WINDTREE THERAPEUTICS INC /DE/ - Quarter Report: 2009 September (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
x
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2009
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 000-26422
DISCOVERY
LABORATORIES, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
94-3171943
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
Number)
|
|
2600
Kelly Road, Suite 100
|
||
Warrington,
Pennsylvania 18976-3622
|
||
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(215)
488-9300
(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 x
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 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 definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller
reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer
|
¨
|
Accelerated filer
x
|
|||||
Non-accelerated filer
|
¨
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
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 x
As of
November 6, 2009, 126,271,520 shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value
$0.001 per share, were outstanding.
Table
of Contents
Page
|
|
PART
I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1. Financial Statements
|
1
|
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
As
of September 30, 2009 (unaudited) and December 31, 2008
|
1
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (unaudited)
|
|
For
the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009 and
2008
|
2
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (unaudited)
|
|
For
the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009 and
2008
|
3
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)
|
4
|
Item
2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations
|
13
|
Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
|
28
|
Item
4. Controls and Procedures
|
28
|
PART
II - OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
|
28
|
Item
1A. Risk Factors
|
29
|
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds
|
32
|
Item
3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
|
32
|
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders
|
32
|
Item
5. Other Information
|
32
|
Item
6. Exhibits
|
33
|
Signatures
|
34
|
ii
Unless
the context otherwise requires, all references to “we,” “us,” “our,” and the
“Company” include Discovery
Laboratories,
Inc., and its wholly-owned, presently inactive subsidiary, Acute Therapeutics,
Inc.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains “forward-looking statements” within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act). The forward-looking
statements are only predictions and provide our current expectations or
forecasts of future events and financial performance and may be identified by
the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms “believes,”
“estimates,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “intends,” “may,” “will” or
“should” or, in each case, their negative, or other variations or comparable
terminology, though the absence of these words does not necessarily mean that a
statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements include all
matters that are not historical facts and include, without limitation,
statements concerning: our business strategy, outlook, objectives, future
milestones, plans, intentions, goals, and future financial condition, including
the period of time for which our existing resources will enable us to fund our
operations; the possibility, timing and outcome of submitting regulatory filings
for our products under development; our research and development programs for
our KL4 surfactant
technology and our capillary aerosolization technology platform, including
planning for and timing of any clinical trials and potential development
milestones; the development of financial, clinical, manufacturing and
distribution plans related to the potential commercialization of our drug
products, if approved; and plans regarding potential strategic alliances
and other collaborative arrangements with pharmaceutical companies and others to
develop, manufacture and market our products.
We intend
that all forward-looking statements be subject to the safe-harbor provisions of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking
statements are subject to many risks and uncertainties that could cause actual
results to differ materially from any future results expressed or implied by the
forward-looking statements. Examples of the risks and uncertainties
include, but are not limited to:
|
·
|
risks
related generally to our efforts to gain regulatory approval, in the
United States and elsewhere, for our drug product candidates that we are
developing to address Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) in premature
infants including Surfaxin®
(lucinactant) for the prevention of RDS, our lyophilized KL4
surfactant (Surfaxin LS™) and our aerosolized KL4
surfactant (Aerosurf®);
|
|
·
|
the
risk that we and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other
regulatory authorities will not be able to agree on matters raised during
the regulatory review process, or that we may be required to conduct
significant additional activities to potentially gain approval of our
product candidates, if ever;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that the FDA or other regulatory authorities may not accept, or may
withhold or delay consideration of, any applications that we may file, or
may not approve our applications or may limit approval of our products to
particular indications or impose unanticipated label
limitations;
|
|
·
|
risks
relating to the rigorous regulatory approval processes, including
pre-filing activities, required for approval of any drug or combination
drug-device products that we may develop, whether independently, with
strategic development partners or pursuant to collaboration
arrangements;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that the FDA will not be satisfied with the results of our efforts to
further optimize our fetal rabbit biological activity assay and release
test, which is needed to advance our KL4
surfactant pipeline;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that changes in the national or international political and
regulatory environment may make it more difficult to gain FDA or other
regulatory approval of our drug product
candidates;
|
|
·
|
risks
relating to our research and development activities, which involve
time-consuming and expensive preclinical studies and other efforts, and
potentially multiple clinical trials, which may be subject to potentially
significant delays or regulatory holds, or fail, and which must be
conducted using sophisticated and extensive analytical methodologies,
including an acceptable biological activity test, if required, as well as
other quality control release and stability tests to satisfy the
requirements of the regulatory
authorities;
|
|
·
|
risks
relating to our ability to develop and manufacture drug products and
capillary aerosolization systems for clinical studies and, if approved,
for commercialization of drug and combination drug-device
products;
|
|
·
|
risks
relating to the transfer of our manufacturing technology to third-party
contract manufacturers and
assemblers;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that we, our contract manufacturers or any of our third-party
suppliers may encounter problems or delays in manufacturing or assembling
drug products, drug product substances, capillary aerosolization devices
and related components and other materials on a timely basis or in an
amount sufficient to support our development efforts and, if our products
are approved,
commercialization;
|
iii
|
·
|
the
risk that we may be unable to identify potential strategic partners or
collaborators with whom we can develop and, if approved, commercialize our
products in a timely manner, if at
all;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that we or our strategic partners or collaborators will not be able
to attract or maintain qualified
personnel;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that, if approved, market conditions, the competitive landscape or
otherwise may make it difficult to launch and profitably sell our
products;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that we may not be able to raise additional capital or enter into
strategic alliances or collaboration agreements (including strategic
alliances for development or commercialization of our drug products and
combination drug-device products);
|
|
·
|
risks
that the current credit environment will adversely affect our ability to
fund our activities, that our share price will not reach or remain at the
price level necessary for us to access capital under our Committed Equity
Financing Facilities (CEFFs), that the CEFFs may expire before we are able
to access the full dollar amount potentially available thereunder, and
that additional equity financings could result in substantial equity
dilution;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that we will be unable to maintain The Nasdaq Global Market listing
requirements, which would likely cause the price of our shares of common
stock to decline;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that recurring losses, negative cash flows and the inability to raise
additional capital could threaten our ability to continue as a going
concern;
|
|
·
|
the
risks that we may be unable to maintain and protect the patents and
licenses related to our Surfactant Replacement Therapies (SRT) and that
other companies may develop competing therapies and/or
technologies;
|
|
·
|
the
risk that we may become involved in securities, product liability and
other litigation;
|
|
·
|
risks
related to reimbursement and health care reform that may adversely affect
us; and
|
|
·
|
other
risks and uncertainties, including those described in our most recent
Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended, and other filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, on Forms 10-Q and 8-K, and any
amendments thereto.
|
Pharmaceutical
and biotechnology companies have suffered significant setbacks in advanced
clinical trials, even after obtaining promising earlier trial results.
Data obtained from such clinical trials are susceptible to varying
interpretations, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval.
After gaining approval of a drug product, pharmaceutical companies face
considerable challenges in marketing and distributing their products, and may
never become profitable.
Except to
the extent required by applicable laws, rules or regulations, we do not
undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statements or to publicly
announce revisions to any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a result
of new information, future events or otherwise.
iv
PART
I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM
1. FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
DISCOVERY
LABORATORIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
(in
thousands, except per share data)
September 30,
|
December 31,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
(Unaudited)
|
||||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Current
Assets:
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 17,683 | $ | 22,744 | ||||
Available-for-sale
marketable securities
|
— | 2,048 | ||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
272 | 625 | ||||||
Total
Current Assets
|
17,955 | 25,417 | ||||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
4,960 | 5,965 | ||||||
Restricted
cash
|
400 | 600 | ||||||
Other
assets, including deferred financing costs
|
494 | 907 | ||||||
Total
Assets
|
$ | 23,809 | $ | 32,889 | ||||
LIABILITIES
& STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
||||||||
Current
Liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 1,559 | $ | 2,111 | ||||
Accrued
expenses
|
4,319 | 5,313 | ||||||
Loan
payable, including accrued interest
|
10,375 | — | ||||||
Equipment
loans, current portion
|
690 | 2,442 | ||||||
Total
Current Liabilities
|
16,943 | 9,866 | ||||||
Loan
payable, including accrued interest
|
— | 10,128 | ||||||
Equipment
loans, non-current portion
|
546 | 1,092 | ||||||
Other
liabilities
|
696 | 870 | ||||||
Total
Liabilities
|
18,185 | 21,956 | ||||||
Stockholders’
Equity:
|
||||||||
Common
stock, $0.001 par value; 180,000 shares authorized; 122,013 and 101,588
shares issued; and 121,700 and 101,275 shares outstanding at September 30,
2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively.
|
122 | 102 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
360,064 | 341,293 | ||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(351,508 | ) | (327,409 | ) | ||||
Treasury
stock (at cost); 313 shares
|
(3,054 | ) | (3,054 | ) | ||||
Accumulated
Other comprehensive loss
|
— | 1 | ||||||
Total
Stockholders’ Equity
|
5,624 | 10,933 | ||||||
Total
Liabilities & Stockholders’ Equity
|
$ | 23,809 | $ | 32,889 |
1
DISCOVERY
LABORATORIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
(in
thousands, except per share data)
Three Months Ended
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
September 30,
|
September 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Revenue
from collaborative arrangement and grants
|
$ | — | $ | 50 | $ | — | $ | 4,600 | ||||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
4,530 | 6,724 | 15,189 | 21,395 | ||||||||||||
General
and administrative
|
2,417 | 3,726 | 8,105 | 13,307 | ||||||||||||
Total
expenses
|
6,947 | 10,450 | 23,294 | 34,702 | ||||||||||||
Operating
loss
|
(6,947 | ) | (10,400 | ) | (23,294 | ) | (30,102 | ) | ||||||||
Other
income / (expense):
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest
and other income
|
8 | 142 | 29 | 800 | ||||||||||||
Interest
and other expense
|
(252 | ) | (381 | ) | (834 | ) | (1,266 | ) | ||||||||
Other
income / (expense), net
|
(244 | ) | (239 | ) | (805 | ) | (466 | ) | ||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (7,191 | ) | $ | (10,639 | ) | $ | (24,099 | ) | $ | (30,568 | ) | ||||
Net
loss per common share - Basic and diluted
|
$ | (0.06 | ) | $ | (0.11 | ) | $ | (0.22 | ) | $ | (0.31 | ) | ||||
Weighted
average number of common shares outstanding - basic and
diluted
|
119,993 | 98,619 | 111,683 | 97,324 |
2
DISCOVERY
LABORATORIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
(in
thousands)
Nine Months Ended
|
||||||||
September 30,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (24,099 | ) | $ | (30,568 | ) | ||
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,503 | 1,685 | ||||||
Stock-based
compensation and 401(k) match
|
2,277 | 3,744 | ||||||
Loss
on disposal of property and equipment
|
— | 110 | ||||||
Changes
in:
|
||||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
353 | 348 | ||||||
Accounts
payable
|
(552 | ) | 1,672 | |||||
Accrued
expenses
|
(994 | ) | (1,250 | ) | ||||
Other
assets
|
3 | 3 | ||||||
Other
liabilities and accrued interest on loan payable
|
73 | 387 | ||||||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(21,436 | ) | (23,869 | ) | ||||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
||||||||
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
(88 | ) | (599 | ) | ||||
Restricted
cash
|
200 | — | ||||||
Purchases
of marketable securities
|
— | (23,722 | ) | |||||
Proceeds
from sales or maturity of marketable securities
|
2,047 | 35,234 | ||||||
Net
cash provided by/(used in) investing activities
|
2,159 | (10,913 | ) | |||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of securities, net of expenses
|
16,514 | 4,231 | ||||||
Proceeds
from equipment loans
|
— | 896 | ||||||
Principal
payments under equipment loan obligations
|
(2,298 | ) | (2,175 | ) | ||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
14,216 | 2,952 | ||||||
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
(5,061 | ) | (10,004 | ) | ||||
Cash
and cash equivalents - beginning of period
|
22,744 | 36,929 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents - end of period
|
$ | 17,683 | $ | 26,925 | ||||
Supplementary
disclosure of cash flows information:
|
||||||||
Interest
paid
|
$ | 183 | $ | 420 | ||||
Non-cash
transactions:
|
||||||||
Unrealized
loss on marketable securities
|
(1 | ) | (32 | ) |
3
Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements (unaudited)
Note
1 – The Company and Basis of Presentation
The
Company
Discovery
Laboratories, Inc. (referred to as “we,” “us,” or the “Company”) is a
biotechnology company developing Surfactant Replacement Therapies (SRT) to treat
respiratory disorders and diseases for which there frequently are few or no
approved therapies. Our novel KL4
proprietary technology produces a synthetic, peptide-containing surfactant
(KL4
surfactant) that is structurally similar to pulmonary surfactant, a substance
produced naturally in the lung and essential for survival and normal respiratory
function. In addition, our proprietary capillary aerosol generating
technology (Capillary Aerosolization Technology) produces a dense aerosol with a
defined particle size, to potentially deliver our aerosolized KL4 surfactant
to the deep lung. As many respiratory disorders are associated with
surfactant deficiency or surfactant degradation, we believe that our proprietary
technology platform makes it possible, for the first time, to develop a
significant pipeline of surfactant products targeted to treat a wide range of
previously unaddressed respiratory problems.
Our top
priority is to secure strategic alliance partners and access capital to maximize
the inherent value in our KL4 surfactant
technology. Our lead pipeline programs, Surfaxin LS™, Aerosurf® and
Surfaxin®, are
focused initially on addressing the most significant respiratory conditions
affecting pediatric populations. Our lyophilized KL4
surfactant, beginning with Surfaxin LS™, is manufactured as a dry powder
formulation and reconstituted as a liquid prior to use. It may also
potentially support future development of our pipeline of KL4
surfactant-based therapies. Aerosurf® is our
proprietary KL4 surfactant
in aerosolized form, which we are developing using our proprietary Capillary
Aerosolization Technology initially to treat premature infants at risk for
RDS. Premature infants with RDS currently are treated with surfactants
that are administered by means of invasive endotracheal intubation and
mechanical ventilation, procedures that frequently result in serious respiratory
conditions and complications. If approved, Aerosurf will make it possible
to administer surfactant into the deep lung without subjecting patients to such
invasive procedures. We believe that Aerosurf has the potential to enable
a significant increase in the use of SRT in pediatric medicine.
In April
2009, we received a Complete Response Letter from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) with respect to our New Drug Application (NDA) for our
first product based on our novel KL4 surfactant
technology, Surfaxin®
(lucinactant) for the prevention of Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) in
premature infants. The letter focused primarily on our fetal rabbit
biological activity test (BAT), a quality control and stability release test and
one of the many analytical Quality Control tests for Surfaxin and our other
KL4
pipeline programs, including whether preclinical data from preterm lamb studies
and the BAT had established to the FDA’s satisfaction that Surfaxin clinical
drug product is comparable to the to-be-manufactured commercial drug product
(Comparability) and whether the BAT can adequately distinguish change in
Surfaxin biological activity over time. At an “end-of-review” meeting with
the FDA on June 2, 2009, the FDA suggested that, to demonstrate Comparability
and increase the likelihood of gaining Surfaxin approval, we could consider
conducting a limited clinical trial. On September 29, 2009, we held a
teleconference with the FDA to discuss our plans to optimize the BAT, the design
of a proposed limited clinical trial, and whether conducting such a trial while
simultaneously employing the optimized BAT could potentially resolve the key
remaining requirement for Surfaxin approval. Based on our discussions, we
believe that we will be able to optimize the BAT to the satisfaction of the
FDA. We
intend to employ the optimized BAT in conjunction with all of our KL4 surfactant
pipeline programs, including the potential limited Surfaxin clinical
trial.
At the
September 2009 teleconference, we also discussed a limited clinical trial design
intended primarily to assess a pharmacodynamic (PD) response following Surfaxin
administration in preterm infants with RDS. The FDA indicated that a
PD-based design is consistent with their expectation and provided direction
regarding trial design specifics. However, the final clinical trial
design, from which we will be able to estimate expense and duration of the
trial, is subject to FDA review following submission of a formal
protocol. We have been collaborating with leading academic neonatologists
to finalize the protocol and anticipate submitting it to the FDA in
mid-fourth quarter 2009. Based on the FDA’s guidelines, we expect that we
may receive the FDA’s comments early in the first quarter 2010. When
received, we will estimate the expected costs and duration of the trial and,
with existing and potential new partners, we will make a strategic
assessment as to the appropriate level and timing of any investment in a
potential limited clinical trial for Surfaxin for RDS.
4
We are
actively assessing various strategic and financial alternatives to secure
necessary capital and advance our KL4
respiratory pipeline programs to maximize shareholder value. We
would prefer to accomplish our objectives through strategic alliances.
Although we are presently actively engaged in discussions with potential
strategic and financial partners, there can be no assurance that any strategic
alliance or other financing transaction will be successfully concluded.
Until such time as we secure an alliance or complete another financing
alternative, we continue to conserve our financial resources, predominantly by
curtailing investments in our pipeline programs.
Over
time, we plan to develop our KL4 surfactant
technology into a robust pipeline of products that potentially will address a
variety of debilitating respiratory conditions in a range of patient
populations, from premature infants to adults, that suffer from severe and
debilitating respiratory conditions for which there currently are few or no
approved therapies. We have an ongoing Phase 2 trial to potentially
address Acute Respiratory Failure (ARF) and our KL4 surfactant is the subject of
an investigator initiated trial assessing the safety, tolerability and
short-term effectiveness (via improvement in mucociliary clearance) of
aerosolized KL4 surfactant
in patients with Cystic Fibrosis (CF). In addition, we are conducting
research and preclinical development with our KL4 surfactant
to potentially address Acute Lung Injury (ALI), and other diseases associated
with inflammation of the lung, such as Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary
Disease (COPD).
Basis
of Presentation
The
accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States for interim financial information in accordance with the
instructions to Form 10-Q. Accordingly, they do not include all of the
information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States for complete financial statements. In the opinion of
management, all adjustments (consisting of normally recurring accruals)
considered for fair presentation have been included. Operating results for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 are not necessarily
indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31,
2009. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial
statements and footnotes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2008.
Note
2 – Liquidity Risks and Management’s Plans
We have
incurred substantial losses since inception due to investments in research and
development, manufacturing and potential commercialization activities and we
expect to continue to incur substantial losses over the next several
years. Historically, we have funded our business operations through
various sources, including public and private securities offerings, draw downs
under our Committed Equity Financing Facilities (CEFFs), capital equipment and
financing and debt facilities, and strategic alliances. We expect to
continue to fund our business operations through a combination of these sources,
as well as sales revenue from our product candidates, if approved.
Following
receipt of the April 2009 FDA Complete Response Letter for Surfaxin, we made
fundamental changes in our business strategy. We are actively assessing
various strategic and financial alternatives to secure necessary capital to
advance our KL4
respiratory pipeline programs to maximize shareholder value.
Although we are presently actively engaged in discussions with potential
strategic and financial partners, there can be no assurance that any strategic
alliance or other financing transaction will be successfully
concluded.
Our
capital requirements will depend upon many factors, including the success of our
product development and commercialization plans. Currently, we are focused
on developing our lead KL4 surfactant
products, Surfaxin LS, Aerosurf and Surfaxin, to address the most significant
respiratory conditions affecting pediatric populations. However, there can
be no assurance that our research and development projects will be successful,
that products developed will obtain necessary regulatory approval, that any
approved product will be commercially viable, that any CEFF will be available
for future financings, or that we will be able to obtain additional capital when
needed on acceptable terms, if at all. Even if we succeed in raising
additional capital and developing and subsequently commercializing product
candidates, we may never achieve sufficient sales revenue to achieve or maintain
profitability.
5
As of
September 30, 2009, we had cash and cash equivalents of $17.7 million.
Also as of September 30, 2009, under our two CEFFs, we may potentially raise
(subject to certain conditions, including minimum stock price and volume
limitations) up to an aggregate of $73.8 million. In May 2009, we
completed a registered direct public offering resulting in gross proceeds of
$11.3 million ($10.5 million net). Through September 30, 2009 we raised an
aggregate of $6.6 million from seven draw-downs under our CEFFs in 2009.
In October 2009, we raised an additional $4.3 million from three draw-downs
under our CEFFs. However, as of November 4, 2009, the May 2008 CEFF was
unavailable because our stock price was below the minimum price required to
utilize it. Also, as of September 30, 2009, our $10.4 million loan with
Novaquest (formerly PharmaBio Development Inc.), a strategic investment group of
Quintiles Transnational Corp., is classified as a current liability, payable in
April 2010. See “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations –
Liquidity and Capital Resources – Committed Equity Financing Facilities, and “–
Financings Pursuant to Common Stock Offerings.”
Until we
are able to secure a strategic alliance or complete a financing transaction to
generate required capital, we have taken steps to conserve our financial
resources, predominantly by curtailing investments in our pipeline
programs. Following receipt in April 2009 of the Complete Response Letter
for Surfaxin, we implemented cost containment measures and reduced our workforce
from 115 to 91 employees. The workforce reduction was focused primarily in
our commercial and corporate administrative groups. We have retained the
core capabilities that we need to support development of our KL4 surfactant
technology, including our quality, manufacturing and research and development
resources. We incurred a one-time charge of approximately $0.6 million in
the quarter ending June 30, 2009 related to the workforce reduction (see Note 5
- Commercial Strategy and Cost Containment Measures).
The
accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements have been
prepared assuming that we will continue as a going concern, which contemplates
the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course
of business. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on
our ability to raise additional capital, to fund our research and development
and commercial programs and meet our obligations on a timely basis. If we
are unable to successfully raise sufficient additional capital, through
strategic and collaborative ventures with potential partners and/or
future debt and equity financings, we will likely not have sufficient cash
flows and liquidity to fund our business operations, which could significantly
limit our ability to continue as a going concern. In addition, as of
September 30, 2009, we have authorized capital available for issuance (and not
otherwise reserved) of approximately 500,000 shares of common stock. We
have presented to our stockholders, for approval at our Annual Meeting of
Stockholders on December 7, 2009, a proposal to increase our authorized shares
by 200 million from 180 million to 380 million. If this proposal is not
approved, we may be unable to undertake additional financings without first
seeking stockholder approval, a process that would require a special meeting of
stockholders, is time-consuming and expensive and could impair our ability to
efficiently raise capital when needed, if at all. In that case, we may be
forced to further limit development of many, if not all, of our programs.
If we are unable to raise the necessary capital, we may be forced to curtail all
of our activities and, ultimately, potentially cease operations. Even if
we are able to raise additional capital, such financings may only be available
on unattractive terms, or could result in significant dilution of stockholders’
interests and, in such event, the market price of our common stock may
decline. Our balance sheet does not include any adjustments relating to
recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or the amounts and
classification of liabilities that might be necessary should we be unable to
continue in existence.
Note 3 – Accounting Policies and Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
Accounting
policies
There
have been no changes to our critical accounting policies since December 31,
2008. For more information on critical accounting policies, refer to our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. Readers
are encouraged to review these disclosures in conjunction with the review of
this Form 10-Q.
6
Net loss per common
share
Basic net
loss per common share is computed by dividing the net loss by the weighted
average number of common shares outstanding for the periods. As of
September 30, 2009 and 2008, 30.9 million and 22.0 million shares of common
stock, respectively, were potentially issuable upon the exercise of certain
stock options and warrants and vesting of restricted stock awards. Due to
our net loss, these potentially issuable shares were not included in the
calculation of diluted net loss per share as the effect would be anti-dilutive,
therefore basic and dilutive net loss per share are the same.
Comprehensive
loss
Comprehensive
loss consists of net loss plus the changes in unrealized gains and losses on
available-for-sale securities. Comprehensive loss for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
For the three months ended
|
For the nine months ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(in thousands)
|
September 30,
|
September 30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (7,191 | ) | $ | (10,639 | ) | $ | (24,099 | ) | $ | (30,568 | ) | ||||
Change
in unrealized (losses)/gains on marketable securities
|
— | 3 | (1 | ) | (32 | ) | ||||||||||
Comprehensive
loss
|
$ | (7,191 | ) | $ | (10,636 | ) | $ | (24,100 | ) | $ | (30,600 | ) |
Recent accounting
pronouncements
In
June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued the Accounting Standards
Codification™ (the Codification). The Codification now is the
single source of authoritative accounting principles recognized by FASB to be
applied by nongovernmental entities in the preparation of financial statements
in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"), in the
United States. The Codification became effective for interim and annual
periods ending after September 15, 2009. All other accounting
literature not included in the Codification will be
nonauthoritative, except for additional authoritative rules and
interpretive releases issued by the SEC. The Codification is not intended
to change GAAP; instead it reorganizes the thousands of US GAAP pronouncements
into approximately 90 Accounting Topics. The Company’s adoption of the
Codification did not have an impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In May
2009, FASB issued new guidance for accounting for subsequent events. The
new guidance, which is now part of Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic
855, Subsequent
Events, is
consistent with existing auditing standards in its definition of subsequent
events, but requires disclosure of the date through which an entity has
evaluated subsequent events and the basis for that date. There are two
types of subsequent events: (1) events that provide additional evidence
about conditions that existed at the balance sheet date, and are recognized in
the financial statements, and (2) events that provide evidence about
conditions that did not exist at the balance sheet date, but arose before the
financial statements are issued or are available to be issued, and are not
recognized at the balance sheet date. The adoption of the new guidance had
no impact on our consolidated financial statements. We evaluated all
events or transactions that occurred after September 30, 2009 up through
November 9, 2009, the date these financial statements were issued and filed with
the SEC. During this period we did not have any material recognized
subsequent events, however, there were three nonrecognized subsequent events
described in Note 10.
In
December 2007, FASB issued new guidance for accounting for collaborative
arrangements. The new guidance, which is now part of ASC Topic 808, Collaborative Arrangements,
is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. The scope
of the new guidance is limited to collaborative arrangements where no separate
legal entity exists and in which the parties are active participants and are
exposed to significant risks and rewards that depend on the success of the
activity. The new guidance requires certain income statement presentation
of transactions with third parties and of payments between parties to the
arrangement, along with disclosure about the nature and purpose of the
arrangement. The adoption of the new guidance on January 1, 2009 did not
have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
7
In
December 2007, FASB issued new guidance for accounting for business
combinations. The new guidance, which is now part of ASC topic 805, Business Combinations, is
effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning on or after
December 15, 2008. The new guidance establishes principles and
requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and measures in its financial
statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, any
noncontrolling interest in the acquiree, and the goodwill acquired in the
business combination. ASC Topic 805 also establishes disclosure
requirements to enable the evaluation of the nature and financial effects of the
business combination. We adopted the new guidance on January 1, 2009, which had
no immediate impact on our financial statements; however it may have an impact
on the accounting for any potential future business combinations.
Note 4 – Revenue from Collaborative
Arrangement and Grants
We did
not earn any revenue during the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009.
In March
2008, we restructured our strategic alliance agreement with Philip Morris USA
Inc. d/b/a Chrysalis Technologies (Chrysalis). See our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 – Note 12 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements. Under the modified agreement, Chrysalis agreed to
pay us $4.5 million to support future development of our Capillary
Aerosolization Technology, of which $2.0 million became payable upon execution
of the revised agreement in March 2008 and $2.5 million became payable upon
completion of a technology transfer to us in June 2008.
Note 5 – Commercial Strategy and Cost Containment
Measures
In April
2009, following receipt of the Complete Response Letter for Surfaxin for the
prevention of RDS in premature infants, we reviewed all aspects of our business
with an immediate intention to conserve cash. As a result of this review,
we implemented a fundamental change in our business strategy. We are no
longer planning to establish our own specialty pulmonary organization to
commercialize our potential pediatric products, including Surfaxin, in the
United States. To secure capital and advance our KL4 surfactant
pipeline programs, we are now seeking to reduce our financial burden by entering
into strategic alliances in all markets, including the United States, to support
our research and development programs and, if approved, to commercialize our
products.
In
addition, we implemented cost containment measures and reduced our workforce
from 115 to 91 employees, focused primarily on commercial and corporate
personnel. We continue to maintain our core capabilities to support
development of our KL4 surfactant
technology, including quality, manufacturing and research and development
resources. We incurred a charge of $0.6 million in the second quarter of
2009 associated with staff reductions and the close-out of certain contractual
arrangements, which is included within the appropriate line items on the
Statement of Operations ($0.4 million in general and administrative expenses and
$0.2 million in research and development expenses). As of September 30,
2009, payments totaling $0.6 million had been made related to these items and
$0.1 million were unpaid.
8
(in thousands)
|
Severance
and Benefits
Related
|
Termination of
Commercial
Programs
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Q2
2009 Charge
|
$ | 554 | $ | 74 | $ | 628 | ||||||
Payments
/ Adjustments
|
(450 | ) | — | (450 | ) | |||||||
Liability
as of June 30, 2009
|
$ | 104 | $ | 74 | $ | 178 | ||||||
Payments
/ Adjustments
|
(97 | ) | (4 | ) | (101 | ) | ||||||
Liability
as of September 30, 2009
|
$ | 7 | $ | 70 | $ | 77 |
Note 6 – Stockholders’
Equity
May 2009 Registered Direct
Public Offering
On May
13, 2009, we completed a registered direct public offering that resulted in
gross proceeds of $11.3 million ($10.5 million net proceeds) from the issuance
of 14.0 million shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase seven
million shares of common stock. The shares were sold to select
institutional investors at a price of $0.81 for each share of common stock,
together with a related warrant to purchase 0.5 shares of common stock.
The warrants are exercisable for a period of five years at an exercise price of
$1.15 per share. Lazard Capital Markets LLC acted as the exclusive
placement agent for the offering and received a fee of 6% of the gross proceeds
of the offering and reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by it in
connection with the offering. Under the Placement Agent Agreement, we
agreed not to draw down on our CEFFs for a period of 30 days after the offering,
and, for the 60 days following that date, agreed to an aggregate draw down limit
of 2% of our outstanding common stock, and also agreed not to sell, for a period
of 90 days following the entry into the definitive agreements, any of our common
stock other than in connection with the offering, pursuant to employee benefit
plans, or in connection with strategic alliances involving us and a strategic
partner. In addition, each of our directors and select executive officers
agreed to 90 day lock-up provisions with regard to future sales of our common
stock, which expired on August 16, 2009. The common stock issued and
issuable by exercise of the warrants in connection with this offering are
covered by the universal shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (No.
333-151654) (2008 Universal Shelf).
Committed Equity Financing
Facilities
As of
September 30, 2009, we had two CEFFs that we entered into on December 12, 2008
(December 2008 CEFF) and May 22, 2008 (May 2008 CEFF) that allow us to raise
capital for a period of three years ending February 6, 2011 and
June 18, 2011, respectively, at the time and in amounts deemed
suitable to us. A third CEFF expired on May 12, 2009. Under the
December 2008 CEFF, as of September 30, 2009, we had 11.1 million shares
potentially available for issuance (up to a maximum of $21.4 million), provided
that the volume weighted-average price of our common stock on each trading day
(VWAP) must be at least equal to the greater of (i) $.60 or (ii) 90% of the
closing price of our common stock on the trading day immediately preceding the
draw down period (Minimum VWAP). Under the May 2008 CEFF, as of September
30, 2009, we had approximately 13.3 million shares potentially available for
issuance (up to a maximum of $52.3 million), provided that the VWAP on each
trading day must be at least the greater of $1.15 or the Minimum VWAP. Use
of each CEFF is subject to certain other covenants and conditions, including
aggregate share and dollar limitations for each draw down. See our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 – “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and
Capital Resources – Committed Equity Financing Facility (CEFF)”). We
anticipate using our CEFFs (at such times our stock price is at a level above
the CEFF minimum price requirement) to support our working capital needs and
maintain cash availability into 2010.
9
Financings
pursuant to the CEFF
On
January 2, 2009, we completed a financing that was initiated in 2008 under the
May 2008 CEFF, resulting in gross proceeds of $0.5 million from the issuance of
478,783 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $1.04.
On
January 16, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $0.4 million from the issuance of 419,065 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.04.
On
February 18, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the issuance of 857,356 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.17.
On March
31, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in gross
proceeds of approximately $1.1 million from the issuance of 1,015,127 shares of
our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable discount,
of $1.08.
On April
8, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the issuance of 806,457 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.24.
On May 7,
2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF resulting in gross
proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the issuance of 1,272,917 shares of
our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable discount,
of $0.79.
On
September 23, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.6 million from the issuance of
1,793,258 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.88.
On
October 13, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $0.6 million from the issuance of 558,689 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.09.
On
October 13, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.8 million from the issuance of
1,908,956 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.94.
On
October 21, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.9 million from the issuance of
2,100,790 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.90.
Note
7 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments
We
adopted the provisions of ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and
Disclosures, which defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value under GAAP and enhances disclosures about fair value
measurements.
Under ASC
Topic 820, fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received
for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most
advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants on the measurement date.
Valuation
techniques used to measure fair value must maximize the use of observable inputs
and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. The fair value hierarchy is
based on three levels of inputs, of which the first two are considered
observable and the last unobservable, that may be used to measure fair value
which are the following:
10
|
·
|
Level
1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and
liabilities. Level 1 is generally considered the most reliable
measurement of fair value under ASC
820.
|
|
·
|
Level
2 – Inputs other than Level 1 that are observable, either directly or
indirectly, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities;
quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are
observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for
substantially the full term of the assets or
liabilities.
|
|
·
|
Level
3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity
and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or
liabilities.
|
Fair Value on a Recurring
Basis
Due to
their short-term maturity, the carrying amounts of cash, money markets and
accounts payable approximate their fair values. The table below
categorized assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis based upon the
lowest level of significant input (Level 1) to the valuations as of September
30, 2009.
Fair Value
|
Fair value measurement using
|
|||||||||||||||
Assets
|
September 30,
2009
|
Level 1
|
Level 2
|
Level 3
|
||||||||||||
Money
Markets and Certificates of Deposit
|
$ | 14,688 | $ | 14,688 | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||||
Restricted
Cash
|
600 | 600 | - | - | ||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 15,288 | $ | 15,288 | $ | - | $ | - |
Note
8 – Stock Options and Stock-Based Employee Compensation
We use
the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to determine the fair value of stock
options and amortize the stock-based compensation expense over the requisite
service periods of the stock options. The fair value of stock options
is affected by our stock price and several subjective variables included the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model, such as the expected stock price volatility
over the term of the option, actual and projected employee stock option exercise
behaviors, risk-free interest rate and expected dividends.
The fair
value of each stock option is estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model, which incorporates the assumptions used for
the three and nine month periods noted in the following table:
September 30,
|
September 30,
|
|||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
Expected
volatility
|
92%
|
77%
|
||||
Expected
term
|
4 and 5 years
|
4
and 5 years
|
||||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
1.17% - 1.35%
|
3.5%
|
||||
Expected
dividends
|
–
|
–
|
11
The total
employee stock-based compensation for the three and nine months ended September
30, 2009 and 2008 was as follows:
(in thousands)
|
Three Months Ended
|
Nine Months Ended
|
||||||||||||||
September 30,
|
September 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Research
& Development
|
$ | 84 | $ | 389 | $ | 530 | $ | 1,081 | ||||||||
General
& Administrative
|
344 | 764 | 1,711 | 2,310 | ||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 428 | $ | 1,153 | $ | 2,241 | $ | 3,391 |
As of
September 30, 2009, there was $2.8 million of total unrecognized compensation
cost related to non-vested share-based compensation arrangements granted under
the Amended and Restated 1998 Stock Incentive Plan (1998 Plan) and the 2007
Long-Term Incentive Plan. That cost is expected to be recognized over
a weighted-average vesting period of 1.5 years.
Note
9 – Contractual Obligations and Commitments
Effective
August 13, 2009, Dr. Robert J. Capetola resigned his positions as our President
and Chief Executive Officer and as a member of our Board of Directors
(Board). The Board elected Mr. W. Thomas Amick, Chairman of the
Board, to serve as Chief Executive Officer on an interim basis. We
entered into a separation agreement and general release (Separation Agreement)
with Dr. Capetola providing for (i) an upfront severance payment of $250,000,
and (ii) periodic payments in an amount equal to his base salary (calculated at
a rate of $490,000 per annum), in accordance with our payroll practices and less
required withholdings. The periodic payments will end the earlier of
(x) May 3, 2010 or (y) the date, if ever, that a Corporate Transaction (as
defined below) occurs. In addition, Dr. Capetola will be entitled to
(A) continuation of medical benefits and insurance coverage for a period of 24
or 27 months, depending upon circumstances, and (B) accelerated vesting of all
outstanding restricted shares and options, which shall remain exercisable to the
end of their stated terms. The Separation Agreement provides further
that, upon the occurrence of a Corporate Transaction prior to May 4, 2010, Dr.
Capetola will receive a payment of up to $1,580,000 or, if any such Corporate
Transaction also constitutes a Change of Control (as such term is defined in the
Separation Agreement), a payment of up to $1,777,500; provided, however, that,
in each case, any such payment will be reduced by the sum of the amounts
described in clauses (i) and (ii) of this paragraph that theretofore have been
paid. A “Corporate Transaction” is defined in the Separation
Agreement as (1) one or more corporate partnering or strategic alliance
transactions, Business Combinations or public or private financings that (A) are
completed during the Severance Period (as defined in the Separation Agreement)
and (B) result in cash proceeds (net of transaction costs) to the Company of at
least $20 million received during the Severance Period or within 90 calendar
days thereafter, or (2) an acquisition of the Company, by business combination
or other similar transaction, that occurs during the Severance Period and the
consideration paid to stockholders of the Company, in cash or securities, is at
least $20 million. For this purpose, net proceeds will be calculated
without taking into account any amounts received by the Company as reimbursement
for costs of development and research activities to be performed in connection
with any such transaction.
In
connection with his appointment as interim Chief Executive Officer, we entered
into an agreement (the CEO Agreement) pursuant to which Mr. Amick will be paid
at a per diem rate of $3,000. In addition, on September 3, 2009, in
accordance with the CEO Agreement, the Compensation Committee of our Board
authorized a grant of options to Mr. Amick to purchase 60,000 shares of our
common stock under our 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Plan) at an exercise price
of $0.49 per share, the closing market price of our common stock on
the date of grant. The option grant, in part, replaces an automatic
grant of options to purchase 30,000 shares of our common stock that Mr. Amick
would have received under the Plan as a non-executive Chairman of the
Board. The options will vest in full on the first anniversary date of
the grant.
12
Note
10 – Subsequent Events
We
evaluated all events or transactions that occurred after September 30, 2009
up through November 9, 2009, the date we issued these financial statements.
During this period we did not have any material recognized subsequent events,
however, there were three nonrecognized subsequent events described
below:
On
October 13, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $0.6 million from the issuance of 558,689 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.09.
On
October 13, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.8 million from the issuance of
1,908,956 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.94.
On
October 21, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.9 million from the issuance of
2,100,790 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.90.
ITEM
2.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
“Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” should
be read in connection with our accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements
(including the notes thereto) appearing elsewhere herein.
OVERVIEW
Discovery
Laboratories, Inc. (referred to as “we,” “us,” or the “Company”) is a
biotechnology company developing Surfactant Replacement Therapies (SRT) to treat
respiratory disorders and diseases for which there frequently are few or no
approved therapies. Our novel KL4
proprietary technology produces a synthetic, peptide-containing surfactant
(KL4
surfactant) that is structurally similar to pulmonary surfactant, a substance
produced naturally in the lung and essential for survival and normal respiratory
function. In addition, our proprietary capillary aerosol generating
technology (Capillary Aerosolization Technology) produces a dense aerosol with a
defined particle size, to potentially deliver our aerosolized KL4 surfactant
to the deep lung. As many respiratory disorders are associated with
surfactant deficiency or surfactant degradation, we believe that our proprietary
technology platform makes it possible, for the first time, to develop a
significant pipeline of surfactant products targeted to treat a wide range of
previously unaddressed respiratory problems.
Our top
priority is to secure strategic alliance partners and access to sufficient
capital to maximize the inherent value in our KL4 surfactant
technology. Our lead pipeline programs, Surfaxin LS™, Aerosurf® and
Surfaxin®, are
focused initially on addressing the most significant respiratory conditions
affecting pediatric populations. Our lyophilized KL4
surfactant, beginning with Surfaxin LS™, is manufactured as a dry powder
formulation and reconstituted as a liquid prior to use. It may also
potentially support future development of our pipeline of KL4
surfactant-based therapies. Aerosurf® is our
proprietary KL4 surfactant
in aerosolized form, which we are developing using our proprietary Capillary
Aerosolization Technology initially to treat premature infants at risk for
RDS. Premature infants with RDS currently are treated with
surfactants that are administered by means of invasive endotracheal intubation
and mechanical ventilation, procedures that frequently result in serious
respiratory conditions and complications. If approved, Aerosurf will
make it possible to administer surfactant into the deep lung without subjecting
patients to such invasive procedures. We believe that Aerosurf has
the potential to enable a significant increase in the use of SRT in pediatric
medicine.
13
In
connection with our New Drug Application (NDA) for Surfaxin (lucinactant) for
the prevention of Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) in premature infants, in
April 2009, we received a Complete Response Letter from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). If approved, Surfaxin will represent the first
synthetic, peptide-containing surfactant approved for use in pediatric
medicine. The FDA’s letter focused primarily on our fetal rabbit
biological activity test (BAT), a quality control and stability release test for
Surfaxin and our other KL4 pipeline
programs. We held a meeting with the FDA on June 2, 2009 and a
teleconference with the FDA on September 29, 2009. We believe that
the guidance we received during these interactions with the FDA defines a path
that could result in the potential approval of Surfaxin in the United
States and could meaningfully support advancing our other pipeline product
development programs (see “Surfaxin® for the
Prevention of Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Premature Infants,”
below).
We are
actively assessing various strategic and financial alternatives to secure
necessary capital and advance our KL4
respiratory pipeline programs to maximize shareholder
value. We would prefer to accomplish our objectives through strategic
alliances. Although we are presently actively engaged in discussions with
potential strategic and financial partners, there can be no assurance that any
strategic alliance or other financing transaction will be successfully
concluded. Until such time as we secure an alliance or complete
another financing alternative, we continue to conserve our financial resources,
predominantly by curtailing investments in our pipeline programs.
Over
time, we plan to develop our KL4 surfactant
technology into a robust pipeline of products that potentially will address a
variety of debilitating respiratory conditions in a range of patient
populations, from premature infants to adults, that suffer from severe and
debilitating respiratory conditions for which there currently are few or no
approved therapies. We have an ongoing Phase 2 trial to potentially
address Acute Respiratory Failure (ARF) and our KL4 surfactant is the subject of
an investigator initiated trial assessing the safety, tolerability and
short-term effectiveness (via improvement in mucociliary clearance) of
aerosolized KL4 surfactant
in patients with Cystic Fibrosis (CF). In addition, we are conducting
research and preclinical development with our KL4 surfactant
to potentially address Acute Lung Injury (ALI), and other diseases associated
with inflammation of the lung, such as Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary
Disease (COPD).
Business
Strategy Update
The
following are updates to our Business Strategy (See our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 – “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Business – Business
Strategy”):
|
·
|
Following
receipt of the April 2009 FDA Complete Response Letter for Surfaxin, we
reviewed all aspects of our business plan with an immediate intention to
conserve cash. As a result of this review, we implemented a
fundamental change in our business strategy. We are no longer
planning to establish our own specialty pulmonary organization to
commercialize our potential pediatric products, including Surfaxin, in the
United States. To secure capital and advance our KL4
surfactant pipeline programs, we are now seeking to reduce our financial
burden by entering into strategic alliances in all markets, including the
United States, to support our research and development programs and, if
approved, to commercialize our
products.
|
|
·
|
We
are now seeking alliances that potentially provide non-dilutive capital in
the form of upfront payments, milestone payments, commercialization
royalties and a sharing of research and development expenses, and that
leverage the individual expertise and capabilities of the
parties. We are also considering financial alternatives to
secure the necessary capital to advance our KL4 respiratory pipeline
programs. We are currently in active discussions with several
potential strategic and financial partners. If successful, we
believe that we will be in a position to advance our KL4 surfactant
pipeline, meet our capital requirements, including potentially satisfying
our loan with Novaquest (formerly PharmaBio Development Inc.), a strategic
investment group of Quintiles Transnational Corp., and continue our
operations. Although we are presently actively engaged in discussions
with several potential strategic partners and financial parties, there can
be no assurance that any strategic alliance or other financing transaction
will be concluded.
|
|
·
|
In
addition, to conserve our cash resources, we continue to manage our
activities with the intent to conserve our financial resources,
predominantly by curtailing investments in our pipeline
programs. Also, in April 2009, we implemented cost containment
measures and reduced our workforce from 115 to 91
employees. The workforce reduction was focused primarily in our
commercial and corporate administrative groups. We have
successfully reduced the rate of cash outflow for operating activities,
but at the same time we have retained the core capabilities needed to
support development of our KL4
surfactant technology, including our quality, manufacturing and research
and development resources.
|
14
|
·
|
To
advance our KL4 pipeline products, as resources permit, we plan to make
prudent investments in preclinical studies and our drug product and device
development programs, and will focus our resources on being in a position
to initiate key clinical programs after we have secured appropriate
strategic alliances and necessary capital. Our preparatory work
is expected to include, where appropriate, discussions with U.S. and
European regulatory authorities to gain information about the requirements
for our regulatory packages and other planning activities required for the
initiation of our planned clinical
trials.
|
|
·
|
Effective
August 13, 2009, Dr. Robert J. Capetola resigned his positions as our
President and Chief Executive Officer and as a member of the Board of
Directors. The Board elected Mr. W. Thomas Amick, the Chairman
of our Board, to serve as Chief Executive Officer on an interim
basis. Since his appointment, Mr. Amick has been actively
involved in management’s strategic planning and discussions with potential
strategic and financial
partners.
|
As of
September 30, 2009, we had cash and cash equivalents of $17.7
million. Also as of September 30, 2009, under our two CEFFs, we may
potentially raise (subject to certain conditions, including minimum stock price
and volume limitations) up to an aggregate of $73.8 million. However, as of
November 4, 2009, the May 2008 CEFF was unavailable because our stock price was
below the minimum price required to utilize it. (See “Liquidity and Capital
Resources – Committed Equity Financing Facilities,” and “– Financings Pursuant
to Common Stock Offerings”). Also, as of September 30, 2009, our
$10.4 million loan with Novaquest is classified as a current liability, payable
in April 2010. Our plans include pursuing a potential strategic
restructuring of this loan, as well as assessing alternative means of financing
its payment, although there can be no assurance that we will be successful in
these efforts.
Our
future capital requirements depend upon many factors, including the success of
our efforts to secure one or more strategic alliances to support our product
development activities and commercialization plans, and the
ultimate success of our product development and commercialization
plans. We are currently focused on developing our lead KL4 surfactant
products, Surfaxin LS, Aerosurf and Surfaxin, to address the most significant
respiratory conditions affecting pediatric populations. However,
there can be no assurance that we will be able to secure strategic partners to
support and advise our activities, that our research and development projects
will be successful, that products developed will obtain necessary regulatory
approval, that any approved product will be commercially viable, that any CEFF
will be available for future financings, or that we will be able to obtain
additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. In
addition to multiple strategic alternatives, we continue to consider potential
additional financings and other similar opportunities to meet our capital
requirements and continue our operations. Even if we succeed in
raising additional capital and developing and subsequently commercializing
product candidates, we may never achieve sufficient sales revenue to achieve or
maintain profitability.
Potential
RDS Market Opportunity
We
believe the current market is underserved and constrained by limitations
associated with the currently-approved animal-derived
products. Surfactants today are approved solely to address RDS in
premature infants. The annual revenue from the current surfactant
market is estimated to be approximately $200 million worldwide (IMS Midas Data
MAT, September 2008); however, we do not believe that this revenue value is
indicative of the RDS revenue opportunity that we are pursuing. With
our synthetic KL4 surfactant
and Capillary Aerosolization Technology platform, over time, we plan to
potentially displace the animal-derived surfactants and treat many more of the
premature infants that currently are not treated with surfactant therapy
today.
Surfaxin
LS™, a lyophilized (dry powder) formulation of Surfaxin, is administered in the
same manner as Surfaxin and the currently-approved animal-derived
surfactants. However, Surfaxin LS is handled more conveniently than
both Surfaxin and the currently-approved animal-derived surfactants and exhibits
characteristics that may result in improved clinical performance. We
believe that the potential advantages and benefits of Surfaxin LS may support a
market penetration and a significant price premium relative to today’s standard
of care and could, over time, create a potential worldwide annual market
opportunity approaching $250 million.
15
To avoid
the risks associated with surfactant administration, which requires invasive
intubation and mechanical ventilation, neonatologists generally prefer to treat
RDS-diagnosed infants initially with nasal continuous positive air pressure
(nCPAP). Approximately 240,000 low birth weight infants are managed
on nCPAP in the U.S. annually (Vermont Oxford Network Data, 2005/2006 (VON
Data)). However, nCPAP may fail in more than 50% (depending on
gestational age, VON Data) of
these infants, who will then require subsequent intubation and surfactant
therapy, resulting in delayed surfactant therapy and potentially less favorable
clinical outcomes (Soll, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1997, Issue
4). As a result, of the more than 500,000 patients at-risk for
developing RDS in developed markets worldwide, less than 200,000 are treated
with surfactant therapy today, including approximately 80,000 in the United
States (VON Data, CDC National Vital Statistics, 2005, UNICEF
Online Data Set, 2005).
Aerosurf® is a
drug-device combination product that delivers our KL4 surfactant
in aerosolized form via nCPAP. As less invasive nCPAP is the
preferred method of treating RDS infants, the combination of Aerosurf, if
approved, and nCPAP will make it possible to deliver surfactant therapy to many
more premature infants than are treated currently, potentially significantly
expanding the treated-patient population. In addition, because
Aerosurf has the potential to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation, the
cost of which can exceed $25,000 per patient (ZD Associates Primary Market
Research, 2009; Gdovin, J Peds Pharm &
Therapuetics, 2006), we believe that we will be able to establish a new
frame of reference for pricing and command a significant price premium for this
novel product based on hospital cost-savings (i.e., average days of mechanical
ventilation avoided and reduction in related morbidities). As such,
we believe that the potential advantages and benefits of Aerosurf may, over
time, support a potential worldwide annual RDS market opportunity approaching
$750 million.
As a
result, we believe that the combined revenues from Surfaxin LS and Aerosurf have
the potential to approach $1 billion for the worldwide annual RDS market
opportunity alone.
Surfaxin
LS and Aerosurf are investigational drugs currently under development and are
subject to all of the risks and uncertainties associated with development-stage
drug product candidates, including whether regulatory development and marketing
approvals can be successfully obtained. Examples of these and other
risks and uncertainties are included in our Annual Report on Form 10K for the
year ended December 31, 2008, as amended, and in this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q, as well as in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission including, without limitation, the most recent reports on Form and
8-K.
Research and Development Update
– KL4 Surfactant Pipeline
Programs
Our first
priority is to maximize the inherent value in our KL4 surfactant
technology. Our lead pipeline programs, Surfaxin LS™, Aerosurf® and
Surfaxin®, are
focused initially on addressing the most significant respiratory conditions
affecting pediatric populations, beginning with RDS. We believe that
we will be able to use the established proof-of-efficacy of Surfaxin to minimize
development risk and potentially greatly improve the management of RDS, while
expanding the use of surfactants to treat significantly more
patients.
Programs
Addressing Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS)
RDS is
one of the most common, potentially life-threatening disorders, with more than
500,000 low-birth-weight premature infants at risk globally each
year. However, fewer than 200,000 infants per year now receive the
currently-approved, animal-derived surfactants (Von Data) because healthcare
practitioners try to avoid the risks associated with intubation and mechanical
ventilation, which are presently required for surfactant
administration. (See “Overview – Business
Strategy Update – Our
Potential Market Opportunities”). If the risk of intubation
and mechanical ventilation could be reduced or eliminated, the
surfactant-eligible RDS patient population could be significantly
expanded. Our advanced-stage RDS programs include:
Surfaxin
LS™
Surfaxin
LS is a lyophilized (dry powder) formulation of KL4 surfactant
intended to improve product ease of use for healthcare practitioners, eliminate
the need for cold-chain storage, and potentially further improve product
clinical performance. We are presently conducting preclinical studies
and plan to meet with U.S. and European regulatory authorities to present a
development program entailing the conduct of a single Phase 3 clinical trial for
global registration. We anticipate initiating a clinical program
after we have secured appropriate strategic alliances and necessary
capital.
16
Aerosurf®
Aerosurf
is KL4
surfactant in aerosolized form using our proprietary Capillary Aerosolization
Technology. Presently, surfactant treatment for neonatal RDS requires
administration through an endotracheal tube and, although life-saving, the
invasiveness of this method often results in serious respiratory conditions and
complications. Aerosurf, if approved, holds the promise to
significantly expand the use of KL4 surfactant
therapy by providing neonatologists with a novel means of administration without
invasive endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Pending
Surfaxin approval, we had curtailed significant investments in research,
engineering, device development and device manufacturing capabilities as well as
our next-generation capillary aerosolization system. However, we
continue to conduct certain developmental and preclinical activities to support
our regulatory package. We have met with and received guidance from
the FDA with respect to the design of our planned Phase 2 clinical
program. We expect to accelerate investment in our Capillary
Aerosolization Technology and potentially initiate a Phase 2 clinical program
after we have secured appropriate strategic alliances and necessary
capital.
Surfaxin® for the Prevention of
Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Premature Infants
In April
2009, we received a Complete Response Letter from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) with respect to our New Drug Application (NDA) for our
first product based on our novel KL4 surfactant
technology, Surfaxin®
(lucinactant) for the prevention of Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) in
premature infants. The letter focused primarily on our fetal rabbit
biological activity test (BAT), a quality control and stability release test and
one of the many analytical Quality Control tests for Surfaxin and our other
KL4
pipeline programs, including (a) whether preclinical data generated using
both a well-established preterm lamb model of RDS and the BAT had established to
the FDA’s satisfaction that Surfaxin drug product used in Phase 3 clinical
trials is comparable to the to-be-manufactured commercial drug product
(Comparability), and (b) whether the BAT can adequately distinguish change
in Surfaxin biological activity over time. The Complete Response
Letter also included, among other things, (i) a request to tighten one drug
product specification, which we can readily implement, (ii) routine requests to
update safety and other information in the NDA, and (iii) information
requests about certain regulatory matters. In addition, the FDA
indicated that it has approved the trade name Surfaxin. Following
receipt of the Complete Response Letter, we requested an “end-of-review” meeting
with the FDA, which occurred on June 2, 2009.
At the
June 2, 2009 meeting, we presented a compilation of previously-submitted data
from the preterm lamb model and BAT studies together with a comprehensive
statistical evaluation of that data (in the form of a comparative regression
analysis) that was intended to establish Comparability. The FDA
indicated that, instead of comparative regression analysis, it would require
that data generated from the preterm lamb model and BAT studies must
demonstrate, in a point-to-point analysis, the same relative changes in
respiratory compliance between both models over time. Taking this
newly-defined standard into account and the expected variability inherent in
animal models, we think it unlikely that we can establish Comparability with
existing preclinical data. The FDA suggested that, to demonstrate
Comparability and increase the likelihood of gaining Surfaxin approval, we could
consider conducting a limited clinical trial.
Also at
the June 2 meeting, we discussed our ongoing efforts to further refine the BAT
in accordance with our continuing quality improvement initiatives. We
believe that the BAT, as an ICH validated method, represents an acceptable
quality control test to assess biological activity and are continuing to employ
the BAT during the conduct of ongoing clinical trials addressing Acute
Respiratory Failure and Cystic Fibrosis, consistent with guidance from the FDA,
and plan to use the BAT in our pending clinical programs, Surfaxin LS and
Aerosurf for RDS.
On
September 29, 2009, we held a teleconference with the FDA to discuss our plans
to optimize the BAT, the design of a proposed limited clinical trial, and
whether conducting such a trial while simultaneously employing the optimized BAT
could potentially resolve the key remaining requirement for Surfaxin
approval. The FDA indicated that our proposed program to optimize and
validate the BAT is reasonable. The program is intended, among other things, to
confirm that the BAT can adequately distinguish change in Surfaxin biological
activity over time. Based on our discussions, we believe that we will
be able to optimize the BAT to the satisfaction of the FDA. We intend to
employ the optimized BAT in conjunction with all of our KL4 surfactant pipeline
programs, including the potential limited Surfaxin clinical
trial.
17
At the
September 2009 teleconference, we also discussed a limited clinical trial design
intended primarily to assess a pharmacodynamic (PD) response following Surfaxin
administration in preterm infants with RDS. This design was selected to
address FDA requirements for Surfaxin approval while limiting trial expense and
duration. The FDA indicated that a PD-based approach is consistent with
their expectation for a limited clinical trial and provided direction regarding
trial design specifics. However, the final clinical trial design,
from which we will be able to estimate expense and duration of the
trial, is subject to FDA review following submission of a formal
protocol. We have been collaborating with leading academic
neonatologists to finalize the protocol and anticipate submitting it to the
FDA in mid-fourth quarter 2009. Based on the FDA’s guidelines, we
expect that we may receive the FDA’s comments early in the first quarter
2010. When received, we will estimate the expected costs and duration
of the trial and, with existing and potential new partners, we will make a
strategic assessment as to the appropriate level and timing of any investment in
a potential limited clinical trial for Surfaxin for RDS.
Our
Other KL4 Surfactant
Programs
We
believe that our KL4 surfactant
technology also has the potential to address a range of other serious and
debilitating neonatal and pediatric indications, many of which represent
significant unmet medical needs, potentially redefining pediatric respiratory
medicine.
Acute Respiratory Failure
(ARF) and Acute Lung Injury (ALI)
ARF and
ALI are severe respiratory conditions associated with prolonged critical care
intervention, including mechanical ventilation. Both of these serious medical
conditions often entail surfactant dysfunction. Patient management
typically includes prolonged critical care intervention, including mechanical
ventilation. No medications are currently approved for these
debilitating conditions.
ARF
occurs after patients have been exposed to serious respiratory infections, such
as influenza (including the type A serotype referred to as H1N1) or respiratory
syncytial virus (RSV). Hospitalization following influenza or other
viral infection is associated with high mortality, morbidity and significant
healthcare cost.
We are
conducting a Phase 2 ARF clinical trial to determine whether Surfaxin improves
lung function and reduces duration of mechanical ventilation in children up to
two years of age diagnosed with ARF. Trial enrollment has been
conducted in the northern and southern hemispheres to track with viral season
peaks. As H1N1-influenza has reached pandemic levels, participating trial
centers have observed an escalating frequency of this specific diagnosis and
H1N1-confirmed patients have been enrolled in this trial. Presently,
enrollment is approximately 90% complete with full enrollment expected in the
first quarter of 2010 and top-line results becoming available shortly
thereafter.
ALI is
typically associated with severe respiratory infections, certain major
surgeries, and lung injury including mechanical ventilator induced lung
injury. Together with a leading academic center, we are presently
conducting a preclinical assessment to determine the potential utility of
aerosolized KL4 surfactant
in the prevention and treatment of ALI.
In
addition, hospitalization for influenza and other viral infections, including
the pandemic H1N1 virus, is associated with high mortality, morbidity and
significant healthcare cost. We believe that our KL4 surfactant
technology may provide a novel solution for patients that require critical care
intervention following exposure to viral pathogens. We have held
exploratory meetings with U.S. Government officials to explore whether funding
can be obtained to accelerate development of these programs in light of concerns
regarding pandemic risk. Although we believe that our KL4 technology
may represent a promising alternative, there can be no assurance that any such
program will be initiated or that any governmental funding will be
obtained.
18
We
believe that our KL4 surfactant
technology may, whether administered as a rescue therapy into the endotracheal
tube or as a less-invasive surfactant aerosol earlier in the course of
respiratory compromise to prevent the progression of disease, provide for a
series of novel solutions for patients that require critical care intervention
following exposure to viral pathogens. As of last week, separate from
typical seasonal influenza, the World Health Organization reported more than
440,000 confirmed H1N1 cases with more than 5,700 attributable deaths while
acknowledging that its reporting methodology underestimates true frequency. In
the United States to date, 45% of H1N1-related hospitalizations have occurred in
the pediatric population. Discovery Labs has met with U.S. Government officials
to explore whether funding can be obtained for programs to address respiratory
disease following exposure to viral pathogens.
Cystic
Fibrosis (CF)
CF is
characterized by a genetic mutation that results in the production of thick,
viscous mucus that is difficult to clear from the airways and typically leads to
life-threatening respiratory infections. Preclinical and exploratory
clinical studies suggest that therapeutic surfactants may improve lung function
by loosening mucus and making it easier to clear. Aerosolized KL4 surfactant
is being evaluated in an investigator-initiated Phase 2a clinical trial in CF
patients. The trial is being conducted at The University of North
Carolina and is funded primarily through a grant provided by the Cystic Fibrosis
Foundation. The trial has been designed to assess the safety,
tolerability and short-term effectiveness (via improvement in mucociliary
clearance) of aerosolized KL4 surfactant
in CF patients. The results from this trial are anticipated in the first half of
2010.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The
preparation of financial statements, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States, requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of 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. There have been no changes to our critical
accounting policies since December 31, 2008. For more information on
critical accounting policies, see our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. Readers
are encouraged to review these disclosures in conjunction with the review of
this Form 10-Q.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
The net
loss for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 was $7.2 million (or
$0.06 per share) and $24.1 million (or $0.22 per share),
respectively. The net loss for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008 were $10.6 million (or $0.11 per share) and $30.6 million (or
$0.31 per share), respectively.
Revenue
from Collaborative Arrangements and Grants
We did
not earn any revenue during the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009.
In March
2008, we restructured our strategic alliance agreement with Philip Morris USA
Inc. d/b/a Chrysalis Technologies (Chrysalis). See our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 – Note 12 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements. Under the modified agreement, Chrysalis agreed
to pay us $4.5 million to support future development of our Capillary
Aerosolization Technology, of which $2.0 million became payable upon execution
of the revised agreement in March 2008 and $2.5 million became payable upon
completion of a technology transfer to us in June 2008.
Research
and Development Expenses
Research
and development expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009
were $4.5 million and $15.2 million, respectively. Research and
development expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2008 were
$6.7 million and $21.4 million, respectively. These costs are charged
to operations as incurred and are tracked by category, as
follows:
19
( in thousands)
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
||||||||||||||
Research
and Development Expenses:
|
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||||
Manufacturing
development
|
$ | 2,638 | $ | 3,286 | $ | 8,898 | $ | 12,658 | ||||||||
Development
operations
|
915 | 1,910 | 3,717 | 5,900 | ||||||||||||
Direct
preclinical and clinical programs
|
977 | 1,528 | 2,574 | 2,837 | ||||||||||||
Total Research &
Development Expenses (1)
|
$ | 4,530 | $ | 6,724 | $ | 15,189 | $ | 21,395 |
|
(1)
|
Included
in research and development expenses are charges associated with
stock-based employee compensation in accordance with the provisions
of ASC Topic 718 (formerly FASB Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 123R). For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, these charges were $0.1 million and $0.5 million,
respectively. For the three and nine months ended September 30,
2008, these charges were $0.4 million and $1.1 million,
respectively.
|
The
decrease in research and development expenses for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2009 compared to the same periods in 2008 primarily
reflects:
Manufacturing
Development
Manufacturing
development includes: (i) manufacturing operations, quality assurance and
analytical chemistry capabilities to assure adequate production of clinical and
potential commercial drug supply for our KL4 surfactant
products, in conformance with current good manufacturing practices (cGMP) (these
costs include employee expenses, facility-related costs, depreciation, costs of
drug substances (including raw materials), supplies, quality control and
assurance activities and analytical services, etc.); (ii) design and
development for the manufacture of our novel capillary aerosolization systems,
including an aerosol generating device, the disposable dose delivery packets and
patient interface system necessary to administer Aerosurf for our anticipated
Phase 2 clinical trials; and (iii) pharmaceutical development activities,
including development of a lyophilized formulation of our KL4
surfactant.
The
decrease in manufacturing development expenses of approximately $0.6 million and
$3.8 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,
respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2008, is primarily due to:
(i) expenditures in 2008 to support our quality assurance and analytical
chemistry capabilities, including implementation and validation of analytical
methods and quality testing of drug product for our development programs;
(ii) expenditures in 2008 for the design, development and manufacture of
the initial prototype version of our novel capillary aerosolization systems to
be used in our anticipated Phase 2 clinical trials; and (iii) a reduction
in expenditures in 2009 related to our efforts to conserve financial resources
while we focused on potentially gaining regulatory approval for Surfaxin in the
United States and as we pursue strategic and financial alternatives to secure
necessary capital to further advance our KL4
respiratory pipeline programs.
Manufacturing
development expenses included charges associated with stock-based employee
compensation in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 718. For the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2009, these charges were $44,000 and $0.3
million, respectively. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008, these charges were $0.2 million and $0.6 million,
respectively.
Development
Operations
Development
operations includes scientific, clinical, regulatory, and data
management/biostatistics capabilities for the execution of our product
development programs, as well as medical affairs activities to provide
scientific and medical education support to the pediatric community
regarding our KL4 surfactant
technology pipeline programs. These costs include personnel,
specialized consultants, outside services to support regulatory and data
management activities, symposiums at key neonatal medical meetings,
facilities-related costs, and other costs for the management of clinical
trials.
20
The
decrease in development operations expenses of approximately $1.0 million and
$2.2 million, respectively, for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, as compared to the same period in 2008, is primarily due to
(i) expenditures in the first half of 2008 associated with our medical
affairs capabilities, including medical science liaisons and symposiums at key
pediatric medical meetings in anticipation of the potential approval and
commercial launch of Surfaxin in May 2008; and (ii) a reduction in expenditures
in 2009 related to our efforts to conserve financial resources while we focused
on potentially gaining regulatory approval for Surfaxin in the United States and
as we pursue strategic and financial alternatives to secure necessary capital to
further advance our KL4
respiratory pipeline programs.
Development
operations expenses included charges associated with stock-based employee
compensation in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 718. For
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, these charges were $40,000
and $0.2 million, respectively. For the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2008, these charges were $0.2 million and $0.5 million,
respectively.
Direct Preclinical and
Clinical Programs
Direct
preclinical and clinical programs include: (i) preclinical activities, including
toxicology studies and other preclinical studies to obtain data to support
potential Investigational New Drug (IND) and NDA filings for our product
candidates; and (ii) activities associated with conducting human clinical
trials, including patient enrollment costs, external site costs, clinical drug
supply and related external costs such as contract research consultant fees and
expenses.
Direct
preclinical and clinical programs expenses for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009 primarily included: (i) activities associated with the
ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials of Surfaxin for children with Acute Respiratory
Failure (ARF) as well as clinical drug supply for the ongoing
investigator-initiated trial for Cystic Fibrosis; (ii) preclinical activities
and product characterization testing of our lyophilized form of Surfaxin; and
(iii) preclinical and preparatory activities for anticipated Phase 2 clinical
trials for Aerosurf for RDS in premature infants.
Direct
preclinical and clinical programs expenses for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008 primarily included: (i) activities associated with the
Phase 2 clinical trial of Surfaxin for children with ARF; and
(ii) preclinical activities for our Aerosurf program.
In an
effort to conserve our financial resources, we plan to continue limiting
investments in preclinical and clinical programs until we have secured
appropriate strategic alliances and necessary capital. Where
appropriate, we plan to meet with U.S. and European regulatory authorities to
discuss the requirements for our regulatory packages, including potential trial
design requirements, to prepare for our planned clinical trials.
General
and Administrative Expenses
General
and administrative expenses consist primarily of the costs of executive
management, business and commercial development, finance and accounting,
intellectual property and legal, human resources, information technology,
facility and other administrative costs.
General
and administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009 were $2.4 million and $8.1 million, respectively. General
and administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2008 were $3.7 million and $13.3 million, respectively. Additionally,
general and administrative expenses included charges associated with stock-based
employee compensation in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 718. For the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2009, these charges were $0.3 million and
$1.7 million, respectively. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008, these charges were $0.8 million and $2.3 million,
respectively.
The
decrease of approximately $1.3 million and $5.2 million in general and
administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,
respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2008, is primarily due to
pre-launch commercial activities in the first half of 2008 in anticipation of
the potential approval and commercial launch of Surfaxin in May
2008. Following receipt of an Approvable Letter in May 2008, we
scaled back our pre-launch commercial activities. Throughout the
remainder of 2008 and the first half of 2009, we made only limited our
investment in our commercial capabilities while we focused on potentially
gaining regulatory approval for Surfaxin in the United States. Since
receiving a Complete Response Letter for Surfaxin in April 2009, we have revised
our business strategy (see “Commercial Strategy and Cost Containment Measures”,
below) and have further curtailed investment in commercial
capabilities.
21
Commercial
Strategy and Cost Containment Measures
Rather
than incur the significant expense to establish our own specialty pulmonary
commercial organization, we are now seeking to reduce our financial burden by
entering into strategic alliances in all markets, including the United States,
to support our research and development programs and, if approved, to
commercialize our products. Although we are presently actively
engaged in discussions with potential strategic and financial partners, there
can be no assurance that any strategic alliance or other financing transaction
will be successfully concluded. Until such time as we secure an
alliance or complete another financing alternative, we continue to conserve our
financial resources by predominantly limiting investments in our pipeline
programs.
In
addition, following receipt in April 2009 of a Complete Response Letter for
Surfaxin, to conserve our cash resources, we implemented cost containment
measures and reduced our workforce from 115 to 91 employees. The
workforce reduction was focused primarily in our commercial and corporate
administrative groups. We incurred a one-time charge of $0.6 million
($0.4 million in general and administrative expenses and $0.2 million in
research and development expenses) in the quarter ending June 30, 2009 related
to the workforce reduction.
Other
Income and (Expense)
Other
income and (expense) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 were
$(0.2) million and $(0.8) million, respectively. Other income and
(expense) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2008 were $(0.2)
million and $(0.5) million, respectively.
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Three months ended
|
Nine months ended
|
||||||||||||||
September 30,
|
September 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Interest
income
|
$ | 8 | $ | 142 | $ | 29 | $ | 795 | ||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(252 | ) | (380 | ) | (834 | ) | (1,264 | ) | ||||||||
Other
income / (expense)
|
- | (1 | ) | - | 3 | |||||||||||
Other
income / (expense), net
|
$ | (244 | ) | $ | (239 | ) | $ | (805 | ) | $ | (466 | ) |
Interest
income consists of interest earned on our cash and marketable
securities. During the second half of 2008, we transferred most of
our cash and marketable securities into a treasury-based money market fund to
ensure preservation of capital. The decrease in interest income in
2009 is primarily due to a significant decline in the interest rate for this
fund, consistent with overall market trends. Our earned interest
rates have declined from approximately 1.64% in the first three quarters of 2008
to approximately 0.03% for the first three quarters of
2009. Additionally, our average cash and marketable securities
balance declined from $35.5 million for the first three quarters of 2008 to
$20.1 million for the first three quarters of 2009.
Interest
expense consists of interest accrued on the outstanding balance of our loan with
Novaquest and under our equipment financing facilities. In addition,
interest expense includes expenses associated with the amortization of deferred
financing costs for warrants issued to Novaquest in October 2006 as
consideration for a restructuring of our loan in 2006. The decrease
in interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 as
compared to the same periods for 2008 is due to a decline in the variable
interest rate on our Novaquest loan and a reduction in the outstanding principal
balances on our equipment loans.
22
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
We have
incurred substantial losses since inception due to investments in research and
development, manufacturing and potential commercialization activities and we
expect to continue to incur substantial losses over the next several
years. Historically, we have funded our business operations through
various sources, including public and private securities offerings, financings
under our Committed Equity Financing Facilities (CEFFs), capital equipment and
debt facilities, and strategic alliances. We expect to continue to
fund our business operations through a combination of these
sources. We continue to assess various strategic and financial
alternatives to secure necessary capital and advance our KL4
respiratory pipeline programs to maximize shareholder
value. Although we are presently actively engaged in discussions with
several potential strategic partners and financial investors, there can be no
assurance that any such strategic alliance or other financing transaction will
be successfully concluded.
As of
September 30, 2009, we had $10.4 million outstanding under our loan with
Novaquest. The outstanding principal and all accrued interest on this loan
is due and payable on April 30, 2010. Our plans include pursuing a
potential restructuring of this loan, as well as assessing alternative means of
financing its payment, although there can be no assurance that we will be
successful in these efforts.
Our
future capital requirements depend upon many factors, including the success of
our efforts to secure one or more strategic alliances to support our product
development activities and commercialization plans, and the
ultimate success of our product development and commercialization
plans. We are currently focused on developing our lead KL4 surfactant
products, Surfaxin LS, Aerosurf and Surfaxin, to address the most significant
respiratory conditions affecting pediatric populations. However,
there can be no assurance that we will be able to secure strategic partners to
support and advise our activities, that our research and development projects
will be successful, that products developed will obtain necessary regulatory
approval, that any approved product will be commercially viable, that any CEFF
will be available for future financings, or that we will be able to obtain
additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. In
addition to multiple strategic alternatives, we continue to consider potential
additional financings and other similar opportunities to meet our capital
requirements and continue our operations. Even if we succeed in
raising additional capital and developing and subsequently commercializing
product candidates, we may never achieve sufficient sales revenue to achieve or
maintain profitability.
As of
September 30, 2009, we had cash and cash equivalents of $17.7
million. Also as of September 30, 2009, under our two CEFFs, we may
potentially raise (subject to certain conditions, including minimum stock price
and volume limitations) up to an aggregate of $73.8 million. In May 2009,
we completed a registered direct public offering resulting in gross proceeds of
$11.3 million ($10.5 million net). Through September 30, 2009 we
raised an aggregate of $6.6 million from seven draw-downs under our CEFFs in
2009. In October 2009, we raised an additional $4.3 million from
three draw-downs under our CEFFs. However, as of November 4, 2009,
the May 2008 CEFF was unavailable because our stock price was below the minimum
price required to utilize it. See “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations –
Liquidity and Capital Resources – Committed Equity Financing Facilities, and “–
Financings Pursuant to Common Stock Offerings.”
Until we
are able to secure a strategic alliance or complete a financing transaction to
generate required capital, we continue to conserve our financial resources by
predominantly limiting investments in our pipeline programs. We also
initiated a workforce reduction in the second quarter 2009 (see, “Management’s Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Results of
Operations – Commercial Strategy and Cost Containment
Measures”.)
23
The
accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements have been
prepared assuming that we will continue as a going concern, which contemplates
the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course
of business. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent
on our ability to raise additional capital, to fund our research and development
and commercial programs and meet our obligations on a timely
basis. If we are unable to successfully raise sufficient additional
capital, through strategic and collaborative ventures with potential partners
and/or future debt and equity financings, we will likely not have
sufficient cash flows and liquidity to fund our business operations, which could
significantly limit our ability to continue as a going concern. In
addition, as of September 30, 2009, we have authorized capital available for
issuance (and not otherwise reserved) of approximately 500,000 shares of common
stock. In our 2009 proxy statement filed with the SEC on October 19,
2009 we presented to our stockholders, for approval at our Annual Meeting of
Stockholders on December 7, 2009, a proposal to increase the number of our
authorized shares of Common Stock available for issuance by 200 million shares
from 180 million to 380 million. If this proposal is not approved, we
may be unable to undertake additional financings without first seeking
stockholder approval, a process that would require a special meeting of
stockholders, is time-consuming and expensive and could impair our ability to
efficiently raise capital when needed, if at all. In that case, we
may be forced to further limit development of many, if not all, of our
programs. If we are unable to raise the necessary capital, we may be
forced to curtail all of our activities and, ultimately, potentially cease
operations. Even if we are able to raise additional capital, such
financings may only be available on unattractive terms, or could result in
significant dilution of stockholders’ interests and, in such event, the market
price of our common stock may decline. Our balance sheet does not
include any adjustments relating to recoverability and classification of
recorded asset amounts or the amounts and classification of liabilities that
might be necessary should we be unable to continue in existence.
Cash
Flows
As of
September 30, 2009, we had cash and cash equivalents of $17.7 million compared
to $24.8 million as of December 31, 2008, a decrease of $7.1
million. The decrease is primarily due to $21.4 million used for
operating activities and $2.3 million used for debt service, offset by net
proceeds of $10.5 million received from the May 2009 financing from the issuance
of 14.0 million shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase seven
million shares of common stock, and $6.1 million received from the issuance of
6.2 million shares of common stock pursuant to financings under our
CEFFs.
Cash Flows Used in Operating
Activities
Cash
flows used in operating activities were $21.4 million and $23.9 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Our cash
flows used in operating activities are a result of our net operating losses
adjusted for non-cash items associated with stock-based compensation,
depreciation and changes in our accounts payable, accrued liabilities and
receivables.
Cash Flows from/(used in)
Investing Activities
Cash
flows from/(used in) investing activities included purchases of equipment of
$0.1 million and $0.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, respectively.
Cash
flows from investing activities also include cash used to purchase short-term
marketable securities and cash received from the sale and/or maturity of
short-term marketable securities. When assessing our cash position
and managing our liquidity and capital resources, we do not consider cash flows
between cash and marketable securities to be meaningful. Cash used to
purchase marketable securities is subject to an investment policy that is
approved by the Board of Directors and provides for the purchase of high-quality
marketable securities, while ensuring preservation of capital and fulfillment of
liquidity needs.
Cash Flows from/(used in)
Financing Activities
Cash
flows from financing activities were $14.2 million and $3.0 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Cash
flows from financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2009
included net proceeds of $10.5 million from the May 2009 registered direct
offering and $6.1 million from financings pursuant to our CEFFs, offset by
principal payments on our equipment loan facilities of $2.3
million. Cash flows used in financing activities for the nine months
ended September 30, 2008 included $4.2 million from financings pursuant to our
CEFF, $0.9 million of proceeds from our equipment financing facilities, offset
by $2.1 million of debt service payments under our equipment
loan.
24
Committed
Equity Financing Facilities (CEFFs)
As of
September 30, 2009, we had two CEFFs that we entered into on December 12, 2008
(December 2008 CEFF) and May 22, 2008 (May 2008 CEFF) that allow us to raise
capital for a period of two years ending February 6, 2011 and three years ending
June 18, 2011, respectively, at the time and in amounts deemed
suitable to us. A third CEFF expired on May 12,
2009. However, as of November 4, 2009, the May 2008 CEFF was
unavailable because our stock price was below the minimum price required to
utilize it.
Under the
December 2008 CEFF, as of September 30, 2009, we had 11.1 million shares
potentially available for issuance (up to a maximum of $21.4 million), provided
that the volume weighted-average price of our common stock on each trading day
(VWAP) must be at least equal to the greater of (i) $.60 or (ii) 90% of the
closing price of our common stock on the trading day immediately preceding the
draw down period (Minimum VWAP). Under the May 2008 CEFF, as of
September 30, 2009, we had approximately 13.3 million shares potentially
available for issuance (up to a maximum of $52.3 million), provided that the
VWAP on each trading day must be at least the greater of $1.15 or the Minimum
VWAP. Use of each CEFF is subject to certain other covenants and
conditions, including aggregate share and dollar limitations for each draw
down. See
our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 –
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources – Committed Equity Financing
Facility (CEFF)”). We anticipate using our CEFFs (at such times our
stock price is at a level above the CEFF minimum price requirement) to support
our working capital needs and maintain cash availability into 2010.
CEFF
Financings
On
January 2, 2009, we completed a financing that was initiated in 2008 under the
May 2008 CEFF, resulting in gross proceeds of $0.5 million from the issuance of
478,783 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $1.04.
On
January 16, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $0.4 million from the issuance of 419,065 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.04.
On
February 18, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the issuance of 857,356 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.17.
On March
31, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in gross
proceeds of approximately $1.1 million from the issuance of 1,015,127 shares of
our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable discount,
of $1.08.
On April
8, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the issuance of 806,457 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.24.
On May 7,
2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF resulting in gross
proceeds of approximately $1.0 million from the issuance of 1,272,917 shares of
our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable discount,
of $0.79.
On
September 23, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.6 million from the issuance of
1,793,258 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.88.
On
October 13, 2009, we completed a financing under the May 2008 CEFF resulting in
gross proceeds of approximately $0.6 million from the issuance of 558,689 shares
of our common stock at an average price per share, after the applicable
discount, of $1.09.
25
On
October 13, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.8 million from the issuance of
1,908,956 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.94.
On
October 21, 2009, we completed a financing under the December 2008 CEFF
resulting in gross proceeds of approximately $1.9 million from the issuance of
2,100,790 shares of our common stock at an average price per share, after the
applicable discount, of $0.90.
Financings
Pursuant to Common Stock Offerings
Historically,
we have funded, and expect that we may continue to fund, our business operations
through various sources, including financings in the form of common stock
offerings. In June 2008, we filed a universal shelf registration
statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-151654) (2008 Universal Shelf) with the SEC for
the proposed offering from time to time of up to $150 million of our securities,
including common stock, preferred stock, varying forms of debt and warrant
securities, or any combination of the foregoing, on terms and conditions that
will be determined at that time.
Financing under the 2008
Universal Shelf
On May
13, 2009, we completed a registered direct public offering that resulted in
gross proceeds of $11.3 million ($10.5 million net proceeds) from the issuance
of 14.0 million shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase
seven million shares of common stock. The shares were sold to
select institutional investors at a price of $0.81 for each share of common
stock, together with a related warrant to purchase 0.5 shares of common
stock. The warrants are exercisable for a period of five years at an
exercise price of $1.15 per share. Lazard Capital Markets LLC acted
as the exclusive placement agent for the offering and received a fee of 6% of
the gross proceeds of the offering and reimbursement of certain expenses
incurred by it in connection with the offering. Under the Placement
Agent Agreement, we agreed not to draw down on our CEFFs for a period of 30 days
after the offering, and, for the 60 days following that date, agreed to an
aggregate draw down limit of 2% of our outstanding common stock, and also agreed
not to sell, for a period of 90 days following the entry into the definitive
agreements, any of our common stock other than in connection with the offering,
pursuant to employee benefit plans, or in connection with strategic alliances
involving us and a strategic partner. In addition, each of our
directors and select executive officers agreed to 90 day lock-up provisions with
regard to future sales of our common stock, which expired on August 16,
2009. The common stock issued and issuable by exercise of the
warrants in connection with this offering is covered by the 2008 Universal
Shelf.
As of
September 30, 2009, there was $138.7 million remaining available under the 2008
Universal Shelf for potential future offerings.
Debt
Historically,
we have, and expect to continue to, fund our business operations through various
sources, including debt arrangements such as credit facilities and equipment
financing facilities.
Loan with Novaquest (formerly
PharmaBio Development Inc.), a strategic investment group of Quintiles
Transnational Corp.
We have a
loan with Novaquest that is due and payable on April 30, 2010, together with
interest since October 1, 2006, accrued at the prime rate, compounded
annually. See our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 – “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and
Capital Resources – Debt – Loan with PharmaBio.” We may repay the
loan, in whole or in part, at any time without prepayment penalty or
premium. Our obligations to Novaquest are secured by a security
interest in substantially all of our assets, subject to limited exceptions set
forth in the security agreement. As of September 30, 2009, the
outstanding balance under the loan was $10.4 million ($8.5 million of
pre-restructured principal and $1.9 million of accrued interest) and was
classified as a short-term loan payable (current liability) on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets. Our plans include pursuing a potential strategic
restructuring of this loan, as well as assessing alternative means of financing
its payment, although there can be no assurance that we will be successful in
these efforts.
26
Equipment Financing
Facilities
In May
2007, we entered into a Credit and Security Agreement with GE Business Financial
Services Inc. (GE, formerly Merrill Lynch Business Financial Services Inc.),
pursuant to which GE agreed to provide us a $12.5 million facility (Facility) to
fund our capital programs. The right to draw under this Facility
expired on November 30, 2008. See our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 – “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and
Capital Resources – Debt – Equipment Financing Facilities.” As of
September 30, 2009, approximately $0.8 million was outstanding under the
facility ($0.6 million classified as current liabilities and $0.2 million as
long-term liabilities).
Contractual Obligations and
Commitments
During
the nine-month period ended September 30, 2009, there were no material changes
to our contractual obligations and commitments disclosures as set forth in our
most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources
– Contractual Obligations”, except as noted below.
Effective
August 13, 2009, Dr. Robert J. Capetola resigned his positions as our President
and Chief Executive Officer and as a member of our Board of Directors
(Board). The Board elected Mr. W. Thomas Amick, Chairman of the
Board, to serve as Chief Executive Officer on an interim basis. We
entered into a separation agreement and general release (Separation Agreement)
with Dr. Capetola providing for (i) an upfront severance payment of $250,000,
and (ii) periodic payments in an amount equal to his base salary (calculated at
a rate of $490,000 per annum), in accordance with our payroll practices and less
required withholdings. The periodic payments will end the earlier of
(x) May 3, 2010 or (y) the date, if ever, that a Corporate Transaction (as
defined below) occurs. In addition, Dr. Capetola will be entitled to
(A) continuation of medical benefits and insurance coverage for a period of 24
or 27 months, depending upon circumstances, and (B) accelerated vesting of all
outstanding restricted shares and options, which shall remain exercisable to the
end of their stated terms. The Separation Agreement provides further
that, upon the occurrence of a Corporate Transaction prior to May 4, 2010, Dr.
Capetola will receive a payment of up to $1,580,000 or, if any such Corporate
Transaction also constitutes a Change of Control (as such term is defined in the
Separation Agreement), a payment of up to $1,777,500; provided, however, that,
in each case, any such payment will be reduced by the sum of the amounts
described in clauses (i) and (ii) of this paragraph that theretofore have been
paid. A “Corporate Transaction” is defined in the Separation
Agreement as (1) one or more corporate partnering or strategic alliance
transactions, Business Combinations or public or private financings that (A) are
completed during the Severance Period (as defined in the Separation Agreement)
and (B) result in cash proceeds (net of transaction costs) to the Company of at
least $20 million received during the Severance Period or within 90 calendar
days thereafter, or (2) an acquisition of the Company, by business combination
or other similar transaction, that occurs during the Severance Period and the
consideration paid to stockholders of the Company, in cash or securities, is at
least $20 million. For this purpose, net proceeds will be calculated
without taking into account any amounts received by the Company as reimbursement
for costs of development and research activities to be performed in connection
with any such transaction.
In
connection with his appointment as interim Chief Executive Officer, we entered
into an agreement (the CEO Agreement) pursuant to which Mr. Amick will be paid
at a per diem rate of $3,000. In addition, on September 3, 2009, in
accordance with the CEO Agreement, the Compensation Committee of our Board
authorized a grant of options to Mr. Amick to purchase 60,000 shares of common
stock of the Company under our 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Plan) at an
exercise price of $0.49 per share, the closing market price of our
common stock on the date of grant. The option grant, in part,
replaces an automatic grant of options to purchase 30,000 shares of our common
stock that Mr. Amick would have received under the Plan as a non-executive
Chairman of the Board. The options will vest in full on the first
anniversary date of the grant.
27
ITEM
3.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
Our
exposure to market risk is confined to our cash, cash equivalents and available
for sale securities. We place our investments with high quality
issuers and, by policy, limit the amount of credit exposure to any one
issuer. We currently do not hedge interest rate or currency exchange
exposure. We classify highly liquid investments purchased with a
maturity of three months or less as “cash equivalents” and commercial paper and
fixed income mutual funds as “available for sale securities.” Fixed
income securities may have their fair market value adversely affected due to a
rise in interest rates and we may suffer losses in principal if forced to sell
securities that have declined in market value due to a change in interest
rates.
ITEM
4.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
Evaluation of disclosure
controls and procedures
Our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
does not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal control over
financial reporting will prevent all error and all fraud. A control
system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable,
not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be
met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact
that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be
considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent
limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide
absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any,
within the company have been detected. These inherent limitations
include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that
breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can
also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two
or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design
of any system of controls is based in part on certain assumptions about the
likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future
conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies
or procedures. Because of the inherent limitations in a
cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and
not be detected. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls
and procedures, our management recognized that any controls and procedures, no
matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of
achieving the desired control objectives and our management necessarily was
required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of
possible controls and procedures.
Our Chief
Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer have evaluated the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and Rule 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act)
as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and our
Chief Financial Officer concluded that as of the end of the period covered by
this report our disclosure controls and procedures were effective in their
design to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports
that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized
and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and
forms.
Changes in internal
controls
There
were no changes in internal controls over financial reporting or other factors
that could materially affect those controls subsequent to the date of our
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.
PART
II – OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM
1.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
We are
not aware of any pending or threatened legal actions that would, if determined
adversely to us, have a material adverse effect on our business and
operations.
28
We have
from time to time been involved in disputes and proceedings arising in the
ordinary course of business, including in connection with the conduct of our
clinical trials. In addition, as a public company, we are also
potentially susceptible to litigation, such as claims asserting violations of
securities laws. Any such claims, with or without merit, if not
resolved, could be time-consuming and result in costly
litigation. There can be no assurance that an adverse result in any
future proceeding would not have a potentially material adverse effect on our
business, results of operations and financial condition.
ITEM
1A.
|
RISK
FACTORS
|
In
addition to the risks, uncertainties and other factors set forth below and
elsewhere in this Form 10-Q, see the “Risk Factors”
section contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2008.
Our
pending NDA for Surfaxin for the prevention of RDS in premature infants may not
be approved by the FDA in a timely manner, or at all, which would prevent our
commercializing this product in the United States.
Receipt
of the Complete Response Letter in April 2009 has further delayed the FDA’s
review of our NDA for Surfaxin for the prevention of RDS in premature
infants. See
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial condition and Results of
Operations – Research and Development Update – KL4 Surfactant
Pipeline Programs
–
Programs Addressing Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) – Surfaxin® for the
Prevention of Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Premature Infants.” In
its letter, the FDA focused primarily on certain aspects of a Surfaxin fetal
rabbit biological activity test (BAT). At an “end of review” meeting
with the FDA that occurred on June 2, 2009, we presented a comprehensive
statistical evaluation of data from preterm lamb model and BAT studies (in
the form of a comparative regression analysis) that we believed were sufficient
to respond to the FDA’s requirements. However, the FDA indicated
that, instead of accepting our comparative regression analysis, it would require
that data generated from the preterm lamb model and BAT studies must
demonstrate, in a point-to-point analysis, the same relative changes in
respiratory compliance between both models over time. Taking this
newly-defined standard into account and the expected variability inherent in
animal models, we think it unlikely that we can resolve the remaining
requirements for Surfaxin approval with existing preclinical
data. The FDA suggested that, to increase the likelihood of gaining
Surfaxin approval, we could consider conducting a limited clinical
trial.
In
September 2009, we held a teleconference with the FDA to discuss our plans to
optimize the BAT, the design of a proposed limited clinical trial, and whether
conducting such a trial while simultaneously employing the optimized BAT could
potentially resolve the key remaining requirement for Surfaxin
approval. Based on our discussions, we believe that we will be able
to optimize the BAT to the satisfaction of the FDA. However, if we
fail to satisfy the FDA’s concerns, this could potentially have a material
adverse effect on our business and could delay all of our KL4 surfactant
pipeline development programs, including any potential limited Surfaxin clinical
trial.
At the
September 2009 teleconference, we also discussed a limited clinical trial design
intended primarily to assess a pharmacodynamic (PD) response following Surfaxin
administration in preterm infants with RDS. The FDA indicated that a
PD-based approach is consistent with their expectation for a limited clinical
trial and provided direction regarding trial design
specifics. However, the final clinical trial design, from which we
will be able to estimate expense and duration of the trial, is subject to
FDA review following submission of a formal protocol. We have been
collaborating with leading academic neonatologists to finalize the
protocol and anticipate submitting it to the FDA in mid-fourth quarter
2009. After the trial design is finalized, we will be able to
estimate the expected costs and duration of the trial and, with existing and
potential new partners, make a strategic assessment as to the appropriate level
and timing of any investment in a potential limited clinical trial for Surfaxin
for RDS. Even if we determine to proceed with such a trial,
ultimately, the FDA may not approve Surfaxin for RDS in premature
infants. Any failure to secure FDA approval or further delay
associated with the FDA’s review process would have a material adverse effect on
our business.
29
The
April 2009 Complete Response Letter and the resulting delay in our gaining
approval of Surfaxin have caused us to make fundamental changes in our business
strategy and take additional steps to conserve our financial resources, which
may subject us to unanticipated risks and uncertainties.
Following
receipt of the Complete Response Letter from the FDA, to conserve our cash
resources, we implemented cost containment measures and reduced our workforce
from 115 to 91 employees. The workforce reduction was focused
primarily in our commercial and corporate administrative groups and is expected
to result in annual savings of approximately $2.6 million. We
incurred a one-time charge of $0.6 million in the second quarter ending June 30,
2009 related to the workforce reduction.
In light
of our interactions with the FDA concerning Surfaxin and the resulting delay, we
have made fundamental changes in our business strategy. To secure
capital and advance our KL4 surfactant
pipeline programs, we are seeking to reduce our financial burden by entering
into strategic alliances in all markets, including, the United
States. We are now seeking alliances that potentially provide
non-dilutive capital in the form of upfront payments, milestone payments,
commercialization royalties and a sharing of research and development expenses,
and that leverage the individual expertise and capabilities of the
parties. In addition to multiple strategic alternatives, we are also
considering potential additional financings and other similar opportunities to
meet our capital requirements, including potentially satisfying our loan with
Novaquest, and continue our operations. As we continue to manage our
cash resources and work towards securing potential strategic alliances, we are
curtailing our investment in research and development programs, which will
likely cause us to experience additional delays. While we remain
reasonably confident that we can achieve our goals, our timelines may be
extended. Also, as we reassess our regulatory position and financial
resources, at any time we may implement additional and potentially
significant changes to our development plans and our operations as we seek to
strengthen our financial and operational position. Such changes, if
adopted, could prove to be disruptive and detrimental to our development
programs.
Our revised business plan, if
successful, will cause us to be dependent upon strategic partners to fund and
support our research and development initiatives and for the marketing and sales
of our drug and drug-device combination products for neonatal and pediatric
applications, both in
the United States and in international markets, which will subject us to risks
and uncertainties.
Before we
received the Complete Response Letter for Surfaxin, we had planned to develop by
ourselves our KL4 surfactant
pipeline for neonatal and pediatric applications in the United States and, if
approved, launch our products in the U. S. using our own fully-integrated
pediatric franchise with our own specialty pulmonary commercial organization in
the United States. Our plans also included launching our products
outside the U.S. through strategic partnerships. We have now revised
this strategy and are seeking strategic alliances in all markets, including the
United States. If we are able to secure such strategic alliances, our
ability to execute our current operating plan will be dependent on numerous
factors, including, the performance of third-party strategic partners and
collaborators with whom we may contract. Under such arrangements, our
partners may control key decisions relating to the development of our
products. The rights of our partners would limit our flexibility in
considering development strategies and in the alternatives for the
commercialization of our products. If we are successful in entering
into strategic alliance agreements, if we breach or terminate the agreements
that make up these arrangements or if our strategic partners otherwise fail to
conduct their activities in a timely manner or if there is a dispute about their
respective obligations, we may need to seek other partners or we may have to
develop our own internal sales and marketing capability to commercialize our
products in the United States. If we fail to successfully develop
these relationships or if our partners fail to successfully develop or
commercialize any of our products, it may delay or prevent us from developing or
commercializing our products in a competitive and timely manner and would have a
material adverse effect on the commercialization of our products.
In
addition, as we no longer plan to build our own sales and marketing organization
in the United States, we will be dependent upon strategic partners for the
marketing and sales of our KL4 surfactant
products for neonatal and pediatric applications. If we are
unable to identify strategic partners or do not succeed in entering into these
agreements, or if we or our strategic partners and collaborators do not perform
under such agreements, it would have a material adverse effect on our ability to
commercialize our products. In addition, if we do not succeed in
securing marketing and sales capabilities, the commercial launch of our products
in the United States may be delayed.
30
In
light of the change in our business strategy, the delay in potentially gaining
approval for Surfaxin, and our decision to focus on our KL4 surfactant
pipeline, initially Surfaxin LS™ and Aerosurf®, we will
require significant additional capital to continue our planned research and
development activities and continue to operate as a going concern.
Moreover, such additional financing could result in equity
dilution.
Until
such time as we are able to commercialize any of our lead products, if
approved, and generate revenues, we will need substantial additional funding to
conduct our ongoing research and product development activities and continue to
operate as a going concern. Our operating plans require that we make
prudent investments in preclinical studies and our drug product and device
development programs, and focus our resources on being in a position to initiate
key clinical programs only after we have secured appropriate strategic alliances
and necessary capital. Accordingly, as we attempt to conserve our
resources during this period, we may experience additional delays in certain of
our development programs. If we are unable to raise substantial
additional funds through strategic alliances or, in the alternative,
future debt and equity financings, we may be forced to further limit many,
if not all, of our programs, which could have a material adverse impact on our
business plan.
Our
consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that we will
continue as a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and
satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. Our
ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on our ability to raise
additional capital, to fund our research and development and commercial programs
and meet our obligations on a timely basis. If we are unable to
successfully raise sufficient additional capital, through strategic alliances
and other financing alternatives, with potential partners and/or
future debt and equity financings, we will likely not have sufficient cash
flow and liquidity to fund our business operations, which could significantly
limit our ability to continue as a going concern. In addition, as of
September 30, 2009, we have authorized capital available for issuance (and not
otherwise reserved) of approximately 500,000 shares of common
stock. In our 2009 proxy statement filed with the SEC on
October 19, 2009 we presented to our stockholders, for approval at our Annual
Meeting of Stockholders on December 7, 2009, a proposal to increase the number
of our authorized shares of Common Stock available for issuance by 200 million
shares from 180 million to 380 million. If this proposal is not
approved, we may be unable to undertake additional financings without first
seeking stockholder approval, a process that would require a special meeting of
stockholders, is time-consuming and expensive and could impair our ability to
efficiently raise capital when needed, if at all. In that case, we
may be forced to further limit development of many, if not all, of our
programs. If we are unable to raise the necessary capital, we may be
forced to curtail all of our activities and, ultimately, potentially cease
operations. Even if we are able to raise additional capital, such
financings may only be available on unattractive terms, or could result in
significant dilution of stockholders’ interests and, in such event, the market
price of our common stock may decline.
In
addition, the ongoing credit environment and related instability in the global
financial system may have an impact on our business and our financial
condition. We may face significant challenges if conditions in the
financial markets do not significantly improve, including an inability to access
the capital markets at a time when we would like or require, and an increased
cost of capital. Except for our CEFFs, we currently do not have
arrangements to obtain additional financing. Any such financing could be
difficult to obtain, only available on unattractive terms or could result in
significant dilution of stockholders’ interests and, in such event, the market
price of our common stock may decline. Furthermore, if the market price of
our common stock were to decline, we could cease to meet the financial
requirements to maintain the listing of our common stock on The Nasdaq Global
Market. In addition, failure to secure any necessary financing in a
timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our
business plan, financial performance and stock price and could require the delay
of new product development and clinical trial plans.
In
addition to multiple strategic alternatives, we continue to consider potential
additional financings and other similar opportunities to meet our capital
requirements, including potentially satisfying our loan with Novaquest, and
continue our operations. Although we are hopeful that we can achieve
one or more strategic alliances in our key target markets, there can be no
assurance that any such strategic alliance or any alternative financing to will
be achieved.
Our
common stock has not traded consistently at a price above $1.00 per
share, which subjects us to the risk of failing to comply with the Nasdaq Stock
Market LLC (Nasdaq) listing requirement. If our stock were no longer
listed on Nasdaq, the liquidity of our securities would be impaired, which would
likely cause our stock price to decline.
31
Following
a temporary suspension of its minimum price per-share listing requirement,
Nasdaq has reinstated its listing requirement that a company’s stock must trade
at a minimum price of $1.00 per share. If the closing price of our
common stock closes below $1.00 for 30 consecutive business days at any time, we
will receive a deficiency notice from Nasdaq. We understand that
Nasdaq will then allow a 180-day period during which we can regain compliance by
meeting the $1.00 minimum bid price standard for at least 10 consecutive
business days. If we fail to regain compliance prior to the
expiration of the 180-day period, assuming that we are in compliance with all of
the other applicable standards for initial listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market,
under current rules, we could then elect to transfer to the Nasdaq Capital
Market, which would grant us an additional 180 days to regain compliance with
Nasdaq’s minimum price per-share listing requirement. If our stock
price does not exceed the minimum bid price of $1.00 within the time frames set
forth above, our securities will be subject to delisting. Recently,
between October 20, 2009 and November 6, 2009, our stock price has closed below
$1.00 per share. If our stock continues to close below a dollar
through December 1, we will likely receive a de-listing warning letter from
Nasdaq. If our common stock were no longer listed on The Nasdaq
Global Market or the Nasdaq Capital Market, investors might only be able to
trade in the over-the-counter market in the Pink Sheets® (a
quotation medium operated by Pink OTC Markets Inc.) or on the OTC Bulletin
Board® of the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA). This would
impair the liquidity of our securities not only in the number of shares that
could be bought and sold at a given price, which might be depressed by the
relative illiquidity, but also through delays in the timing of transactions and
reduction in media coverage.
ITEM
2.
|
UNREGISTERED
SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF
PROCEEDS
|
During
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, we did not issue any
unregistered shares of common stock pursuant to the exercise of outstanding
warrants and options. There were no stock repurchases during the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2009.
ITEM
3.
|
DEFAULTS
UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
|
None.
ITEM
4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY
HOLDERS
|
None.
ITEM
5.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
We
anticipated that Surfaxin might be approved in April 2009, which was the
approximate time for printing and mailing our Proxy Statement if the 2009 Annual
Meeting were scheduled at the same time in the year as the 2008 Annual
Meeting. As the FDA’s decision with respect to Surfaxin was one
consideration defining the substance of proposals to be included in our Proxy
Statement, we determined to delay scheduling the 2009 Annual Meeting to have the
opportunity to respond to the FDA’s decision. Accordingly, we
temporarily deferred scheduling our 2009 Annual Meeting.
On
September 4, 2009, we issued a press release, (which was filed with the SEC on
Form 8-K on September 4, 2009), announcing that our 2009 annual meeting of
stockholders will be held on December 7, 2009 in New York, New York. The
record date for determining stockholders entitled to vote at the meeting was
October 8, 2009. Pursuant to Rule 14a-8 under the Exchange Act,
stockholders were advised that they may present proposals for inclusion in our
proxy statement for the 2009 annual meeting by submitting their proposals to us
a reasonable time before we began printing and sending our proxy
materials. Our Board of Directors set September 15, 2009 as the
deadline for receipt of stockholder proposals pursuant to Rule 14a-8, and
no proposals were received by that date.
32
ITEM
6.
|
EXHIBITS
|
Exhibits
are listed on the Index to Exhibits at the end of this Quarterly
Report. The exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K, listed
on such Index in response to this Item, are incorporated herein by
reference.
33
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.
Discovery
Laboratories, Inc.
|
||
(Registrant)
|
||
Date: November
9, 2009
|
By:
|
/s/ W. Thomas Amick
|
W.
Thomas Amick, Chairman of the Board and
Principal
Executive Officer
|
||
Date: November
9, 2009
|
By:
|
/s/ John G. Cooper
|
John
G. Cooper
|
||
Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
(Principal Financial
Officer)
|
34
INDEX
TO EXHIBITS
The
following exhibits are included with this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q.
Exhibit No.
|
Description
|
Method of Filing
|
||
3.1
|
Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of Discovery Laboratories, Inc. (Discovery),
dated September 18, 2002.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Discovery’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the SEC on March
31, 2003.
|
||
3.2
|
Certificate
of Designations, Preferences and Rights of Series A Junior Participating
Cumulative Preferred Stock of Discovery, dated February 6,
2004.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 2.2 to Discovery’s Form 8-A, as filed with the SEC
on February 6, 2004.
|
||
3.3
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation of Discovery, dated as of
May 28, 2004.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Discovery’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the SEC on August 9,
2004.
|
||
3.4
|
Certificate
of Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Discovery,
dated as of July 8, 2005.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Discovery’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the SEC on August 5,
2005.
|
||
3.5
|
Amended
and Restated By-Laws of Discovery Labs, effective as of September 3,
2009
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on September 4. 2009.
|
||
4.1
|
Shareholder
Rights Agreement, dated as of February 6, 2004, by and between Discovery
and Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on February 6, 2004.
|
||
4.2
|
Form
of Class A Investor Warrant.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on June 20, 2003.
|
||
4.3
|
Class
B Investor Warrant dated July 7, 2004, issued to Kingsbridge Capital
Limited.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K as
filed with the SEC on July 9, 2004.
|
||
4.4
|
Warrant
Agreement, dated as of November 3, 2004, by and between Discovery and
QFinance, Inc.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of Discovery’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the SEC on
November 9, 2004.
|
||
4.5
|
Class
C Investor Warrant, dated April 17, 2006, issued to Kingsbridge Capital
Limited
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on April 21,
2006.
|
Exhibit No.
|
Description
|
Method of Filing
|
||
4.6
|
Second
Amended and Restated Promissory Note, dated as of October 25, 2006, issued
to PharmaBio Development Inc. (“PharmaBio”)
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on October 26, 2006.
|
||
4.7
|
Warrant
Agreement, dated as of October 25, 2006, by and between Discovery and
PharmaBio
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on October 26, 2006.
|
||
4.8
|
Warrant
Agreement, dated November 22, 2006
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on November 22, 2006.
|
||
4.9
|
Warrant
Agreement dated May 22, 2008 by and between Kingsbridge Capital Limited
and Discovery.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K as
filed with the SEC on May 28, 2008.
|
||
4.10
|
Warrant
Agreement dated December 12, 2008 by and between Kingsbridge Capital
Limited and Discovery.
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on December 15, 2008.
|
||
4.11
|
Form
of Warrant Agreement dated May 13, 2009
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on May 8, 2009.
|
||
10.1
|
Agreement
dated as of August 13, 2009 by and between Discovery Labs and W. Thomas
Amick
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on September 4. 2009.
|
||
10.2
|
Separation
of Employment Agreement and General Release dated as of August 13, 2009 by
and between Discovery Labs and Robert J. Capetola
|
Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to Discovery’s Current Report on Form 8-K, as
filed with the SEC on September 4. 2009.
|
||
31.1
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange
Act.
|
Filed
herewith.
|
||
31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer pursuant to
Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act.
|
Filed
herewith.
|
||
32.1
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
Filed
herewith.
|