Vistagen Therapeutics, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2016 September (Form 10-Q)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
Form 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
☑
|
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2016
or
|
|
|
☐
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the transition period from
to
.
Commission File Number: 000-54014
VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nevada
|
|
20-5093315
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
343 Allerton Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
(Address of principal executive offices including zip
code)
(650) 577-3600
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area
code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to
file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every
Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant
to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 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 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.
|
|
||
Large accelerated filer
|
[ ]
|
Accelerated filer
|
[ ]
|
Non-Accelerated filer
|
[ ]
|
Smaller reporting company
|
[X]
|
(do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes
☐ No ☒
As of November 11, 2016, 8,379,921 shares of the registrant’s common stock,
$0.001 par value, were issued and
outstanding.
VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc.
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the Quarter Ended September 30, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1. |
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
4
|
|
15
|
||
29
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
||
30
|
||
65
|
||
65
|
||
66
|
||
|
|
|
67
|
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
VISTAGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE
SHEETS
(Amounts in Dollars, except share amounts)
|
September 30,
|
March 31,
|
|
2016
|
2016
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
ASSETS
|
||
Current
assets:
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$6,257,100
|
$428,500
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
648,900
|
426,800
|
Total
current assets
|
6,906,000
|
855,300
|
Property
and equipment, net
|
69,200
|
87,600
|
Security
deposits and other assets
|
47,800
|
46,900
|
Total
assets
|
$7,023,000
|
$989,800
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(DEFICIT)
|
||
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
$930,200
|
$936,000
|
Accrued
expenses
|
795,000
|
814,000
|
Current
portion of notes payable and accrued interest
|
71,100
|
43,600
|
Capital
lease obligations
|
600
|
1,100
|
Total
current liabilities
|
1,796,900
|
1,794,700
|
|
|
|
Non-current
liabilities:
|
|
|
Notes
payable
|
-
|
27,200
|
Accrued
dividends on Series B Preferred Stock
|
1,101,600
|
2,089,600
|
Deferred
rent liability
|
37,400
|
55,500
|
Total
non-current liabilities
|
1,139,000
|
2,172,300
|
Total
liabilities
|
2,935,900
|
3,967,000
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’
equity (deficit):
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, $0.001 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized at September
30, 2016 and March 31, 2016:
|
|
|
Series
A Preferred, 500,000 shares authorized and outstanding at September
30, 2016 and March 31, 2016
|
500
|
500
|
Series
B Preferred; 4,000,000 shares authorized at September 30, 2016 and
March 31, 2016; 1,160,240 shares
and 3,663,077 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2016
and March 31, 2016, respectively
|
1,200
|
3,700
|
Series
C Preferred; 3,000,000 shares authorized at September 30, 2016 and
March 31, 2016;
2,318,012 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2016 and
March 31, 2016
|
2,300
|
2,300
|
Common
stock, $0.001 par value; 30,000,000 shares authorized at September
30, 2016 and March 31, 2016;
8,405,128 and 2,623,145 shares issued at September 30, 2016 and
March 31, 2016, respectively
|
8,400
|
2,600
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
144,854,200
|
132,725,000
|
Treasury
stock, at cost, 135,665 shares of common stock held at September
30, 2016 and March 31, 2016
|
(3,968,100)
|
(3,968,100)
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
(136,811,400)
|
(131,743,200)
|
Total
stockholders’ equity (deficit)
|
4,087,100
|
(2,977,200)
|
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity (deficit)
|
$7,023,000
|
$989,800
|
See accompanying notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
VISTAGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(Unaudited)
(Amounts in dollars, except share amounts)
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
Six Months Ended
September 30,
|
||
|
2016
|
2015
|
2016
|
2015
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development
|
$1,606,100
|
$1,656,100
|
2,431,800
|
$2,028,700
|
General
and administrative
|
1,493,600
|
3,730,500
|
2,631,200
|
5,179,000
|
Total
operating expenses
|
3,099,700
|
5,386,600
|
5,063,000
|
7,207,700
|
Loss
from operations
|
(3,099,700)
|
(5,386,600)
|
(5,063,000)
|
(7,207,700)
|
Other
expenses, net:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense, net
|
(1,400)
|
(12,200)
|
(2,800)
|
(767,300)
|
Change
in warrant liability
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,894,700)
|
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
-
|
(1,649,300)
|
-
|
(26,700,200)
|
Loss
before income taxes
|
(3,101,100)
|
(7,048,100)
|
(5,065,800)
|
(36,569,900)
|
Income
taxes
|
-
|
-
|
(2,400)
|
(2,300)
|
Net
loss
|
$(3,101,100)
|
$(7,048,100)
|
$(5,068,200)
|
$(36,572,200)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
dividend on Series B Preferred stock
|
(241,000)
|
(614,700)
|
(780,800)
|
(828,000)
|
Deemed
dividend on Series B Preferred Units
|
-
|
(886,900)
|
(111,100)
|
(1,143,100)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss attributable to common stockholders
|
$(3,342,100)
|
$(8,549,700)
|
$(5,960,100)
|
$(38,543,300)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted net loss attributable to common stockholders per
common share
|
$(0.42)
|
$(5.26)
|
$(0.91)
|
$(24.21)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares used in computing basic and
diluted net loss attributable to common stockholders
per common share
|
8,041,619
|
1,624,371
|
6,577,769
|
1,592,104
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
loss
|
$(3,101,100)
|
$(7,048,100)
|
$(5,068,200)
|
$(36,572,200)
|
See accompanying notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
VISTAGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH
FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(Amounts in Dollars)
|
Six Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
$(5,068,200)
|
$(36,572,200)
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
26,000
|
28,900
|
Amortization
of discounts on convertible and promissory notes
|
-
|
564,800
|
Change
in warrant liability
|
-
|
1,894,700
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
306,700
|
3,769,900
|
Expense related to modification of warrants, including exchange of
warrants for Series C Preferred and common stock
|
57,400
|
122,300
|
Amortization
of deferred rent
|
(18,100)
|
(11,600)
|
Fair
value of common stock granted for services
|
217,000
|
500,000
|
Fair
value of Series B Preferred stock granted for services
|
375,000
|
707,500
|
Fair
value of warrants granted for services
|
227,500
|
-
|
Gain
on currency fluctuation
|
-
|
(6,300)
|
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
-
|
26,700,200
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
40,400
|
24,200
|
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses, including accrued
interest
|
(36,800)
|
(51,900)
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(3,873,100)
|
(2,329,500)
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
Purchases
of equipment
|
(7,700)
|
-
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(7,700)
|
-
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
Net
proceeds from issuance of common stock and warrants, including
Units
|
9,537,100
|
280,000
|
Net
proceeds from issuance of Series B Preferred Units
|
278,000
|
2,722,800
|
Repayment
of capital lease obligations
|
(500)
|
(500)
|
Repayment
of notes
|
(105,200)
|
(48,800)
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
9,709,400
|
2,953,500
|
Net
increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
5,828,600
|
624,000
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
428,500
|
70,000
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$6,257,100
|
$694,000
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of noncash activities:
|
|
|
Conversion
of Senior Secured Notes, Subordinate Convertible Notes, Promissory
Notes, Accounts payable and other debt into Series B
Preferred
|
$-
|
$18,891,400
|
Insurance
premiums settled by issuing note payable
|
$117,500
|
$79,400
|
Accrued
dividends on Series B Preferred
|
$780,800
|
$828,000
|
Accrued
dividends on Series B Preferred settled upon conversion by issuance
of common stock
|
$1,768,800
|
$22,700
|
See accompanying notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
VISTAGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note 1. Description of Business
Overview
VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: VTGN), a Nevada corporation,
is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to
developing and commercializing innovative product candidates for
patients with diseases and disorders involving the central nervous
system (CNS). Our principal executive offices are
located at 343 Allerton Avenue, South San Francisco,
California 94080, and our telephone number is (650) 577-3600. Our
website address is www.vistagen.com.
Unless the context otherwise requires, the words
“VistaGen Therapeutics,
Inc.”
“VistaGen,” “we,” “the Company,” “us” and “our” refer to VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc., a
Nevada corporation.
Our lead product candidate, AV-101, is a new generation, oral
antidepressant drug candidate in Phase 2 development for the
adjunctive treatment of Major Depressive Disorder
(MDD) in patients with an inadequate response to
standard antidepressants approved by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). We believe AV-101 may also have
therapeutic potential in chronic neuropathic pain, epilepsy,
Huntington’s disease and Parkinson’s
disease.
AV-101’s mechanism of action, as an N-methyl D aspartate
receptor (NMDAR) antagonist binding selectively at the glycine
binding (GlyB) co-agonist site of the NMDAR, is fundamentally
differentiated from all FDA-approved antidepressants, as well as
all atypical antipsychotics used to augment standard antidepressant
therapy.
Our ongoing Phase 2a clinical study of AV-101 in subjects with
treatment-resistant MDD is being fully funded by the U.S. National
Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) under our February 2015 Cooperative Research and
Development Agreement (CRADA) with the NIMH, and is being conducted by Dr.
Carlos Zarate, Jr., Chief of the NIMH’s Experimental
Therapeutics & Pathophysiology Branch and its Section on
Neurobiology and Treatment of Mood and Anxiety Disorders. The first
patient in this NIMH-sponsored Phase 2a study was dosed in November
2015. Previous NIMH studies, including studies conducted by Dr.
Zarate, have focused on the antidepressant effects of low dose,
intravenous (I.V.) ketamine in patients with treatment-resistant
depression. These NIMH studies, as well as clinical research by
others, have demonstrated robust antidepressant effects in patients
with treatment-resistant MDD within twenty-four hours of a single
low dose of I.V. ketamine. We believe orally administered AV-101
may have potential to deliver ketamine-like fast-acting
antidepressant effects without ketamine’s serious side
effects.
We are preparing to launch our Phase 2b clinical study of AV-101
for the adjunctive treatment of MDD in patients with an inadequate
response to standard, FDA-approved antidepressants. We
currently anticipate commencement of this multi-center, multi-dose,
double blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2b efficacy and safety study
in the first half of 2017. Dr. Maurizio Fava, Professor of
Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and Director, Division of
Clinical Research, Massachusetts General Hospital
(MGH) Research Institute, will be the Principal
Investigator of our Phase 2b study of AV-101 in MDD. Dr.
Fava was the co-Principal Investigator with Dr. A. John Rush of the
largest clinical trial conducted in depression to date, the STAR*D
study, whose findings were published in journals such as the New
England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA). We currently anticipate top line results in
this Phase 2b study in the third calendar quarter of
2018.
In addition to clinical development of AV-101, we are advancing
potential commercial applications of our human pluripotent stem
cell (hPSC) technology
platform, including drug rescue and regenerative medicine
(RM). Our small
molecule drug rescue programs involve using CardioSafe 3D, our
customized cardiac bioassay system, to develop new chemical
entities (NCEs) for our
internal pipeline. Potential RM applications include using
blood, cartilage, heart and/or liver cells derived from hPSCs for
(A) cell-based therapy, (B) cell repair therapy, and/or (C) tissue
engineering. We may pursue these drug rescue and RM
applications in collaboration with third-parties.
AV-101 and Major Depressive Disorder
Background
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 350 million people worldwide are
affected by depression. According to the U.S. National Institutes
of Health (NIH) major depression is one of the most common
mental disorders in the U.S. The NIMH reports that, in 2014, an
estimated 15.7 million adults aged 18 or older in the U.S. had at
least one major depressive episode in the past year. This
represented 6.7 percent of all U.S. adults. According to the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) one in 10 Americans over the age of 12 takes an
antidepressant medication.
Most standard, FDA-approved antidepressants target neurotransmitter
reuptake inhibition – either serotonin (SSRIs) or serotonin/norepinephrine (SNRIs). Even when effective, these standard depression
medications take many weeks to achieve adequate antidepressant
effects. Nearly two out of every three drug-treated depression
patients, including an estimated 6.9 million drug-treated MDD
patients in the U.S., obtain inadequate therapeutic benefit from
initial treatment with a standard antidepressant. Unfortunately,
even after treatment with as many as four different standard
antidepressants, nearly one out of every three drug-treated
depression patients do not achieve adequate therapeutic
benefits. Such depression patients often seek to treat
their depression with non-drug-related approaches, such as
Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT), or to augment their inadequate response to
standard antidepressants by adding an atypical antipsychotic (such
as, for example, aripiprazole) to their treatment regimen, despite
the modest potential therapeutic benefit and significant risk of
additional side effects with such augmentation
options.
All standard antidepressants have risks of significant side
effects, including, among others, potentially anxiety, metabolic
syndrome, sleep disturbance and sexual dysfunction. They
also have a “Black Box” warning due to risks of
worsening depression and suicide in certain groups. Use of atypical
antipsychotics to augment inadequately performing standard
antidepressants increases the risk of serious side effects,
including, potentially, tardive dyskinesia, significant weight
gain, diabetes and heart disease, while offering only a modest
potential increase in therapeutic benefit. Use of ECT increases the
risk of serious side effects, including, headaches, tiredness,
disorientation, intense sleepiness, hallucinations and long-term
memory loss.
AV-101
AV-101, our oral new generation antidepressant drug candidate, is
in Phase 2 clinical development for the adjunctive treatment of MDD
patients with an inadequate response to standard antidepressants.
As published in the October 2015 issue of the
peer-reviewed, Journal of Pharmacology and
Experimental Therapeutics, in an article entitled, The prodrug 4-chlorokynurenine
causes ketamine-like antidepressant effects, but not side effects,
by NMDA/glycineB-site inhibition, using well-established preclinical models of
depression, AV-101 was shown to induce fast-acting, dose-dependent,
persistent and statistically significant antidepressant-like
responses, following a single treatment. These responses were
equivalent to those seen with a single, sub-anesthetic control dose
of the NMDAR antagonist ketamine. In the same preclinical studies,
a standard antidepressant, the SSRI fluoxetine, did not induce
rapid onset antidepressant-like responses. In addition, these
studies confirmed that the fast-acting antidepressive effects of
AV-101 were mediated through the GlyB site and involved the
activation of a key neurological pathway, the
alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic
acid (AMPA) receptor pathway. Activation of the AMPA
receptor pathway is a common feature of fast-acting
antidepressants.
Following the completion of our NIH-funded, randomized, double
blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1a and Phase 1b safety studies, we
are now collaborating with the NIMH in a Phase 2a study. Under our
February 2015 CRADA, the NIMH is funding, and Dr. Carlos Zarate Jr.
of the NIMH as Principal Investigator is conducting, our ongoing
Phase 2a efficacy and safety study of AV-101 in subjects with
treatment-resistant MDD. The trial is expected to enroll 20 to 28
patients. The first patient was dosed in November 2015,
and we currently anticipate receiving topline results in the second
quarter of 2017.
We are preparing to launch our Phase 2b clinical study of AV-101
for the adjunctive treatment of MDD in patients with an inadequate
response to standard, FDA-approved antidepressants. We anticipate
the launch of this Phase 2b study, with Dr. Maurizio Fava of
Harvard Medical School serving as Principal Investigator, in the
first half of 2017. We anticipate top line results from this Phase
2b study in the third calendar quarter of
2018.
Several preclinical studies support the hypothesis that AV-101 also
has the potential to treat multiple CNS disorders and
neurodegenerative diseases in addition to depression, including
chronic neuropathic pain, epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease and
Huntington’s disease, where modulation of the NMDAR, AMPA
pathway and/or active metabolites of AV-101 may achieve therapeutic
benefit.
CardioSafe 3D™ NCE Drug Rescue and Regenerative
Medicine
CardioSafe 3D™ is
our customized in vitro cardiac bioassay system capable of
predicting potential human heart toxicity of small molecule
NCEs in vitro, long before they are ever tested in animal and
human studies. Our current strategic interests involving our stem
cell technology platform include (i) advancing current internal
efforts focused on CardioSafe 3D drug rescue to expand our drug candidate
pipeline with selected proprietary small molecule NCEs, leveraging
substantial prior research and development investments by
pharmaceutical companies and others related to public domain NCEs
terminated before FDA approval due to heart toxicity risks and (ii)
establishing collaborative arrangements with qualified
third-parties focused on RM applications, including (A) cell-based therapy
(injection of stem cell-derived mature organ-specific cells
obtained through directed differentiation), (B) cell repair therapy
(induction of regeneration by biologically active molecules
administered alone or produced by infused genetically engineered
cells), or (C) tissue engineering (transplantation
of in
vitro grown complex
tissues), involving hPSC-derived blood, bone, cartilage, heart
and/or liver cells. We may collaborate with one or more
third-parties in connection with these potential commercial
applications of our stem cell technology
platform.
Subsidiaries
VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc., a California corporation
(VistaGen
California), is our
wholly-owned subsidiary. Our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements in this Report also include the accounts of VistaGen
California’s two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Artemis
Neuroscience, Inc., a Maryland corporation, and VistaStem Canada,
Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of Ontario,
Canada.
Note 2. Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States
(U.S.
GAAP) for interim financial
information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and
Rule 8-03 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not contain
all of the information and footnotes required for complete
consolidated financial statements. In the opinion of management,
the accompanying unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements reflect all adjustments, which include only normal
recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly our interim
financial information. The accompanying Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheet at March 31, 2016 has been derived from our audited
consolidated financial statements at that date but does not include
all disclosures required by U.S. GAAP. The operating results
for the three and six months ended September 30, 2016 are not
necessarily indicative of the operating results to be expected for
our fiscal year ending March 31, 2017 or for any other interim
period or any other future period.
The accompanying unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements and notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
should be read in conjunction with our audited Consolidated
Financial Statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016
contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on June 24, 2016.
The accompanying unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going
concern. As a developing-technology company having not yet
developed commercial products or achieved sustainable revenues, we
have experienced recurring losses and negative cash flows from
operations resulting in a deficit of $136.8 million accumulated
from inception through September 30, 2016. We expect losses and
negative cash flows from operations to continue for the foreseeable
future as we engage in further potential development of AV-101 and
launch and execute our drug rescue programs and pursue potential
drug development and regenerative medicine
opportunities.
Since our inception in May 1998 through September 30, 2016, we have
financed our operations and technology acquisitions primarily
through the issuance and sale of our equity and debt securities,
including convertible promissory notes and short-term promissory
notes, for cash proceeds of approximately $44.3 million, as well as
from an aggregate of approximately $16.4 million of government
research grant awards, strategic collaboration payments and other
revenues. Additionally, we have issued equity securities with an
approximate value at issuance of $30.1 million in non-cash
settlements of certain liabilities, including liabilities for
professional services rendered to us or as compensation for such
services.
Between April 1, 2016 and May 4, 2016, we
sold to accredited investors Series B Preferred Units consisting of
39,714 unregistered shares of our Series B Preferred Stock, par
value $0.001 per share (Series B
Preferred), and five year
warrants to purchase 39,714 shares of our common stock, from which
we received cash proceeds of $278,000. Further, on May 16, 2016 we
consummated an underwritten public offering pursuant to which we
issued an aggregate of 2,570,040 registered shares of our
common stock at the public offering price of $4.24 per share and
five-year warrants to purchase up to 2,705,883 registered
shares of common stock, with an exercise price of $5.30 per share,
at the public offering price of $0.01 per warrant, including shares
and warrants issued pursuant to the exercise of the underwriters'
over-allotment option (the May 2016 Public
Offering). We received
net cash proceeds of approximately $9.5 million from the May 2016
Public Offering after deducting fees and expenses.
We believe that we
currently have sufficient financial resources to fund our expected
operations through the first half of 2017, including preparation
for and launch of our AV-101 Phase 2b study in MDD. Although
our current financial resources are not yet sufficient to complete
our AV-101 Phase 2b study when launched, we anticipate raising
sufficient additional capital through sales of our securities in
2017 to satisfy our key corporate objectives, including completion
of our AV-101 Phase 2b study in 2018. There can be no assurance,
however, that future financing will be available in sufficient
amounts, in a timely manner, or on terms acceptable to us,
if at all. We may also seek research and development
collaborations that could generate revenue, as well as government
grant awards. Further, strategic collaborations, such as our
February 2015 CRADA with the NIMH providing for the NIMH to fund
our Phase 2a study of AV-101 in MDD, may provide non-dilutive
resources to advance our strategic initiatives while reducing a
portion of our future cash outlays and working capital
requirements. Although we may seek additional collaborations that
could generate revenue, as well as new government grant awards, no
assurance can be provided that any such collaborations or awards
will occur in the future. Our future working capital
requirements will depend on many factors, including, without
limitation, the scope and nature of opportunities related to our
success and the success of certain other companies in clinical
trials, including our development of AV-101 as a treatment for MDD
and other CNS conditions, and our stem cell technology platform,
the availability of, and our ability to obtain, government grant
awards and our ability to enter into collaborations on terms
acceptable to us. To further advance the clinical development of
AV-101 and our stem cell technology platform, as well as support
our operating activities, we plan to continue to carefully manage
our routine operating costs, including our employee headcount and
related expenses, as well as costs relating to regulatory
consulting, contract research and development, investor relations
and corporate development, legal, accounting, public company
compliance and other professional services and working capital
costs.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, substantial additional financing may
not be available to us on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or
at all. If we are unable to obtain substantial additional financing
on a timely basis in the near term, our business, financial
condition, and results of operations may be harmed, the price of
our stock may decline, we may be required to reduce, defer, or
discontinue certain of our research and development activities and
we may not be able to continue as a going concern. These
unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements do not
include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty.
Note 3. Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at
the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from those estimates. Significant estimates
include those relating to share-based compensation, and assumptions
that have been used to value warrants, warrant modifications,
warrant liabilities. We do not currently have, nor have we had
during the periods covered by this report, any arrangements
requiring the recognition of revenue.
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses are composed of both internal and
external costs. Internal costs include salaries and
employment-related expenses of scientific personnel and direct
project costs. External research and development expenses consist
primarily of costs associated with nonclinical and clinical
development of AV-101, now in Phase 2 clinical development,
initially for Major Depressive Disorder, stem cell
technology-related research and development costs, and costs
related to the filing, maintenance and prosecution of patents and
patent applications. All such costs are charged to expense as
incurred.
Stock-Based Compensation
We recognize compensation cost for all stock-based awards to
employees or consultants based on the grant date fair value of the
award. Non-cash, stock-based compensation expense is recognized
over the period during which the employee or consultant is required
to perform services in exchange for the award, which generally
represents the scheduled vesting period. We have no awards with
market or performance conditions. For equity awards to
non-employees, we re-measure the fair value of the awards as they
vest and the resulting value is recognized as an expense during the
period over which the services are performed.
The table below summarizes stock-based compensation expense
included in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Operations and Comprehensive Loss for the three and six months
ended September 30, 2016 and 2015.
|
Three Months Ended
|
Six Months Ended
|
||
|
September 30,
|
September 30,
|
||
|
2016
|
2015
|
2016
|
2015
|
Research
and development expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
option grants
|
$82,000
|
$31,900
|
$126,000
|
$47,400
|
Warrants
granted to officer in March 2014
|
-
|
2,900
|
-
|
5,700
|
Warrants
granted to officer in September 2015
|
-
|
852,200
|
-
|
852,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82,000
|
887,000
|
126,000
|
905,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
General
and administrative expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
option grants
|
116,800
|
9,100
|
180,700
|
16,100
|
Warrants granted to officers and directors
|
|
|
|
|
in
March 2014
|
-
|
3,900
|
-
|
7,800
|
Warrants granted to officers, directors and
|
|
|
|
|
consultants
in September 2015
|
-
|
2,840,700
|
-
|
2,840,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,800
|
2,853,700
|
180,700
|
2,864,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
stock-based compensation expense
|
$198,800
|
$3,740,700
|
$306,700
|
$3,769,900
|
In June 2016, our Board of Directors (the Board) approved the grant of options to purchase an
aggregate of 655,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise
price of $3.49 per share to the independent members of our Board
and to our officers, including our newly-hired Chief Medical
Officer. In September 2016, the Board approved the grant of an
option to purchase 125,000 shares of our common stock at an
exercise price of $4.27 per share to another newly-hired officer.
At September 30, 2016, there were stock options outstanding to
purchase 1,100,643 shares of our common stock at a weighted average
exercise price of $5.26 per share. We valued the options granted in
June 2016 and September 2016 using the Black-Scholes Option Pricing
Model and the following weighted average
assumptions:
Assumption:
|
June
2016
|
September
2016
|
Market
price per share at grant date
|
$3.49
|
$4.27
|
Exercise
price per share
|
$3.49
|
$4.27
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
1.34%
|
1.29%
|
Contractual
or estimated term in years
|
6.68
|
6.25
|
Volatility
|
81.69%
|
83.26%
|
Dividend
rate
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
Shares
|
655,000
|
125,000
|
|
|
|
Fair Value per share
|
$2.50
|
$3.05
|
During September 2015, our Board approved the grant of options to
purchase an aggregate of 90,000 shares of our common stock at an
exercise price of $9.25 per share to our non-officer employees and
certain consultants. The Board also granted immediately vested
warrants to purchase an aggregate of 650,000 shares of our common
stock to our executive officers, independent members of our Board
and certain consultants. We valued the warrants and options granted
in September 2015 using the Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model and
the following assumptions:
Assumption:
|
Warrants
|
Employee Options
|
Non-employee Options
|
Market
price per share at grant date
|
$9.11
|
$9.11
|
$9.11
|
Exercise
price per share
|
$9.25
|
$9.25
|
$9.25
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
1.52%
|
2.02%
|
2.20%
|
Contractual
or estimated term in years
|
5.00
|
6.25
|
10.00
|
Volatility
|
77.19%
|
79.48%
|
103.42%
|
Dividend
rate
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
Shares
|
650,000
|
60,000
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value per share
|
$5.68
|
$6.35
|
$8.27
|
Comprehensive Loss
We have no components of other comprehensive loss other than net
loss, and accordingly our comprehensive loss is equivalent to our
net loss for the periods presented.
Income (Loss) per Common Share
Basic
net income (loss) per share of
common stock excludes the effect of dilution and is computed by
dividing net income (loss) by
the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding
for the period. Diluted net income
(loss) per share of common stock reflects the potential
dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue
shares of common stock were exercised or converted into shares of
common stock. In calculating diluted
net income (loss) per share, we have historically adjusted the
numerator for the change in the fair value of the warrant liability
attributable to outstanding warrants, only if dilutive, and
increased the denominator to include the number of potentially
dilutive common shares assumed to be outstanding during the period
using the treasury stock method. The change in the fair value of
the warrant liability, which was eliminated in May 2015, had no
impact on the diluted net earnings per share calculation in any
period included in these unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
As a result of our net loss for the periods presented,
potentially dilutive securities were excluded from the computation
of net loss per share, as their effect would be antidilutive. For
the three and six month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015,
the accrual for dividends on our Series B Preferred and the deemed
dividend attributable to the issuance of our Series B Preferred
Units represent deductions from our net loss to arrive at net loss
attributable to common stockholders for those periods.
Potentially
dilutive securities excluded in determining diluted net loss
attributable to common stockholders per common share are as
follows:
|
As of September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Series A Preferred stock issued and
outstanding (1)
|
750,000
|
750,000
|
|
|
|
Series B Preferred stock issued and
outstanding (2)
|
1,160,240
|
3,426,523
|
|
|
|
Series C Preferred stock issued and
outstanding (3)
|
2,318,012
|
-
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
options under the 2008 and 1999 Stock Incentive Plans
|
1,100,643
|
296,738
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
warrants to purchase common stock
|
4,678,414
|
4,687,211
|
|
|
|
Warrant
shares issuable to PLTG upon exchange of Series A
Preferred
|
|
|
under
the terms of the October 11, 2012 Note Exchange and
Purchase
|
|
|
Agreement,
as subsequently amended
|
-
|
535,715
|
|
|
|
Total
|
10,007,309
|
9,696,187
|
____________
|
|
|
(1) Assumes exchange under the
terms of the October 11, 2012 Note Exchange and Purchase Agreement
with PLTG, as amended
|
||||
(2) Assumes exchange under the
terms of the Certificate of Designation of the Relative Rights and
Preferences of the Series B 10% Convertible Preferred Stock,
effective May 5, 2015
|
||||
(3) Assumes exchange under the
terms of the Certificate of Designation of the Relative Rights and
Preferences of the Series C Convertible Preferred Stock, effective
January 25, 2016
|
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Other
than as identified below, there have been no recent accounting
pronouncements or changes in accounting pronouncements during the
six months ended September 30, 2016, as compared to the recent
accounting pronouncements described in the Company’s Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016, that are of
significance or potential significance to the Company.
In August 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued
guidance to reduce the diversity in the presentation of certain
cash receipts and cash payments presented and classified in the
statement of cash flows. The guidance addresses the following eight
specific cash flow issues: (1) debt prepayment or debt
extinguishment costs, (2) settlement of zero-coupon debt
instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates
that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate
of the borrowing, (3) contingent consideration payments made after
a business combination, (4) proceeds from the settlement of
insurance claims, (5) proceeds from settlement of corporate-owned
life insurance policies, including bank-owned life insurance
policies, (6) distributions received from equity method investees,
(7) beneficial interests in securitization transitions and (8)
separately identifiable cash flows and application of predominance
principle. The guidance will be effective for fiscal years and
interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and early
adoption is permitted. The guidance requires retrospective
adoption. We are evaluating the effect that ASU No. 2016-15 will
have on our consolidated financial statements and related
disclosures.
Note 4. Fair Value Measurements
We do not use derivative instruments for hedging of market risks or
for trading or speculative purposes.
In conjunction with certain Senior Secured Convertible Promissory
Notes that we issued to Platinum Long Term Growth VII, LLC
(PLTG) between October 2012 and July 2013 and the
related PLTG Warrants, and the contingently issuable Series A
Exchange Warrant, we determined that the warrants included certain
exercise price and other adjustment features requiring the warrants
to be treated as liabilities, which were recorded at their
issuance-date estimated fair values and marked to market at each
subsequent reporting period. We determined the fair value of the
warrant liabilities using Level 3 (unobservable) inputs, since
there was minimal comparable external market data available. Inputs
used to determine fair value included the remaining contractual
term of the warrants, risk-free interest rates, expected volatility
of the price of the underlying common stock, and the probability of
a financing transaction that would trigger a reset in the warrant
exercise price, and, in the case of the Series A Exchange Warrant,
the probability of PLTG’s exchange of the shares of Series A
Preferred it holds into shares of common stock. The change in the
fair value of these warrant liabilities between March 31, 2015 and
their subsequent elimination (described below) was recognized as a
non-cash expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of
Operations and Comprehensive Loss for the three months ended June
30, 2015.
On May 12, 2015, we entered into an agreement with PLTG pursuant to
which PLTG agreed to amend the PLTG Warrants to (i) fix the
exercise price thereof at $7.00 per share, (ii) eliminate the
exercise price reset features and (iii) fix the number of shares of
our common stock issuable thereunder. This agreement and
the related modification of the PLTG Warrants resulted in the
elimination of the warrant liability with respect to the PLTG
Warrants during the quarter ended June 30, 2015.
In January 2016, we entered into an Exchange Agreement with PLTG
pursuant to which PLTG exchanged all outstanding PLTG Warrants plus
the shares issuable pursuant to the Series A Preferred Exchange
Warrant for unregistered shares of our Series C Convertible
Preferred Stock (Series C
Preferred) in the ratio of 0.75
share of Series C Preferred for each warrant share
cancelled.
We carried no assets or liabilities at fair value at September 30,
2016 or March 31, 2016.
Note 5. Prepaid Expenses and Other Current
Assets
Prepaid expenses and other current assets are composed of the
following at September 30, 2016 and March 31, 2016:
|
September 30,
|
March 31,
|
|
2016
|
2016
|
|
|
|
Insurance
|
$94,900
|
$27,000
|
Prepaid
compensation under financial advisory
|
|
|
and
other consulting agreements
|
550,800
|
337,500
|
Public
offering expenses
|
-
|
57,400
|
Technology
license fees and all other
|
3,200
|
4,900
|
|
|
|
|
$648,900
|
$426,800
|
Accrued expenses are composed of the following at September 30,
2016 and March 31, 2016:
|
September 30,
|
March 31,
|
|
2016
|
2016
|
|
|
|
Accrued
professional services
|
$133,000
|
$318,000
|
Accrued
AV-101 development expenses
|
662,000
|
186,000
|
Accrued
compensation
|
-
|
310,000
|
|
|
|
|
$795,000
|
$814,000
|
Note 7. Notes Payable
The following table summarizes our unsecured promissory notes at
September 30, 2016 and March 31, 2016.
|
September 30,
2016
|
March 31,
2016
|
||||
|
Principal
|
Accrued
|
|
Principal
|
Accrued
|
|
|
Balance
|
Interest
|
Total
|
Balance
|
Interest
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.75%
Note payable to insurance premium financing company
(current)
|
$71,100
|
$-
|
$71,100
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.0% Note
payable to Progressive Medical Research
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
$58,800
|
$12,000
|
$70,800
|
less:
current portion
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(31,600)
|
(12,000)
|
(43,600)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.0% Notes
payable - non-current portion
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
$27,200
|
$-
|
$27,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
notes payable to unrelated parties
|
$71,100
|
$-
|
$71,100
|
$58,800
|
$12,000
|
$70,800
|
less:
current portion
|
(71,100)
|
-
|
(71,100)
|
(31,600)
|
(12,000)
|
(43,600)
|
Net
non-current portion
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
$27,200
|
$-
|
$27,200
|
Between May 2015 and August 2015, we extinguished the outstanding
balances of approximately $17,200,000 of indebtedness, including
all senior secured promissory notes and a substantial portion of
other indebtedness that was either due and payable or would have
become due and payable prior to March 31, 2016, by converting such
indebtedness into shares of our Series B Preferred.
Evaluating each converted note or debt class separately, we
determined that the conversion of each of such notes and other debt
instruments into Series B Preferred should be accounted for as an
extinguishment of debt. Because the fair value of the Series B
Preferred into which the debt instruments were converted in all
cases exceeded the carrying value of the debt, we recorded an
aggregate non-recurring non-cash loss on extinguishment of debt of
$26,700,200, in our fiscal year ended March 31, 2016, of which
$25,050,900 was recorded in the quarter ended June 30, 2015, and
the remaining $1,649,300 was recorded in the quarter ended
September 30, 2015, as reflected in the accompanying Consolidated
Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss for that
period.
On January 5, 2016, we paid in full the $33,300 outstanding balance
(principal and accrued but unpaid interest) of the promissory note
previously issued to the University of California in connection
with our collaborative research and development relationship with
the University of California at Davis.
On June 13, 2016, we paid in full the $71,600 outstanding balance
(principal and accrued but unpaid interest) of the promissory note
we issued to Progressive Medical Research (PMR) in connection with our clinical development
relationship with PMR.
In May 2016, we executed a promissory note in the face amount of
$117,500 in connection with certain insurance policy premiums. The
note is payable in monthly installments of $12,100, including
principal and interest, through March 2017, and the remaining
balance of such note as of September 30, 2016 was
$71,100.
Note 8. Capital Stock
Series B Preferred Unit Offering
In April and May 2016, in self-placed private placement
transactions, we sold to accredited investors an aggregate of
$278,000 of units in our Series B Preferred Unit offering, which
units consist of Series B Preferred and Series B Warrants
(together Series B Preferred
Units). We issued 39,714 shares
of Series B Preferred and Series B Warrants to purchase 39,714
shares of our common stock. Through the termination of
the Series B Preferred Unit offering in May 2016, we received an
aggregate of $5,303,800 in cash proceeds from our self-placed
private placement and sale of the Series B Preferred
Units.
We allocated the proceeds from the sale of the Series B Preferred
Units during April and May 2016 to the Series B Preferred and the
Series B Warrants based on their relative fair values on the dates
of the sales. We determined that the fair value of a share
of Series B Preferred was equal to the quoted market value of a
share of our common stock on the date of a Series B Preferred Unit
sale. We calculated the fair value of
the Series B Warrants using the Black Scholes Option Pricing Model
and the weighted average assumptions indicated in the table below.
The table below also presents the aggregate allocation of the
Series B Preferred Unit sales proceeds based on the relative fair
values of the Series B Preferred and the Series B Warrants as of
their respective Series B Preferred Unit sales dates. The
difference between the relative fair value per share of the Series
B Preferred, approximately $4.20 per share, and its Conversion
Price (or stated value) of $7.00 per share represents a deemed
dividend to the purchasers of the Series B Preferred Units.
Accordingly, we have recognized a deemed dividend in the aggregate
amount of $111,100 in arriving at net loss attributable to common
stockholders in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated
Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss for the six months
ended September 30, 2016.
Unit
Warrants
|
|
|
Aggregate
Allocation of
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Weighted
Average Issuance Date Valuation Assumptions
|
|
Per Share
|
Aggregate
|
|
Aggregate
|
Proceeds
Based on
|
||||||
Warrant
|
|
|
|
|
Risk free
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
Fair Value
|
|
Proceeds
|
Relative
Fair Value of:
|
|
Shares
|
|
Market
|
Exercise
|
Term
|
Interest
|
|
Dividend
|
|
Value of
|
of Unit
|
|
of Unit
|
Unit
|
Unit
|
Issued
|
|
Price
|
Price
|
(Years)
|
Rate
|
Volatility
|
Rate
|
|
Warrant
|
Warrants
|
|
Sales
|
Stock
|
Warrant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,714
|
|
$ 8.45
|
$ 7.00
|
5.00
|
1.27%
|
78.43%
|
0.0%
|
|
$ 5.63
|
$ 223,500
|
|
$ 278,000
|
$ 166,900
|
$ 61,100
|
May 2016 Public Offering and NASDAQ Uplisting
Effective on May 16, 2016, we consummated an underwritten public
offering of our securities, pursuant to which we issued an
aggregate of 2,570,040 registered shares of our common stock at a
public sales price of $4.24 per share and five-year warrants
exercisable at $5.30 per share to purchase an aggregate of
2,705,883 shares of our common stock at a public sales price of
$0.01 per warrant share, including shares and warrants issued in
June 2016 pursuant to the exercise of the underwriters’
over-allotment option (the May 2016 Public
Offering). We received gross
proceeds of approximately $10.9 million and net proceeds of
approximately $9.5 million from the May 2016 Public Offering, after
deducting underwriters’ commissions and other offering
expenses. The warrants issued in the May 2016 Public Offering have
no anti-dilution or other exercise price or share reset features,
except as is customary with respect to a change in the
Company’s capital structure in the event of a stock split or
dividend, and, accordingly, we have accounted for them as equity
warrants.
The
securities included in the May 2016 Public Offering Warrants were
offered, issued and sold under a prospectus filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) pursuant to an effective
registration statement (Registration Statement) filed with the
SEC on Form S-1 (File No. 333-210152) pursuant to the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act). The Registration
Statement was first filed with the SEC on March 14, 2016, and was
declared effective on May 10, 2016.
In
connection with the completion of our May 2016 Public Offering, our
common stock was approved for listing on The NASDAQ Capital Market,
and began trading under the symbol “VTGN” on May 11,
2016.
Conversion of Series B Preferred into Common Stock
During April 2016, prior to the May 2016 Public Offering, holders
of an aggregate of 7,500 shares of Series B Preferred voluntarily
converted such shares into an equivalent number of registered
shares of our common stock. In connection with such
conversions, we issued an aggregate of 510 shares of our
unregistered common stock as payment in full of $4,000 in accrued
dividends on the Series B Preferred that was voluntarily
converted.
On May 19, 2016, upon the consummation of the May 2016 Public
Offering, an aggregate of 2,403,051 shares of Series B Preferred
were automatically converted into an aggregate of 2,192,847
registered shares of our common stock and an aggregate of 210,204
shares of our unregistered common stock. Additionally, we issued an
aggregate of 416,806 shares of our unregistered common stock as
payment in full of $1,642,100 in accrued dividends on the Series B
Preferred that was automatically converted, at the rate of one
share of common stock for each $3.94 of accrued Series B Preferred
dividends. On June 15, 2016, pursuant to the
underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option, an
additional 44,500 shares of Series B Preferred were converted into
44,500 shares of our registered common stock. We issued
an additional 9,580 shares of our unregistered common stock as
payment in full of $37,400 in accrued dividends on the Series B
Preferred that was automatically converted, at the rate of one
share of common stock for each $3.90 in accrued
dividends.
In
August 2016, one of the remaining holders of our Series B Preferred
voluntarily converted 87,500 shares of
Series B Preferred into an equivalent number of registered shares
of our common stock. In connection with this conversion,
we issued 26,258 shares of our unregistered common stock as payment
in full of $85,300 in accrued dividends on the Series B Preferred
that was voluntarily converted.
Issuance of Common Stock to Professional Services
Providers
In September 2016, we issued an aggregate of 170,000 shares
of our unregistered common stock having an aggregate fair value on
the date of issuance of $737,800 to various professional services
providers. Of that amount, we issued 120,000 shares having a fair value of $520,800 on
the date of issuance for services to be rendered from October 2016
to December 2016. The value of these shares has been
recorded as a prepaid expense at September 30, 2016 and will be
expensed during the quarter ended December 31, 2016.
Modification of Warrants
Between April 1, 2016 and May 4, 2016, we entered into Warrant
Exchange Agreements with certain holders of outstanding warrants to
purchase an aggregate of 41,469 shares of our common stock pursuant
to which the holders agreed to the cancellation of such warrants in
exchange for the issuance of an aggregate of 31,238 shares of our
unregistered common stock.
We accounted for the exchange of these warrants as warrant
modifications, comparing their fair value prior to the exchange
with the fair value of the common stock issued. We calculated the
weighted average fair value of the warrants prior to the exchange
to be $5.37 per share, or $223,700, using the Black Scholes Option
Pricing Model and the following weighted average assumptions:
market price per share: $8.44; exercise price per share: $7.37;
risk-free interest rate: 1.23%; remaining contractual term: 4.77
years; volatility: 79.0%; and expected dividend rate: 0%. The
weighted average fair value of the aggregate of 31,238 shares of
common stock issued in the exchange was $8.45 per share or
$264,000. Accordingly, we recognized the additional fair
value, $40,300, as warrant modification expense, included as a
component of general and administrative expenses in our Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
for the quarter ended June 30, 2016.
In August 2016, we entered into Warrant Exchange Agreements with
holders of outstanding warrants to purchase an aggregate of 20,000
shares of our common stock pursuant to which the holders agreed to
the cancellation of such warrants in exchange for the issuance of
an aggregate of 15,000 shares of our unregistered common stock. We
likewise accounted for the exchange of these warrants as warrant
modifications. We calculated the weighted average fair value of the
warrants prior to the exchange to be $1.64 per share, or $32,900,
using the Black Scholes Option Pricing Model and the following
weighted average assumptions: market price per share: $3.33;
exercise price per share: $8.00; risk-free interest rate: 1.10%;
remaining contractual term: 4.58 years; volatility: 87.0%; and
expected dividend rate: 0%. The weighted average fair value
of the aggregate of 15,000 shares of common stock issued in the
exchange was $3.33 per share or $50,000. Accordingly, we
recognized the additional fair value, $17,100, as warrant
modification expense, included as a component of general and
administrative expenses in the accompanying Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
for the quarter ended September 30, 2016.
Warrants Outstanding
Following the warrant issuances in the May 2016 Public Offering,
the Series B Warrant issuances and the warrant exchanges described
above, at September 30, 2016, we had outstanding warrants to
purchase shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise
price of $6.44 per share as follows:
Exercise Price
|
Expiration
|
Shares Subject to Purchase at
|
per Share
|
Date
|
September 30, 2016
|
|
|
|
$4.50
|
9/26/2019
|
25,000
|
$5.30
|
5/16/2021
|
2,705,883
|
$6.00
|
9/26/2019
|
75,000
|
$7.00
|
12/11/2018
to 3/3/2023
|
1,417,125
|
$8.00
|
3/25/2021
|
210,000
|
$10.00
|
8/31/2016
to 1/11/2020
|
131,358
|
$20.00
|
9/15/2019
|
110,448
|
$30.00
|
11/20/2017
|
3,600
|
|
|
|
|
4,678,414
|
With the exception of 2,705,883 shares of common stock underlying
the warrants issued in the May 2016 Public Offering, all of the
common shares underlying our outstanding warrants are
unregistered.
Note 9. Related Party Transactions
Cato Holding Company (CHC), doing business as Cato BioVentures
(CBV), is the parent of Cato Research Ltd
(CRL) . CRL is a contract research, development and
regulatory services organization (CRO) engaged by us for certain aspects of the
development of AV-101. CBV is among our largest institutional
stockholders at September 30, 2016, holding approximately 7.5% of
our outstanding common stock. Shawn Singh, our Chief Executive
Officer and member of our Board of Directors, served as Managing
Principal of CBV and Chief Business Officer and General Counsel of
CRL from February 2001 to August 2009. On October 10, 2012, we
issued to CBV an unsecured promissory note in the principal amount
of $310,400 (the 2012 CBV
Note) and a five-year warrant
to purchase 12,500 restricted shares of our common stock at a price
of $30.00 per share (the CBV Warrant). Additionally, on October
10, 2012, we issued to CRL: (i) an unsecured
promissory note in the initial principal amount of $1,009,000,
payable solely in restricted shares of our common stock and
which accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, compounded
monthly (the CRL Note), as payment in full for all contract research
and development services and regulatory advice rendered to us
by CRL through December 31, 2012 with respect to CRO services,
including regulatory strategy and preclinical and clinical
development of AV-101, and (ii) a five-year warrant to
purchase, at a price of $20.00 per share, 50,450 restricted
shares of our common stock, such number of shares to be adjusted in
relation to accrued interest on the CRL Note (CRL Warrant). The Cato Notes and additional amounts payable
to CRL for CRO services were extinguished in June 2015 in exchange
for our issuance of an aggregate of 328,571 shares of Series B
Preferred to CBV, which shares of Series B Preferred were
automatically converted into an equal number of registered shares
of our common stock in connection with the May 2016 Public
Offering. CBV also participated in our February 2016 warrant
exchange, exchanging the CBV Warrant and the CRL Warrant, as
adjusted to reflect accrued interest, for an aggregate of 54,894
shares of our unregistered common stock.
Under the terms of our CRO arrangement with CRL related to the
development of AV-101, we incurred expenses of $27,800 and $10,900
for the quarters ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively,
and $78,200 and $22,100 in the six month periods ended September
30, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Total interest expense, including
amortization of note discount, on the notes payable to CBV and CRL
was $28,200 for the three-month period ended June 30, 2015 during
which the notes were extinguished.
Note 10. Subsequent Events
We have
evaluated subsequent events through November 11, 2016 and have
identified the following matters requiring disclosure:
Warrants Exchanged for Common Stock
In
October 2016, we entered into a Warrant Exchange Agreement with a
holder of outstanding warrants to purchase 113,944 shares of our
common stock pursuant to which the holder agreed to cancel such
warrants in exchange for the issuance of 85,458 restricted shares
of our common stock.
Issuance of Common Stock for Professional Services
Effective November
1, 2016, we issued 25,000 shares of our unregistered common stock
as partial compensation for investor relations, market awareness
and other services.
Stock Option
Grants
Effective November
9, 2016, our Board authorized the grant of stock options to
purchase an aggregate of 560,000 shares of our common stock
pursuant to our Amended and Restated 2016 Stock Incentive
Plan. Options were granted to independent members of our
Board and our officers and employees. The ten-year options
are exercisable at $3.80 per share and vest over a period of three
years.
Lease Extension
Effective November
10, 2016, we entered into an amendment to the lease of our
headquarters facility, pursuant to which the term of the lease was
extended from July 31, 2017 to July 31, 2022 and the base rent
under the lease for the five-year extension period was specified. A
copy of the amended lease is attached to this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q.
Item 2.
|
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (Quarterly Report) includes
forward-looking statements. All statements contained in this
Quarterly Report other than statements of historical fact,
including statements regarding our future results of operations and
financial position, our business strategy and plans, and our
objectives for future operations, are forward- looking statements.
The words “believe,” “may,”
“estimate,” “continue,”
“anticipate,” “intend,”
“expect” and similar expressions are intended to
identify forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-
looking statements largely on our current expectations and
projections about future events and trends that we believe may
affect our financial condition, results of operations, business
strategy, short-term and long-term business operations and
objectives, and financial needs. These forward-looking statements
are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions.
Our business is subject to significant risks including, but not
limited to, our ability to obtain additional financing, the results
of our research and development efforts, the results of
non-clinical and clinical testing, the effect of regulation by the
United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other
agencies, the impact of competitive products, product development,
commercialization and technological difficulties, the effect of our
accounting policies, and other risks as detailed in the section
entitled “Risk Factors” in this Quarterly
Report. Further, even if our product candidates appear
promising at various stages of development, our share price may
decrease such that we are unable to raise additional capital
without significant dilution or other terms that may be
unacceptable to our management, Board of Directors and
stockholders.
Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing
environment. New risks emerge from time to time. It is not possible
for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the
impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any
factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to
differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking
statements we may make. In light of these risks, uncertainties and
assumptions, the future events and trends discussed in this
Quarterly Report may not occur and actual results could differ
materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in the
forward-looking statements.
You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions
of future events. The events and circumstances reflected in the
forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur. Although
we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking
statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results,
levels of activity, performance or achievements. We are under no
duty to update any of these forward-looking statements after the
date of this Quarterly Report or to conform these statements to
actual results or revised expectations. If we do update one or more
forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that we
will make additional updates with respect to those or other
forward-looking statements.
Business Overview
We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to
developing and commercializing innovative product candidates for
patients with diseases and disorders involving the central nervous
system (CNS). Unless the context otherwise requires, the
words “VistaGen Therapeutics,
Inc.”
“VistaGen,” “we,” “the Company,” “us” and “our” refer to VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc., a
Nevada corporation. All references to future quarters and years in
this Item 2 refer to calendar quarters and calendar years, unless
reference is made otherwise.
Our lead product candidate, AV-101, is a new generation, oral
antidepressant drug candidate in Phase 2 development, initially for
the adjunctive treatment of Major Depressive Disorder
(MDD) in patients with an inadequate response to
standard antidepressants approved by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). We believe AV-101 may also have
therapeutic potential in other CNS indications, including chronic
neuropathic pain, epilepsy, Huntington’s disease and
Parkinson’s disease.
AV-101’s mechanism of action, as an N-methyl D aspartate
receptor (NMDAR) antagonist binding selectively at the glycine
binding (GlyB) co-agonist site of the NMDAR, is fundamentally
differentiated from all FDA-approved antidepressants, as well as
all atypical antipsychotics used to augment standard antidepressant
therapy.
We are preparing to launch our Phase 2b clinical study of AV-101
for the adjunctive treatment of MDD in patients with an inadequate
response to standard, FDA-approved antidepressants
(Phase 2b
Study). We currently
anticipate commencement of this multi-center, multi-dose, double
blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2b efficacy and safety study in the
first half of 2017. Dr. Maurizio Fava, Professor of Psychiatry at
Harvard Medical School and Director, Division of Clinical Research,
Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Research Institute, will be the Principal
Investigator of our Phase 2b Study. Dr. Fava was the co-Principal
Investigator with Dr. A. John Rush of the largest clinical trial
conducted in depression to date, the STAR*D study, whose findings
were published in journals such as the New England Journal of
Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA). We currently anticipate top line results in
this Phase 2b Study in the third quarter of
2018.
In addition to clinical development of AV-101, we are advancing
potential commercial applications of our human pluripotent stem
cell (hPSC) technology
platform, including drug rescue and regenerative medicine
(RM). Our small
molecule drug rescue programs involve using CardioSafe 3D, our
customized cardiac bioassay system, to develop new chemical
entities (NCEs) for our
internal pipeline. Potential RM applications include using
blood, cartilage, heart and/or liver cells derived from hPSCs for
(A) cell-based therapy, (B) cell repair therapy, and/or (C) tissue
engineering. We may pursue these drug rescue and RM
applications in collaboration with third-parties.
AV-101 and Major Depressive Disorder
Background
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 350 million people worldwide are
affected by depression. According to the U.S. National Institutes
of Health (NIH) major depression is one of the most common
mental disorders in the U.S. The NIMH reports that, in 2014, an
estimated 15.7 million adults aged 18 or older in the U.S. had at
least one major depressive episode in the past year. This
represented 6.7 percent of all U.S. adults. According to the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) one in 10 Americans over the age of 12 takes an
antidepressant medication.
Most standard, FDA-approved antidepressants target neurotransmitter
reuptake inhibition – either serotonin (SSRIs) or serotonin/norepinephrine (SNRIs). Even when effective, these standard depression
medications take many weeks to achieve adequate antidepressant
effects. Nearly two out of every three drug-treated depression
patients, including an estimated 6.9 million drug-treated MDD
patients in the U.S., obtain inadequate therapeutic benefit from
initial treatment with a standard antidepressant. Unfortunately,
even after treatment with as many as four different standard
antidepressants, nearly one out of every three drug-treated
depression patients do not achieve adequate therapeutic
benefits. Such treatment-resistant depression patients
often seek to treat their depression with non-drug-related
approaches, such as Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT), or to augment their inadequate
response to standard antidepressants by adding an atypical
antipsychotic (such as, for example, aripiprazole) to their
treatment regimen, despite only modest potential therapeutic
benefit and significant risk of additional side effects from such
augmentation options.
All standard antidepressants have risks of significant side
effects, including, among others, potentially anxiety, metabolic
syndrome, sleep disturbance and sexual dysfunction. They
also have a “Black Box” warning due to risks of
worsening depression and suicide in certain groups. Use of atypical
antipsychotics to augment inadequately performing standard
antidepressants increases the risk of serious side effects,
including, potentially, tardive dyskinesia, significant weight
gain, diabetes and heart disease, while offering only a modest
potential increase in therapeutic benefit. Use of ECT increases the
risk of serious side effects, including, headaches, tiredness,
disorientation, intense sleepiness, hallucinations and long-term
memory loss.
AV-101
AV-101, our oral new generation antidepressant drug candidate, is
in Phase 2 clinical development, initially for the adjunctive
treatment of MDD patients with an inadequate response to standard
antidepressants. As published in the October 2015 issue of the
peer-reviewed, Journal of Pharmacology and
Experimental Therapeutics, in an article entitled, The prodrug 4-chlorokynurenine
causes ketamine-like antidepressant effects, but not side effects,
by NMDA/glycineB-site inhibition, using well-established preclinical models of
depression, AV-101 was shown to induce fast-acting, dose-dependent,
persistent and statistically significant antidepressant-like
responses, following a single treatment. These responses were
equivalent to those seen with a single, sub-anesthetic control dose
of the NMDAR antagonist ketamine. In the same preclinical studies,
a standard antidepressant, the SSRI fluoxetine, did not induce
rapid onset antidepressant-like responses. In addition, these
studies confirmed that the fast-acting antidepressive effects of
AV-101 were mediated through the GlyB site and involved the
activation of a key neurological pathway, the
alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid
(AMPA)
receptor pathway. Activation of the AMPA receptor pathway is a
common feature of fast-acting antidepressants.
Following the completion of our NIH-funded, randomized, double
blind, placebo-controlled AV-101 Phase 1a and Phase 1b safety
studies, we are now collaborating with the NIMH in a Phase 2a
study. Under our February 2015 CRADA, the NIMH is funding, and Dr.
Carlos Zarate Jr. of the NIMH as Principal Investigator is
conducting, our ongoing Phase 2a efficacy and safety study of
AV-101 in subjects with treatment-resistant MDD. The trial is
expected to enroll 20 to 28 patients. The first patient
was dosed in November 2015, and we currently anticipate topline
results in the second quarter of 2017.
We are preparing to launch our Phase 2b Study of AV-101 for the
adjunctive treatment of MDD in patients with an inadequate response
to standard, FDA-approved antidepressants. We currently anticipate
the launch of the Phase 2b Study, with Dr. Maurizio Fava of Harvard
Medical School serving as Principal Investigator, in the first half
of 2017. We currently anticipate topline results from the Phase 2b
Study in the third quarter of 2018.
We believe several preclinical studies support the hypothesis that
AV-101 also has the potential to treat multiple CNS disorders and
neurodegenerative diseases in addition to MDD, including chronic
neuropathic pain, epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease and
Huntington’s disease, where modulation of the NMDAR, AMPA
pathway and/or active metabolites of AV-101 may achieve therapeutic
benefit.
CardioSafe 3D™ NCE Drug Rescue and Regenerative
Medicine
CardioSafe 3D™ is
our customized in vitro cardiac bioassay system capable of
predicting potential human heart toxicity of small molecule
NCEs in vitro, long before they are ever tested in animal and
human studies. We are currently focused on potential commercial
applications of our stem cell technology platform involving (i)
use of CardioSafe 3D for small molecule NCE drug discovery and
drug rescue to expand our drug candidate pipeline, leveraging
substantial prior research and development investments by
pharmaceutical companies and others related to public domain NCEs
terminated before FDA approval due to heart toxicity risks and (ii)
RM, including (A) cell-based therapy (injection of stem
cell-derived mature organ-specific cells obtained through directed
differentiation), (B) cell repair therapy (induction of
regeneration by biologically active molecules administered alone or
produced by infused genetically engineered cells), or (C) tissue
engineering (transplantation of in vitro grown complex tissues) using hPSC-derived
blood, bone, cartilage, heart and/or liver cells. We may
collaborate with one or more third-parties in connection with these
potential commercial applications of our stem cell technology
platform.
Financial Operations Overview and Results of
Operations
Our critical accounting policies and estimates and recent
accounting pronouncements are disclosed in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016, as filed with
the SEC on June 24, 2016, and in Note 3 to the accompanying
unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in
Part 1, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q.
Summary
Net Loss
We have
not yet achieved revenue-generating status from any of our product
candidates or technologies. Since
inception, we have devoted substantially all of our time and
efforts to developing our lead CNS product candidate, AV-101, from
early preclinical studies to our ongoing Phase 2 clinical
development programs in MDD, as well as stem cell technology
research and development, bioassay development, small molecule drug
development, and creating, protecting and patenting intellectual
property related to our product candidates and technologies, with
the corollary initiatives of recruiting and retaining personnel and
raising working capital. As of September 30, 2016, we had an
accumulated deficit of approximately $136.8 million. Our net loss
for the six months ended September 30, 2016 was approximately $5.1
million. Our net loss for the six months ended September 30, 2015
was approximately $36.6 million, which amount included a
non-recurring, non-cash loss of approximately $26.7 million
attributable to extinguishment and conversion of approximately
$17.2 million of our prior indebtedness into equity securities
between May and August 2015. We expect losses to continue for the
foreseeable future, primarily related to our further clinical
development of AV-101 for the adjunctive treatment of MDD, as well
as a range of other CNS indications.
Summary of Six Months Ended September 30, 2016
During the six months ended September 30, 2016, we continued to (i)
advance clinical development of AV-101 as a new generation
antidepressant, (ii) expand the regulatory foundation to support
Phase 2 clinical development of AV-101 in the U.S. both as a new
adjunctive treatment for patients with inadequate response to
standard, FDA-approved antidepressants and as a new therapeutic
alternative for several other CNS indications, and, (iii) on a
limited basis, advance both (a) the predictive toxicology
capabilities of CardioSafe 3D for drug rescue applications, including our
ongoing participation in the FDA’s Comprehensive in-vitro
Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) initiative designed to change the landscape of
preclinical drug development by providing a more complete and
accurate assessment of potential drug effects on cardiac risk, and
(b) regenerative medicine opportunities related to our stem cell
technology platform.
Pursuant to our February 2015 Cooperative Research and Development
Agreement (CRADA) with the NIH, the NIH continues to fund, and Dr.
Carlos Zarate Jr. of the NIMH continues to conduct, a Phase 2a
clinical study of AV-101 in treatment-resistant MDD. In addition,
we continue preparations for our Phase 2b clinical study of AV-101
for the adjunctive treatment of MDD in patients with an inadequate
response to standard, FDA-approved antidepressants (the
Phase 2b
Study). We currently anticipate
the launch of the Phase 2b Study, with Dr. Maurizio Fava of Harvard
Medical School serving as Principal Investigator, in the first half
of 2017.
In May 2016, we consummated an underwritten public offering of our
securities, pursuant to which we issued to institutional investors
an aggregate of 2,570,040 registered shares of our common stock and
five-year warrants exercisable at $5.30 per share to purchase an
aggregate of 2,705,883 shares of our common stock and received net
proceeds, after deducting underwriters’ commissions and other
expenses, of approximately $9.5 million (May 2016 Public
Offering). In connection with
the May 2016 Public Offering, we also uplisted our common stock to
the NASDAQ Capital Markets, where it has traded under the symbol
“VTGN” since May 11, 2016. Please see the section
titled “Liquidity and Capital
Resources” below, for a
discussion of our capital needs following the May 2016 Public
Offering.
In addition to bolstering our Clinical and Regulatory Advisory
Board with the appointment of Dr. Maurizio Fava as Chairman and the
addition of members Dr. Sanjay Matthew and Dr. Thomas Laughren, all
pre-eminent opinion leaders in the field of depression, and the
addition of veteran healthcare executive Jerry Gin, Ph.D., MBA to
our Board of Directors, we recently enhanced our management
team with the addition of Mark A. Smith, MD, Ph.D., as our Chief
Medical Officer in June 2016. Dr. Smith has over 20 years of
pharmaceutical industry and CNS drug development experience.
He has been a successful project leader in both drug
discovery and development on projects resulting in approximately 20
investigational new drugs (INDs). Dr. Smith has directed
clinical trials examining depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety,
schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease, ADHD and agitation in
Phase 1 through Phase 2b. In addition, Dr. Smith has vast knowledge
and expertise in translational neuroscience, clinical trial design
and regulatory interactions. Further, in September 2016, we
appointed Mark A. McPartland as our Vice President of Corporate
Development and Investor Relations. Mr. McPartland has over 20
years of experience in corporate development, capital markets,
corporate communications and management consulting for companies at
varying stage of their corporate evolution, including early- and
mid-stage biopharmaceutical companies. Mr. McPartland will
concentrate his initial efforts in expanding awareness of VistaGen
across a range of investors, researchers, patients, clinicians and
potential partners.
As a
matter of course, we attempt to minimize to the greatest extent
possible cash commitments and expenditures for both internal and
external research and development and general and administrative
services. To further advance the
clinical development of AV-101 and our stem cell technology
platform, as well as support our operating activities, we will
continue to carefully manage our routine operating costs, including
our internal employee related expenses, as well as external costs
relating to regulatory consulting, contract research and
development, investor relations and corporate development, legal,
accounting, public company compliance and other professional
services and working capital costs.
Results of Operations
Comparison of Three Months Ended September 30, 2016 and
2015
The following table summarizes the results of our operations for
the three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 (amounts in
thousands).
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
Research
and development
|
$1,606
|
$1,656
|
General
and administrative
|
1,494
|
3,731
|
Total
operating expenses
|
3,100
|
5,387
|
|
|
|
Loss
from operations
|
(3,100)
|
(5,387)
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense, net
|
(1)
|
(12)
|
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
-
|
(1,649)
|
|
|
|
Loss
before income taxes
|
(3,101)
|
(7,048)
|
Income
taxes
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
$(3,101)
|
$(7,048)
|
Accrued
dividend on Series B Preferred Stock
|
(241)
|
(615)
|
Deemed
dividend on Series B Preferred Stock
|
-
|
(887)
|
Net
loss attributable to common stockholders
|
$(3,342)
|
$(8,550)
|
Revenue
We reported no revenue for the quarters ended September 30, 2016 or
2015 and we presently have no revenue generating arrangements.
However, as indicated previously, we have entered into a CRADA with
the NIH providing for NIH funding of a Phase 2a clinical study of
AV-101 in treatment resistant Major Depressive Disorder. This Phase
2a study, which began in November 2015, is being fully funded by
the NIH and conducted at the NIMH by Dr. Carlos Zarate,
Jr.
Research and Development Expense
Research and development expense totaled $1,606,100 for the quarter
ended September 30, 2016, a 3% decrease compared with the
$1,656,100 reported for the quarter ended September 30, 2015, which
included significant noncash stock-based compensation expense.
Although the decrease between periods is modest, current period
costs reflect the increasing impact of our concentration on
continued development of AV-101 and preparations for launch of the
Phase 2b Study, which is currently anticipated in the first half of
2017. The following table indicates the primary components of
research and development expense for each of the periods (amounts
in thousands):
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Salaries
and benefits
|
$461
|
$212
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
82
|
887
|
Consulting
and other professional services
|
31
|
24
|
Technology
licenses and royalties
|
94
|
434
|
Project-related
research and supplies:
|
|
|
AV-101
|
817
|
13
|
Stem
cell and all other
|
51
|
21
|
|
868
|
34
|
Rent
|
62
|
55
|
Depreciation
|
8
|
10
|
|
|
|
Total
Research and Development Expense
|
$1,606
|
$1,656
|
The increase in salaries and benefits reflects the impact of a
bonus payment made to our President and Chief Scientific Officer
(CSO), the hiring of Dr. Mark Smith as our Chief
Medical Officer (CMO), and salary increases granted to our CSO and the
four non-officer members of our scientific
staff.
The decrease in stock based compensation expense is primarily
attributable to the $852,200 fair value, determined using the
Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model and the assumptions indicated in
Note 2, Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies, to the
accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I
of this Report, of the September 2015 grant of immediately vested
and expensed warrants to purchase 150,000 shares of our common
stock granted to our CSO. Stock compensation expense in 2016
reflects the ratable amortization of option grants made to our CSO
and CMO, scientific staff and consultants, most recently in June
2016 (CSO and CMO only) and September 2015 (primarily in 2016
expense). Our stock options are generally amortized over a two-year
to four-year vesting period. A substantial number of the option
grants made in or prior to our fiscal year ended March 31, 2014
became fully-vested and were fully-expensed prior to the quarter
ended September 30, 2016.
Consulting services reflects fees paid or accrued for scientific,
preclinical and clinical development and regulatory advisory
services rendered to us by third-parties, primarily by members of
our scientific and clinical and regulatory advisory
boards.
Technology license expense reflects both recurring annual fees as
well as legal counsel and other costs related to patent prosecution
and protection that we are required to fund under the terms of
certain of our stem cell technology license agreements or have
elected to pursue for commercial purposes. We recognize these costs
as they are invoiced to us by the licensors and they do not occur
ratably throughout the year or between years. In both periods, but
to a greater extent in the quarter ended September 30, 2015, this
expense includes legal counsel and other costs we have incurred to
advance in the U.S. and numerous foreign countries numerous pending
patent applications with respect to AV-101 and our stem cell
technology platform. Expense for the quarter ended September 30,
2015, also included approximately $153,000 of fees and expenses
related to stem cell technology related licenses acquired from
University Health Network (UHN) in connection with our Sponsored Research
Collaboration Agreement with UHN. Further, in July 2015, we granted
an aggregate of 10,000 shares of our Series B Preferred having an
aggregate fair value on the date of grant of $120,000 to two
strategic intellectual property legal service
providers.
AV-101 project expenses for the quarter ended September 30, 2016
includes continuing costs incurred to develop more efficient and
cost-effective production methods for AV-101 and for certain
pre-production and preclinical trial analyses and procedures to
facilitate Phase 2 clinical development of AV-101, including the
Phase 2b Study. AV-101 expense in both periods reflects the costs
associated with monitoring for and responding to potential feedback
related to the AV-101 Phase 1 clinical trials and addressing other
matters required under the terms of our prior NIH grant awards,
primarily through our Cato Research Ltd., our CRO for our Phase 1
safety studies. Stem cell and other project related expenses in
both periods were nominal.
General and Administrative Expense
General and administrative expense decreased to $1,493,600 from
$3,730,500, for the quarters ended September 30, 2016 and 2015,
respectively, primarily as a result of the decrease in noncash
stock compensation expense attributable to option and warrant
grants to employees and noncash expense related to grants of equity
securities in payment of certain professional services. The
following table indicates the primary components of general and
administrative expenses for each of the periods (amounts in
thousands):
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Salaries
and benefits
|
$485
|
$172
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
117
|
2,854
|
Consulting
Services
|
36
|
28
|
Legal,
accounting and other professional fees
|
207
|
511
|
Investor
relations
|
471
|
22
|
Insurance
|
38
|
34
|
Travel
expenses
|
23
|
38
|
Rent
and utilities
|
45
|
39
|
Warrant
modification expense
|
17
|
-
|
All
other expenses
|
54
|
33
|
|
|
|
Total
General and Administrative Expense
|
$1,493
|
$3,731
|
The increase in salaries and benefits reflects the impact of bonus
payments made to our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO); the hiring of Mark McPartland as our Vice
President of Corporate Development and Investor Relations; and
salary increases granted to our CEO, CFO and a non-officer member
of our administrative staff and the change in that employee’s
status from part-time to full-time.
The decrease in stock based compensation expense is primarily
attributable to the $2,841,000 fair value, determined using the
Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model and the assumptions indicated in
Note 2, Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies, to the
accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I
of this Report, of the September 2015 grant of immediately vested
and expensed warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of our common
stock granted to our CEO, CFO, independent members of our Board of
Directors and certain consultants. Stock compensation expense in
2016 reflects the ratable amortization of option grants made to our
CEO, CFO, independent members of our Board of Directors and
administrative staff and consultants, most recently in June 2016
(CEO, CFO and independent Board members only) and September 2015
(primarily in 2016 expense), as well as to Mr. McPartland upon his
commencement of employment in September 2016. Our stock options are
generally amortized over a two-year to four-year vesting period. A
substantial number of the option grants made in or prior to our
fiscal year ended March 31, 2014 became fully-vested and were
fully-expensed prior to the quarter ended September 30,
2016.
Consulting services primarily includes fees recognized for the
services of independent members of our Board of Directors. We added
an additional independent director to our Board in March
2016.
Legal, accounting and other professional fees in the quarter ended
September 30, 2015 included $337,500 of noncash expense recognized
during the quarter pursuant to the June 30, 2015 grant of an
aggregate of 90,000 shares of our Series B Preferred having an
aggregate fair value of $1,350,000 as compensation for financial
advisory and corporate development service contracts with two
independent contractors for services to be performed through June
30, 2016. In the quarter ended
September 30, 2016, we also granted an aggregate of 25,000
unregistered shares of our common stock having a fair value of
$108,500 to a legal services provider as compensation for services.
In both years, professional services fees also include the expense
related to the annual audit of the prior year financial statements
and quarterly reviews of current year financial
statements.
Investor relations expense includes the fees of our external
service providers for a broad spectrum of investor relations and
market awareness and support functions and, in the quarter ended
September 30, 2016, initiatives that include numerous meetings and
other communication activities focused on expanding market
awareness of the Company, including among investment professionals
and investment advisors, and individual and institutional
investors. In the quarter ended September 30, 2016, we granted an
aggregate of 25,000 unregistered shares of our common stock having
a fair value at the time of issuance of $108,500 to an investor
relations service provider as compensation for services, and,
as noted in Note 8,
Capital
Stock, to the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I of this
Report, 120,000 unregistered shares of our common stock having a
fair value at the time of issuance of $520,800 to a consulting
services provider for corporate development and other strategic
advisory services to be rendered from October 2016 to December
2016. The value of the latter common stock grant was
recorded as a prepaid expense at the date of the grant and will be
expensed during the quarter ended December 31, 2016.
In both periods, travel expense reflects costs associated with
presentations to and meetings with existing and potential
individual and institutional investors, investment professionals
and investment advisors, media and securities analysts, as well as
various investor relations, market awareness and corporate
development initiatives.
In August 2016, we entered into warrant exchange agreements with
certain warrant holders pursuant to which the warrant holders
exchanged outstanding warrants to purchase an aggregate of 20,000
shares of our common stock for an aggregate of 15,000 shares of our
unregistered common stock. As with similar transactions
during the quarters ended March 31, 2016 and June 30, 2016, we
accounted for these transactions as warrant modifications,
resulting in our recognition of $17,100 in noncash expense in the
quarter ended September 30, 2016.
Interest and Other Expenses, Net
Interest expense, net totaled $1,400 for the quarter ended
September 30, 2016 compared to $12,200 reported for the quarter
ended September 30, 2015, with both quarters reflecting the impact
of the extinguishment of a substantial majority of our promissory
notes, as well as other indebtedness, between May 2015 and August
2015 by conversion into our Series B Preferred or cash repayment
and the related elimination of note interest and discount
amortization. The following table summarizes the primary components
of interest expense for each of the periods (amounts in
thousands):
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense on promissory notes
|
$-
|
$13
|
Amortization
of discount on promissory notes
|
-
|
14
|
Other
interest expense, including on capital leases and premium
financing
|
1
|
1
|
|
1
|
28
|
Effect
of foreign currency fluctuations on notes payable
|
-
|
(16)
|
Interest
income
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense, net
|
$1
|
$12
|
Interest expense on promissory notes in the quarter ended September
30, 2015 represents the quarterly interest accrued on our
outstanding Note A to Morrison & Foerster prior to its
conversion into our Series B Preferred in August 2015, our
outstanding note to University of California at Davis prior to our
repayment of such note in January 2016 and our outstanding note to
Progressive Medical Research prior to our repayment of such in June
2016. Discount amortization for the same period was attributable to
Note A to Morrison & Foerster. Other interest expense in both
periods relates to interest paid on insurance premium financing and
one capital lease of office equipment.
During the quarter ended September 30, 2015, we eliminated the
outstanding balances of an additional approximately $1.8 million of
promissory notes and other debt (after having eliminated the
outstanding balances of approximately $15.4 million of promissory
notes, including our Senior Secured Notes, our 2014 Unit Notes and
other debt and certain adjustments thereto, in the quarter ended
June 30, 2015) by converting such balances into shares of our
Series B Preferred. We treated the conversion of the indebtedness
into Series B Preferred as extinguishments of debt for accounting
purposes. Because the fair value of the Series B Preferred we
negotiated in settlement of the promissory notes and other
indebtedness in the both the quarter ended September 30, 2015 and
the quarter ended June 30, 2015 exceeded the carrying value of the
debts, we incurred non-recurring noncash losses on each of the
extinguishments. During the quarter ended September 30, 2015, we
recorded an aggregate net noncash loss of $1,649,300 attributable
to the extinguishment of debt converted into Series B
Preferred.
We allocated proceeds from our self-placed private placement sales
of Series B Preferred Units during the quarter ended September 30,
2015 to the Series B Preferred and the Series B Warrants based on
their relative fair values on the dates of the sales. The
difference, for accounting purposes, between the relative fair
value per share of the Series B Preferred, approximately $4.05 per
share, and its Conversion Price (or stated value) of $7.00 per
share represented a deemed dividend to the purchasers of the Series
B Preferred Units. Accordingly, we recognized a deemed dividend in
the aggregate amount of $886,900 in arriving at net loss
attributable to common stockholders for the quarter ended
September 30, 2015 in the
accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations and
Comprehensive Loss included in Part I of this Report. Our private
placement offering of Series B Preferred Units was completed in May
2016.
We have
recognized $241,000 and $614,700 for
the quarters ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively,
representing the 10% cumulative dividend payable on our Series B
Preferred as an additional deduction in arriving at net loss
attributable to common stockholders in the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive
Loss included in Part I of this Report. The reduction in the
quarterly dividend accrual results from the automatic conversion of
an aggregate of 2,403,051 shares of
Series B Preferred upon our completion of the May 2016 Public
Offering, as disclosed in Note 8, Capital
Stock, to the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I of this
Report.
Comparison of Six Months Ended September 30, 2016 and
2015
The following table summarizes the results of our operations for
the six months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 (amounts in
thousands).
|
Six Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
Research
and development
|
$2,432
|
$2,029
|
General
and administrative
|
2,631
|
5,179
|
Total
operating expenses
|
5,063
|
7,208
|
|
|
|
Loss
from operations
|
(5,063)
|
(7,208)
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense (net)
|
(3)
|
(767)
|
Change
in warrant liabilities
|
-
|
(1,895)
|
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
-
|
(26,700)
|
|
|
|
Loss
before income taxes
|
(5,066)
|
(36,570)
|
Income
taxes
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
$(5,068)
|
$(36,572)
|
Accrued
dividend on Series B Preferred Stock
|
(781)
|
(828)
|
Deemed
dividend on Series B Preferred Stock
|
(111)
|
(1,143)
|
Net
loss attributable to common stockholders
|
$(5,960)
|
$(38,543)
|
Revenue
We reported no revenue for the six month periods ended September
30, 2016 or 2015 and we presently have no revenue generating
arrangements. However, as indicated previously, we have entered
into a CRADA with the NIH providing for the NIH to fund and conduct
a Phase 2a clinical study of AV-101 in treatment resistant Major
Depressive Disorder. This Phase 2a study, which began in November
2015, is being funded by the NIH and conducted at the NIMH by Dr.
Carlos Zarate, Jr.
Research and Development Expense
Research and development expense totaled $2,431,800 for the six
months ended September 30, 2016, approximately 20% greater than the
$2,028,700 incurred for the six months ended September 30, 2015,
reflecting our increasing focus on the continued development of
AV-101 and preparations to launch the Phase 2b Study, which we
currently anticipate to begin in the first half of 2017, and offset
by a reduction in noncash stock compensation expense compared to
the prior period. The following table indicates the primary
components of research and development expense for each of the
periods (amounts in thousands):
|
Six Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Salaries
and benefits
|
$711
|
$414
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
126
|
905
|
Consulting
and other professional services
|
58
|
46
|
Technology
licenses and royalties
|
254
|
487
|
Project-related
research and supplies:
|
|
|
AV-101
|
1,069
|
24
|
Stem
cell and all other
|
79
|
23
|
|
1,148
|
47
|
Rent
|
118
|
108
|
Depreciation
|
17
|
21
|
All
other
|
-
|
1
|
|
|
|
Total
Research and Development Expense
|
$2,432
|
$2,029
|
The increase in salaries and benefits reflects the impact of bonus
payments made to our President and Chief Scientific Officer
(CSO) and to the four non-officer members of our
scientific staff, the hiring of Dr. Mark Smith as our Chief Medical
Officer (CMO), and salary increases granted to our CSO and
members of our scientific staff.
The decrease in stock based compensation expense is primarily
attributable to the $852,200 fair value, determined using the
Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model and the assumptions indicated in
Note 2, Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies, to the
accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I
of this Report, of the September 2015 grant of immediately vested
and expensed warrants to purchase 150,000 shares of our common
stock granted to our CSO. Stock compensation expense in 2016
reflects the ratable amortization of option grants made to our CSO
and CMO, scientific staff and consultants, most recently in June
2016 (CSO and CMO only) and September 2015 (primarily in 2016
expense). Our stock options are generally amortized over a two-year
to four-year vesting period. A substantial number of the option
grants made in or prior to our fiscal year ended March 31, 2014
became fully-vested and were fully-expensed prior to the quarter
ended September 30, 2016.
Consulting services reflects fees paid or accrued for scientific,
preclinical and clinical development and regulatory advisory
services rendered to us by third-parties, primarily by members of
our scientific and clinical and regulatory advisory
boards.
Technology license expense reflects both recurring annual fees as
well as legal counsel and other costs related to patent prosecution
and protection that we are required to fund under the terms of
certain of our stem cell technology license agreements or have
elected to pursue for commercial purposes. We recognize these costs
as they are invoiced to us by the licensors and they do not occur
ratably throughout the year or between years. Additionally, in both
periods, this expense includes legal counsel and other costs we
have incurred to advance in the U.S. and numerous foreign countries
several pending patent applications with respect to AV-101 and our
stem cell technology platform. Expense for the six months ended
September 30, 2015, also included approximately $153,000 of fees
and expenses related to stem cell technology related licenses
acquired in connection with our Sponsored Research Collaboration
Agreement with UHN. Further, in July 2015, we granted an aggregate
of 10,000 shares of our Series
B Preferred having an aggregate fair value on the date of grant of
$120,000 to two intellectual property legal service
providers.
AV-101 project expenses for the six months ended September 30, 2016
includes continuing costs incurred to develop more efficient and
cost-effective production methods for AV-101 and for certain
pre-production and preclinical trial analyses and procedures to
facilitate Phase 2 clinical development of AV-101, including the
Phase 2b Study. We expect these expenses to increase materially
over the next several quarters as we conduct the Phase 2b Study.
Additionally, AV-101 expense in both periods reflects the costs
associated with monitoring for and responding to potential feedback
related to our AV-101 Phase 1 clinical safety program and
addressing other matters required under the terms of our prior NIH
grant awards, primarily through our CRO for our Phase 1 safety
studies, Cato Research Ltd. Stem cell and other project related
expenses in both periods were nominal.
General and Administrative Expense
General and administrative expense decreased to $2,631,200 from
$5,179,000, for the six month periods ended September 30, 2016 and
2015, respectively, primarily as a result of the decrease in
noncash stock compensation expense attributable to option and
warrant grants to employees, officer and independent Board members
and noncash expense related to grants of equity securities in
payment of certain professional services during 2015. The following
table indicates the primary components of general and
administrative expenses for each of the periods (amounts in
thousands):
|
Six Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Salaries
and benefits
|
$675
|
$348
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
181
|
2,865
|
Consulting
services
|
69
|
56
|
Legal,
accounting and other professional fees
|
749
|
1,470
|
Investor
relations
|
579
|
56
|
Insurance
|
78
|
72
|
Travel
and entertainment
|
72
|
55
|
Rent
and utilities
|
85
|
76
|
Warrant
modification expense
|
57
|
122
|
All
other expenses
|
86
|
59
|
|
|
|
Total
General and Administrative Expense
|
$2,631
|
$5,179
|
The increase in salaries and benefits reflects the impact of bonus
payments made to our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the hiring of Mark McPartland as our Vice
President of Corporate Development and Investor Relations, and
salary increases granted to our CEO, CFO and a non-officer member
of our administrative staff and the change in that employee’s
status from part-time to full-time.
The decrease in stock based compensation expense is primarily
attributable to the $2,841,000 fair value, determined using the
Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model and the assumptions indicated in
Note 2, Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies, to the
accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I
of this Report, of the September 2015 grant of immediately vested
and expensed warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of our common
stock granted to our CEO, CFO, independent members of our Board of
Directors and certain consultants. Stock compensation expense in
2016 reflects the ratable amortization of option grants made to our
CEO, CFO, independent members of our Board of Directors and
administrative staff and consultants, most recently in June 2016
(CEO, CFO and independent Board members only) and September 2015
(primarily in 2016 expense), as well as to Mr. McPartland upon his
commencement of employment in September 2016. Our stock options are
generally amortized over a two-year to four-year vesting period. A
substantial number of the option grants made in or prior to our
fiscal year ended March 31, 2014 became fully-vested and were
fully-expensed prior to the quarter ended September 30,
2016.
Consulting services primarily includes fees recognized for the
services of independent members of our Board of Directors. We added
an additional independent director to our Board in March
2016.
Legal, accounting and other professional fees in the six month
periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, each included $337,500
of noncash expense recognized during the respective period pursuant
to the June 30, 2015 grant of an aggregate of 90,000 shares
of our Series B Preferred having an aggregate fair value of
$1,350,000 as compensation for financial advisory and corporate
development service contracts with two independent contractors for
services performed between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2016. During
the six-month period ended September
30, 2016, we also granted an aggregate of 25,000 unregistered
shares of our common stock having a fair value at the date of
issuance of $108,500 to a legal services provider as compensation
for services. During the six-month period ended September 30, 2015,
we granted an aggregate of 50,000 shares of our common stock having
a fair value of $500,000 pursuant to two corporate development
contracts and granted 25,000 shares of our Series B Preferred
having a fair value at the time of issuance of $250,000 to legal
counsel as compensation for services in connection with our debt
restructuring and other corporate finance matters. In both years,
professional services fees also include the expense related to the
annual audit of the prior year financial statements and quarterly
reviews of current year financials statements.
Investor relations expense includes the fees of our external
service providers for a broad spectrum of investor relations and
market awareness and support functions and, in the six-month period
ended September 30, 2016, initiatives that include meetings and
other communication activities focused on expanding market
awareness of the Company, including among investment professionals
and investment advisors, individual and institutional investors,
media and securities analysts. In the six months ended September
30, 2016, we also granted an aggregate of 25,000 unregistered
shares of our common stock having a fair value at the time of
issuance of $108,500 to an investor relations service provider as
compensation for services, and, as disclosed in Note 8, Capital
Stock, to the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I of this
Report, in September 2016, 120,000 unregistered shares of our
common stock having a fair value at the time of issuance of
$520,800 to a consulting services provider for corporate
development and strategic advisory services to be rendered from
October 2016 to December 2016. The value of the latter
common stock grant was recorded as a prepaid expense at the date of
the grant and will be expensed during the quarter ended December
31, 2016.
In both periods, travel expense reflects costs associated with
presentations to and meetings with existing and potential investors
and investment professionals and advisors, media and securities
analysts, as well as various investor relations, market awareness
and corporate development initiatives.
Between April 2016 and August 2016, we entered into warrant
exchange agreements with certain warrant holders pursuant to which
the warrant holders exchanged outstanding warrants to purchase an
aggregate of 61,649 shares of our common stock for an aggregate of
46,238 shares of our unregistered common stock. As with
similar transactions during our fiscal year ended March 31, 2016,
we accounted for these transactions as warrant modifications,
resulting in our recognition of an aggregate of $57,400 in noncash
expense during the six-month period ended September 30, 2016.
Warrant modification expense in the six-month period ended
September 30, 2015 reflects the impact of June 2015 strategic
reductions in the exercise price of certain outstanding warrants,
generally from $30.00 per share to $10.00 per share.
Interest and Other Expenses, Net
Interest expense, net, totaled $2,800 for the six months ended
September 30, 2016, a significant decrease compared to the $767,300
reported for the six months ended September 30, 2015, resulting
from the extinguishment of substantially all of our promissory
notes, as well as other indebtedness, between May 2015 and August
2015 by conversion into our Series B Preferred or cash repayment
and the related elimination of note interest and discount
amortization. The following table summarizes the primary components
of interest expense for each of the periods (amounts in
thousands):
|
Six Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense on promissory notes
|
$ 1
|
$206
|
Amortization
of discount on promissory notes
|
-
|
565
|
Other
interest expense, including on capital leases and premium
financing
|
2
|
2
|
|
3
|
773
|
Effect
of foreign currency fluctuations on notes payable
|
-
|
(6)
|
Interest
income
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense, net
|
$3
|
$767
|
Interest expense on promissory notes in the six months ended
September 30, 2016 represents only the interest accrued on our
promissory note to Progressive Medical Research prior to its
repayment in June 2016. The substantial overall decrease in
interest expense on promissory notes and the related amortization
of discounts on such notes between the periods reflects the
cessation of interest accrual and discount amortization upon the
extinguishment and conversion of all outstanding Senior Secured
Convertible Notes, certain 10% convertible notes
(2014 Unit
Notes) and other outstanding
promissory notes into shares of our Series B Preferred between May
2015 and August 2015.
Under the terms of our October 2012 Note Exchange and Purchase
Agreement with Platinum Long Term Growth VII, LLC
(PLTG), we issued certain Senior Secured Convertible
Promissory Notes and a related Exchange Warrant and Investment
Warrants between October 2012 and July 2013. Upon PLTG’s
exchange of the shares of our Series A Preferred Stock held by PLTG
into shares of our common stock, we were also required to issue a
Series A Exchange Warrant to PLTG. We determined that the various
warrants included certain exercise price and other adjustment
features requiring us to treat the warrants as liabilities.
Accordingly, we recorded a noncash warrant liability at its
estimated fair value as of the date of warrant issuance or contract
execution. As described in Note 4, Fair Value
Measurements, to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part 1, Item 1
of this Report, on May 12, 2015, we entered into an agreement with
PLTG pursuant to which we amended the various warrants to fix the
exercise price thereof and eliminate the anti-dilution reset
features that had previously required the warrants to be treated as
liabilities and carried at fair value. Accordingly, during the
quarter ended June 30, 2015, we adjusted these warrants to their
fair value, reflecting an increase of $1,894,700 since March 31,
2015, resulting primarily from the increase in the market price of
our common stock in relation to the exercise price of the warrants,
and then subsequently eliminated the entire warrant liability with
respect to these warrants. In January 2016, the PLTG warrants were
exchanged for shares of our Series C Preferred
stock.
Between May 2015 and August 2015 we extinguished the outstanding
balances of approximately $17,200,000 of promissory notes,
including our Senior Secured Notes, our 2014 Unit Notes and other
debt and certain adjustments thereto that were either already due
and payable or would have otherwise matured prior to March 31, 2016
by converting such balances into shares of our Series B Preferred.
We treated the conversion of the indebtedness into Series B
Preferred as extinguishments of debt for accounting purposes. Since
the fair value of the Series B Preferred we negotiated in
settlement of the promissory notes and other indebtedness exceeded
the carrying value of the debts, we incurred non-recurring noncash
losses on each of the extinguishments. Additionally, under the
terms of our May 2015 agreement with PLTG in which they agreed to,
among other things, convert the Senior Secured Notes and certain
other of our convertible promissory notes into Series B Preferred,
we issued to PLTG 400,000 shares of Series B Preferred
having an aggregate fair value of $4.0 million and Series B Warrants to purchase 1.2 million
shares of our common stock having an aggregate of fair value
of $8,270,900. We recognized this
aggregate fair value as an additional noncash component of
loss on extinguishment of debt. Many of the 2014 Unit Notes that were converted into
Series B Preferred contained a beneficial conversion feature at the
time they were originally issued. We accounted for the repurchase
of the beneficial conversion feature at the time the 2014 Unit
Notes were extinguished and converted, an aggregate of $2,237,100,
as a reduction to the loss on extinguishment of debt. We recorded
an aggregate net non-recurring noncash loss of $26.7 million
attributable to the extinguishment of the indebtedness converted
into shares of Series B Preferred.
We allocated the proceeds from self-placed private placement sales
of Series B Preferred Units to the Series B Preferred and the
Series B Warrants based on their relative fair values on the dates
of the sales. The difference between the relative fair value per
share of the Series B Preferred, approximately $4.20 per share and
$4.06 per share for the six month periods ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, respectively, and its Conversion Price (or stated value)
of $7.00 per share represents a deemed dividend to the purchasers
of the Series B Preferred Units. Accordingly, we recognized a
deemed dividend in the aggregate amount of $111,100 and $1,143,100
in arriving at net loss attributable to common stockholders
for the six months ended September 30,
2016 and 2015, respectively, in the accompanying Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
included in Part I of this Report. Further, we recognized $780,000
and $828,000 for the six months ended
September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, representing the 10%
cumulative dividend payable on our Series B Preferred as an
additional deduction in arriving at net loss attributable to common
stockholders in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated
Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss, included elsewhere
in this Report. The reduction in the dividend accrual results from
the automatic conversion of an
aggregate of 2,403,051 shares of Series B Preferred upon our
completion of the May 2016 Public Offering, as disclosed in Note
8, Capital
Stock, to the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I of this
Report.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Since our inception in May 1998 through September 30, 2016, we have
financed our operations and technology acquisitions primarily
through the issuance and sale of our equity and debt securities,
including convertible promissory notes and short-term promissory
notes, for cash proceeds of approximately $44.3 million, as well as
from an aggregate of approximately $16.4 million of government
research grant awards, strategic collaboration payments and other
revenues, but not including the fair market value of the NIH-funded
AV-101 Phase 2a clinical study in MDD. Additionally, we have issued
equity securities with an approximate aggregate value at issuance
of $30.1 million in non-cash settlements of certain liabilities,
including liabilities for professional services rendered to us or
as compensation for such services.
Between April 1, 2016 and May 4, 2016, we sold to
accredited investors Series B Preferred Units consisting of 39,714
unregistered shares of our Series B Preferred Stock, par value
$0.001 per share (Series B
Preferred), and five year
warrants to purchase 39,714 shares of our common stock, and we
received cash proceeds of $278,000. Further, on May 16, 2016 we
consummated the May 2016 Public Offering, an underwritten public
offering pursuant to which we issued an aggregate of 2,570,040
registered shares of our common stock at the public offering price
of $4.24 per share and five-year warrants to purchase up
to 2,705,883 registered shares of common stock, with an
exercise price of $5.30 per share, at the public offering price of
$0.01 per warrant, including shares and warrants issued pursuant to
the exercise of the underwriters' over-allotment option. We
received net cash proceeds of approximately $9.5 million from the
May 2016 Public Offering after deducting fees and expenses. We
believe that we currently have sufficient financial resources to
fund our expected operations through the first half of 2017,
including preparation for and launch of our AV-101 Phase 2b Study
in MDD. Although our current financial resources are not yet
sufficient to complete our AV-101 Phase 2b Study when launched, we
anticipate raising sufficient additional capital in 2017 to satisfy
our key corporate objectives, including completion of our AV-101
Phase 2b Study in 2018. Accordingly, our executive management
continues to focus significant efforts on raising additional
capital to complete the Phase 2b Study and for other operational
requirements through sales of our securities, which may
include both debt and equity securities, or from other sources.
There can be no assurance, however, that future financing will be
available in sufficient amounts, in a timely manner, or on terms
acceptable to us, if at all.
We may also seek research and development collaborations that could
generate revenue, as well as government grant awards. Further,
strategic collaborations, such as our February 2015 CRADA which
provides for the NIMH to fully fund our Phase 2a study of AV-101 in
MDD, may provide non-dilutive resources to advance our strategic
initiatives while reducing a portion of our future cash outlays and
working capital requirements. Although we may seek additional
collaborations that could generate revenue, as well as new
government grant awards, no assurance can be provided that any such
collaborations or awards will occur in the future.
Our future working capital requirements will depend on many
factors, including, without limitation, the scope and nature of
opportunities related to our success and the success of certain
other companies in clinical trials, including our development of
AV-101 as a treatment for MDD and other CNS conditions, and our
stem cell technology platform, the availability of, and our ability
to obtain, government grant awards and our ability to enter into
collaborations on terms acceptable to us. To further advance the
clinical development of AV-101 and our stem cell technology
platform, as well as support our operating activities, we plan to
continue to carefully manage our routine operating costs, including
our employee headcount and related expenses, as well as costs
relating to regulatory consulting, contract research and
development, investor relations and corporate development, legal,
accounting, public company compliance and other professional
services and working capital costs.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, substantial additional financing may
not be available to us on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or
at all. If we are unable to obtain substantial additional financing
on a timely basis in the near term, our business, financial
condition, and results of operations may be harmed, the price of
our stock may decline, we may be required to reduce, defer, or
discontinue certain of our research and development activities and
we may not be able to continue as a going
concern.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The following table summarizes changes in cash and cash equivalents
for the periods stated (in thousands):
|
Six Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2016
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
$(3,873)
|
$(2,330)
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(8)
|
-
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
9,709
|
2,954
|
|
|
|
Net
increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
5,828
|
624
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
429
|
70
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$6,257
|
$694
|
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Item 4.
|
|
CONTROLS AND
PROCEDURES
|
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of
our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule
13a-15(e) of the Exchange Act) as of the end of the period covered
by this Report. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive
Officer and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period
covered by this Report were effective.
Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There was no change in our internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act) that
occurred during the fiscal quarter to which this Report relates
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II: OTHER INFORMATION
None.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You
should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described
below, together with all of the other information in this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended March 31, 2016 before investing in our securities. The risks
described below are not the only risks facing our
Company. Additional risks and uncertainties not
currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial
may also materially adversely affect our business, financial
condition and/or operating results. If any of the following
risks are realized, our business, financial condition and
results of operations could be materially and adversely
affected.
Risks Related to Product Development, Regulatory Approval and
Commercialization
We depend heavily on the success of AV-101. We cannot be certain
that we will be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or
successfully commercialize AV-101, or any product
candidate.
We currently have no drug products for sale and may never be able
to develop and commercialize marketable drug products. Our business
depends heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval
and commercialization of AV-101 for depression, including for MDD,
and various other diseases and disorders involving the CNS, as well
as, but to a more limited extent, our ability to produce, develop
and commercialize NCEs from our drug rescue programs. AV-101 will
require substantial additional Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical
development, testing and regulatory approval before we are
permitted to commence its commercialization and is unlikely to
achieve regulatory approval until at least 2021, if at all. Each
drug rescue NCE will require substantial non-clinical development,
all phases of clinical development, and regulatory approval before
we are permitted to commence its commercialization. The
non-clinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates
are, and the manufacturing and marketing of our product candidates
will be, subject to extensive and rigorous review and regulation by
numerous government authorities in the United States and in other
countries where we intend to test and, if approved, market any
product candidate. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the
commercial sale of any product candidate, we must demonstrate
through non-clinical studies and clinical trials that the product
candidate is safe and effective for use in each target indication.
Drug development is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and
delay or failure can occur at any stage of any of our non-clinical
studies or clinical trials. This process can take many years and
may also include post-marketing studies and surveillance, which
will require the expenditure of substantial resources beyond the
proceeds we have raised to date. Of the large number of drugs in
development in the United States, only a small percentage will
successfully complete the FDA regulatory approval process and will
be commercialized. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the
requisite financing to continue to fund our non-clinical studies
and clinical trials, we cannot assure you that AV-101, any drug
rescue NCE, or any other product candidate will be successfully
developed or commercialized.
We are not permitted to market our product candidates in the United
States until we receive approval of a New Drug Application
(NDA) from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until
we receive the requisite approval from such countries. In late
2015, in collaboration with the NIMH under our CRADA, we began a
Phase 2a clinical trial involving AV-101, to study its safety,
tolerability and efficacy in patients with MDD. If our Phase 2a
clinical trial of AV-101 is successful, we expect the FDA to
require us to complete at least two pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials
in order to submit an NDA for AV-101 as an adjunctive treatment for
MDD patients with an inadequate response to standard, FDA-approved
antidepressants. Also, we anticipate that the FDA will require
that we conduct additional toxicity studies and additional
non-clinical studies before submitting an NDA for AV-101.
The
results of all of these trials and studies are not known until
after the studies are concluded.
Obtaining FDA approval of an NDA is a complex, lengthy, expensive
and uncertain process, and the FDA may delay, limit or deny
approval of AV-101 or any of our product candidates for many
reasons, including, among others:
●
if our NDA,
if and when submitted, is reviewed by an advisory committee, the
FDA may have difficulties scheduling an advisory committee meeting
in a timely manner or the advisory committee may recommend against
approval of our application or may recommend that the FDA require,
as a condition of approval, additional non-clinical studies or
clinical trials, limitations on approved labeling or distribution
and use restrictions;
●
the FDA may require development of a Risk
Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) as a condition of approval or
post-approval;
●
the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory
agency may determine that the manufacturing processes or facilities
of third-party contract manufacturers with which we contract do not
conform to applicable requirements, including current Good
Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs); or
●
the FDA or
applicable foreign regulatory agency may change its approval
policies or adopt new regulations.
Any of these factors, many of which are beyond our control, could
jeopardize our ability to obtain regulatory approval for and
successfully commercialize AV-101 or any other product candidate we
may develop, including drug rescue NCEs. Any such setback in our
pursuit of regulatory approval would have a material adverse effect
on our business and prospects.
We intend to seek a Fast Track designation from the FDA for AV-101
for adjunctive treatment of MDD patients with an inadequate
response to standard antidepressants. Even if the FDA approves Fast
Track designation for AV-101 for this indication, it may not
actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or
approval process.
The Fast Track designation is a program offered by the FDA pursuant
to certain mandates under the FDA Modernization Act of 1997,
designed to facilitate drug development and to expedite the review
of new drugs that are intended to treat serious or life threatening
conditions. Compounds selected must demonstrate the potential to
address unmet medical needs. The Fast Track designation allows for
close and frequent interaction with the FDA. A designated Fast
Track drug may also be considered for priority review with a
shortened review time, rolling submission, and accelerated approval
if applicable. The designation does not, however, guarantee
approval or expedited approval of any application for the
product.
We intend to seek FDA Fast Track designation for AV-101 for
adjunctive treatment of MDD patients with an inadequate response to
standard antidepressants, and we may do so for other product
candidates as well. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to
grant this designation, and even if we believe AV-101 and other
product candidates are eligible for this designation, we cannot be
sure that the review or approval will compare to conventional FDA
procedures. Even if granted, the FDA may withdraw Fast Track
designation if it believes that the designation is no longer
supported by data from our clinical development
programs.
The number of patients suffering from MDD has not been established
with precision. If the actual number of patients with MDD is
smaller than we anticipate, we or our collaborators may encounter
difficulties in enrolling patients in AV-101 clinical trials,
including our NIH-funded Phase 2a clinical study of AV-101 in
treatment-resistant MDD, thereby delaying or preventing clinical
development. Further, if AV-101 is approved for
adjunctive treatment of MDD patients with an inadequate response to
standard antidepressants, and the market for this indication is
smaller than we anticipate, our ability to achieve profitability
could be limited.
Results of earlier clinical trials may not be predictive of the
results of later-stage clinical trials.
The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of
AV-101 and other product candidates may not be predictive of the
results of later-stage clinical trials. AV-101 or other product
candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the
desired safety and efficacy results despite having progressed
through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Many
companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered
significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to adverse
safety profiles or lack of efficacy, notwithstanding promising
results in earlier studies. Similarly, our future clinical trial
results may not be successful for these or other
reasons.
This drug candidate development risk is heightened by any changes
in planned clinical trials compared to completed clinical trials.
As product candidates are developed through preclinical to early
and late stage clinical trials towards approval and
commercialization, it is customary that various aspects of the
development program, such as manufacturing and methods of
administration, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize
processes and results. While these types of changes are common and
are intended to optimize the product candidates for later stage
clinical trials, approval and commercialization, such changes do
carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended
objectives.
For example, the results of planned clinical trials may be
adversely affected if we or our collaborator seek to optimize and
scale-up production of a product candidate. In such case, we will
need to demonstrate comparability between the newly manufactured
drug substance and/or drug product relative to the previously
manufactured drug substance and/or drug product. Demonstrating
comparability may cause us to incur additional costs or delay
initiation or completion of our clinical trials, including the need
to initiate a dose escalation study and, if unsuccessful, could
require us to complete additional preclinical or clinical studies
of our product candidates.
If serious adverse events or other undesirable side effects are
identified during the use of AV-101 in clinical trials, it may
adversely affect our development of AV-101 for MDD and other CNS
indications.
AV-101 is currently being tested in an NIMH-investigator sponsored
Phase 2a clinical trial for the treatment of MDD and may be
subjected to testing in the future for other CNS indications in
additional investigator sponsored clinical trials. If serious
adverse events or other undesirable side effects, or unexpected
characteristics of AV-101 are observed in investigator sponsored
clinical trials of AV-101 or our clinical trials, it may adversely
affect or delay our clinical development of AV-101, and the
occurrence of these events would have a material adverse effect on
our business.
Positive results from early preclinical studies and clinical trials
of AV-101 or other product candidates are not necessarily
predictive of the results of later preclinical studies and clinical
trials of such product candidates. If we cannot replicate the
positive results from our earlier preclinical studies and clinical
trials of AV-101 or other product candidates in our later
preclinical studies and clinical trials, we may be unable to
successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and
commercialize our product candidates.
Positive results from preclinical studies of our product
candidates, and any positive results we may obtain from early
clinical trials of our product candidates, may not necessarily be
predictive of the results from required later preclinical studies
and clinical trials. Similarly, even if we are able to complete our
planned preclinical studies or clinical trials of our product
candidates according to our current development timeline, the
positive results from our preclinical studies and clinical trials
of our product candidates may not be replicated in subsequent
preclinical studies or clinical trial results. Many companies in
the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered
significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving
positive results in early-stage development, and we cannot be
certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have
been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while
clinical trials were underway or safety or efficacy observations
made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including
previously unreported adverse events. Moreover, preclinical and
clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and
analyses, and many companies that believed their product candidates
performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials
nonetheless failed to obtain FDA approval. We have not yet
completed a Phase 2a clinical trial for AV-101, and if we fail to
produce positive results in our NIH-sponsored Phase 2a clinical
trial of AV-101 in MDD, the development timeline and regulatory
approval and commercialization prospects for AV-101 and,
correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, could be
materially adversely affected.
Failures or delays in the commencement or completion of our planned
clinical trials and non-clinical studies of our product candidates
could result in increased costs to us and could delay, prevent or
limit our ability to generate revenue and continue our
business.
Under our CRADA, we and the NIH have commenced an NIH-funded Phase
2a clinical trial of AV-101 as a treatment for MDD. We will need to
complete at least two additional large clinical trials prior to the
submission of an NDA for AV-101 as a treatment for MDD. Successful
completion of our clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting
an NDA to the FDA and, consequently, the ultimate approval and
commercial marketing of AV-101 for
MDD and any other product candidates we may develop. We do not know
whether the NIH-funded Phase 2a study of AV-101 or any of our
future-planned clinical trials will be completed on schedule, if at
all, as the commencement and completion of clinical trials can be
delayed or prevented for a number of reasons, including, among
others:
●
the FDA may deny permission to proceed with our
planned clinical trials or any other clinical trials we may
initiate, or may place a clinical trial on
hold;
●
delays in filing or receiving approvals of
additional INDs that may be required;
●
negative results from our ongoing non-clinical
studies;
●
delays in reaching or failing to reach agreement
on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites,
the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may
vary significantly among different CROs and trial
sites;
●
inadequate quantity or quality of a product
candidate or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials,
for example delays in the manufacturing of sufficient supply of
finished drug product;
●
difficulties obtaining Institutional Review Board
(IRB) approval to conduct a clinical trial at a
prospective site or sites;
●
challenges in recruiting and enrolling patients to
participate in clinical trials, including the proximity of patients
to trial sites;
●
eligibility criteria for the clinical trial, the
nature of the clinical trial protocol, the availability of approved
effective treatments for the relevant disease and competition from
other clinical trial programs for similar
indications;
●
severe or unexpected drug-related side effects
experienced by patients in a clinical trial;
●
delays in validating any endpoints utilized in a
clinical trial;
●
the FDA may disagree with our clinical trial
design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may
change the requirements for approval even after it has reviewed and
commented on the design for our clinical
trials;
●
reports from non-clinical or clinical testing of
other CNS therapies that raise safety or efficacy concerns;
and
●
difficulties retaining patients who have enrolled
in a clinical trial but may be prone to withdraw due to rigors of
the clinical trials, lack of efficacy, side effects, personal
issues or loss of interest.
●
Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated
as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. In addition,
a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA, the
IRBs at the sites where the IRBs are overseeing a clinical trial, a
data and safety monitoring board (DSMB), overseeing the clinical
trial at issue or other regulatory authorities due to a number of
factors, including, among others
●
failure to conduct the clinical trial in
accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical
protocols;
●
inspection of the clinical trial operations or
trial sites by the FDA or other regulatory authorities that reveals
deficiencies or violations that require us to undertake corrective
action, including the imposition of a clinical
hold;
●
unforeseen safety issues, including any that could
be identified in our ongoing non-clinical carcinogenicity studies,
adverse side effects or lack of effectiveness;
●
changes in government regulations or
administrative actions;
●
problems with clinical supply materials;
and
●
lack of adequate funding to continue clinical
trials.
Changes in regulatory requirements, FDA guidance or unanticipated
events during our non-clinical studies and clinical trials of our
product candidates may occur, which may result in changes to
non-clinical studies and clinical trial protocols or additional
non-clinical studies and clinical trial requirements, which could
result in increased costs to us and could delay our development
timeline.
Changes in regulatory requirements, FDA guidance or unanticipated
events during our non-clinical studies and clinical trials may
force us to amend non-clinical studies and clinical trial protocols
or the FDA may impose additional non-clinical studies and clinical
trial requirements. Amendments or changes to our clinical trial
protocols would require resubmission to the FDA and IRBs for review
and approval, which may adversely impact the cost, timing or
successful completion of clinical trials. Similarly, amendments to
our non-clinical studies may adversely impact the cost, timing, or
successful completion of those non-clinical studies. If we
experience delays completing, or if we terminate, any of our
non-clinical studies or clinical trials, or if we are required to
conduct additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials, the
commercial prospects for our product candidates may be harmed and
our ability to generate product revenue will be
delayed.
We rely, and expect that we will continue to rely, on third parties
to conduct any clinical trials for our product candidates. If these
third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual
duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain
regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and
our business could be substantially harmed.
We do not have the ability to independently conduct clinical
trials. We rely on medical institutions, clinical investigators,
contract laboratories and other third parties, such as CROs, to
conduct clinical trials on our product candidates. We enter into
agreements with third-party CROs to provide monitors for and to
manage data for our clinical trials, as well as provide other
services necessary to prepare for, conduct and complete clinical
trials. We rely heavily on these parties for execution of clinical
trials for our product candidates and control only certain aspects
of their activities. As a result, we have less direct control over
the conduct, timing and completion of these clinical trials and the
management of data developed through clinical trials than would be
the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff.
Communicating with outside parties can also be challenging,
potentially leading to mistakes as well as difficulties in
coordinating activities. Outside parties may:
●
have staffing difficulties;
●
fail to comply with contractual
obligations;
●
experience regulatory compliance
issues;
●
undergo changes in priorities or become
financially distressed; or
●
form relationships with other entities, some of
which may be our competitors.
These factors may materially adversely affect the willingness or
ability of third parties to conduct our clinical trials and may
subject us to unexpected cost increases that are beyond our
control. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of
our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable
protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific requirements and
standards, and our reliance on CROs or the NIH does not relieve us
of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs and the NIMH
are required to comply with regulations and guidelines, including
current cGCPs 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
patients are adequately informed of the potential risks of
participating in clinical trials. These regulations are enforced by
the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the
European Economic Area and comparable foreign regulatory
authorities for any products in clinical development. The FDA
enforces cGCP regulations through periodic inspections of clinical
trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or
our CROs fail to comply with applicable cGCPs, the clinical data
generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the
FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to
perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing
applications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, the FDA
will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with cGCPs.
In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product
candidates produced under cGMPs regulations and will require a
large number of test patients. Our failure or the failure of our
CROs to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat
clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process
and could also subject us to enforcement action up to and including
civil and criminal penalties.
Although we design our clinical trials for our product candidates,
we plan to have CROs, and in the case of our initial AV-101 Phase
2a study in MDD, the NIH, conduct the AV-101 Phase 2 and Phase 3
clinical trials. As a result, many important aspects of our drug
development programs are outside of our direct control. In
addition, the CROs or the NIH, as the case may be, may not perform
all of their obligations under arrangements with us or in
compliance with regulatory requirements, but we remain responsible
and are subject to enforcement action that may include civil
penalties up to and including criminal prosecution for any
violations of FDA laws and regulations during the conduct of our
clinical trials. If the NIH or CROs do not perform clinical trials
in a satisfactory manner, breach their obligations to us or fail to
comply with regulatory requirements, the development and
commercialization of AV-101 and other product candidates may be
delayed or our development program materially and irreversibly
harmed. We cannot control the amount and timing of resources these
CROs or the NIH devote to our program or our clinical products. If
we are unable to rely on clinical data collected by our CROs or the
NIH, we could be required to repeat, extend the duration of, or
increase the size of our clinical trials and this could
significantly delay commercialization and require significantly
greater expenditures.
If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs or the NIH
terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with
alternative CROs or collaborators. If CROs or the NIH do
not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations
or meet expected deadlines, if they 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 protocols, regulatory
requirements or for other reasons, any clinical trials that such
CROs or the NIH are associated with may be extended, delayed or
terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval
for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a
result, we believe that our financial results and the commercial
prospects for our product candidates in the subject indication
would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to
generate revenue could be delayed.
We rely completely on third-party suppliers to manufacture our
clinical drug supplies for our product candidates, and we intend to
rely on third parties to produce non-clinical, clinical and
commercial supplies of any future product candidate.
We do not currently have, nor do we plan to acquire, the
infrastructure or capability to internally manufacture our clinical
drug supply of AV-101 or any other product candidates for use in
the conduct of our nonclinical studies and clinical trials, and we
lack the internal resources and the capability to manufacture any
product candidates on a clinical or commercial
scale. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers
to manufacture the active pharmaceutical ingredient and final drug
product must complete a pre-approval inspection by the FDA and
other comparable foreign regulatory agencies to assess compliance
with applicable requirements, including cGMPs, after we submit our
NDA or relevant foreign regulatory submission to the applicable
regulatory agency.
We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely
dependent on, our contract manufacturers to comply with cGMPs for
manufacture of both active drug substances and finished drug
products. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully
manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the
strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or applicable foreign
regulatory agencies, they will not be able to secure and/or
maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. In
addition, we have no direct control over our contract
manufacturers’ ability to maintain adequate quality control,
quality assurance and qualified personnel. Furthermore, all of our
contract manufacturers are engaged with other companies to supply
and/or manufacture materials or products for such companies, which
exposes our third-party contract manufacturers to regulatory risks
for the production of such materials and products. As a result,
failure to satisfy the regulatory requirements for the production
of those materials and products may affect the regulatory clearance
of our contract manufacturers’ facilities generally. If the
FDA or an applicable foreign regulatory agency determines now or in
the future that these facilities for the manufacture of our product
candidates are noncompliant, we may need to find alternative
manufacturing facilities, which would adversely impact our ability
to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product
candidates. Our reliance on contract manufacturers also exposes us
to the possibility that they, or third parties with access to their
facilities, will have access to and may appropriate our trade
secrets or other proprietary information.
We do not yet have long-term supply agreements in place with our
contract manufacturers and each batch of our product candidates are
individually contracted under a quality and supply agreement. If we
engage new contract manufacturers, such contractors must complete
an inspection by the FDA and other applicable foreign regulatory
agencies. We plan to continue to rely upon contract manufacturers
and, potentially, collaboration partners, to manufacture commercial
quantities of AV-101 and other product candidates, if approved. Our
current scale of manufacturing for AV-101 is adequate to support
our currently planned needs for additional non-clinical studies and
clinical trial supplies.
Even if we receive marketing approval for our product candidates in
the United States, we may never receive regulatory approval to
market our product candidates outside of the United
States.
We have not yet selected any markets outside of the United States
where we intend to seek regulatory approval to market our product
candidates. In order to market any product outside of the United
States, however, we must establish and comply with the numerous and
varying safety, efficacy and other regulatory requirements of other
countries. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve
additional product candidate testing and additional administrative
review periods. The time required to obtain approvals in other
countries might differ from that required to obtain FDA approval.
The marketing approval processes in other countries may implicate
all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the
United States as well as other risks. In particular, in many
countries outside of the United States, products must receive
pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be
commercialized. Obtaining this approval can result in substantial
delays in bringing products to market in such countries. Marketing
approval in one country does not ensure marketing approval in
another, but a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in
one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in
others. Failure to obtain marketing approval in other countries or
any delay or other setback in obtaining such approval would impair
our ability to market our product candidates in such foreign
markets. Any such impairment would reduce the size of our potential
market, which could have a material adverse impact on our business,
results of operations and prospects.
If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or
enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our
product candidates, we may not be able to generate any
revenue.
We do not currently have an infrastructure for the sales, marketing
and distribution of pharmaceutical products, nor do we intend to
create such capabilities. Therefore, in order to market our product
candidates globally, if approved by the FDA or any other regulatory
body, we must make contractual arrangements with third parties to
perform services related to sales, marketing, managerial and other
non-technical capabilities relating to the commercialization of our
product candidates. If we are unable to establish adequate
contractual arrangements for such sales, marketing and distribution
capabilities, or if we are unable to do so on commercially
reasonable terms, our business, results of operations, financial
condition and prospects will be materially adversely
affected.
Even if we receive marketing approval for our product candidates,
our product candidates may not achieve broad market acceptance,
which would limit the revenue that we generate from their
sales.
The commercial success of our product candidates, if approved by
the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities, will depend
upon the awareness and acceptance of our product candidates among
the medical community, including physicians, patients and
healthcare payors. Market acceptance of our product candidates, if
approved, will depend on a number of factors, including, among
others:
●
the efficacy and safety of our product candidates
as demonstrated in clinical trials, and, if required by any
applicable regulatory authority in connection with the approval for
the applicable indications, to provide patients with incremental
health benefits, as compared with other available
therapies;
●
limitations or warnings contained in the labeling
approved for our product candidates by the FDA or other applicable
regulatory authorities;
●
the clinical indications for which our product
candidates are approved;
●
availability of alternative treatments already
approved or expected to be commercially launched in the near
future;
●
the potential and perceived advantages of our
product candidates over current treatment options or alternative
treatments, including future alternative
treatments;
●
the willingness of the target patient population
to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these
therapies;
●
the strength of marketing and distribution support
and timing of market introduction of competitive
products;
●
publicity concerning our products or competing
products and treatments;
●
pricing and cost
effectiveness;
●
the effectiveness of our sales and marketing
strategies;
●
our ability to increase awareness of our product
candidates through marketing efforts;
●
our ability to obtain sufficient third-party
coverage or reimbursement; or
●
the willingness of patients to pay out-of-pocket
in the absence of third-party coverage.
If our product candidates are approved but do not achieve an
adequate level of acceptance by patients, physicians and payors, we
may not generate sufficient revenue from our product candidates to
become or remain profitable. Before granting reimbursement
approval, healthcare payors may require us to demonstrate that our
product candidates, in addition to treating these target
indications, also provide incremental health benefits to patients.
Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors
about the benefits of our product candidates may require
significant resources and may never be successful.
Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects that
could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the
commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant
negative consequences following marketing approval, if
any.
Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could
cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt
nonclinical studies and clinical trials and could result in a more
restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by
the FDA or other regulatory authorities.
Further, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the
potential patient population. With a limited number of patients and
limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side effects of our
product candidates may only be uncovered with a significantly
larger number of patients exposed to the product candidate. If our
product candidates receive marketing approval and we or others
identify undesirable side effects caused by such product candidates
(or any other similar products) after such approval, a number of
potentially significant negative consequences could result,
including:
●
regulatory authorities may withdraw or limit their
approval of such product candidates;
●
regulatory authorities may require the addition of
labeling statements, such as a “black box” warning or a
contraindication;
●
we may be required to change the way such product
candidates are distributed or administered, conduct additional
clinical trials or change the labeling of the product
candidates;
●
we may be subject to regulatory investigations and
government enforcement actions;
●
we may decide to remove such product candidates
from the marketplace;
●
we could be sued and held liable for injury caused
to individuals exposed to or taking our product candidates;
and
●
our reputation may suffer.
We believe that any of these events could prevent us from achieving
or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidates
and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our
product candidates and significantly impact our ability to
successfully commercialize our product candidates and generate
revenues.
Even if we receive marketing approval for our product candidates,
we may still face future development and regulatory
difficulties.
Even if we receive marketing approval for our product candidates,
regulatory authorities may still impose significant restrictions on
our product candidates, indicated uses or marketing or impose
ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies.
Our product candidates will also be subject to ongoing FDA
requirements governing the labeling, packaging, storage and
promotion of the product and record keeping and submission of
safety and other post-market information. The FDA has significant
post-marketing authority, including, for example, the authority to
require labeling changes based on new safety information and to
require post-marketing studies or clinical trials to evaluate
serious safety risks related to the use of a drug. The FDA also has
the authority to require, as part of an NDA or post-approval, the
submission of a REMS. Any REMS required by the FDA may lead to
increased costs to assure compliance with new post-approval
regulatory requirements and potential requirements or restrictions
on the sale of approved products, all of which could lead to lower
sales volume and revenue.
Manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to
continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other
regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMPs and other
regulations. If we or a regulatory agency discover problems with
our product candidates, such as adverse events of unanticipated
severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where our
product candidates are manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose
restrictions on our product candidates, the manufacturer or us,
including requiring withdrawal of our product candidates from the
market or suspension of manufacturing. If we, our product
candidates or the manufacturing facilities for our product
candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements,
a regulatory agency may, among other things:
●
issue warning letters or untitled
letters;
●
seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal
penalties or monetary fines;
●
suspend or withdraw marketing
approval;
●
suspend any ongoing clinical
trials;
●
refuse to approve pending applications or
supplements to applications submitted by us;
●
suspend or impose restrictions on operations,
including costly new manufacturing requirements;
or
●
seize or detain products, refuse to permit the
import or export of products, or require that we initiate a product
recall.
Competing therapies could emerge adversely affecting our
opportunity to generate revenue from the sale of our product
candidates.
The pharmaceuticals industry is highly competitive. There are many
public and private pharmaceutical companies, universities,
governmental agencies and other research organizations actively
engaged in the research and development of products that may be
similar to our product candidates or address similar markets. It is
probable that the number of companies seeking to develop products
and therapies similar to our products will increase.
Currently, management is unaware of any FDA-approved adjunctive
therapy for MDD patients with an inadequate response to standard
antidepressants having the same mechanism of action and safety
profile as AV-101. However, new antidepressant products with other
mechanisms of action or products approved for other indications,
including the anesthetic ketamine, are being or may be used
off-label for treatment of MDD, as well as other CNS indications
for which AV-101 may have therapeutic potential. Additionally,
other non-pharmaceutical treatment options, such psychotherapy and
electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) are sometimes used before or instead of standard
antidepressants to treat patients with MDD.
In the field of new generation antidepressants focused on
modulation of the NMDA receptor at the glycine binding co-agonist
site, we believe our principal competitor is Allergan, which
recently acquired from and is now developing both the
intravenously-administered peptide, rapastinel (formerly GLYX-13),
and NRX-1074, which may be or may become orally-available, for
treatment-resistant MDD.
Many of our potential competitors, alone or with their strategic
partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human
resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the
discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and
other regulatory approvals of treatments and the commercialization
of those treatments. We believe that a range of
pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have programs to develop
small molecule drug candidates for the treatment of depression,
including MDD, epilepsy, neuropathic pain, Parkinson’s
disease and other neurological conditions and diseases, including,
but not limited to, Abbott Laboratories, Acadia, Allergan,
Alkermes, Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, IntraCellular,
Johnson & Johnson, Lundbeck, Merck, Novartis, Ono, Otsuka,
Pfizer, Roche, Sage, Sumitomo Dainippon, Teva and Takeda, as well
as any affiliates of the foregoing companies. Mergers
and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries
may result in even more resources being concentrated among a
smaller number of our competitors. Our commercial opportunity could
be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and
commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer
or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less
expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors
also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products
more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could
result in our competitors establishing a strong market position
before we are able to enter the market.
We may seek to establish collaborations, and, if we are not able to
establish them on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to
alter our development and commercialization plans.
Our drug development programs and the potential commercialization
of our product candidates will require substantial additional cash
to fund expenses. For some of our product candidates, we may decide
to collaborate with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for
the development and potential commercialization of those product
candidates.
We face significant competition in seeking appropriate
collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for
collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment
of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and
conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed
collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those
factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the
likelihood of approval by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities
outside the United States, the potential market for the subject
product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and
delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of
competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to
our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a
challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the
challenge and industry and market conditions generally. The
collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or
technologies for similar indications that may be available to
collaborate on and whether such collaboration could be more
attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. The
terms of any collaboration or other arrangements that we may
establish may not be favorable to us.
We may also be restricted under existing collaboration agreements
from entering into future agreements on certain terms with
potential collaborators. Collaborations are complex and
time-consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have
been a significant number of recent business combinations among
large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced
number of potential future collaborators.
We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis,
on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may
have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which
we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay its development
program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its
potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or
marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake
development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If
we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or
commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain
additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable
terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be
able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to
market and generate product revenue.
In addition, any future collaboration that we enter into may not be
successful. The success of our collaboration arrangements will
depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators.
Collaborators generally have significant discretion in determining
the efforts and resources that they will apply to these
collaborations. Disagreements between parties to a collaboration
arrangement regarding clinical development and commercialization
matters can lead to delays in the development process or
commercializing the applicable product candidate and, in some
cases, termination of the collaboration arrangement. These
disagreements can be difficult to resolve if neither of the parties
has final decision-making authority. Collaborations with
pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies and other third parties
often are terminated or allowed to expire by the other party. Any
such termination or expiration would adversely affect us
financially and could harm our business reputation.
We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover
additional product candidates or we may expend our limited
resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication
and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that
may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood
of success.
The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to
identify, develop and commercialize product candidates with
commercial and therapeutic potential. Although AV-101 is in Phase 2
clinical development for treatment of depression, we may fail to
pursue additional CNS-related Phase 2 development opportunities for
AV-101, or identify additional product candidates for clinical
development for a number of reasons. Our research methodology may
be unsuccessful in identifying new product candidates or our
product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may
have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable
or unlikely to receive marketing approval.
Because we have limited financial and management resources, we
focus on a limited number of research programs and product
candidates and are currently focused primarily on development of
AV-101, with additional limited focus on NCE drug rescue and RM. As
a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with
other product candidates or for other potential CNS-related
indications for AV-101 that later prove to have greater commercial
potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail
to capitalize on viable commercial drugs or profitable market
opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and
development programs and product candidates for specific
indications may not yield any commercially viable drugs. If we do
not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market
for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable
rights to that product candidate through future collaboration,
licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would
have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and
commercialization rights to such product candidate.
If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our
development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a
material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause
us to cease operations. Research programs to identify new product
candidates require substantial technical, financial and human
resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential
programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be
unsuccessful.
We are subject to healthcare laws and regulations, which could
expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual
damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future
earnings.
Although we do not currently have any products on the market, once
we begin commercializing our products, we may be subject to
additional healthcare statutory and regulatory requirements and
enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign
governments in which we conduct our business. Healthcare providers,
physicians and others will play a primary role in the
recommendation and prescription of our product candidates, if
approved. Our future arrangements with third-party payors will
expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other
healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or
financial arrangements and relationships through which we market,
sell and distribute our product candidates, if we obtain marketing
approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state
healthcare laws and regulations include the following:
●
The federal anti-kickback statute prohibits, among
other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting,
offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or
indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the
referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or
recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be
made under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and
Medicaid.
●
The federal False Claims Act imposes criminal and
civil penalties, including those from civil whistleblower or qui
tam actions, against individuals or entities for knowingly
presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government,
claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false
statement to avoid, decrease, or conceal an obligation to pay money
to the federal government.
●
The federal Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996, as amended by the Health Information
Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, imposes criminal
and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any
healthcare benefit program and also imposes obligations, including
mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the
privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable
health information.
●
The federal false statements statute prohibits
knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a
material fact or making any materially false statement in
connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits,
items or services.
●
The federal transparency requirements, sometimes
referred to as the “Sunshine Act,” under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act, require manufacturers of drugs,
devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under
Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance
Program to report to the Department of Health and Human Services
information related to physician payments and other transfers of
value and physician ownership and investment
interests.
●
Analogous state laws and regulations, such as
state anti-kickback and false claims laws and transparency laws,
may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving
healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental
third-party payors, including private insurers, and some state laws
require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical
industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant
compliance.
●
Guidance promulgated by the federal government in
addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information
related to payments to physicians and other healthcare providers or
marketing expenditures and drug pricing.
Ensuring that our future business arrangements with third parties
comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations could be
costly. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude
that our business practices do not comply with current or future
statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and
abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations,
including anticipated activities to be conducted by our sales team,
were found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other
governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to
significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages,
fines and exclusion from government funded healthcare programs,
such as Medicare and Medicaid, any of which could substantially
disrupt our operations. If any of the physicians or other providers
or entities with whom we expect to do business is found not to be
in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to
criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions
from government funded healthcare programs.
The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and
regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. If we are
found to have improperly promoted off-label uses, we may become
subject to significant liability.
The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the
promotional claims that may be made about prescription products,
such as AV-101, if approved. In particular, a product may not be
promoted for uses 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 AV-101
as an augmentation therapy for MDD, physicians may nevertheless
prescribe AV-101 to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent
with the approved label. If we are found to have promoted such
off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. 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. 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 cannot successfully manage the
promotion of our product candidates, if approved, we could become
subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely
affect our business and financial condition.
Even if approved, reimbursement policies could limit our ability to
sell our product candidates.
Market acceptance and sales of our product candidates will depend
on reimbursement policies and may be affected by healthcare reform
measures. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as
private health insurers and health maintenance organizations,
decide which medications they will pay for and establish
reimbursement levels for those medications. Cost containment is a
primary concern in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere.
Government authorities and these third-party payors have attempted
to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of
reimbursement for particular medications. We cannot be sure that
reimbursement will be available for our product candidates and, if
reimbursement is available, the level of such reimbursement.
Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, our
product candidates. If reimbursement is not available or is
available only at limited levels, we may not be able to
successfully commercialize our product candidates.
In some foreign countries, particularly in Canada and European
countries, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject
to strict governmental control. In these countries, pricing
negotiations with governmental authorities can take six months or
longer after the receipt of regulatory approval and product launch.
To obtain favorable reimbursement for the indications sought or
pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a
clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product
candidates with other available therapies. If reimbursement for our
product candidates is unavailable in any country in which we seek
reimbursement, if it is limited in scope or amount, if it is
conditioned upon our completion of additional clinical trials, or
if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our operating results
could be materially adversely affected.
We may seek FDA Orphan Drug designation for one or more of our
product candidates, including AV-101. Even if we have obtained FDA
Orphan Drug designation for one or more of our product candidates,
there may be limits to the regulatory exclusivity afforded by such
designation.
We may, in the future, choose to seek FDA Orphan Drug designation
for one or more of our product candidates, including AV-101. Even
if we obtain Orphan Drug designation from the FDA for any one of
our product candidates, there are limitations to the exclusivity
afforded by such designation. In the United States, the company
that first obtains FDA approval for a designated orphan drug for
the specified rare disease or condition receives orphan drug
marketing exclusivity for that drug for a period of seven years.
This orphan drug exclusivity prevents the FDA from approving
another application, including a full NDA to market the same drug
for the same orphan indication, except in very limited
circumstances, including when the FDA concludes that the later drug
is safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient
care. For purposes of small molecule drugs, the FDA defines
“same drug” as a drug that contains the same active
moiety and is intended for the same use as the drug in question. To
obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a drug that shares the same
active moiety as an already approved drug, it must be demonstrated
to the FDA that the drug is safer or more effective than the
approved orphan designated drug, or that it makes a major
contribution to patient care. In addition, a designated orphan drug
may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use
that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan
designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in
the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the
request for designation was materially defective or if the
manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to
meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition or if
another drug with the same active moiety is determined to be safer,
more effective, or represents a major contribution to patient
care.
Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to penetrate
foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory
burdens and other risks and uncertainties.
Our future profitability may depend, in part, on our ability to
commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets for which
we may rely on collaboration with third parties. If we
commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets, we would
be subject to additional risks and uncertainties,
including:
●
our customers’ ability to obtain
reimbursement for our product candidates in foreign
markets;
●
our inability to directly control commercial
activities because we are relying on third
parties;
●
the burden of complying with complex and changing
foreign regulatory, tax, accounting and legal
requirements;
●
different medical practices and customs in foreign
countries affecting acceptance in the
marketplace;
●
import or export licensing
requirements;
●
longer accounts receivable collection
times;
●
longer lead times for
shipping;
●
language barriers for technical
training;
●
reduced protection of intellectual property rights
in some foreign countries;
●
the existence of additional potentially relevant
third party intellectual property rights;
●
foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations;
and
●
the interpretation of contractual provisions
governed by foreign laws in the event of a contract
dispute.
Foreign sales of our product candidates could also be adversely
affected by the imposition of governmental controls, political and
economic instability, trade restrictions and changes in
tariffs.
We are a development stage biopharmaceutical company with no
current revenues or approved products, and limited experience
developing new drug, biological and/or regenerative medicine
candidates, including conducting clinical trials and other areas
required for the successful development and commercialization of
therapeutic products, which makes it difficult to assess our future
viability.
We are a development stage biopharmaceutical company. Although our
lead drug candidate is in Phase 2 development, we currently have no
approved products and currently generate no revenues, and we have
not yet fully demonstrated an ability to overcome many of the
fundamental risks and uncertainties frequently encountered by
development stage companies in new and rapidly evolving fields of
technology, particularly biotechnology. To execute our business
plan successfully, we will need to accomplish the following
fundamental objectives, either on our own or with strategic
collaborators:
●
produce product candidates;
●
develop and obtain required regulatory approvals
for commercialization of products we produce;
●
maintain, leverage and expand our intellectual
property portfolio;
●
establish and maintain sales, distribution and
marketing capabilities, and/or enter into strategic partnering
arrangements to access such capabilities;
●
gain market acceptance for our products;
and
●
obtain adequate capital resources and manage our
spending as costs and expenses increase due to research,
production, development, regulatory approval and commercialization
of product candidates.
Our future success is highly dependent upon our ability to
successfully develop and commercialize AV-101 and discover, as well
as produce, develop and commercialize proprietary drug rescue NCEs
using our stem cell technology, and we cannot provide any assurance
that we will successfully develop and commercialize AV-101 or drug
rescue NCEs, or that, if produced, AV-101 or any drug rescue NCE
will be successfully commercialized.
Research programs designed to identify and produce drug rescue NCEs
require substantial technical, financial and human resources,
whether or not any NCEs are ultimately identified and produced. In
particular, our drug rescue programs may initially show promise in
identifying potential NCEs, yet fail to yield a lead NCE suitable
for preclinical, clinical development or commercialization for many
reasons, including the following:
●
our drug rescue research methodology may not be
successful in identifying potential drug rescue
NCEs;
●
competitors may develop alternatives that render
our drug rescue NCEs obsolete;
●
a drug rescue NCE may, on further study, be shown
to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate
it is unlikely to be effective or otherwise does not meet
applicable regulatory criteria;
●
a drug rescue NCE may not be capable of being
produced in commercial quantities at an acceptable cost, or at all;
or
●
a drug rescue NCE may not be accepted as safe and
effective by regulatory authorities, patients, the medical
community or third-party payors.
In addition, we do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure,
and we, including our executive officers, do not have any
significant pharmaceutical sales, marketing or distribution
experience. We may seek to collaborate with others to develop and
commercialize AV-101, drug rescue NCEs and/or other product
candidates if and when they are developed. If we enter
into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing
and distribution services for our products, the resulting revenues
or the profitability from these revenues to us are likely to be
lower than if we had sold, marketed and distributed our products
ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into
arrangements with third parties to sell, market and distribute
AV-101, any drug rescue NCEs or other product candidates or may be
unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We
likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of
these third parties may fail to devote the necessary resources and
attention to sell, market and distribute our products
effectively. If we do not establish sales, marketing and
distribution capabilities successfully, in collaboration with third
parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product
candidates.
We have limited operating history with respect to drug development,
including our anticipated focus on the identification and
assessment of potential drug rescue NCEs and no operating history
with respect to the production of drug rescue NCEs, and we may
never be able to produce a drug rescue NCE.
If we are unable to develop and commercialize AV-101 or
produce suitable drug rescue NCEs, we may not be able to generate
sufficient revenues to execute our business plan, which likely
would result in significant harm to our financial position and
results of operations, which could adversely impact our stock
price.
There are a number of factors, in addition to the utility of
CardioSafe
3D, that may impact our ability to
identify and produce, develop or out-license and commercialize drug
rescue NCEs, independently or with strategic partners,
including:
●
our ability to identify potential drug rescue
candidates in the public domain, obtain sufficient quantities of
them, and assess them using our bioassay
systems;
●
if we seek to rescue drug rescue candidates that
are not available to us in the public domain, the extent to which
third parties may be willing to out-license or sell certain drug
rescue candidates to us on commercially reasonable
terms;
●
our medicinal chemistry collaborator’s
ability to design and produce proprietary drug rescue NCEs based on
the novel biology and structure-function insight we provide
using CardioSafe 3D; and
●
financial resources available to us to develop and
commercialize lead drug rescue NCEs internally, or, if we
out-license them to strategic partners, the resources such partners
choose to dedicate to development and commercialization of any drug
rescue NCEs they license from us.
Even if we do produce proprietary drug rescue NCEs, we can give no
assurance that we will be able to develop and commercialize them as
a marketable drug, on our own or in collaboration with others.
Before we generate any revenues from AV-101 and/or additional drug
rescue NCEs we or our potential collaborators must complete
preclinical and clinical developments, submit clinical and
manufacturing data to the FDA, qualify a third party contract
manufacturer, receive regulatory approval in one or more
jurisdictions, satisfy the FDA that our contract manufacturer is
capable of manufacturing the product in compliance with cGMP, build
a commercial organization, make substantial investments and
undertake significant marketing efforts ourselves or in partnership
with others. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our
product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the
FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never
receive such regulatory approval for any of our product
candidates.
If
CardioSafe 3D
fails to predict
accurately and efficiently the cardiac effects, both toxic and
nontoxic, of drug rescue candidates and drug rescue NCEs, then our
drug rescue programs will be adversely
affected.
Our success is partly dependent on our ability to use
CardioSafe
3D to identify and predict, accurately
and efficiently, the potential toxic and nontoxic cardiac effects
of drug rescue candidates and drug rescue NCEs. If CardioSafe 3D is not capable of providing physiologically
relevant and clinically predictive information regarding human
cardiac biology, our drug rescue business will be adversely
affected.
CardioSafe
3D may not be meaningfully more
predictive of the behavior of human cells than existing
methods.
The success of our drug rescue programs is highly dependent
upon CardioSafe 3D being more accurate, efficient and clinically
predictive than long-established surrogate safety models, including
animal cells and live animals, and immortalized, primary and
transformed cells, currently used by pharmaceutical companies and
others. We cannot give assurance that CardioSafe 3D will be more efficient or accurate at
predicting the heart safety of new drug candidates than the testing
models currently used. If CardioSafe 3D fails to provide a meaningful difference
compared to existing or new models in predicting the behavior of
human heart, respectively, their utility for drug rescue will be
limited and our drug rescue business will be adversely
affected.
We may invest in producing drug rescue NCEs for which there proves
to be no demand.
To generate revenue from our drug rescue activities, we must
produce proprietary drug rescue NCEs for which there proves to be
demand within the healthcare marketplace, and, if we intend to
out-license a particular drug rescue NCE for development and
commercialization prior to market approval, then also among
pharmaceutical companies and other potential collaborators.
However, we may produce drug rescue NCEs for which there proves to
be no or limited demand in the healthcare market and/or among
pharmaceutical companies and others. If we misinterpret market
conditions, underestimate development costs and/or seek to rescue
the wrong drug rescue candidates, we may fail to generate
sufficient revenue or other value, on our own or in collaboration
with others, to justify our investments, and our drug rescue
business may be adversely affected.
We may experience difficulty in producing human cells and our
future stem cell technology research and development efforts may
not be successful within the timeline anticipated, if at
all.
Our human pluripotent stem cell technology is technically complex,
and the time and resources necessary to develop various human cell
types and customized bioassay systems are difficult to predict in
advance. We might decide to devote significant personnel and
financial resources to research and development activities designed
to expand, in the case of drug rescue, and explore, in the case of
drug discovery and regenerative medicine, potential applications of
our stem cell technology platform. In particular, we may conduct
exploratory nonclinical RM programs involving blood, bone,
cartilage, heart, and/or liver cells. Although we and our
collaborators have developed proprietary protocols for the
production of multiple differentiated cell types, we could
encounter difficulties in differentiating and producing sufficient
quantities of particular cell types, even when following these
proprietary protocols. These difficulties could result in delays in
production of certain cells, assessment of certain drug rescue
candidates and drug rescue NCEs, design and development of certain
human cellular assays and performance of certain exploratory
nonclinical regenerative medicine studies. In the past, our stem
cell research and development projects have been significantly
delayed when we encountered unanticipated difficulties in
differentiating human pluripotent stem cells into heart and liver
cells. Although we have overcome such difficulties in the past, we
may have similar delays in the future, and we may not be able to
overcome them or obtain any benefits from our future stem cell
technology research and development activities. Any delay or
failure by us, for example, to produce functional, mature blood,
bone, cartilage, and liver cells could have a substantial and
material adverse effect on our potential drug discovery, drug
rescue and regenerative medicine business opportunities and results
of operations.
Restrictions on research and development involving human embryonic
stem cells and religious and political pressure regarding such stem
cell research and development could impair our ability to conduct
or sponsor certain potential collaborative research and development
programs and adversely affect our prospects, the market price of
our common stock and our business model.
Some of our research and development programs may involve the use
of human cells derived from our controlled differentiation of human
embryonic stem cells (hESCs). Some believe the use of hESCs gives rise to
ethical and social issues regarding the appropriate use of these
cells. Our research related to differentiation of hESCs may become
the subject of adverse commentary or publicity, which could
significantly harm the market price of our common stock. Although
now substantially less than in years past, certain political and
religious groups in the United States and elsewhere voice
opposition to hESC technology and practices. We may use hESCs
derived from excess fertilized eggs that have been created for
clinical use in in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures and have been donated for research
purposes with the informed consent of the donors after a successful
IVF procedure because they are no longer desired or suitable for
IVF. Certain academic research institutions have adopted policies
regarding the ethical use of human embryonic tissue. These policies
may have the effect of limiting the scope of future collaborative
research opportunities with such institutions, thereby potentially
impairing our ability to conduct certain research and development
in this field that we believe is necessary to expand the drug
rescue capabilities of our technology, which would have a material
adverse effect on our business.
The use of embryonic or fetal tissue in research (including the
derivation of hESCs) in other countries is regulated by the
government, and varies widely from country to country.
Government-imposed restrictions with respect to use of hESCs in
research and development could have a material adverse effect on us
by harming our ability to establish critical collaborations,
delaying or preventing progress in our research and development,
and causing a decrease in the market interest in our
stock.
The foregoing potential ethical concerns do not apply to our use of
induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) because their derivation does not involve the
use of embryonic tissues.
We have assumed that the biological capabilities of iPSCs and hESCs
are likely to be comparable. If it is discovered that this
assumption is incorrect, our exploratory research and development
activities focused on potential regenerative medicine applications
of our stem cell technology platform could be harmed.
We may use both hESCs and iPSCs to produce human cells for our
customized in vitro assays for drug discovery and drug rescue
purposes. However, we anticipate that our future exploratory
research and development, if any, focused on potential regenerative
medicine applications of our stem cell technology platform
primarily will involve iPSCs. With respect to iPSCs, we believe
scientists are still somewhat uncertain about the clinical utility,
life span, and safety of such cells, and whether such cells differ
in any clinically significant ways from hESCs. If we discover that
iPSCs will not be useful for whatever reason for potential
regenerative medicine programs, this would negatively affect our
ability to explore expansion of our platform in that manner,
including, in particular, where it would be preferable to use iPSCs
to reproduce rather than approximate the effects of certain
specific genetic variations.
If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and
regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur
costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of
our business.
We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws
and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures
and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous
materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous
and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological
materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We
generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these
materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination
or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or
injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be
held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could
exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs
associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.
Although we maintain workers' compensation insurance to cover us
for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our
employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this
insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential
liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental
liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in
connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or
radioactive materials.
In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with
current or future environmental, health and safety laws and
regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may
impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to
comply with these laws and regulations also may result in
substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions, which could have a
material adverse effect on our operations.
To the extent our research and development activities involve using
iPSCs, we will be subject to complex and evolving laws and
regulations regarding privacy and informed consent. Many of these
laws and regulations are subject to change and uncertain
interpretation, and could result in claims, changes to our research
and development programs and objectives, increased cost of
operations or otherwise harm the Company.
To the extent that we pursue research and development activities
involving iPSCs, we will be subject to a variety of laws and
regulations in the United States and abroad that involve matters
central to such research and development activities, including
obligations to seek informed consent from donors for the use of
their blood and other tissue to produce, or have produced for us,
iPSCs, as well as state and federal laws that protect the privacy
of such donors. United States federal and state and foreign laws
and regulations are constantly evolving and can be subject to
significant change. If we engage in iPSC-related research and
development activities in countries other than the United States,
we may become subject to foreign laws and regulations relating to
human subjects research and other laws and regulations that are
often more restrictive than those in the United States. In
addition, both the application and interpretation of these laws and
regulations are often uncertain, particularly in the rapidly
evolving stem cell technology sector in which we operate. These
laws and regulations can be costly to comply with and can delay or
impede our research and development activities, result in negative
publicity, increase our operating costs, require significant
management time and attention and subject us to claims or other
remedies, including fines or demands that we modify or cease
existing business practices.
Legal, social and ethical concerns surrounding the use of iPSCs,
biological materials and genetic information could impair our
operations.
To the extent that our future stem cell research and development
activities involve the use of iPSCs and the manipulation of human
tissue and genetic information, the information we derive from such
iPSC-related research and development activities could be used in a
variety of applications, which may have underlying legal, social
and ethical concerns, including the genetic engineering or
modification of human cells, testing for genetic predisposition for
certain medical conditions and stem cell banking. Governmental
authorities could, for safety, social or other purposes, call for
limits on or impose regulations on the use of iPSCs and genetic
testing or the manufacture or use of certain biological materials
involved in our iPSC-related research and development programs.
Such concerns or governmental restrictions could limit our future
research and development activities, which could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
Our human cellular bioassay systems and human cells we derive from
human pluripotent stem cells, although not currently subject to
regulation by the FDA or other regulatory agencies as biological
products or drugs, could become subject to regulation in the
future.
The human cells we produce from hPSCs and our customized bioassay
systems using such cells, including CardioSafe 3D, are not currently sold, for research purposes
or any other purpose, to biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies,
government research institutions, academic and nonprofit research
institutions, medical research organizations or stem cell banks,
and they are not therapeutic procedures. As a result, they are not
subject to regulation as biological products or drugs by the FDA or
comparable agencies in other countries. However, if, in the future,
we seek to include human cells we derive from hPSCs in therapeutic
applications or product candidates, such applications and/or
product candidates would be subject to the FDA’s pre- and
post-market regulations. For example, if we seek to develop and
market human cells we produce for use in performing regenerative
medicine applications, such as tissue engineering or organ
replacement, we would first need to obtain FDA pre-market clearance
or approval. Obtaining such clearance or approval from the FDA is
expensive, time-consuming and uncertain, generally requiring many
years to obtain, and requiring detailed and comprehensive
scientific and clinical data. Notwithstanding the time and expense,
these efforts may not result in FDA approval or clearance. Even if
we were to obtain regulatory approval or clearance, it may not be
for the uses that we believe are important or commercially
attractive.
Risks Related to Our Financial Position
We have incurred significant net losses since inception and we will
continue to incur substantial operating losses for the foreseeable
future. We may never achieve or sustain profitability, which would
depress the market price of our common stock, and could cause you
to lose all or a part of your investment.
We have incurred significant net losses in each fiscal year since
our inception in 1998, including net losses of $47.2 million, which
includes $26.7 million of non-cash expense related to the
extinguishment of essentially all of our outstanding promissory
notes and certain other indebtedness, and $13.9 million during the
fiscal years ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and a net
loss of $5.1 million in the six months ended September 30,
2016. As of September 30, 2016, we had an accumulated
deficit of approximately $136.8 million. We do not know whether or
when we will become profitable. Substantially all of our operating
losses have resulted from costs incurred in connection with our
research and development programs and from general and
administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to
incur increasing levels of operating losses over the next several
years and for the foreseeable future. Our prior losses, combined
with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an
adverse effect on our stockholders’ deficit and working
capital. We expect our research and development expenses to
significantly increase in connection with non-clinical studies and
clinical trials of our product candidates. In addition, if we
obtain marketing approval for our product candidates, we may incur
significant sales, marketing and outsourced-manufacturing expenses
should we elect not to collaborate with one or more third parties
for such services and capabilities. As a public company, we incur
additional costs associated with operating as a public company. As
a result, we expect to continue to incur significant and increasing
operating losses for the foreseeable future. Because of the
numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing
pharmaceutical products, we are unable to predict the extent of any
future losses or when we will become profitable, if at all. Even if
we do become profitable, we may not be able to sustain or increase
our profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.
Our ability to become profitable depends upon our ability to
generate revenues. To date, we have generated approximately $16.4
million in revenues, primarily from the receipt of research and
development grant awards from the NIH, not including the fair
market value of the ongoing NIH-funded Phase 2a MDD study of
AV-101. We have not yet commercialized any product or generated any
revenues from product sales, and we do not know when, or if, we
will generate any revenue from product sales. We do not expect to
generate significant revenue unless and until we obtain marketing
approval of, and begin to experience sales of, AV-101, or we enter
into one or more development and commercialization agreements with
respect to AV-101 or one or more other product candidates. Our
ability to generate revenue depends on a number of factors,
including, but not limited to, our ability to:
●
initiate
and successfully complete preclinical and clinical trials that meet
their prescribed endpoints;
●
initiate
and successfully complete all safety studies required to obtain
U.S. and foreign marketing approval for our product
candidates;
●
commercialize
our product candidates, if approved, by developing a sales force or
entering into collaborations with third parties; and
●
achieve
market acceptance of our product candidates in the medical
community and with third-party payors.
Unless we enter into a development and commercialization
collaboration or partnership agreement, we expect to incur
significant sales and marketing costs as we prepare to
commercialize AV-101 or other product candidates. Even if we
initiate and successfully complete pivotal clinical trials of
AV-101 or other product candidates, and AV-101 or other product
candidates are approved for commercial sale, and despite expending
these costs, AV-101 or other product candidates may not be
commercially successful. We may not achieve profitability soon
after generating product sales, if ever. If we are unable to
generate product revenue, we will not become profitable and may be
unable to continue operations without continued
funding.
Despite consummation of the May 2016 Public Offering (defined
below), we require additional financing to execute our
business plan and continue to operate as a going
concern.
Our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended
March 31, 2016 and our condensed consolidated financial statements
for the six months ended September 30, 2016 have been prepared
assuming we will continue to operate as a going concern. Because we
continue to experience net operating losses, our ability to
continue as a going concern is subject to our ability to obtain
necessary funding from outside sources, including obtaining
additional funding from the sale of our securities or obtaining
loans and grant awards from financial institutions and/or
government agencies where possible. Our continued net operating
losses increase the difficulty in completing such sales or securing
alternative sources of funding, and there can be no assurances that
we will be able to obtain such funding on favorable terms or at
all. If we are unable to obtain sufficient financing from the sale
of our securities or from alternative sources, we may be required
to reduce, defer, or discontinue certain or all of our research and
development activities or we may not be able to continue as a going
concern.
Since our inception, most of our resources have been dedicated to
research and development of AV-101 and the drug rescue capabilities
of our stem cell technology platform. In particular, we have
expended substantial resources advancing AV-101 through preclinical
development and Phase 1 clinical safety studies, and
developing CardioSafe 3D for drug rescue applications, and we will
continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future
developing and commercializing AV-101, and, potentially, developing
drug rescue NCEs and RM therapies. These expenditures will include
costs associated with general and administrative costs, facilities
costs, research and development, acquiring new technologies,
manufacturing product candidates, conducting preclinical
experiments and clinical trials and obtaining regulatory approvals,
as well as commercializing any products approved for
sale.
At March 31, 2016, our existing cash and cash equivalents were not
sufficient to fund our current operations for the next 12 months.
However, as described in Note 8, Capital
Stock, to the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for the six months
ended September 30, 2016 included elsewhere in this Quarterly
Report, on May 16, 2016, we consummated an underwritten public
offering, pursuant to which we issued an aggregate of 2,570,040
registered shares of our common stock at a public sales price of
$4.24 per share and five-year warrants, exercisable at $5.30 per
share, to purchase an aggregate of 2,705,883 shares of our common
stock at a public sales price of $0.01 per warrant share, including
shares and warrants issued pursuant to the exercise of the
underwriters’ over-allotment option, resulting in gross
proceeds of approximately $10.9 million (May 2016 Public
Offering). Our net proceeds
from the May 2016 Public Offering were approximately $9.5 million
after deducting underwriters’ commissions and other expenses
of the offering. Additionally,
in February 2015, we entered into the CRADA with the NIH, under
which the NIH is fully funding and conducting the initial Phase 2a
clinical efficacy and safety of AV-101 in MDD. However, we have no
current source of revenue to sustain our present activities, and we
do not expect to generate revenue until, and unless, we (i)
out-license or sell AV-101, a drug rescue NCE, and/or another drug
candidate unrelated to AV-101 to third-parties, (ii) enter into
license arrangements involving our stem cell technology, or (iii)
obtain approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities and
successfully commercialize, on our own or through a future
collaboration, one or more of our compounds.
As the outcome of our AV-101 and NCE drug rescue activities and
future anticipated clinical trials is highly uncertain, we cannot
reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully
complete the development and commercialization of our product
candidates, on our own or in collaboration with others. In
addition, other unanticipated costs may arise. As a result of these
and other factors, we will need to seek additional capital in the
near term to meet our future operating requirements, including
capital necessary to obtain regulatory approval for, and to
commercialize, our product candidates, and may seek additional
capital in the event there exists favorable market conditions or
strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient
funds for our current or future operating plans. We are considering
a range of potential sources of funding, including public or
private equity or debt financings, government or other third-party
funding, marketing and distribution arrangements and other
collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements or a
combination of these approaches, and we may complete additional
financing arrangements in 2016. Raising funds in the current
economic environment may present additional challenges. Even if we
believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future
operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market
conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic
considerations.
Our future capital requirements depend on many factors,
including:
●
the
number and characteristics of the product candidates we pursue,
including AV-101 and drug rescue NCEs;
●
the
scope, progress, results and costs of researching and developing
our product candidates, and conducting preclinical and clinical
studies;
●
the
timing of, and the costs involved in, obtaining regulatory
approvals for our product candidates;
●
the cost
of commercialization activities if any of our product candidates
are approved for sale, including marketing, sales and distribution
costs;
●
the
cost of manufacturing our product candidates and any products we
successfully commercialize;
●
our
ability to establish and maintain strategic partnerships, licensing
or other arrangements and the financial terms of such
agreements;
●
market
acceptance of our products;
●
the
effect of competing technological and market
developments;
●
our
ability to obtain government funding for our programs;
●
the
costs involved in obtaining and enforcing patents to preserve our
intellectual property;
●
the
costs involved in defending against such claims that we infringe
third-party patents or violate other intellectual property rights
and the outcome of such litigation;
●
the
timing, receipt and amount of potential future licensee fees,
milestone payments, and sales of, or royalties on, our future
products, if any; and
●
the
extent to which we acquire or invest in businesses, products and
technologies, although we currently have no commitments or
agreements relating to any of these types of
transactions.
Any additional fundraising efforts will divert certain members of
our management team from their day-to-day activities, which may
adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our
product candidates. In addition, we cannot guarantee that future
financing will be available in sufficient amounts, in a timely
manner, or on terms acceptable to us, if at all, and the terms of
any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of
our stockholders and the issuance of additional securities, whether
equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may
cause the market price of our shares to decline. The sale of
additional equity securities and the conversion or exchange of
certain of our outstanding securities will dilute all of our
stockholders. The incurrence of debt could result in increased
fixed payment obligations and we could be required to agree to
certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability
to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire,
sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating
restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our
business. We could also be required to seek funds through
arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise at an earlier
stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to
relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidate
or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may
have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results
and prospects.
If we are unable to obtain additional funding on a timely basis and
on acceptable terms, we may be required to significantly curtail,
delay or discontinue one or more of our research or product
development programs or the commercialization of any product
candidate or be unable to continue or expand our operations or
otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired,
which could materially affect our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
Proceeds from recent financing
activity, including the May 2016 Public Offering will not be
sufficient to complete the Phase 2b MDD Study, resulting in the
need for additional financing.
Although we anticipate that the net proceeds from the May 2016
Public Offering will provide
sufficient funding for our operations through the release of
topline results of our fully-funded, NIH-sponsored AV-101 Phase 2a
clinical study in MDD (Phase 2a MDD Study), anticipated in the second quarter of 2017, as
well as the launch and conduct of a portion of our AV-101 Phase 2b
clinical study in MDD (Phase 2b MDD
Study), the proceeds received
will not be sufficient to complete the Phase 2b MDD Study. We
believe an additional $12.0 million or more will be required during
the next 24 months to complete the Phase 2b MDD Study and fund our
operations through the second half of calendar 2018. No
assurances can be provided that such additional capital will be
available to us when necessary, on reasonable terms, or at
all. In the event we are unable to raise such additional
capital, our operations, including the conduct of the Phase 2b MDD
Study, will be negatively and materially
affected.
Raising additional capital will cause dilution to our existing
stockholders, and may restrict our operations or require us to
relinquish rights.
We intend to pursue private and public equity offerings, debt
financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements in 2016 and
beyond. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the
sale of common stock or securities convertible or exchangeable into
common stock, or to the extent, for strategic purposes, we convert
or exchange certain of our outstanding securities into common
stock, our current stockholders’ ownership interest in our
company will be diluted. In addition, the terms of any such
securities may include liquidation or other preferences that
materially adversely affect rights of our stockholders. Debt
financing, if available, would increase our fixed payment
obligations and may involve agreements that include covenants
limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such
as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or
declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through
collaboration, strategic partnerships and licensing arrangements
with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to
our product candidates, our intellectual property, future revenue
streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to
us.
Some of our programs have been partially supported by government
grant awards, which may not be available to us in the
future.
Since inception, we have received substantial funds under grant
award programs funded by state and federal governmental agencies,
such as the NIH, the NIH’s National Institute of Neurological
Disease and Stroke and the NIH’s National Institute of Mental
Health, and the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. To
fund a portion of our future research and development programs, we
may apply for additional grant funding from such or similar
governmental organizations. However, funding by these
governmental organizations may be significantly reduced or
eliminated in the future for a number of reasons. For example, some
programs are subject to a yearly appropriations process in
Congress. In addition, we may not receive funds under future grants
because of budgeting constraints of the agency administering the
program. Therefore, we cannot assure you that we will receive any
future grant funding from any government organization or
otherwise. A restriction on the government funding
available to us could reduce the resources that we would be able to
devote to future research and development efforts. Such a reduction
could delay the introduction of new products and hurt our
competitive position.
Our ability to use net operating losses to offset future taxable
income is subject to certain limitations.
As of March 31, 2016, we had federal and state net operating
loss carryforwards of $67.9 million and $60.1 million,
respectively, which begin to expire in fiscal
2017. Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) changes in our ownership may limit the amount of
our net operating loss carryforwards that could be utilized
annually to offset our future taxable income, if any. This
limitation would generally apply in the event of a cumulative
change in ownership of our company of more than 50% within a
three-year period. Any such limitation may significantly reduce our
ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and tax
credit carryforwards before they expire. Any such limitation,
whether as the result of future offerings, prior private
placements, sales of our common stock by our existing stockholders
or additional sales of our common stock by us in the future, could
have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in
future years. We have not completed a study to assess whether an
ownership change for purposes of Section 382 has occurred, or
whether there have been multiple ownership changes since our
inception, due to the significant costs and complexities associated
with such study.
General Company-Related Risks
If we fail to attract and retain senior management and key
scientific personnel, we may be unable to successfully produce,
develop and commercialize AV-101, drug rescue NCEs, other potential
product candidates and other commercial applications of our stem
cell technology.
Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract,
retain and motivate highly qualified management and scientific and
technical personnel. We are highly dependent upon our Chief
Executive Officer, President and Chief Scientific Officer, Chief
Medical Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as well as other
employees, consultants and scientific collaborators. As of the date
of this Quarterly Report, we have ten full-time employees, which
may make us more reliant on our individual employees than companies
with a greater number of employees. The loss of services of any of
these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development
of AV-101, drug rescue NCEs, other product candidates, and other
applications of our stem cell technology, including our production
and assessment of potential drug recuse NCEs or disrupt our
administrative functions.
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. We will need to hire additional personnel as we expand our
research and development and administrative activities. We may not
be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable
terms.
In addition, we rely on a diverse range of strategic consultants
and advisors, including manufacturing, scientific and clinical
development, and regulatory advisors, to assist us in designing and
implementing our research and development and regulatory strategies
and plans, including our AV-101 development and drug rescue
strategies and plans. Our consultants and advisors may be employed
by employers other than us and may have commitments under
consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit
their availability to us.
As we seek to advance development of AV-101 for MDD and other
CNS-related conditions, as well as drug rescue and stem cell
technology-related RM programs, we will need to expand our research
and development capabilities and/or contract with third parties to
provide these capabilities for us. As our operations expand, we
expect that we will need to manage additional relationships with
various strategic partners and other third parties. Future growth
will impose significant added responsibilities on members of
management. Our future financial performance and our ability to
develop and commercialize our product candidates and to compete
effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any
future growth effectively. To that end, we must be able to manage
our research and development efforts effectively and hire, train
and integrate additional management, administrative and technical
personnel. The hiring, training and integration of new employees
may be more difficult, costly and/or time-consuming for us because
we have fewer resources than a larger organization. We may not be
able to accomplish these tasks, and our failure to accomplish any
of them could prevent us from successfully growing the
company.
If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur
substantial liabilities and may be required to limit
commercialization of our product candidates.
If we develop AV-101, drug rescue NCEs, other product candidates,
or regenerative medicine product candidates, either on our own
or in collaboration with others, we will face inherent risks of
product liability as a result of the required clinical testing of
such product candidates, and will face an even greater risk if we
or our collaborators commercialize any such product candidates. For
example, we may be sued if AV-101, any drug rescue NCE, other
product candidate, or regenerative medicine product candidate 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 product candidates. Even successful defense would require
significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the
merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result
in:
●
decreased
demand for products that we may develop;
●
injury
to our reputation;
●
withdrawal
of clinical trial participants;
●
costs
to defend the related litigation;
●
a
diversion of management's time and our resources;
●
substantial
monetary awards to trial participants or patients;
●
product
recalls, withdrawals or labeling, marketing or promotional
restrictions;
Our inability to obtain and retain sufficient product
liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against
potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the
commercialization of products we develop. Although we maintain
liability 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 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.
As a public company, we incur significant administrative workload
and expenses to comply with U.S. regulations and requirements
imposed by The NASDAQ Stock Market concerning corporate governance
and public disclosure.
As a public company with common stock listed on The NASDAQ Capital
Market, we must comply with various laws, regulations and
requirements, including certain provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, as well as rules implemented by the SEC and The NASDAQ
Stock Market. Complying with these statutes, regulations and
requirements, including our public company reporting requirements,
continues to occupy a significant amount of the time of management
and involves significant accounting, legal and other expenses.
Furthermore, these laws, regulations and requirements require us to
observe greater corporate governance practices than we have
employed in the past, including, but not limited to maintaining a
sufficient number of independent directors, increased frequency of
board meetings, and holding annual stockholder meetings. Our
efforts to comply with these regulations are likely to result in
increased general and administrative expenses and management time
and attention directed to compliance activities.
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 and
stock markets. Global financial crises cause extreme volatility and
disruptions in the capital and credit markets. A severe or
prolonged economic downturn, such as the recent global financial
crisis, could result in a variety of risks to our business,
including, weakened demand for our product candidates and our
ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable
terms, if at all. A weak or declining 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.
We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely
affected by natural disasters and our business continuity and
disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a
serious disaster.
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 the manufacturing facilities of our
third-party CMOs, 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. The disaster recovery
and business continuity plans we have in place may prove inadequate
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 could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
Our internal computer systems, or those of our third-party CROs or
other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security
breaches, which could result in a material disruption of our
product candidates’ development programs.
Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal
computer systems and those of our third-party CROs and other
contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer
viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and
telecommunication and electrical failures. While we have not
experienced any such system failure, accident, or security breach
to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in
our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our
programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data for AV-101
or other product candidates could result in delays in our
regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to
recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or
security breach results in a loss of or damage to our data or
applications or other data or applications relating to our
technology or product candidates, or inappropriate disclosure of
confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liabilities
and the further development of our product candidates could be
delayed.
We may acquire businesses or products, or form strategic alliances,
in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such
acquisitions.
We may acquire additional businesses or products, form strategic
alliances or create joint ventures with third parties that we
believe will complement or augment our existing business. If we
acquire businesses with promising markets or technologies, we may
not be able to realize the benefit of acquiring such businesses if
we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing
operations and company culture. We may encounter numerous
difficulties in developing, manufacturing and marketing any new
products resulting from a strategic alliance or acquisition that
delay or prevent us from realizing their expected benefits or
enhancing our business. We cannot assure you that, following any
such acquisition, we will achieve the expected synergies to justify
the transaction.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property Rights
If we are unable to adequately protect our proprietary technology,
or obtain and maintain issued patents that are sufficient to
protect our product candidates, others could compete against us
more directly, which would have a material adverse impact on our
business, results of operations, financial condition and
prospects.
We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technologies that
we believe are important to our business, including seeking patents
intended to cover our products and compositions, their methods of
use and any other inventions we consider are important to the
development of our business. We also rely on trade secrets to
protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that
we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection.
Our success will depend significantly on our ability to obtain and
maintain patent and other proprietary protection for commercially
important technology, inventions and know-how related to our
business, to defend and enforce our patents, should they issue, to
preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets and to operate
without infringing the valid and enforceable patents and
proprietary rights of third parties. We also rely on know-how,
continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities
to develop, strengthen and maintain the proprietary position of our
product candidates. We own patent applications related to AV-101
and we own and have licensed patents and patent applications
related to human pluripotent stem cell technology.
We currently have no issued patents covering AV-101. We cannot
provide any assurances that any of our numerous pending U.S. and
foreign patent applications relating to AV-101 will mature into
issued patents and, if they do, that such patents will include
claims with a scope sufficient to protect AV-101 or otherwise
provide any competitive advantage. Moreover, other parties may have
developed technologies that may be related or competitive to our
approach, and may have filed or may file patent applications and
may have received or may receive patents that may overlap or
conflict with our patent applications, either by claiming the same
methods or formulations or by claiming subject matter that could
dominate our patent position. Such third-party patent positions may
limit or even eliminate our ability to obtain patent
protection.
The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies,
including our patent position, involve complex legal and factual
questions, and, therefore, the issuance, scope, validity and
enforceability of any patent claims that we may obtain cannot be
predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged,
deemed unenforceable, invalidated, or circumvented. U.S. patents
and patent applications may also be subject to interference
proceedings, ex parte reexamination, or inter partes
review proceedings, supplemental
examination and challenges in district court. Patents may be
subjected to opposition, post-grant review, or comparable
proceedings lodged in various foreign, both national and regional,
patent offices. These proceedings could result in either loss of
the patent or denial of the patent application or loss or reduction
in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent
application. In addition, such proceedings may be costly. Thus, any
patents, should they issue, that we may own or exclusively license
may not provide any protection against competitors. Furthermore, an
adverse decision in an interference proceeding can result in a
third party receiving the patent right sought by us, which in turn
could affect our ability to develop, market or otherwise
commercialize our product candidates.
Furthermore, though a patent, if it were to issue, is presumed
valid and enforceable, its issuance is not conclusive as to its
validity or its enforceability and it may not provide us with
adequate proprietary protection or competitive advantages against
competitors with similar products. Even if a patent issues and is
held to be valid and enforceable, competitors may be able to design
around our patents, such as using pre-existing or newly developed
technology. Other parties may develop and obtain patent protection
for more effective technologies, designs or methods. We may not be
able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical
knowledge or trade secrets by consultants, vendors, former
employees and current employees. The laws of some foreign countries
do not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as the
laws of the United States, and we may encounter significant
problems in protecting our proprietary rights in these countries.
If these developments were to occur, they could have a material
adverse effect on our sales.
Our ability to enforce our patent rights depends on our ability to
detect infringement. It is difficult to detect infringers who do
not advertise the components that are used in their products.
Moreover, it may be difficult or impossible to obtain evidence of
infringement in a competitor’s or potential
competitor’s product. Any litigation to enforce or defend our
patent rights, even if we were to prevail, could be costly and
time-consuming and would divert the attention of our management and
key personnel from our business operations. We may not prevail in
any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies
awarded if we were to prevail may not be commercially
meaningful.
In addition, proceedings to enforce or defend our patents, if and
when issued, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated,
held unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly. Such proceedings could
also provoke third parties to assert claims against us, including
that some or all of the claims in one or more of our patents are
invalid or otherwise unenforceable. If any of our patents, if and
when issued, covering our product candidates are invalidated or
found unenforceable, our financial position and results of
operations would be materially and adversely impacted. In addition,
if a court found that valid, enforceable patents held by third
parties covered our product candidates, our financial position and
results of operations would also be materially and adversely
impacted.
The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is
uncertain, and we cannot ensure that:
●
any
of our AV-101 or other pending patent applications, if issued, will
include claims having a scope sufficient to protect AV-101 or any
other products or product candidates, particularly considering that
the compound patent to AV-101 has expired;
●
any
of our pending patent applications will issue as patents at
all;
●
we
will be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates,
if approved, before our relevant patents expire;
●
we
were the first to make the inventions covered by each of our
patents and pending patent applications;
●
we
were the first to file patent applications for these
inventions;
●
others
will not develop similar or alternative technologies that do not
infringe our patents;
●
others
will not use pre-existing technology to effectively compete against
us;
●
any
of our patents, if issued, will be found to ultimately be valid and
enforceable;
●
any
patents issued to us will provide a basis for an exclusive market
for our commercially viable products, will provide us with any
competitive advantages or will not be challenged by third
parties;
●
we
will develop additional proprietary technologies or product
candidates that are separately patentable; or
●
that
our commercial activities or products will not infringe upon the
patents or proprietary rights of others.
We also rely upon unpatented trade secrets, unpatented know-how and
continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our
competitive position, which we seek to protect, in part, by
confidentiality agreements with our employees and our collaborators
and consultants. It is possible that technology relevant to our
business will be independently developed by a person that is not a
party to such an agreement. Furthermore, if the
employees and consultants who are parties to these agreements
breach or violate the terms of these agreements, we may not have
adequate remedies for any such breach or violation, and we could
lose our trade secrets through such breaches or violations.
Further, our trade secrets could otherwise become known or be
independently discovered by our competitors.
We may infringe the intellectual property rights of others, which
may prevent or delay our product development efforts and stop us
from commercializing or increase the costs of commercializing our
product candidates, if approved.
Our success will depend in part on our ability to operate without
infringing the intellectual property and proprietary rights of
third parties. We cannot assure you that our business, products and
methods do not or will not infringe the patents or other
intellectual property rights of third parties.
The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by extensive
litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property
rights. Other parties may allege that our product candidates or the
use of our technologies infringes patent claims or other
intellectual property rights held by them or that we are employing
their proprietary technology without authorization. As we continue
to develop and, if approved, commercialize our current product
candidates and future product candidates, competitors may claim
that our technology infringes their intellectual property rights as
part of business strategies designed to impede our successful
commercialization. There may be third-party patents or patent
applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of
manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or
manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications
can take many years to issue, third parties may have currently
pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents
that our product candidates may infringe, or which such third
parties claim are infringed by our technologies. The outcome of
intellectual property litigation is subject to uncertainties that
cannot be adequately quantified in advance. The coverage of patents
is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation
is not always uniform. If we are sued for patent infringement, we
would need to demonstrate that our product candidates, products or
methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant
patent or that the patent claims are invalid, and we may not be
able to do this. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we
may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of our
management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing
these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on
us. In addition, we may not have sufficient resources to bring
these actions to a successful conclusion.
Patent and other types of intellectual property litigation can
involve complex factual and legal questions, and their outcome is
uncertain. Any claim relating to intellectual property infringement
that is successfully asserted against us may require us to pay
substantial damages, including treble damages and attorney’s
fees if we are found to be willfully infringing another
party’s patents, for past use of the asserted intellectual
property and royalties and other consideration going forward if we
are forced to take a license. In addition, if any such claim was
successfully asserted against us and we could not obtain such a
license, we may be forced to stop or delay developing,
manufacturing, selling or otherwise commercializing our product
candidates.
Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur
substantial costs and divert management time and attention in
pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse
effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent
rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, defend an
infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in
court, or redesign our products. Patent litigation is costly and
time-consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these
actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, intellectual
property litigation or claims could force us to do one or more of
the following:
●
cease
developing, selling or otherwise commercializing our product
candidates;
●
pay
substantial damages for past use of the asserted intellectual
property;
●
obtain
a license from the holder of the asserted intellectual property,
which license may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all;
and
●
in
the case of trademark claims, redesign, or rename, some or all of
our product candidates to avoid infringing the intellectual
property rights of third parties, which may not be possible and,
even if possible, could be costly and time-consuming.
Any of these risks coming to fruition could have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition
and prospects.
We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or
ownership of our patents and other intellectual
property.
We enter into confidentiality and intellectual property assignment
agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific
collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors. These
agreements generally provide that inventions conceived by the party
in the course of rendering services to us will be our exclusive
property. However, these agreements may not be honored and may not
effectively assign intellectual property rights to us. For example,
even if we have a consulting agreement in place with an academic
advisor pursuant to which such academic advisor is required to
assign any inventions developed in connection with providing
services to us, such academic advisor may not have the right to
assign such inventions to us, as it may conflict with his or her
obligations to assign all such intellectual property to his or her
employing institution.
Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other
claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in
defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages,
we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as
exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual
property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on
our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such
claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a
distraction to management and other employees.
Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on
compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee
payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent
agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated
for non-compliance with these requirements.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and various foreign governmental patent agencies
require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee
payment and other provisions during the patent process. There are
situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or
lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or
complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In
such an event, competitors might be able to enter the market
earlier than would otherwise have been the
case.
We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or
the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive,
time-consuming and unsuccessful.
Even if the patent applications we own or license are issued,
competitors may infringe these patents. To counter infringement or
unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims,
which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an
infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours
or our licensors is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not
infringed, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the
technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover
the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or
defense 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 proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us
may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with
respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our
licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using
the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from
the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the
prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially
reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference
proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in
substantial costs and distract our management and other employees.
We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors,
misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly
in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully
as in the United States.
Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery
required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there
is a risk that some of our confidential information could be
compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There
could also be public announcements of the results of hearings,
motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities
analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it
could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common
stock.
Issued patents covering our product candidates could be found
invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court.
If we or one of our licensing partners initiated legal proceedings
against a third party to enforce a patent, if and when issued,
covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could
counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is
invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United
States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or
unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge
include alleged failures to meet any of several statutory
requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness or
non-enablement. Grounds for unenforceability assertions include
allegations that someone connected with prosecution of the patent
withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading
statement, during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar
claims before administrative bodies in the U.S. or abroad, even
outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include
re-examination, post grant review and equivalent proceedings in
foreign jurisdictions, e.g., opposition proceedings. Such
proceedings could result in revocation or amendment of our patents
in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates or
competitive products. The outcome following legal assertions of
invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to
validity, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no
invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were
unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a
legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would
lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on
our product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have
a material adverse impact on our business.
We will not seek to protect our intellectual property rights in all
jurisdictions throughout the world and we may not be able to
adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the
jurisdictions where we seek protection.
Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in
all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world is
prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in
some countries outside the United States could be less extensive
than those in the United States, assuming that rights are obtained
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.
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.
The statutory deadlines for pursuing patent protection in
individual foreign jurisdictions are based on the priority date of
each of our patent applications. For the patent applications
relating to AV-101, as well as for many of the patent families that
we own or license, the relevant statutory deadlines have not yet
expired. Thus, for each of the patent families that we believe
provide coverage for our lead product candidates or technologies,
we will need to decide whether and where to pursue protection
outside the United States.
Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we do
not pursue and obtain 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. Even if we pursue and obtain issued patents in
particular jurisdictions, our patent claims or other intellectual
property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent third
parties from so competing.
The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual
property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United
States. Many companies have encountered significant problems in
protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain
foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries,
particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of
patents and other intellectual property protection, especially
those relating to biotechnology. This could make it difficult for
us to stop the infringement of our patents, if obtained, or the
misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. For
example, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws
under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. In
addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents
against third parties, including government agencies or government
contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no
benefit. Patent protection must ultimately be sought on a
country-by-country basis, which is an expensive and time-consuming
process with uncertain outcomes. Accordingly, we may choose not to
seek patent protection in certain countries, and we will not have
the benefit of patent protection in such countries.
Furthermore, 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,
could put 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.
We are dependent, in part, on licensed intellectual property. If we
were to lose our rights to licensed intellectual property, we may
not be able to continue developing or commercializing our product
candidates, if approved. If we breach any of the agreements under
which we license the use, development and commercialization rights
to our product candidates or technology from third parties or, in
certain cases, we fail to meet certain development or payment
deadlines, we could lose license rights that are important to our
business.
We are a party to a number of license agreements under which we are
granted rights to intellectual property that are or could become
important to our business, and we expect that we may need to enter
into additional license agreements in the future. Our existing
license agreements impose, and we expect that future license
agreements will impose on us, various development, regulatory
and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of fees,
milestones and/or royalties and other obligations. If we fail to
comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are
subject to a bankruptcy, the licensor may have the right to
terminate the license, in which event we would not be able to
develop or market products, which could be covered by the license.
Our business could suffer, for example, if any current or future
licenses terminate, if the licensors fail to abide by the terms of
the license, if the licensed patents or other rights are found to
be invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter into
necessary licenses on acceptable terms. See
“Business—Intellectual
Property” herein for a
description of our license agreements, which includes a description
of the termination provisions of these
agreements.
As we have done previously, we may need to obtain licenses from
third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of
our product candidates, and we cannot provide any assurances that
third-party patents do not exist that might be enforced against our
current product candidates or future products in the absence of
such a license. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses on
commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to
obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our
competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that
event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources
to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to
do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected
product candidates, which could materially harm our business and
the third parties owning such intellectual property rights could
seek either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect
to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or
other forms of compensation.
Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our
business and involves complex legal, business and scientific
issues. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding
intellectual property subject to a license agreement,
including:
●
the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other
interpretation-related issues;
●
whether and the extent to which our technology and processes
infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not
subject to the licensing agreement;
●
our right to sublicense patent and other rights to third parties
under collaborative development relationships;
●
our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed
technology in relation to our development and commercialization of
our product candidates, and what activities satisfy those diligence
obligations; and
●
the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint
creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us
and our partners.
If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed
prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing
arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully
develop and commercialize the affected product
candidates.
We have entered into several licenses to support our various stem
cell technology-related programs. We may enter into additional
license(s) to third-party intellectual property that are necessary
or useful to our business. Our current licenses and any future
licenses that we may enter into impose various royalty payments,
milestone, and other obligations on us. For example, the licensor
may retain control over patent prosecution and maintenance under a
license agreement, in which case, we may not be able to adequately
influence patent prosecution or prevent inadvertent lapses of
coverage due to failure to pay maintenance fees. If we fail to
comply with any of our obligations under a current or future
license agreement, our licensor(s) may allege that we have breached
our license agreement and may accordingly seek to terminate our
license with them. In addition, future licensor(s) may decide to
terminate our license at will. Termination of any of our current or
future licenses could result in our loss of the right to use the
licensed intellectual property, which could materially adversely
affect our ability to develop and commercialize a product candidate
or product, if approved, as well as harm our competitive business
position and our business prospects.
In addition, if our licensors fail to abide by the terms of the
license, if the licensors fail to prevent infringement by third
parties, if the licensed patents or other rights are found to be
invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter into
necessary licenses on acceptable terms our business could
suffer.
Some intellectual property which we have licensed may have been
discovered through government funded programs and thus may be
subject to federal regulations such as “march-in”
rights, certain reporting requirements, and a preference for U.S.
industry. Compliance with such regulations may limit our exclusive
rights, subject us to expenditure of resources with respect to
reporting requirements, and limit our ability to contract with
non-U.S. manufacturers.
Some of the intellectual property rights we have licensed or
license in the future may have been generated through the use of
U.S. government funding and may therefore be subject to certain
federal regulations. As a result, the U.S. government may have
certain rights to intellectual property embodied in our current or
future product candidates pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980
(Bayh-Dole
Act). These U.S. government
rights in certain inventions developed under a government-funded
program include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable
worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose.
In addition, the U.S. government has the right to require us to
grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to
any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that:
(i) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the
invention; (ii) government action is necessary to meet public
health or safety needs; or (iii) government action is
necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal
regulations (also referred to as “march-in rights”).
The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these
inventions if we fail, or the applicable licensor fails, to
disclose the invention to the government and fail to file an
application to register the intellectual property within specified
time limits. In addition, the U.S. government may acquire title to
these inventions in any country in which a patent application is
not filed within specified time limits. Intellectual property
generated under a government funded program is also subject to
certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require
us, or the applicable licensor, to expend substantial resources. In
addition, the U.S. government requires that any products embodying
the subject invention or produced through the use of the subject
invention be manufactured substantially in the U.S. The
manufacturing preference requirement can be waived if the owner of
the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful
efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to
potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture
substantially in the U.S. or that under the circumstances domestic
manufacture is not commercially feasible. This preference for U.S.
manufacturers may limit our ability to contract with non-U.S.
product manufacturers for products covered by such intellectual
property.
In the event we apply for additional U.S. government funding, and
we discover compounds or drug candidates as a result of such
funding, intellectual property rights to such discoveries may be
subject to the applicable provisions of the Bayh-Dole
Act.
If we do not obtain additional protection under the Hatch-Waxman
Amendments and similar foreign legislation by extending the patent
terms and obtaining data exclusivity for our product candidates,
our business may be materially harmed.
Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA marketing
approval of our product candidates, one or more of the U.S. patents
we own or license may be eligible for limited patent term
restoration under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984, 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, we may not be granted an extension because of, for
example, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to
apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing
to satisfy applicable requirements. For example, we may not be
granted an extension if the active ingredient of AV-101 is used in
another drug company’s product candidate and that product
candidate is the first to obtain FDA approval. Moreover, the
applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded
could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent
term extension or restoration or the term of any such extension is
less than we request, our competitors may obtain approval of
competing products following our patent expiration, and our ability
to generate revenues could be materially adversely
affected.
Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in
general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our
products.
As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is
heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents.
Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry
involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore
costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the
United States has recently enacted and is currently implementing
wide-ranging patent reform legislation: the Leahy-Smith America
Invents Act, referred to as the America Invents Act. The America
Invents Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent
law. These include provisions that affect the way patent
applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent
litigation. It is not yet clear what, if any, impact the America
Invents Act will have on the operation of our business. However,
the America Invents Act and its implementation could increase the
uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent
applications and the enforcement or defense of any patents that may
issue from our patent applications, all of which could have a
material adverse effect on our business and financial
condition.
In addition, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the
scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and
weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. The
full impact of these decisions is not yet known. For example, on
March 20, 2012 in Mayo Collaborative Services, DBA Mayo
Medical Laboratories, et al. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., the
Court held that several claims drawn to measuring drug metabolite
levels from patient samples and correlating them to drug doses were
not patentable subject matter. The decision appears to impact
diagnostics patents that merely apply a law of nature via a series
of routine steps and it has created uncertainty around the ability
to obtain patent protection for certain inventions. Additionally,
on June 13, 2013 in Association for Molecular Pathology v.
Myriad Genetics, Inc., the Court held that claims to isolated
genomic DNA are not patentable, but claims to complementary DNA
molecules are patent eligible because they are not a natural
product. The effect of the decision on patents for other isolated
natural products is uncertain. Additionally, on March 4, 2014,
the USPTO issued a memorandum to patent examiners providing
guidance for examining claims that recite laws of nature, natural
phenomena or natural products under the Myriad and Prometheus
decisions. This guidance did not limit the application of Myriad to
DNA but, rather, applied the decision to other natural products.
Further, in 2015, in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc.,
the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that methods for
detecting fetal genetic defects were not patent eligible subject
matter.
In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to
obtain future patents, this combination of events has created
uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained.
Depending on these and other decisions by the U.S. Congress, the
federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing
patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our
ability to obtain new patents or to enforce any patents that may
issue in the future.
We may be subject to damages resulting from claims that we or our
employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets
of their former employers.
Certain of our current employees have been, and certain of our
future employees may have been, previously employed at other
biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our
competitors or potential competitors. We also engage advisors and
consultants who are concurrently employed at universities or who
perform services for other entities.
Although we are not aware of any claims currently pending or
threatened against us, we may be subject to claims that we or our
employees, advisors or consultants have inadvertently or otherwise
used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or
other proprietary information, of a former employer or other third
party. We have and may in the future also be subject to claims that
an employee, advisor or consultant performed work for us that
conflicts with that person’s obligations to a third party,
such as an employer, and thus, that the third party has an
ownership interest in the intellectual property arising out of work
performed for us. Litigation may be necessary to defend against
these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these
claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a
distraction to management. If we fail in defending such claims, in
addition to paying monetary claims, we may lose valuable
intellectual property rights or personnel. A loss of key personnel
or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to
commercialize our product candidates, which would materially
adversely affect our commercial development efforts.
Numerous factors may limit any potential competitive advantage
provided by our intellectual property rights.
The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual
property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights
have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business,
provide a barrier to entry against our competitors or potential
competitors, or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage.
Moreover, if a third party has intellectual property rights that
cover the practice of our technology, we may not be able to fully
exercise or extract value from our intellectual property rights.
The following examples are illustrative:
●
others may be able to develop and/or practice technology that is
similar to our technology or aspects of our technology but that is
not covered by the claims of patents, should such patents issue
from our patent applications;
●
we might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by
a pending patent application that we own;
●
we might not have been the first to file patent applications
covering an invention;
●
others may independently develop similar or alternative
technologies without infringing our intellectual property
rights;
●
pending patent applications that we own or license may not lead to
issued patents;
●
patents, if issued, that we own or license may not provide us with
any competitive advantages, or may be held invalid or
unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our
competitors;
●
third parties may compete with us in jurisdictions where we do not
pursue and obtain patent protection;
●
we may not be able to obtain and/or maintain necessary or useful
licenses on reasonable terms or at all; and
●
the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our
business.
Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our
business and results of operations.
If, instead of identifying drug rescue candidates based on
information available to us in the public domain, we seek to
in-license drug rescue candidates from biotechnology, medicinal
chemistry and pharmaceutical companies, academic, governmental and
nonprofit research institutions, including the NIH, or other
third-parties, there can be no assurances that we will obtain
material ownership or economic participation rights over
intellectual property we may derive from such licenses or similar
rights to the drug rescue NCEs we may produce and develop. If we
are unable to obtain ownership or substantial economic
participation rights over intellectual property related to drug
rescue NCEs we produce and develop, our business may be adversely
affected.
Risks Related to our Securities
The limited public market for our securities may adversely affect
an investor’s ability to liquidate an investment in the
Company.
Our common stock is currently quoted on The NASDAQ Capital Market,
however, there is presently limited trading activity. We
can give no assurance that an active market will develop, or if
developed, that it will be sustained. If an investor
acquires shares of our common stock, the investor may not be able
to liquidate the shares should there be a need or desire to do
so.
Market volatility may affect our stock price and the value of your
investment.
The market price for our common stock, similar to other
biopharmaceutical companies, is likely to be volatile. The market
price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in response
to a number of factors, most of which we cannot control, including,
among others:
●
plans for, progress of or results from non-clinical studies and
clinical trials of our product candidates;
●
the failure of the FDA to approve our product
candidates;
●
announcements of new products, technologies, commercial
relationships, acquisitions or other events by us or our
competitors;
●
the success or failure of other CNS therapies;
●
regulatory or legal developments in the United States and other
countries;
●
failure of our product candidates, if approved, to achieve
commercial success;
●
fluctuations in stock market prices and trading volumes of similar
companies;
●
general market conditions and overall fluctuations in U.S. equity
markets;
●
variations in our quarterly operating results;
●
changes in our financial guidance or securities analysts’
estimates of our financial performance;
●
changes in accounting principles;
●
our ability to raise additional capital and the terms on which we
can raise it;
●
sales of large blocks of our common stock, including sales by our
executive officers, directors and significant
stockholders;
●
additions or departures of key personnel;
●
discussion of us or our stock price by the press and by online
investor communities; and
●
other risks and uncertainties described in these risk
factors.
Future sales and issuances of our common stock may cause our stock
price to decline.
Sales or issuances of a substantial number of shares of our common
stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales or
issuances are occurring or might occur, could significantly reduce
the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to
raise adequate capital through the sale of additional equity
securities.
The stock market in general, and biotechnology-based companies like
ours in particular, has frequently experienced volatility in the
market prices for securities that often has been unrelated to the
operating performance of the underlying companies. These broad
market and industry fluctuations may adversely affect the market
price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance.
In certain recent situations in which the market price of a stock
has been volatile, holders of that stock have instituted securities
class action litigation against such company that issued the stock.
If any of our stockholders were to bring a lawsuit against us, the
defense and disposition of the lawsuit could be costly and divert
the time and attention of our management and harm our operating
results. Additionally, if the trading volume of our common stock
remains low and limited there will be an increased level of
volatility and you may not be able to generate a return on your
investment.
A significant portion of our total outstanding shares are
restricted from immediate resale but may be sold into the market in
the near future. Future sales of shares by existing stockholders
could cause our stock price to decline, 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. These sales, or the
perception in the market that the holders of a large number of
shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our
common stock. Historically, there has been a highly limited public
market for shares of our common stock. Future sales and issuances
of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public
market, including shares issued upon the conversion of our Series A
Preferred, Series B Preferred or Series C Preferred, and the
exercise of outstanding options and warrants for common stock which
are issuable upon exercise, in the public market, or the perception
that these sales and issuances are occurring or might occur, could
significantly reduce the market price for our common stock and
impair our ability to raise adequate capital through the sale of
equity securities.
Our principal institutional stockholders may continue to have
substantial control over us and could limit your ability to
influence the outcome of key transactions, including changes in
control.
Certain of our current institutional stockholders own a substantial
portion of our outstanding capital stock, including our common
stock, Series A Preferred, Series B Preferred, and Series C
Preferred, all of which preferred stock is convertible into a
substantial number of shares of common
stock. Accordingly, institutional stockholders may exert
significant influence over us and over the outcome of any corporate
actions requiring approval of holders of our common stock,
including the election of directors and amendments to our
organizational documents, such as increases in our authorized
shares of common stock, any merger, consolidation or sale of all or
substantially all of our assets or any other significant corporate
transactions. These stockholders may also delay or prevent a change
of control of us, even if such a change of control would benefit
our other stockholders. The significant concentration of stock
ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common
stock due to investors’ perception that conflicts of interest
may exist or arise. Furthermore, the interests of our principal
institutional stockholders may not always coincide with your
interests or the interests of other stockholders may act in a
manner that advances its best interests and not necessarily those
of other stockholders, including seeking a premium value for its
common stock, which might affect the prevailing market price for
our common stock.
If equity research analysts do not publish research or reports
about our business or if they issue unfavorable commentary or
downgrade our common stock, the price of our common stock could
decline.
The trading market for our common stock relies in part on the
research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us
and our business. We do not control these analysts. The price of
our common stock could decline if one or more equity research
analysts downgrade our common stock or if analysts issue other
unfavorable commentary or cease publishing reports about us or our
business.
There may be additional issuances of shares of preferred stock in
the future.
Our Articles of Incorporation (the Articles) permit us to issue up to 10.0 million shares of
preferred stock. Our Board of Directors has authorized
the issuance of (i) 500,000 shares of Series A Preferred, all of
which shares are currently issued and outstanding; (ii) 4.0 million
shares of Series B 10% Convertible Preferred stock, of which
approximately 1.2 million shares are issued and outstanding as of
the date of this Report; and (iii) 3.0 million shares of Series C
Convertible Preferred Stock, of which approximately 2.3 million
shares are issued and outstanding as of the date of this Report.
Our Board of Directors could authorize the issuance of additional
series of preferred stock in the future and such preferred stock
could grant holders preferred rights to our assets upon
liquidation, the right to receive dividends before dividends would
be declared to holders of our common stock, and the right to the
redemption of such shares, possibly together with a premium, prior
to the redemption of the common stock. In the event and to the
extent that we do issue additional preferred stock in the future,
the rights of holders of our common stock could be impaired
thereby, including without limitation, with respect to
liquidation.
We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock and,
consequently, our stockholders’ ability to achieve a return
on their investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our
common stock.
We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common
stock and do not currently intend to do so in the foreseeable
future. 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 in the
foreseeable future. Therefore, the success of an investment in
shares of our common stock will depend upon any future appreciation
in their value. There is no guarantee that shares of our common
stock will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which
our stockholders purchased them.
We incur significant costs to ensure compliance with corporate
governance, federal securities law and accounting
requirements.
Since becoming a public company by means of a reverse merger in
2011, we have been subject to the reporting requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange
Act), which requires that we
file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our
business and financial condition, and the rules and regulations
implemented by the SEC, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
Dodd-Frank Act, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board,
each of which imposes additional reporting and other obligations on
public companies. We have incurred and will continue to
incur significant costs to comply with these public company
reporting requirements, including accounting and related audit
costs, legal costs to comply with corporate governance requirements
and other costs of operating as a public company. These legal and
financial compliance costs will continue to require us to divert a
significant amount of money that we could otherwise use to achieve
our research and development and other strategic
objectives.
The filing and internal control reporting requirements imposed by
federal securities laws, rules and regulations on companies that
are not “smaller reporting companies” under federal
securities laws are rigorous and, once we are no longer a smaller
reporting company, we may not be able to meet them, resulting in a
possible decline in the price of our common stock and our inability
to obtain future financing. Certain of these requirements may
require us to carry out activities we have not done previously and
complying with such requirements may divert management’s
attention from other business concerns, which could have a material
adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial
condition and cash flows. Any failure to adequately comply with
applicable federal securities laws, rules or regulations could
subject us to fines or regulatory actions, which may materially
adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial
condition.
In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to
corporate governance and public disclosure are creating uncertainty
for public companies, increasing legal and financial compliance
costs and making some activities more time consuming. These laws,
regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations,
in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result,
their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance
is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result
in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher
costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and
governance practices. We will continue to invest resources to
comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, however 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 our
efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards differ
from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due
to ambiguities related to their application and practice,
regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us
and our business may be adversely affected.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use
of Proceeds
Grant of Warrants to Professional
Services Providers
On September 26, 2016, we granted warrants to purchase an aggregate
of 75,000 shares of our unregistered common stock at an exercise
price of $6.00 per share and 25,000 shares of our common stock at
an exercise price to certain consultants who are accredited
investors. On October 11, 2016, we granted warrants to purchase an
aggregate of 6,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price
of $6.00 per share to additional consultants who are accredited
investors. We will receive all proceeds from the exercise of these
warrants; however, there can be no assurance that we will receive
any proceeds therefrom. In all instances, the warrants were issued
in a private placement transaction exempt from registration under
the Securities Act, in reliance on Section 4(2) thereof and Rule
506 of Regulation D thereunder.
Issuance of Common Stock to Professional Services
Providers
On September 26, 2016, we issued an aggregate of 170,000
shares of our unregistered common stock for services provided and
to be provided by certain legal, investor relations, financial
advisory and corporate development professionals who are also
accredited investors. On November 1, 2016, we issued 25,000 shares
of our unregistered common stock to a corporate investor relations
provider for professional services to be provided. In all
instances, the shares were issued in a
private placement transaction exempt from registration under the
Securities Act, in reliance on Section 4(2) thereof and Rule 506 of
Regulation D thereunder.
Warrants Exchanged for Common Stock
Between April 29, 2016 and August 25, 2016, we
entered into warrant exchange agreements with certain warrant
holders pursuant to which the warrant holders exchanged outstanding
warrants to purchase an aggregate of 61,649 shares of our common
stock for an aggregate of 46,238 shares of our unregistered common
stock. On October 25, 2016, we entered into a warrant exchange
agreement with an accredited investor holding outstanding warrants
to purchase an aggregate of 113,944 shares of our common stock
pursuant to which the holder exchanged such warrants in exchange
for an aggregate of 85,458 shares of our unregistered common stock.
In all instances, the common stock was issued in private placement
transactions exempt from registration under the Securities Act, in
reliance on Section 3(a)(9) and/or 4(2)
thereof.
Common Stock Issued in Payment of Dividends
On
August 17, 2016, we issued 26,258 unregistered shares of our common
stock in payment of $85,300 in accrued
dividends on 87,500 shares of our Series B Preferred stock
voluntarily converted.by an institutional investor. The
common stock was issued in private placement transactions exempt
from registration under the Securities Act, in reliance on Section
3(a)(9) and/or 4(2) thereof.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior
Securities
None.
Item 6. Exhibits
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Second Amendment to Lease between Bayside Area Development, LLC and
the Company, effective November 10, 2016, filed
herewith.
|
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Indemnification Agreement effective November 10, 2016 between the Company and Mark A. Smith, filed herewith. |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of the Principal Executive Officer required by
Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of the Principal Financial Officer required by
Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
Certification of the Principal Executive and Financial Officers
required by Rule 13a-14(b) and Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
101.INS
|
|
XBRL Instance Document
|
101.SCH
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema
|
101.CAL
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase
|
101.DEF
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase
|
101.LAB
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase
|
101.PRE
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.
|
VISTAGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC.
/s/
Shawn K. Singh
Shawn K. Singh
Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
||
|
/s/
Jerrold D. Dotson
|
|
||
|
Jerrold D. Dotson
|
|
||
|
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer)
|
|
Dated: November 14, 2016
-67-