, on our then-outstanding

68

Table of Contents

convertible notes and notes payable. In addition, we accrued and charged to interest expense an amount equal to 150% of the aggregate amount of the outstanding principal and accrued interest which the holders of these convertible notes were entitled to receive if the notes would have been paid upon maturity in May 2013. Upon the conversion of these convertible notes in March 2013, we ceased accruing interest related to the convertible notes. During the fourth quarter of the year ended December 31, 2013, we issued convertible promissory notes, or 2013 Notes, in the amount of $19.4 million in aggregate. The 2013 Notes had conversion and redemption features related to the conversion of the notes which were determined to be embedded derivatives requiring bifurcation and separate accounting. The derivative liability required periodic remeasurements to fair value while the derivative was still outstanding and accordingly, we recognized remeasurement gains for the 2013 Notes during the year ended December 31, 2013 of $0.9 million.

Our interest expense includes cash and non-cash components. These non-cash components of our interest expense consist of (i) interest recognized from the amortization of debt issuance costs which are generally derived from cash payments related to the issuance of our convertible notes and our notes payable and which are capitalized on our balance sheets, (ii) interest recognized from the amortization of debt discounts derived from the issuance of warrants and derivatives issued in conjunction with our outstanding convertible notes which are also capitalized on our balance sheets, and (iii) interest recognized on our convertible notes which was not paid and was instead converted into shares of our convertible preferred stock. The capitalized amounts related to the debt issuance costs and debt discounts are generally amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt instruments. The interest expense by cash and non-cash components is as follows:

The change in the fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes changed by $11.2 million to a gain of $2.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to a gain of $13.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. The gain from the remeasurement of the derivative liabilities associated with the 2011 convertible notes was due to the decrease in the fair value of these derivatives liabilities to approximately zero immediately prior to the conversion of the convertible notes in March 2013, as the execution of a qualified financing approached certainty. For the 2013 Notes and the Essex Capital notes, there was less than $0.4 million of interest expense recorded in the year ended December 31, 2013.

The change in the fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement was a gain in the amount of $47,000 and these derivatives were not outstanding during the year ended December 31, 2012. The gain from the remeasurement of the derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement was due primarily to a decrease in the fair value of the Product Approval Payment (which is a payment due upon marketing approval of RT001 or RT002 in the United States or any major European market) derivative liability in the amount of $0.8 million due to our updated estimate of the probability of the related product approval

69

Table of Contents

during the year ended December 31, 2013. This gain was partially offset by an increase in the fair value of the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement Payment (which is a payment due to Medicis upon our achievement of specified capital raising achievements) derivative liability in the amount of $0.7 million as a result of our estimate of the timing of the related payments.

The change in the fair value of the common stock warrant liability increased by $0.6 million, reflecting a loss of $0.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2013. The loss from the re-measurement of the common stock warrant liability was due to an increase in the fair value of the common stock warrants issued in connection with the 2013 Notes. The Company accounted for the warrants to purchase shares of its common stock in connection with the 2013 Notes as liabilities at fair value because the number of common stock shares issuable under the common stock warrants is not fixed until exercise. During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company did not issue warrants to purchase common stock that were accounted for as liabilities requiring remeasurement at each financial reporting period.

The change in the fair value of the convertible preferred stock warrant liability decreased by $0.9 million reflecting a loss of $0.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to a gain of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. The loss from the remeasurement of the convertible preferred stock warrant liability was due to the increase in the fair value of our outstanding convertible preferred stock warrants primarily as a result of a reduction in the exercise price of the warrants due to the modification of the terms as a result of the Series E financing during the year ended December 31, 2013.

In February 2014, the outstanding principal amount balance and any accrued interest through October 7, 2014 on the 2013 Notes converted into 1,637,846 shares of common stock at the closing of our IPO at a conversion price equal to the IPO price of $16.00 per share. Additionally, the warrants associated with the 2013 Notes were net exercised into 405,594 shares of common stock effective immediately prior to the closing of our IPO in February 2014.

We capitalized interest costs in the amount of $453,000 within construction-in-progress during the year ended December 31, 2013.

Other income (expense), net is comprised of miscellaneous tax and other expense items.

Income Taxes

There was no provision or benefit from income taxes during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2012 and 2011

The following table presents our revenue for the periods indicated and related changes from the prior period:

Revenue

70

Table of Contents

Our total revenue increased by $0.2 million, or 29%, to $0.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 from $0.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2011.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, we generated limited product revenue from the promotion and sale of Relastin, an over-the-counter skincare product. During the year ended December 31, 2011, we entered into an asset purchase agreement for the sale of the Relastin product line and royalties on future sales of Relastin. As a result, our only product revenue during the years presented consists of $57,000 in the year ended December 31, 2011 from sales of Relastin and we did not have any product revenue during the year ended December 31, 2012.

We recognized royalty revenue during the year ended December 31, 2012 in the amount of $0.3 million related to the Relastin asset purchase and royalty agreement and we did not recognize any royalty revenue during the year ended December 31, 2011. The Relastin royalty agreement provides for minimum royalty payment of $0.3 million per year, to be paid quarterly for up to 15 years from the execution date; however, the acquirer may terminate the royalty agreement with 90 days’ notice as of December 31, 2013 with the rights to the Relastin product line reverting back to us. With the divestment of Relastin, our primary focus has been on the development of RT001 and RT002.

Our license revenue decreased by $0.1 million, or 17%, to $0.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 from $0.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. The decrease was due to the termination of a license agreement for RT002 as a result of the Medicis settlement in October 2012. Prior to the termination of the Medicis license agreement, we were recognizing license revenue of $0.5 million per year through the amortization of an upfront payment made by Medicis during the year ended December 31, 2009, which was initially recorded as deferred revenue. As a result of the termination of the Medicis license agreement, we will no longer recognize any license revenue from the 2009 Medicis license agreement for RT002.

Operating Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses increased by $10.0 million, or 44%, to $32.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 from $22.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. Of this increase, $9.0 million was due to the reacquisition of technology rights from Medicis as part of our Medicis settlement, which was immediately expensed. Our research and development expenses fluctuate as projects transition from one development phase to the next. Depending on the stage of completion and level of effort related to each development phase undertaken, we may reflect variations in our research and development spending. Our overall research and development spending increased as we experienced a $0.7 million increase in personnel costs due to increased head count related to our research efforts and an increase in outside services of $0.6 million due to increased clinical trials. These increases were partially offset by reductions in our material purchases of $0.4 million and a decrease in stock-based compensation costs of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2012.

Sales, General and Administrative Expenses

Sales, general and administrative expenses increased by $5.6 million, or 102%, to $11.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 from $5.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. The change was

71

Table of Contents

primarily attributable to a $5.4 million increase in legal expenses associated with the Medicis settlement and, to a lesser extent, legal expenses associated with our patents and patent protection. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in stock-based compensation costs of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2012.

Other Income (Expense)

Our interest expense increased by $11.2 million, or 63%, to $29.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 from $17.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2011 as we incurred a full year of interest charges, including amortization of the related debt discount, on our outstanding convertible notes and notes payable which were first issued during the year ended December 31, 2011 with additional borrowings of $18.2 million undertaken in connection with the convertible notes issued during the year ended December 31, 2012.

Our interest expense includes cash and non-cash components. These non-cash components of our interest expense consist of (i) interest recognized from the amortization of debt issuance costs which are generally derived from cash payments related to the issuance of our convertible notes and our notes payable and which are capitalized on our balance sheets, (ii) interest recognized from the amortization of debt discounts derived from the issuance of warrants and derivatives issued in conjunction with our outstanding convertible notes which are also capitalized on our balance sheets, and (iii) interest recognized on our convertible notes which was not paid and was instead converted into shares of our convertible preferred stock. The capitalized amounts related to the debt issuance costs and debt discounts are generally amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt instruments. The interest expense by cash and non-cash components is as follows:

The fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes changed by $14.2 million to a gain of $13.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to a charge of $0.4 million during

72

Table of Contents

the year ended December 31, 2011. The gain from the remeasurement of the outstanding derivative liabilities was due to the reduction in the fair value of the related derivatives primarily as a result of the increased probability of the convertible notes being repaid at maturity as opposed to conversion upon a change of control or initial public offering.

The fair value of the convertible preferred stock warrant liability changed by $0.7 million, or 85%, to a gain of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to a gain of $0.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. The gain from the remeasurement of the convertible preferred stock warrant liability was due to the reduction in the fair value of our outstanding convertible preferred stock warrant liability primarily as a result of a reduction in the contractual term of the warrants.

Other income (expense), net changed by $0.3 million to expense of $0.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to income of $0.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. The $0.3 million change in other income (expense), net was primarily a result of payment to us in the amount of $0.3 million for a one-time option to license certain zinc-based topical skin care products which was recognized during the year ended December 31, 2011.

Income Taxes

There was no provision or benefit from income taxes during the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.

2014 Outlook

We anticipate that 2014 operating expenses excluding amortization, depreciation and stock-based compensation will be in the range of $55 to $60 million. We expect 2014 cash burn to be in the range of $75 million to $85 million. Cash burn in 2014 includes $7.1 million paid under the Company’s settlement agreement with Medicis and debt service of $10 to $11 million.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since our inception, we have incurred losses from operations and negative cash flows from our operations. For the year ended December 31, 2013, we had a net loss of $52.4 million, which includes non-cash interest expenses in the aggregate amount of $14.0 million related to the amortization of debt issuance costs, warrants and derivatives issued in conjunction with our previously outstanding debt instruments, and we also used $45.7 million for our operating activities. As of December 31, 2013, we had a working capital deficit of $42.7 million and an accumulated deficit of $195.9 million. Our principal sources of liquidity as of December 31, 2013 consisted of cash and cash equivalents of $3.9 million.

Historically, we have financed our operations primarily through private placements of our convertible preferred stock and the proceeds received from our debt financings. From inception through December 31, 2013, we have received net cash proceeds of (i) $218.8 million from the sale of convertible preferred stock and convertible notes, (ii) $22.0 million from a term loan and (iii) $2.5 million from a capital lease loan.

In September 2011, we entered into a $22.0 million term loan agreement with Hercules. Notes payable under the Hercules term loan bear interest at the greater of (i) 9.85% per annum or (ii) 9.85% per annum plus the difference of the prime rate less 3.25% per annum, annumand requires the principal balance to be repaid in thirty-three equal monthly installments of $764,000 beginning July 2012. The balance of this term loan was $11.0 million as of December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the applicable interest rate under the term loan was 9.85%. We have the right to prepay amounts due under the Hercules term loan in whole, but not in part, subject to paying a prepayment premium equal to $300,000 if prepaid prior to September 20, 2014 and $150,000 if prepaid later. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, we made principal payments in the amount of $7.6 million and $3.4 million, respectively, on our outstanding notes payable and we will continue to make monthly payments in the amount of $0.8 million until March 2015. In addition, we are required to make

73

Table of Contents

an end of term payment of $400,000, subject to an increase to $500,000, if we elect to prepay amounts due under the term loan. Concurrently with the March 2013 closings of the Series E preferred stock financing, all of our outstanding convertible notes and related accrued interest in the amount of $71.0 million converted into 4,748,484 shares of Series E-4 convertible preferred stock.

In addition, we issued approximately $19.4 million and $4.25 million of convertible notes in the fourth quarter of 2013 and January 2014, respectively, which carry an annual interest rate of 12% and mature in October 2014. The principal and interest under these 2013 Notes are convertible into shares of convertible preferred stock in the next qualified financing at the per share price of the stock sold in the financing. All outstanding interest and unpaid accrued interest, including interest that would have accrued had the 2013 Notes remained outstanding through October 7, 2014, were automatically converted into 1,637,846 shares of common stock immediately prior to our IPO on February 6, 2014.

In connection with the 2013 Notes, we issued warrants to purchase common stock, or 2013 warrants, which were net-exercised into 405,594 shares of our common stock prior to the closing of our IPO in February 2014.

In December 2013, we entered into the Essex Capital Facility to finance the construction and installation of equipment for use in our manufacturing facility. Under this facility, Essex Capital will provide us a series of short-term notes aggregating to $10.8 million during the construction period which is expected to last through 2014. These short-term notes mature one year from the date of the Essex Capital Facility and bear interest at 11.5%. Upon completion of our initial public offering in February 2014, the interest rate decreased to 10.375.% Upon completion of the installation and acceptance of equipment, we will sell the equipment back to Essex Capital for a purchase price equal to the principal and any accrued interest then outstanding on the notes issued to finance such equipment. We will then lease back the equipment for a thirty-six month lease term. At the end of the lease term, we will have the option to purchase the equipment at 10% of the original equipment cost. The short-term notes to be issued under the Essex Capital Facility are secured by all of our tangible assets, excluding intellectual property.

In connection with the Essex Capital Facility, we agreed to issue warrants to purchase our capital stock. We are required to issue these warrants regardless of whether we draw down the full $10.8 million under the agreement, unless the Company chooses to discontinue construction of the equipment. In December 2013, we drew down $2.5 million under short-term notes pursuant to the Essex Capital Facility and issued warrants to purchase 12,345 shares of Series E-5 convertible preferred stock, and drew down an additional $2.5 million in January 2014 under short-term notes and issued warrants to purchase 12,345 shares of Series E-5 convertible preferred stock. Subsequent to the February 2014 IPO, the previously issued warrants to purchase shares of Series E-5 convertible preferred stock converted into warrants to purchase shares of common stock. We will issue warrants to purchase shares of common stock with each future draw down under the Essex Capital Facility. Under the terms of the Essex Capital Facility, the number of shares of common stock to be issued pursuant to these warrants will be determined by dividing 10% of the principal amount of the notes divided by $12.96.

On February 6, 2014, we sold 6,900,000 shares of common stock at $16 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $102.7 million in our IPO.

We have no current source of revenue to sustain our present activities, and we do not expect to generate revenue until, and unless, the FDA or other regulatory authorities approve RT001 or RT002 and we begin commercializing them. Accordingly, our ability to continue as a going concern will require us to obtain additional financing to fund our operations. The sale of additional equity securities could result in additional dilution to our stockholders and those securities may have rights senior to those of our common stock. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased debt service obligations and could result in operating and financing covenants that would restrict our operations. We cannot assure you that financing will be available in the amounts we need or on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

74

Table of Contents

Cash Flows

We derived the following summary of our consolidated cash flows for the periods indicated from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K:

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

Our cash used in operating activities is primarily driven by personnel-related expenditures, manufacturing costs and costs related to our facilities. Our cash flows from operating activities will continue to be affected principally by our working capital requirements and the extent to which we increase spending on personnel and research and development activities as our business grows.

Cash used in operating activities of $47.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 resulted in part from our net loss of $52.4 million and derivative liabilities recognized as a result of non-cash adjustments for the revaluation of derivative liabilities associated with our convertible notes of $2.7 million offset by the accrual of interest on our convertible notes of $9.2 million, convertible preferred stock warrant modification remeasurement adjustment of $1.2 million, amortization of discount on debt and capital leases of $4.1 million, and depreciation and amortization of our property and equipment of $1.9 million. The $9.8 million increase in our net operating assets and liabilities was primarily a result of the reduction in the derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement due to the payment of $6.9 million during the period, the decrease of other non-current assets of $2.6 million and the decrease of accruals and other current liabilities of $3.9 million, however, these increases were partially offset by increases in accounts payable of $3.2 million related to the growth in our operations during the year. Property and equipment purchases included in accounts payable and accruals and other current liabilities was $2.3 million and deferred IPO costs included in accounts payable and accruals and other current liabilities were $2.5 million as of December 31, 2013.

Cash used in operating activities of $38.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 resulted in part from our net loss of $58.3 million and non-cash adjustments for the modification of the Series C-3 convertible preferred stock of $3.2 million associated with the Medicis settlement and the revaluation of derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes of $13.9 million that were partially offset by non-cash adjustments for depreciation and amortization of our property and equipment of $1.8 million, the recognition of derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement of $15.3 million, the amortization of the discount and issuance costs on our outstanding debt and capital leases of $7.7 million and interest accrued on our convertible notes of $18.8 million. The $7.1 million decrease in our net operating assets and liabilities was primarily a result of the decrease in deferred revenue of $10.5 million as a result of this revenue stream being eliminated as a result of the Medicis settlement and a $1.1 million decrease in prepaid expenses and other current assets due primarily to the timing of the related payments. These decreases were partially offset by increases in accruals and other current liabilities of $3.0 million and accounts payable of $1.0 million related to the growth in our operations during the year.

Cash used in operating activities of $28.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily attributable to a net loss of $44.9 million and non-cash adjustments for the revaluation of our convertible preferred stock warrant liability of $0.8 million that was partially offset by non-cash adjustments for the revaluation of derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes of $0.4 million, the amortization of the discount and issuance costs on our outstanding debt and capital leases of $5.1 million, depreciation and amortization of our property and equipment of $2.0 million, stock-based compensation in the amount of $0.3 million and interest accrued on our convertible notes of $9.6 million. The $0.1 million decrease in our net operating assets and liabilities was primarily a result of the decrease in deferred revenue of $0.8 million and

75

Table of Contents

accounts payable of $0.6 million along with increases in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $0.4 million and other noncurrent assets of $0.6 million. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in accruals and other current liabilities of $1.5 million related to the growth in our operations during the year.

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

During the year ended December 31, 2013, cash used in investing activities was $6.4 million due to purchases of property and equipment.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, cash used in investing activities was $0.2 million consisting of $0.3 million in purchases of property and equipment which were partially offset by a reduction of our restricted cash of $0.1 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, cash used in investing activities was $0.1 million resulting from purchases of property and equipment of $0.2 million which were partially offset by a reduction of our restricted cash of $0.1 million.

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

During the year ended December 31, 2013, cash provided by financing activities was $54.0 million primarily comprised of net proceeds received from the issuance of our Series E-5 convertible preferred stock in the amount of $40.6 million and proceeds from issuance of convertible notes and notes payable of $21.9 million which were partially offset by repayments of $7.6 million on our outstanding debt and capital lease obligations.

During the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, cash provided by financing activities was $13.6 million and $54.0 million, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2012, these amounts were primarily comprised of proceeds received from the issuance of convertible notes in the amount of $18.2 million which were partially offset by repayments of $4.6 million on our outstanding debt and capital lease obligations. During the year ended December 31, 2011, these amounts were primarily comprised of proceeds received from the issuance of convertible notes of $45.0 million and notes payable of $22.0 million which were partially offset by repayments of $13.1 million on our outstanding debt and capital lease obligations.

Operating and Capital Expenditure Requirements

We have not achieved profitability on a quarterly or annual basis since our inception and we expect to continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future. We expect our cash expenditures to increase in the near term as we fund our Phase 3 clinical trials of RT001 for the treatment of crow’s feet lines and trials for other indications, our manufacturing, quality and regulatory efforts related to RT001, and our development of RT002. Additionally, as a public company, we will incur significant professional fees and incur other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We believe that our existing capital resources, together with the proceeds from our convertible note financing and the net proceeds from our IPO, will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 15 months. However, we anticipate that we will need to raise substantial additional financing in the future to fund our operations. In order to meet these additional cash requirements, we may seek to sell additional equity or convertible debt securities that may result in dilution to our stockholders. If we raise additional funds through the issuance of convertible debt securities, these securities could have rights senior to those of our common stock and could contain covenants that restrict our operations. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain additional equity or debt financing on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Debt financing, if available, would result in increased fixed payment obligations and may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions such as incurring debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. Our failure to obtain sufficient funds on acceptable terms when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

76

Table of Contents

If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis, or at all, we may be required to terminate or delay clinical trials or other development activities for RT001, RT002 and any future product candidates, or delay our establishment of sales and marketing capabilities or other activities that may be necessary to commercialize our product candidates, if we obtain marketing approval. We may elect to raise additional funds even before we need them if the conditions for raising capital are favorable. Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including:

Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors” for additional risks associated with our substantial capital requirements.

We have not generated revenue from RT001 or RT002 and we do not know when, or if, we will generate such revenue. We do not expect to generate significant revenue unless or until we obtain marketing approval of, and commercialize RT001 or RT002. We expect our continuing operating losses to result in increases in cash used in operations over the next several years.

We have based our estimates of future capital requirements on a number of assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and changing circumstances beyond our control may cause us to consume capital more rapidly than we currently anticipate. For example, our ongoing clinical trials of RT001 and RT002 may encounter technical or other difficulties that could increase our development costs more than we currently expect or the FDA may require us to conduct additional clinical trials prior to approving RT001 or RT002. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development and commercialization of our product candidates, we are unable to estimate the amounts of increased capital outlays and operating expenditures associated with our current and anticipated clinical trials.

77

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires our management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the applicable periods. We base our estimates, assumptions and judgments on historical experience and on various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Different assumptions and judgments would change the estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements, which, in turn, could change the results from those reported. We evaluate our estimates, assumptions and judgments on an ongoing basis.

The critical accounting estimates, assumptions and judgments that we believe have the most significant impact on our consolidated financial statements are described below.

Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenue when the following criteria are met: persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists; delivery has occurred; the price is fixed or determinable; and collectability is reasonably assured. We recognized revenue from the sale of products and from license and royalty agreements as follows.

We recognized only a limited amount of product revenue during the year ended December 31, 2011 of which all was derived from the promotion and sale of Relastin, an over-the-counter skincare product. During the year ended December 31, 2011, we entered into an asset purchase agreement for the sale of the Relastin product line and royalties on future sales of Relastin. We recognized the related product revenue during the year ended December 31, 2011 upon the sale of the products. We did not recognize any revenue from sales of our products during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

We recognized royalty revenue related to the Relastin asset purchase and royalty agreement discussed in the paragraph above. The Relastin royalty agreement provides for minimum royalty payment of $0.3 million per year, to be paid quarterly for up to 15 years from the execution date; however, the royalty agreement may be terminated with 90 days’ notice as of December 31, 2013 with the rights to the Relastin product line reverting to us. We recognize Relastin royalty revenue based upon minimum royalty requirements per the asset purchase and royalty agreement or when we receive the related royalty statement because we do not have sufficient ability to reasonably estimate the underlying sales prior to that time. Accordingly under the Relastin asset purchase agreement, we also recognized $150,000 in revenue in the year ended December 31, 2013 for achievement of a one-time milestone.

During the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, we recognized license revenue from a license agreement with Medicis whereby they were granted exclusive rights to RT002. As part of this license agreement, we received an upfront payment which was deferred and recognized over the estimated performance period which was estimated as the remaining life of the underlying patent at the inception of the license agreement. We did not recognize any license revenues from the agreement with Medicis during the year ended December 31, 2013 as the prior license agreement was discontinued as part of the Medicis settlement in October 2012. In the year ended December 31, 2013, we recognized license revenue of $0.2 million pursuant to an exclusive technology evaluation agreement executed in June 2013 whereby we received an upfront payment in the amount of $0.3 million, which was initially recorded as deferred revenue and is being recognized over the estimated performance period.

Multiple Element Arrangements

We record arrangements with multiple deliverables based on the individual units of accounting determined to exist in the arrangement. A deliverable item is considered a separate unit of accounting when the item has

78

Table of Contents

value to the parties entering into the arrangement on a stand-alone basis, the delivery or performance of an undelivered item is considered probable and under our control, or represents a legal obligation for us. Items are considered to have stand-alone value when we could negotiate similar items on a stand-alone basis. When a deliverable does not meet the criteria to be considered a separate unit of accounting, we group it with other deliverables that, when combined, meet the criteria, and the appropriate allocation of arrangement consideration is determined. Consideration is allocated at the inception of the contract to all deliverables based on their relative fair values.

Clinical Trial Accruals

Our clinical trial accrual process seeks to account for expenses resulting from obligations under contracts with CROs and consultants, and under clinical site agreements in connection with conducting clinical trials. Clinical trial costs are charged to research and development expense as incurred. The financial terms of these contracts are subject to negotiations, which vary from contract to contract and may result in payment flows that do not match the periods over which materials or services are provided under such contracts. Our objective is to reflect the appropriate trial expense in the consolidated financial statements by matching the appropriate expenses with the period in which services and efforts are expended. In the event advance payments are made to a CRO, the payments will be recorded as a prepaid asset which will be amortized over the period of time the contracted services are performed. In addition to pass-through costs, we incur costs in clinical trials in three distinct phases as follows:

The CRO contracts generally include pass-through fees including, but not limited to, regulatory expenses, investigator fees, travel costs and other miscellaneous costs, including shipping and printing fees. We determine accrual estimates through reports from and discussion with applicable personnel and outside services providers as to the progress or state of completion of trials, or the services completed. We make estimates of accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date in the consolidated financial statements based on the facts and circumstances known at that time. Our clinical trial accrual is dependent, in part, upon the receipt of timely and accurate reporting from the CROs and other third-party vendors.

Stock-Based Compensation

We recognize compensation costs related to stock options granted to employees based on the estimated fair value of the awards on the date of grant, net of estimated forfeitures, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The grant date fair value of the stock-based awards is recognized over the requisite service period, which is generally the vesting period of the respective awards. Stock-based compensation expenses are classified in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss based on the functional area to which the related recipients belong.

79

Table of Contents

The estimated grant date fair values of the option awards granted to employees during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011 were calculated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions:

The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the use of highly subjective and complex assumptions that determine the fair value of options. These assumptions are as follows:

In addition to the assumptions used in the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, we must also estimate a forfeiture rate to calculate the stock-based compensation for our options. Our forfeiture rate is based on an analysis of our actual forfeitures. We will continue to evaluate the appropriateness of the forfeiture rate based on actual forfeiture experience, analysis of employee turnover and other factors. Quarterly changes in the estimated forfeiture rate can have a significant impact on our stock-based compensation as the cumulative effect of adjusting the rate is recognized in the period in which we change the forfeiture estimate. If a revised forfeiture rate is higher than the previously estimated forfeiture rate, we make an adjustment that will result in a decrease to the stock-based compensation recognized in our consolidated financial statements. If a revised forfeiture rate is lower than the previously estimated forfeiture rate, we make an adjustment that will result in an increase to the stock-based compensation recognized in our consolidated financial statements.

We will continue to use judgment in evaluating the expected term, expected volatility and forfeiture rate related to our stock-based compensation calculations on a prospective basis. As we continue to accumulate additional data related to our common stock, we may make refinements to the estimates of our expected terms, expected volatility and forfeiture rates that could materially impact our future stock-based compensation.

Warrant Liabilities

We issued freestanding warrants to purchase shares of common stock and convertible preferred stock in connection with certain debt and lease transactions. We account for these warrants as a liability in the financial statements because either the number of common stock shares issuable under the common stock warrants is not fixed until exercise or because the underlying instrument into which the warrants were exercisable, Series E-3, Series E-4 or Series E-5 convertible preferred stock, contain deemed liquidation provisions that are outside of our control.

80

Table of Contents

The warrants are recorded at fair value using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The fair value of these warrants is re-measured at each financial reporting period with any changes in fair value being recognized as a component of other income (expense) in the accompanying statements of operations and comprehensive loss. We will continue to re-measure the fair value of the warrant liabilities until: (i) exercise, (ii) expiration of the related warrant, or (iii) conversion of the convertible preferred stock underlying the security into common stock.

Common Stock Warrants

We account for warrants to purchase shares of our common stock as liabilities at fair value because these warrants may obligate us to transfer assets to the holders at a future date under certain circumstances, such as change of control. The fair value of the common stock warrants was recorded to additional paid-in capital upon issuance. We remeasure these warrants to current fair value at each balance sheet date, and any change of fair value is recognized as a change in fair value of the warrant liability in our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

The fair value of the outstanding common stock warrants was remeasured as of each period end using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions:

These assumptions are subjective and the fair value of these warrants may have differed significantly had we used different assumptions. In February 2014, these warrants were net exercised effective immediately prior to the closing of our IPO.

Convertible Preferred Stock Warrants

We account for warrants to purchase shares of our convertible preferred stock as liabilities at fair value because these warrants may obligate us to transfer assets to the holders at a future date under certain circumstances, such as a change of control. We remeasure these warrants to current fair value at each balance sheet date, and any change in fair value is recognized as a change in fair value of warrant liability in our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss. We estimated the fair value of these warrants at the respective balance sheet dates using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. We use a number of assumptions to estimate the fair value including the remaining contractual terms of the warrant, risk-free interest rates, expected dividend yield and expected volatility of the price of the underlying stock.

The fair value of the outstanding convertible preferred stock warrants was remeasured as of each period end using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions:

81

Table of Contents

These assumptions are subjective and the fair value of these warrants may have differed significantly had we used different assumptions. In February 2014, these warrants to purchase preferred stock converted to warrants to purchase the Company’s common stock.

Derivative Liabilities

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the following derivative liabilities were outstanding (in thousands):

Derivatives Liabilities Associated with the 2011 Convertible Notes

During the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, we issued convertible notes in the aggregate amount of $63.3 million. The convertible notes have conversion and redemption features related to the conversion of the notes. These conversion and redemption features were determined to be embedded derivatives requiring bifurcation and separate accounting. Accordingly, we recorded a derivative liability which will be remeasured to fair value as of each balance sheet date and the related remeasurement adjustments will be recognized as a change in fair value of derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

As a result of the convertible note issuances, we recorded a derivative liability of $13.0 million associated with the convertible notes issued during the year ended December 31, 2011 and an additional derivative liability of $2.3 million associated with the convertible notes issued during the year ended December 31, 2012. The fair value of these derivative instruments was recognized as an additional debt discount and as a derivative liability on the consolidated balance sheets upon issuance of the respective convertible notes. The derivative liability required periodic remeasurements to fair value while the derivative was still outstanding and, accordingly, we recognized remeasurement gains for this instrument during the year ended December 31, 2012 of $13.9 million and recognized the remaining liability of $1.8 million at the time of conversion of the notes into preferred stock in March 2013. The fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes was determined upon issuance in 2012 using “with and without” valuation methodology with the following weighted-average assumptions:

82

Table of Contents

The fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes was determined as of December 31, 2012 using the “with-and-without” valuation methodology with the following weighted-average assumptions:

The remeasurement adjustments were reflected in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss as change in fair value of derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes and the fair value of the derivatives was recorded as a non-current obligation on the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2011 and as a current obligation as of December 31, 2012. The related convertible notes converted into shares of Series E convertible preferred stock during the year ended December 31, 2013. Immediately prior to the conversion in March 2013, we determined the fair value of the embedded derivatives to be approximately zero as the execution of a qualified financing approached certainty. Accordingly, the derivative liabilities associated with these convertible notes were no longer outstanding as of December 31, 2013 and will therefore no longer require periodic fair value remeasurements.

As noted earlier in this section, the fair values of the derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes were measured using a “with-and-without” valuation methodology. Inputs used to determine the estimated fair value of these derivative instruments include the probability estimates of potential settlement scenarios for the convertible notes, a present value discount rate and an estimate of the expected timing of settlement, all of which are highly subjective and open to change. Generally, increases (decreases) in the discount rate would result in a directionally opposite impact to the fair value measurement of this derivative instrument. Also, changes in the probability scenarios would have had varying impacts depending on the weighting of each specific scenario. More specifically, heavier weighting towards a change in control, a PIPE transaction or an initial public offering would result in an increase in fair value of this derivative instrument. The decrease in the fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with the convertible notes during the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was due primarily to (i) the decrease in the expected term for a liquidity event due to the passage of time and (ii) the weightings of the various scenario probabilities. The reduction in the expected term reduces the fair value of the derivatives primarily because awards are generally less valuable if there is less time allowed for exercising and recognizing the related expected benefit underlying the derivative instruments. In addition, the fair value of the award was reduced as we moved our estimated probabilities away from the initial public offering, PIPE and change in control scenarios and estimated a significantly higher weighting towards a qualified financing. Our board of directors’ estimates for these probabilities became much clearer towards the end of 2012 and into 2013 when we had already started discussions for a qualified financing in the form of the Series E preferred stock financing which ultimately occurred in the first quarter of 2013.

Derivative Liabilities Associated with 2013 Convertible Notes

During the fourth quarter of the year ended December 31, 2013, we issued 2013 notes in the amount of $19.4 million in aggregate (Note 7). The 2013 notes had conversion and redemption features related to the conversion of the notes which were determined to be embedded derivatives requiring bifurcation and separate accounting. Accordingly, we recorded a derivative liability of $5.8 million associated with the 2013 notes during the year ended December 31, 2013. The fair value of these derivative instruments was recognized as an additional discount and as a derivative liability on the consolidated balance sheets upon issuance of the respective convertible notes. The derivative liability required periodic remeasurements to fair value while the derivative was

83

Table of Contents

still outstanding and accordingly, we recognized remeasurement gains for the 2013 notes during the year ended December 31, 2013 of $0.9 million.

The fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes was determined upon issuance in 2013 using “Monte Carlo” valuation methodology with the following weighted-average assumptions:

The fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with convertible notes was determined as of December 31, 2013 using the “Monte Carlo” valuation methodology with the following weighted-average assumptions:

Derivatives Associated with the Medicis Settlement

In October 2012, we entered into a settlement with Medicis that resulted in the termination of their contractual relationship with us. In the settlement, we agreed to pay Medicis an aggregate of up to $25.0 million consisting of (i) $7.0 million payable at the execution of the settlement agreement; (ii) $14.0 million payable based on a proceed sharing arrangement (the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement Payment) whereby 15% of specified types of cash proceeds received by us are to be remitted to Medicis until the full $14.0 million is paid (an aggregate of $6.9 million of which was paid to Medicis in April and May 2013 and $7.1 million in February 2014); and (iii) $4.0 million payable due upon marketing approval of RT001 or RT002 in the United States or any major European market (the Product Approval Payment). We determined that the settlement provisions related to (ii) and (iii) above were derivative instruments that require fair value accounting at the time of settlement and fair value remeasurements on a periodic basis going forward. Accordingly, we recorded derivative liabilities on the balance sheet based on the derivative liabilities respective fair values on the settlement date. These derivative liabilities will be reduced as the related payments are made under the settlement agreement and the remaining liabilities will be subsequently remeasured to fair value as of each balance sheet date with the related remeasurement adjustments recognized in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

The fair value of the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement Payment was estimated to be $12.9 million and fair value of the Product Approval Payment was estimated to be $2.4 million upon issuance in October 2012 and as of December 31, 2012. The fair value of the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement Payment derivative was initially determined using an option pricing model with the following assumptions: expected term of 0.75 years, risk-free rate of 0.2% and volatility of 46%. During the year ended December 31, 2013, we made payments in the amount of $6.9 million against the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement Payment. As of December 31, 2013, the fair value of the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement Payment derivative was $6.7 million which was determined using an option pricing

84

Table of Contents

model with the following assumptions: 0.1-0.5 years, risk-free rate of 0.01% — 0.10% and volatility of 37.0%-47.5%. These valuations were also heavily weighted toward an initial public offering being the most likely outcome for our business at the time of issuance. Upon the completion of our IPO, we paid Medicis $7.1 million in settlement of our remaining obligation under the Proceeds Sharing Arrangement of the October 2012.

The fair value of the Product Approval Payment derivative was initially determined by estimating the timing and probability of the related approval and multiplying the payment amount by this probability percentage and a discount factor assuming a term of two years and a risk free rate of 0.25%. As of December 31, 2013, the fair value of the Product Approval Payment derivative as of December 31, 2013 in the amount of $1.6 million was determined by updating the estimate of the timing and probability of the related approval and a discount factor assuming a term of 3.25 years, a risk-free rate of 0.9% and a credit risk adjustment of 6%. The primary drivers of any fair value movements for the Product Approval Payment derivative are the estimated probability of the related approval and the credit risk adjustment. If the probability estimate increases (decreases) and the credit risk adjustment decreases (increases), the fair value of the derivative will increase (decrease).

We will record adjustments to the fair value of the derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement until the Product Approval Payment has been paid. At that time, these derivative liabilities associated with the Medicis settlement will be adjusted to fair value one last time with the final fair value being be reclassified to additional paid-in capital.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

We assess the impairment of long-lived assets, such as property and equipment subject to depreciation and amortization, when events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amount may not be recoverable. Among the factors and circumstances we considered in determining recoverability are: (i) a significant adverse change in the extent to which, or manner in which, a long-lived asset is being used or in its physical condition; (ii) a significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate that could affect the value of a long-lived asset, including an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; (iii) an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected for the acquisition; and (iv) current-period operating or cash flow loss combined with a history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or forecast that demonstrates continuing losses associated with the use of a long-lived asset. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized in the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset. There have been no indicators of impairment, and we did not record any impairment losses during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011.

Income Taxes

We are subject to income taxes in the United States, and we use estimates in determining our provision for income taxes. We use the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, we calculate deferred tax asset or liability account balances at the balance sheet date using current tax laws and rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to affect our taxable income.

We estimate actual current tax exposure together with assessing temporary differences resulting from differences in accounting for reporting purposes and tax purposes for certain items, such as accruals and allowances not currently deductible for tax purposes. These temporary differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included in our consolidated balance sheets. In general, deferred tax assets represent future tax benefits to be received when certain expenses previously recognized in our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss become deductible expenses under applicable income tax laws or when net operating loss or credit carryforwards are utilized. Accordingly, realization of our deferred tax assets is dependent on future taxable income against which these deductions, losses and credit carryforwards can be utilized.

85

Table of Contents

We must assess the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income, and to the extent we believe that recovery is not likely, establish a valuation allowance.

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards available to reduce future taxable income, if any, for Federal, California, and New Jersey income tax purposes of $202.5 million, $159.8 million, and $0.01 million, respectively. If not utilized, the Federal net operating loss carryforward begin expiring in 2020, the California net operating loss carryforwards began expiring in 2010, and the New Jersey state net operating loss carryforwards begin expiring in 2030. The net operating loss related deferred tax assets do not include excess tax benefits from employee stock option exercises.

Due to United States federal legislation on January 2, 2013 extending federal research and development tax credits from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2013, the Company recorded an additional $0.4 million of credits in the tax year 2013 related to the tax year 2012. As of December 31, 2013, the Company also had research and development credit carryforwards of $4.82 million and $4.3 million available to reduce future taxable income, if any, for Federal and California state income tax purposes, respectively. If not utilized, the Federal credit carryforwards will begin expiring in 2023 and the California credit carryforwards have no expiration date.

In general, if the Company experiences a greater than 50 percentage point aggregate change in ownership over a three-year period (a Section 382 ownership change), utilization of its pre-change NOL carryforwards are subject to an annual limitation under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code (California and New Jersey have similar laws). The annual limitation generally is determined by multiplying the value of the Company’s stock at the time of such ownership change (subject to certain adjustments) by the applicable long-term tax-exempt rate. Such limitations may result in expiration of a portion of the NOL carryforwards before utilization. Prior to the IPO, the Company determined that an ownership change occurred on April 7, 2004, but that all carryforwards can be utilized prior to the expiration. The ability of the Company to use its remaining NOL carryforwards may be further limited if the Company experiences a Section 382 ownership change in connection with the IPO or as a result of future changes in its stock ownership.

There was no impact on the provision (benefit) for income taxes or the deferred tax assets as a result of the extinguishment of debt and extinguishment of preferred stock and related conversion, which occurred in March 2013.

JOBS Act

We are an “emerging growth company” within the meaning of the JOBS Act, which was enacted in April 2012. Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, for complying with new or revised accounting standards. Thus, an emerging growth company can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves of this extended transition period and, as a result, we will adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required for other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

86

Table of Contents

Contractual Obligations

Our contractual commitments will have an impact on our future liquidity. The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2013 which represent material expected or contractually committed future obligations, with terms in excess of one year. We believe that we will be able to fund these obligations through cash generated funding activities and from our existing cash balances.