NVIV InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corporation

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

​

FORM 10-K

​

(617) 863-5500

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ⌧ No ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ◻

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2020, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $7,671,905 based on a per share price of $1.58, which was the closing price of the registrant’s Common Stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market on June 30, 2020.

As of February 25, 2021, the number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock, $0.00001 par value per share, was 34,184,071.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None.

​

Table of Contents

INVIVO THERAPEUTICS HOLDINGS CORP.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

​

We cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, or performance. You should not place undue reliance on these forward looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These cautionary statements should be considered with any written or oral forward looking statements that we may issue in the future. Except as required by applicable law, including the securities laws of the United States, we do not intend to update any of the forward looking statements to conform these statements to reflect actual results, later events or circumstances, or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

​

As used herein, “we,” “us,” “our,” or the “Company” means InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corp., together with our wholly owned subsidiary InVivo Therapeutics Corporation, unless otherwise noted.

​

Risk Factor Summary

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

SCIs is based on our investigational Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, a bioresorbable polymer scaffold that is designed for implantation at the site of injury within a spinal cord and is intended to treat acute SCI. The Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant incorporates intellectual property licensed under an exclusive, worldwide license from Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). We also plan to evaluate other technologies and therapeutics that may be complementary to our development of the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant or offer the potential to bring us closer to our goal of redefining the life of the SCI patient.

​

The current standard of care for acute management of spinal cord injuries focuses on preventing further injury to the spinal cord. However, the current standard of care does not address repair of the spinal cord.

​

Market Opportunity

​

Our clinical program is intended to address the lack of successful treatments for SCIs, which can lead to permanent paralysis, sensory impairment, and autonomic (bowel, bladder, and sexual) dysfunction. The current management of acute SCI is a surgical approach consisting of spine stabilization and an external decompression procedure of uncertain value. We believe the market opportunity for our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is significant. It is estimated that approximately 285,000 people are currently living in the United States with paralysis due to SCI (chronic SCI), and approximately 15,000 individuals in the United States will become fully or partially paralyzed each year (acute SCI). We are pursuing regulatory approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, through the Humanitarian Device Exemption, or HDE, pathway. When this pathway was initiated for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, it was limited to populations of 4,000 or less patients per year. We were granted a Humanitarian Use Device, or HUD, designation for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, which includes thoracic and cervical patients afflicted with complete (no motor or sensory function in the lowest sacral segments) SCI, such as paraplegia or tetraplegia, and excludes gunshot or other penetrating wounds. The 21st Century Cures Act increased the upper population limit for an HDE from 4,000 to 8,000, which allows us to potentially request an expansion of our current HUD to include additional SCI patients, i.e., incomplete (partial sensory or sensory/motor function below the injury site, including the lowest sacral segments) SCI patients. Future products, which may include use of stem cells or drug ingredients, may enable the treatment of a broader population such as patients with chronic paralysis and would require separate regulatory approval.

​

Since 1973, the National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center, or NSCISC, at the University of Alabama has been commissioned by the U.S. government to maintain a national database of SCI statistics. The financial impact of SCIs, as reported by the NSCISC, is substantial. Direct costs, which include hospital and medical expenses, modification of the home, and personal assistance, are highest in the first year after injury. According to the fact sheet published in 2017 by NSCISC titled “Spinal Cord Injury—Facts and Figures at a Glance”, (i) during the first year, average cost of care ranges from $352,279 to $1,079,412, depending on the severity of the injury, (ii) the net present value, or NPV, to maintain a quadriplegic injured at age 25 for life is $4,789,384, and (iii) the NPV to maintain a paraplegic injured at age 25 for life is $2,341,988. These costs place a tremendous financial burden on families, insurance providers, and government agencies. Moreover, despite such a significant financial investment, the patient often remains disabled for life because current medical interventions address only the symptoms of SCI rather than the underlying neurological cause. We believe our approach could represent an important advance in the treatment of SCIs.

​

The American Spinal Injury Association, or ASIA, in collaboration with the International Spinal Cord Society, or ISCoS, has developed a neurologic examination tool for assessing SCI known as the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury, or ISNCSCI. Results of the ISNCSCI examination are used to determine the ASIA Impairment Scale, or AIS, classification.

​

Patients with complete SCI are classified as AIS A. Patients with incomplete SCI, who have partial sensory and/or motor function below the level of injury, including the lowest sacral segments, are classified as AIS B (partial sensory function), AIS C (partial sensory and motor function), or AIS D (partial sensory and increased motor function, i.e., can move at least half of the muscles against gravity). Patients who have a complete return of sensory and motor function are classified as AIS E.

​

These classifications are based upon the ISNCSCI examination in which an examiner performs a neurologic examination to assess sensory function of the entire body and motor function of the upper and lower extremities.

​

Table of Contents

Our Clinical Program

​

We currently have 1 clinical development program for the treatment of acute SCI.

​

Neuro-Spinal Scaffold Implant for acute SCI

​

Our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is an investigational bioresorbable polymer scaffold that is designed for implantation at the site of injury within a spinal cord. The Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is intended to promote appositional, or side-by-side, healing by supporting the surrounding tissue after injury, minimizing expansion of areas of necrosis, and providing a biomaterial substrate for the body’s own healing/repair processes following injury. We believe this form of appositional healing may spare white matter, increase neural sprouting, and diminish post-traumatic cyst formation.

​

The Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is composed of 2 biocompatible and bioresorbable polymers that are cast to form a highly porous investigational product:

​

​

​

Because of the complexity of SCIs, it is likely that multi-modal therapies will be required to maximize positive outcomes in SCI patients. In the future, we may attempt to further enhance the performance of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant through multiple combination strategies involving electrostimulation devices, additional biomaterials, drugs approved by the FDA, or growth factors. We expect the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant to be regulated by the FDA as a Class III medical device.

​

INSPIRE 2.0 Study

​

Our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant has been approved to be studied under our approved Investigational Device Exemption, or IDE in the INSPIRE 2.0 Study, which is titled the “Randomized, Controlled, Single-blind Study of Probable Benefit of the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold™ for Safety and Neurologic Recovery in Subjects with Complete Thoracic AIS A Spinal Cord Injury as Compared to Standard of Care.” The purpose of the INSPIRE 2.0 Study is to assess the overall safety and probable benefit of the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold for the treatment of neurologically complete thoracic traumatic acute SCI. The INSPIRE 2.0 Study is designed to enroll 10 subjects into each of the 2 study arms, which we refer to as the Scaffold Arm and the Comparator Arm. Patients in the Comparator Arm will receive the standard of care, which is spinal stabilization without dural opening or myelotomy. The INSPIRE 2.0 Study is a single blind study, meaning that the patients and assessors are blinded to treatment assignments. The FDA approved the enrollment of up to 35 patients in this study so that there would be at least 20 evaluable patients (10 in each study arm) at the primary endpoint analysis, accounting for events such as screen failures or deaths that would prevent a patient from reaching the primary endpoint visit. As of February 25, 2021, 11 patients have been enrolled in the INSPIRE 2.0 Study and 18 sites are activated for enrollment. As of February 25, 2021, 17 of the 18 clinical sites are open for enrollment, and 1 clinical site is currently not open for enrollment due to reasons unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic. We have found the enrollment rates for the INSPIRE 2.0 study to be variable and inconsistent. For example, the 3 most recent patients enrolled into the study were enrolled over the course of four weeks between early December 2020 and early January 2021. Given the recent unpredictable enrollment patterns, we are unable at this time to estimate when enrollment for the study may be complete. We aim to continue to provide quarterly updates regarding the number of patients enrolled into the study.

​

The primary endpoint is defined as the proportion of patients achieving an improvement of at least 1 AIS grade at 6 months post-implantation. Assessments of AIS grade are at hospital discharge, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months. The definition of study success for INSPIRE 2.0 is that the difference in the proportion of subjects who demonstrate an improvement of at least 1 grade on AIS assessment at the 6-month primary endpoint follow-up visit between the Scaffold Arm and the Comparator Arm must be equal to or greater than 20%. In one example, if 50% of subjects in the Scaffold Arm have an improvement of AIS grade at the 6-month primary endpoint and 30% of subjects in the Comparator Arm have an improvement, then the difference in the proportion of subjects who demonstrated an

Table of Contents

improvement is equal to 20% (50% minus 30% equals 20%) and the definition of study success would be met. In another example, if 40% of subjects in the Scaffold Arm have an improvement of AIS grade at the 6-month primary endpoint and 30% of subjects in the Comparator Arm have an improvement, then the difference in the proportion of subjects who demonstrated an improvement is equal to 10% (40% minus 30% equals 10%) and the definition of study success would not be met. Additional endpoints include measurements of changes in NLI, sensory levels and motor scores, bladder, bowel and sexual function, pain, Spinal Cord Independence Measure, and quality of life.

​

Our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold was previously studied in The INSPIRE Study: the “InVivo Study of Probable Benefit of the Neuro- Spinal Scaffold for Safety and Neurologic Recovery in Subjects with Complete Thoracic AIS A Spinal Cord Injury,” under an IDE application for the treatment of neurologically complete thoracic traumatic acute SCI. Although The INSPIRE Study was structured with an Objective Performance Criterion, or OPC, as the primary component for demonstrating probable benefit, the OPC is not the only variable that the FDA would evaluate when reviewing a future HDE application. Similarly, while our INSPIRE 2.0 Study is structured with a definition of study success requiring a minimum difference between study arms in the proportion of subjects achieving improvement, that success definition is not the only factor that the FDA would evaluate in the future HDE application. Approval is not guaranteed if the OPC is met for The INSPIRE Study or the definition of study success is met for the INSPIRE 2.0 Study, and even if the OPC or definition of study success are not met, the FDA may approve a medical device if probable benefit is supported by a comprehensive review of all clinical endpoints and preclinical results, as demonstrated by the sponsor’s body of evidence. We cannot be certain what additional information or studies will be required by the FDA to approve our HDE submission.

​

In 2016, the FDA accepted our proposed HDE modular shell submission and review process for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. The HDE modular shell is comprised of 3 modules: a preclinical studies module, a manufacturing module, and a clinical data module. As part of its review process, the FDA reviews each module, which are individual sections of the HDE submission, on a rolling basis. Following the submission of each module, the FDA reviews and provides feedback, typically within 90 days, allowing the applicant to receive feedback and potentially resolve any deficiencies during the review process. Upon receipt of all 3 modules, which constitutes the complete HDE submission, the FDA makes a filing decision that may trigger the review clock for an approval decision. We submitted the first module in March 2017 and received feedback in June 2017. We submitted an updated first module in the fourth quarter of 2019 and received feedback in September 2020. We expect to submit another updated module in the first quarter of 2021. The HDE submission will not be complete until the manufacturing and clinical modules are also submitted.

​

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic

​

On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization, or the WHO, announced a global health emergency because of a new strain of coronavirus originating in Wuhan, China, or the COVID-19 pandemic, and the risks to the international community as the virus spreads globally beyond its point of origin. In March 2020, the WHO classified the COVID-19 pandemic as a pandemic, based on the rapid increase in exposure globally. Although all our clinical sites except one are currently enrolling patients, we are aware that a significant number of our clinical sites had previously temporarily suspended enrollment into the INSPIRE 2.0 Study at their institution due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected and may continue to affect the potential for enrollment in our INSPIRE 2.0 Study as clinical sites suspend studies in order to manage the pandemic. Aside from the impact on enrollment in our INSPIRE 2.0 Study, we did not experience any significant impact from the COVID-19 pandemic on our financial condition, liquidity, other operations, suppliers, industry, and workforce during the year ended December 31, 2020. As of February 25, 2021, we have 17 clinical sites open for enrollment and 1 clinical site that is currently not open for enrollment due to reasons unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic. The full impact of the COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve as of the date of filing this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and we cannot be certain what future impact the COVID-19 pandemic may have on our clinical sites and their respective abilities to enroll patients. As the pandemic continues to evolve, there may be additional government actions or disruptions that could cause our clinical sites to suspend or alter operations in a manner that would impact enrollment in the INSPIRE 2.0 Study. We are actively monitoring the impact of the global situation on our financial condition, liquidity, operations, suppliers, industry, and workforce, although there remains significant uncertainty related to the public health situation globally. Given the daily evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic and the global responses to curb its spread, we are not able to estimate the ultimate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity in the future. However, as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, it will likely continue to have an adverse effect on enrollment in our INSPIRE 2.0 Study, and may also have an adverse effect on our results of future operations, financial position, and

Table of Contents

liquidity, and even after the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided, we may continue to experience adverse impacts to our business as a result of any economic recession or depression that has occurred or may occur in the future.

​

Intellectual Property

​

We rely on a combination of patents, licenses, trade secrets, and non-disclosure agreements to develop, protect, and maintain our intellectual property. Our patent portfolio includes patents and patent applications. We seek to develop or obtain intellectual property that we believe might be useful or complementary with our products and technologies, including by way of licenses or acquisitions of other companies or intellectual property from third parties.

​

We hold an exclusive worldwide license to a broad suite of patents co-owned by BCH and MIT covering the use of a wide range of polymers to treat SCI, and to promote the survival and proliferation of human stem cells in the spinal cord, or the BCH License. Issued patents and pending patent applications licensed under the BCH License cover the technology underlying our Neuro- Spinal Scaffold implant and the use of a wide range of biomaterial scaffolding for treating SCI by itself or in combination with drugs, growth factors, or human stem cells. The BCH License covers 6 issued United States patents and 19 issued international patents expiring between 2021 and 2027.

​

The BCH License has a term of 15 years from the effective date of July 2, 2007, or as long as the life of the last expiring patent right under the license, whichever is longer, unless terminated earlier by BCH. In connection with our acquisition of the BCH License, we submitted to a 5-year development plan to BCH and MIT that includes certain targets and projections related to the timing of product development and regulatory approvals. We are required to either meet the stated targets and projections in the plan or notify BCH and revise the plan. BCH has the right to terminate the BCH License for failure by us to either meet the targets and projections in the plan or our failure to submit an acceptable revision to the plan within a 60-day cure period after notification by BCH that we are not in compliance with the plan. We are currently in compliance with the development plan.

​

We have the right to sublicense the patents covered by the BCH License and have full control and authority over the development and commercialization of any products that use the licensed technology, including clinical trial design, manufacturing, marketing, and regulatory filings. We also own the rights to the data generated pursuant to the BCH License, whether generated by us or a sublicensee. We have the first right of negotiation with BCH and MIT for a 30 day period to any improvements to the intellectual property covered by the BCH License.

​

We are required to pay certain fees and royalties under the BCH License. We paid an initial fee upon execution of the BCH License and are required to pay an amendment fee if we expand the field of use under the BCH License. We are also required to make milestone payments upon completing various phases of product development, including upon (i) filing with the FDA of the first investigational new drug application and IDE application for a product that uses the licensed technology; (ii) enrollment of the first patient in Phase II testing for a product that uses the licensed technology; (iii) enrollment of the first patient in Phase III testing for a product that uses the licensed technology; (iv) FDA approval of the first new drug application or related application for a product that uses the licensed technology; and (v) first market approval in any country outside the United States for a product that uses the licensed technology. Each year prior to the release of a licensed product, we are also required to pay a maintenance fee for the BCH License. Further, we are required to make ongoing payments based on any sublicenses we grant to manufacturers and distributors. Following commercialization, we are required to make ongoing royalty payments equal to a percentage in the low single digits of net sales of any product that uses the licensed technology.

​

In addition to the rights we license under the BCH License, we have additional rights relating to the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. Together with MIT, we co-own U.S. patent No. 10,131,786 (“Poly((lactic-co-glycolic acid)-b-lysine) and process for synthesizing a block copolymer of PLGA and PLL- (poly-e-cbz-l-lysine)”), which expires in 2033.

​

Government Regulation

​

The testing, manufacturing, and potential labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, import, and marketing of our products are and would be subject to extensive regulation by governmental authorities in the United States and in other countries. In the United States, the FDA, under the Public Health Service Act, the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and their implementing regulations, regulates biologics and medical device products. In addition, our products under development are subject to extensive regulation by other U.S. federal and state regulatory bodies and comparable authorities in other countries. To ensure that medical products distributed domestically are safe

Table of Contents

and effective for their intended use, the FDA and comparable authorities in other countries have imposed regulations that govern, among other things, the following activities that we or our partners perform or will perform:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

The labeling, advertising, promotion, marketing, and distribution of biopharmaceuticals, or biologics, and medical devices also must be in compliance with the FDA requirements which include, among others, standards and regulations for off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, promotional activities involving the internet, and direct-to-consumer advertising. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, also regulates the advertising of many medical devices. The FDA and the FTC have very broad enforcement authority, and failure to abide by these regulations can result in penalties, including the issuance of a warning letter directing us to correct deviations from regulatory standards and enforcement actions that can include seizures, injunctions, and criminal prosecution. In addition, under the federal Lanham Act and similar state laws, competitors and others can initiate litigation relating to advertising claims.

​

The FDA has broad premarket, post-market, and regulatory enforcement powers. As with medical devices, manufacturers of biologics and combination products are subject to unannounced inspections by the FDA to determine compliance with applicable regulations, and these inspections may include the manufacturing facilities of some of our subcontractors. Failure by manufacturers or their suppliers to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Potential FDA enforcement actions include:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

FDA Regulation—Medical Device Products

​

FDA’s Premarket Clearance and Approval Requirements

​

Unless an exemption applies, each medical device commercially distributed in the United States requires one of the following: (i) approval of a de-novo classification petition; (ii) clearance under a 510(k) premarket notification; (iii) approval under a PMA application; or (iv) approval under an HDE. During public health emergencies, FDA also may grant emergency use authorizations to allow commercial distribution of devices intended to address the public health emergency. Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes—Class I, Class II or Class III—depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of manufacturing and regulatory control needed to ensure its safety and effectiveness.

​

Class I devices include those with the lowest risk to the patient and are those for which safety and effectiveness can be reasonably assured by adherence to the FDA’s “general controls” for medical devices, which include compliance with the applicable portions of the FDA’s Quality System Regulation, or QSR, facility registration and product listing, reporting of adverse medical events and malfunctions through the submission of Medical Device Reports, or MDRs, and appropriate, truthful and non-misleading labeling, advertising, and promotional materials. Some Class I or low risk devices also require premarket clearance by the FDA through the 510(k) premarket notification process described below.

​

Class II devices are moderate risk devices subject to the FDA’s general controls, and any other “special controls” deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, such as performance standards, product-specific guidance documents, special labeling requirements, patient registries or post-market surveillance. Premarket review and clearance by the FDA for Class II devices is accomplished through the 510(k) premarket notification process, though certain Class II devices are exempt from this premarket review process. When required, the manufacturer must submit to the FDA a premarket notification, or 510(k), submission demonstrating that the device is “substantially equivalent” to a legally marketed predicate device, which in some cases may require submission of clinical data. If the FDA determines that the device, or its intended use, is not substantially equivalent to a legally marketed device, the FDA will place the device, or the particular use of the device, into Class III, and the device sponsor must then fulfill more rigorous premarket approval requirements.

​

Class III devices include devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting or implantable devices and devices deemed not substantially equivalent to a predicate device following a 510(k) submission. The safety and effectiveness of Class III devices cannot be reasonably assured solely by general or special controls. Submission and FDA approval of a PMA application is required before marketing of a Class III device can proceed. The PMA process is much more demanding than the 510(k) premarket notification process. A PMA application, which is intended to demonstrate that the device is reasonably safe and effective for its intended use and must be supported by extensive data, typically including data from preclinical studies and clinical trials. A Class III device may qualify for FDA approval to be distributed under an HDE rather than a PMA. HDEs are very similar to PMAs but are not required to demonstrate a reasonable assurance of effectiveness. Rather HDE applications require demonstration of “probable benefit.” Devices marketed under an HDE must also first be designated as a HUD. Our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is a Class III device, and we are initially seeking HDE approval. Following our receipt of HDE approval, we intend to pursue a PMA for our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold for use in a broader patient population.

​

Premarket Approval Pathway

​

Class III devices that do not qualify as HUDs require a PMA before they can be marketed, although some

pre-amendment Class III devices for which the FDA has not yet required a PMA are cleared through the 510(k) process. In addition, HDE approved Class III devices require a PMA if the manufacturer desires to expand indications for use or patient populations, or to otherwise treat more than 8000 patients per year and avoid the other limitations imposed on HDE approved devices. The PMA process is more demanding than the HDE and 510(k) processes. In a PMA, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the device is safe and effective, and the PMA must be supported by extensive data, including data from preclinical studies and human clinical trials. The PMA must also contain a full description of the device and its components, a full description of the methods, facilities, and controls used for manufacturing, and proposed labeling. Following receipt of a PMA, the FDA determines whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If the FDA accepts the application for review, it has 180 days under the FDCA to complete

Table of Contents

its review of a PMA, although in practice, the FDA’s review often takes significantly longer, and can take up to several years. In some cases, an advisory panel of experts from outside the FDA may be convened to review and evaluate the application and provide recommendations to the FDA as to the approvability of the device. The FDA may or may not accept the panel’s recommendation. In addition, the FDA will generally conduct a pre-approval inspection of the applicant or its third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ manufacturing facility or facilities to ensure compliance with the QSR. PMA devices are also subject to the payment of user fees.

​

The FDA will approve the new device for commercial distribution if it determines that the data and information in the PMA constitute valid scientific evidence and that there is reasonable assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended use(s). The FDA may approve a PMA with post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution, and collection of long-term follow-up data from patients in the clinical study that supported PMA approval or requirements to conduct additional clinical studies post-approval. The FDA may condition PMA approval on some form of post-market surveillance when deemed necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and efficacy data for the device in a larger population or for a longer period of use. In such cases, the manufacturer might be required to follow certain patient groups for a number of years and to make periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in material adverse enforcement action, including withdrawal of the approval.

​

Certain changes to an approved device, such as changes in manufacturing facilities, methods, or quality control procedures, or changes in the design performance specifications, which may affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, require submission of a PMA supplement. PMA supplements often require submission of the same type of information as a PMA, except that the supplement is limited to information needed to support any changes from the device covered by the original PMA and may not require as extensive clinical data or the convening of an advisory panel. Certain other changes to an approved device require the submission of a new PMA, such as when the design change causes a different intended use, mode of operation, and technical basis of operation, or when the design change is so significant that a new generation of the device will be developed, and the data that were submitted with the original PMA are not applicable for the change in demonstrating a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness.

​

Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE)

​

Alternatively, a Class III device may qualify for FDA approval to be distributed under an HDE rather than a PMA. For a device to be eligible for an HDE, it must be first designated by the FDA as a HUD intended to benefit patients in the treatment or diagnosis of a disease or condition that affects fewer than 8,000 individuals in the United States per year (increased by the 21st Century Cures Act from 4,000 to 8,000). The HDE pathway also requires that there must be no other comparable device available to provide therapy for this condition. An HDE application is similar in form and content to a PMA and, although exempt from the effectiveness requirements of a PMA, an HDE does require sufficient information for the FDA to determine that the device does not pose an unreasonable or significant risk of illness or injury, and that the probable benefit to health outweighs the risk of injury or illness from its use. In addition, a HUD may only be used in facilities that have established a local institutional review board, or IRB, to supervise clinical testing of devices, and after an IRB has approved the use of the device to treat or diagnose the specific disease.

​

In addition, except in certain circumstances, products approved under an HDE cannot be sold for an amount that exceeds the costs of research and development, fabrication, and distribution of the device (i.e., for profit). Currently, a product is only eligible to be sold for profit after receiving HDE approval if the device (1) is intended for the treatment or diagnosis of a disease or condition that occurs in pediatric patients or in a pediatric subpopulation, and such device is labeled for use in pediatric patients or in a pediatric subpopulation in which the disease or condition occurs; or (2) is intended for the treatment or diagnosis of a disease or condition that does not occur in pediatric patients or that occurs in pediatric patients in such numbers that the development of the device for such patients is impossible, highly impracticable, or unsafe. If an HDE-approved device does not meet either of the eligibility criteria, the device cannot be sold for profit. We expect our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant may meet the eligibility criteria to be sold for a profit.

​

Clinical Trials

​

Clinical trials are almost always required to support a PMA or HDE application. If the device presents a “significant risk” to human health as defined by the FDA, the FDA requires the device sponsor to submit an IDE to the FDA and obtain IDE approval prior to commencing the human clinical trials. The IDE must be supported by appropriate

Table of Contents

data, such as animal and laboratory testing results, showing that it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. The IDE must be approved in advance by the FDA for a specified number of patients, unless the product is deemed a “non-significant risk” device, in which case an IDE approval from the FDA would not be required, although the clinical trial would need to meet other requirements including IRB approval. Clinical trials for a significant risk device may begin once an IDE is approved by the FDA and the appropriate IRB at each clinical trial site. Future clinical trials may require that we obtain an IDE from the FDA prior to commencing any such clinical trial and that the trial be conducted with the oversight of an IRB at the clinical trial site.

​

Our clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with FDA regulations and federal and state regulations concerning human subject protection, including informed consent and healthcare privacy. A clinical trial may be suspended by the FDA or at a specific site by the relevant IRB at any time for various reasons, including a belief that the risks to the trial participants outweigh the benefits of participation in the clinical trial. Even if a clinical trial is completed, the results of our clinical testing may not demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the device, or may be equivocal or otherwise not be sufficient for us to obtain approval of our product.

​

Pervasive and Continuing FDA Regulation

​

After a device is placed on the market, numerous regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Class III devices that obtain HDE approval are subject to the additional restrictions discussed above, including:

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

We, and any third party manufacturers that we use, must register with the FDA as medical device manufacturers and must obtain all necessary state permits or licenses to operate our business. As manufacturers, we, and any third party manufacturers that we use, are subject to announced and unannounced inspections by the FDA to determine our compliance with quality system regulation and other regulations. We have not yet been inspected by the FDA. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with quality system regulation and other regulations.

​

Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA, which may include any of the following sanctions:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Regulatory Pathway for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold Implant

​

We expect the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant will be regulated by the FDA as a Class III medical device. The FDA granted HUD designation for our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant in 2013 for use in complete SCI (defined as less than 4,000 patients per year at the time), thus allowing us to potentially qualify for FDA approval under an HDE. In 2015, we received conditional approval from the FDA to convert our ongoing pilot study into a pivotal probable benefit study (The INSPIRE Study). Full approval of such conversion was subsequently granted in January 2016. In early March 2018, we received FDA approval for a randomized controlled trial (the INSPIRE 2.0 Study) to supplement the existing clinical evidence for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant that we obtained from The INSPIRE Study.

​

In the future, if our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is approved via either the PMA or HDE pathway, modifications or enhancements that could significantly affect the safety or effectiveness of the device or that constitute a major change to the intended use of the device will require new PMA or HDE application and approval.

​

Other changes may require a supplement or other change notification that must be reviewed and approved by the FDA. Modified devices for which a new PMA or HDE application, supplement, or notification is required cannot be distributed until the application is approved by the FDA. An adverse determination or a request for additional information could delay the market introduction of new products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. We may not be able to obtain PMA or HDE approval in a timely manner, if at all, for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant or any future devices or modifications to Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant or such devices for which we may submit a PMA or HDE application.

​

Table of Contents

European Economic Area or the EEA

​

Sales of medical devices are subject to foreign government regulations, which vary substantially from country to country. In order to market our products outside the United States, we must obtain regulatory approvals or Conformité Européenne (“CE’) Certificates of Conformity and comply with extensive safety and quality regulations. The time required to obtain approval by a foreign country or to obtain a CE Certificate of Conformity may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA clearance or approval, and the requirements may differ. In the EEA, we are required to obtain Certificates of Conformity before drawing up a European Commission, or EC, Declaration of Conformity and affixing the CE mark to our medical devices. Many other countries, such as Australia, India, New Zealand, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, accept CE Certificates of Conformity or FDA clearance or approval although others, such as Brazil, Canada and Japan, require separate regulatory filings. We have not yet applied for a CE Mark for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant.

​

If any of our products has been CE marked and placed on the market in the EEA, we would need to comply with a number of regulatory requirements relating to:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Failure to comply with these requirements at such time could result in enforcement measures being taken against us by the competent authorities of the EEA countries. These measures can include fines, administrative penalties, compulsory product withdraws, injunctions, and criminal prosecution. Such enforcement measures would have an adverse effect on our capacity to market our products in the EEA and, consequently, on our business and financial position. Such failures could also lead to cancelation, suspension, or variation of our CE Certificates of Conformity by the relevant Notified Body, which is an organization designated by the competent authorities of an EEA country to conduct conformity assessments.

​

Further, the advertising and promotion of our products in the EEA is subject to regulatory directives concerning misleading and comparative advertising, and unfair commercial practices, as well as other national legislation in the individual EEA countries governing the advertising and promotion of medical devices. These laws may limit or restrict the advertising and promotion of our products to the general public and may impose limitations on our promotional activities with healthcare professionals.

​

Financial Information and Research and Development Expenditures

​

We have incurred net losses each year since our inception, including net losses of $9.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 and $11.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. To date, we have not commercialized any products or generated any revenues from the sale of products, and we do not expect to generate any product revenues in the foreseeable future. We have devoted most of our financial resources to research and development, including our clinical and preclinical development activities related to our Neuro Spinal Scaffold implant. Our research and development expenditures, which include research and development related to our product candidates, were $3.9 million and $5.6 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively.

​

Competition

​

We have many potential competitors, including major drug companies, specialized biotechnology firms, academic institutions, government agencies, and private and public research institutions. Many of these competitors have significantly greater financial and technical resources than us, and superior experience and expertise in research and development, preclinical testing, design and implementation of clinical trials, regulatory processes and obtaining

Table of Contents

regulatory approval for products, production and manufacturing, and sales and marketing of approved products. Smaller or early-stage companies and research institutions may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly if they have collaborative arrangements with larger and more established biotechnology companies. We will also face competition from these parties in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites, and registering subjects for clinical trials.

​

In order to compete effectively, we will have to make substantial investments in development, clinical testing, manufacturing, and sales and marketing, or partner with 1 or more established companies. There is no assurance that we will be successful in having any of our products approved or gaining significant market share for any of our products. Our technologies and products also may be rendered obsolete or noncompetitive as a result of products introduced by our competitors.

​

Manufacturing

​

We have developed a proprietary manufacturing process to build our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. We manufacture our implants following FDA regulations for design controls using 2 fully operational manufacturing cleanrooms located at our facility in Cambridge, Massachusetts. These 2 cleanrooms are validated to ISO 14644 1 Class ISO 7 (Class 10-K) and Class ISO 8 (Class 100k) cleanroom standards, respectively. In addition, the manufacturing process contains numerous quality control steps including in process and final inspection. Currently, we are working with 2 vendors for our critical raw materials; however, these materials are also available from other vendors. We are currently manufacturing our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant to support the INSPIRE 2.0 Study. If we are able to move toward preparing for commercialization, we intend to be compliant with all applicable regulations on a country specific basis.

​

Sales and Marketing

​

If we obtain approval from the FDA, or another foreign regulatory body, to commercialize our products, we plan to establish a direct sales force to sell our products to major markets in the United States, and we may sell direct or through distributors in major foreign markets. We anticipate the direct sales force, once and if established, would focus its efforts on maximizing revenue through product training, placement, and support. We would also seek to establish strong relationships with neurosurgeons, orthopedic spine surgeons, and trauma surgeons, and would expect to provide a high level of service for any of our approved products including providing on-site assistance and service during procedures. In addition, we expect to implement medical education programs intended for outreach to practitioners in physical medicine and rehabilitation centers and patient advocacy groups. We may also seek corporate partners with expertise in commercialization.

​

Compliance with Environmental, Health and Safety Laws

​

In addition to the FDA regulations discussed above, we are also subject to evolving federal, state, and local environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations. In the past, compliance with environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations has not had a material effect on our capital expenditures. We believe that we comply in all material respects with existing environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations applicable to us.

​

Employees

​

As of December 31, 2020, we had 6 full-time employees. None of our employees are represented by a labor union and we consider our employee relations to be good. We also utilize a number of consultants to assist with financial, research and development, human resources, clinical and regulatory activities. We believe that our future success will depend in part on our continued ability to attract, hire, and retain qualified personnel.

​

Corporate Information

​

We were incorporated on April 2, 2003, under the name of Design Source, Inc. as a Nevada corporation. On October 26, 2010, we acquired the business of InVivo Therapeutics Corporation, which was founded in 2005 as a Delaware corporation, and we are continuing the existing business operations of InVivo Therapeutics Corporation as our wholly-owned subsidiary.

​

Table of Contents

Our principal executive offices are located in leased premises at One Kendall Square, Suite B14402, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139. Our telephone number is (617) 863-5500. We maintain a website at www.invivotherapeutics.com. Information contained on, or accessible through, our website is not a part of, and is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Available Information

​

We make available free of charge on or through the Investor Relations link on our website, www.invivotherapeutics.com, all materials that we file electronically with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), including our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports.

​

Information appearing on the above websites is not a part of, and is not incorporated in, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Further, our references to the URLs for these websites are intended to be inactive textual reference only.

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

​

Patient enrollment is affected by a number of factors including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

For a period in 2016, as a result of an FDA pre-specified enrollment hold, we were unable to enroll patients in The INSPIRE Study pending FDA authorization to proceed with additional enrollment, which delayed our ability to open new sites and enroll patients at the pace we had anticipated. In addition, in July 2017 we halted enrollment in the study, and subsequently closed enrollment in the study. We are also experiencing enrollment delays with our INSPIRE 2.0 Study.  We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical studies if we cannot enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in the clinical studies required by regulatory agencies, and as a result, if the pace of enrollment does not increase, we may need to make a determination as to the next steps for the INSPIRE 2.0 Study and our clinical program. 

If we have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients to conduct our clinical studies as planned, we may need to delay, limit, or terminate ongoing or planned clinical studies, any of which would have an adverse effect on our business. We also may consider changes to our current business strategy and future operations. We are reviewing alternatives with a goal of maximizing the value of our company. We could determine to engage in one or more potential transactions, such as the sale of our company, a strategic partnership with one or more parties or the licensing, sale or divestiture of some of our assets or proprietary technologies, or to continue to operate our business in accordance with our existing business strategy.

​

We have experienced delays and may experience further delays in our clinical development of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. Clinical trials for future product candidates may also experience delays or may not be able to commence.

Before we can obtain regulatory approval for the sale of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, we must complete the clinical studies that are required. In July 2017, The INSPIRE Study of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant was placed on hold following the third patient death in the trial.  We subsequently closed enrollment in The INSPIRE Study and will follow the active patients until completion. The FDA has approved the INSPIRE 2.0 Study. However, the INSPIRE 2.0 Study may not be successfully completed or may take longer than anticipated because of any number of factors, including potential delays in the enrollment of subjects in the study, including delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the availability of scaffold implants to supply to our clinical sites, failure to demonstrate safety and probable benefit of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial, or unforeseen safety issues. For example, enrollment in our INSPIRE 2.0 Study has been slower than we initially anticipated. Enrolling patients the

Table of Contents

INSPIRE 2.0 Study and any other clinical trial of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant will continue to require the approval of the institutional review boards, or IRBs at each clinical site.

In addition, our results may subsequently fail to meet the safety and probable benefit standards required to obtain regulatory approvals. For example, in The INSPIRE Study, 2 of the 16 evaluable patients were initially assessed to have improved from complete AIS A SCI to incomplete AIS B SCI, but each was later assessed to have reverted to complete AIS A SCI prior to the patient’s 6-month examination. Of these 2 patients, 1 patient had converted back to AIS B and the other remained at AIS A at the 6-month examination. There is known and published variability in some of the measures used to assess AIS improvement and these measures can vary over time or depending upon the examiner. While we implemented procedures in The INSPIRE Study and the INSPIRE 2.0 Study, and will also implement procedures in any future clinical study to limit such variations, we cannot be certain that regulatory authorities will accept the results of our clinical trials or interpret them the way that we do.

In addition, clinical trials can be delayed or aborted for a variety of reasons, including delay or failure to:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the relevant IRB at the sites at which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial, or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, a problematic inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse events, or changes in laws or regulations. In addition, regulatory agencies may require an audit with respect to the conduct of a clinical trial, which could cause further delays or increase costs. For example, in December 2017, we and several of our clinical sites and our CRO were subject to an FDA inspection in association with The INSPIRE Study. At the close of the inspection at the Company, the FDA issued a Form 483 with 2 observations relating to our oversight of clinical trial sites in The INSPIRE Study. We sought input from the FDA regarding the scope and timing of our proposed remediation efforts and the FDA has indicated that our corrective actions appear adequate. We cannot be certain that we will not be subject to additional regulatory action by the FDA. Our remediation efforts have added, and may continue to add, costs to our clinical development plans.  Any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and regulatory review process, and jeopardize our ability to obtain approval and commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly.

​

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

​

We will need additional funding before achieving potential profitability. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts, engage in one or more potential transactions, or cease our operations entirely.

​

Table of Contents

We believe we have sufficient cash resources to continue our business operations through the second quarter of 2023. We expect that our expenses will increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct our INSPIRE 2.0 Study, and as we seek regulatory approval for our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our current or future product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to manufacturing, marketing, sales, and distribution. Accordingly, we will need to obtain additional funding in connection with our continuing operations.

​

If we are unable to raise additional capital, we may seek to engage in one or more potential transactions, such as the sale of our company, a strategic partnership with one or more parties or the licensing, sale or divestiture of some of our assets or proprietary technologies, or we may be forced to cease our operations entirely. There can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into such a transaction or transactions on a timely basis or on terms that are favorable to us. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, or should we engage in one or more potential strategic transactions, we could be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate our research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts or to cease operations entirely. If we determine to change our business strategy or to seek to engage in a strategic transaction, our future business, prospects, financial position and operating results could be significantly different than those in historical periods or projected by our management. Because of the significant uncertainty regarding these events, we are not able to accurately predict the impact of any potential changes in our existing business strategy.

​

Our future funding requirements, both near and long term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials is a time-consuming, expensive, and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for several years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all.

​

We have a limited operating history and have incurred significant losses since our inception.

​

We have incurred net losses each year since our inception, including net losses of $9.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 and $11.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $228.2 million. We have a limited operating history on which to base an evaluation of our business and investors should consider the risks and difficulties frequently encountered by early-stage companies in new and rapidly evolving markets, particularly companies engaged in the development of medical devices. To date, we have not commercialized any products or generated any revenues from the sale of products, and we do not expect to generate any product revenues in the foreseeable future. We do not know whether or when we will generate revenue or become profitable. Moreover, we may allocate significant amounts of capital towards products and technologies for which market demand is lower than anticipated and, as a result, may not achieve expectations or may elect to abandon such efforts.

​

We have devoted most of our financial resources to research and development, including our clinical and preclinical development activities related to our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. Overall, we expect our research and development expenses to be substantial and to increase for the foreseeable future as we continue the development and clinical investigation of our current and future products. We expect that it could be several years, if ever, before we have a product candidate ready for commercialization. Even if we obtain regulatory approval to market our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant or other products, our future revenues will depend upon the size of any markets in which our products have received approval, our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, reimbursement from third-party payers, and other factors.

​

We anticipate that we will continue to incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

​

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing net losses for at least the next several years. We expect our expenses will increase substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, as we:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing and commercializing our product candidates with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical testing and clinical trials of our current and future product candidates, developing additional product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval for these product candidates, and manufacturing, marketing, and selling any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. We are only in the initial stages of most of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant enough to achieve profitability.

​

Table of Contents

Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable could depress the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product offerings, or even continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could cause an investor to lose all or part of their investment.

​

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our existing stockholders, restrict our operations, or require us to relinquish rights to our product candidates on unfavorable terms to us.

​

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, and other third party funding alternatives including license and collaboration agreements. To raise additional capital or pursue strategic transactions, we may in the future sell additional shares of our common stock, par value $0.00001 per share (the “common stock”), or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for our common stock, which will dilute the ownership interest of our current stockholders, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our current stockholders. If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances, or marketing, distribution, or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates, future revenue streams or research programs, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us or that may reduce the value of our common stock. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce, or terminate our product development or commercialization efforts for our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant or any other product candidates that we develop or acquire or to cease operations entirely.

​

Changes in tax laws or in their implementation or interpretation may adversely affect our business and financial condition.

​

As part of Congress’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, or FFCR Act, was enacted on March 18, 2020, and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, was enacted on March 27, 2020. Both contain numerous tax provisions. In particular, the CARES Act retroactively and temporarily (for taxable years beginning before January 1, 2021) suspends application of the 80%-of-income limitation on the use of NOLs, which was enacted as part of the Tax Act. It also provides that NOLs arising in any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2021 are generally eligible to be carried back up to five years. The CARES Act also temporarily (for taxable years beginning in 2019 or 2020) relaxes the limitation of the tax deductibility for net interest expense by increasing the limitation from 30% to 50% of adjusted taxable income. The Company has evaluated the impact of the CARES Act and determined it to have an immaterial effect on the Company’s tax position.

​

Regulatory guidance under the Tax Act, the FFCR Act and the CARES Act is and continues to be forthcoming, and such guidance could ultimately increase or lessen impact of these laws on our business and financial condition. Congress is also considering and may enact further tax law changes in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic, some of which could have an impact on our company. In addition, state tax legislation or administration guidance conforming to or decoupling from particular provisions of the Tax Act, the FFCR Act and the CARES Act could affect our business or financial condition.

​

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and tax credit carryforwards may be limited.

​

We have generated significant NOLs, and research and development tax credits, or R&D credits, as a result of our incurrence of losses and our conduct of research activities since inception. We generally are able to carry NOLs and R&D credits forward to reduce our tax liability in future years. but certain NOL carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset our future income tax liabilities. As described above in “Changes in tax laws or in their implementation or interpretation may adversely affect our business and financial condition,” the Tax Act, as amended by the CARES Act, includes changes to U.S. federal tax rates and the rules governing NOLs that may significantly impact our ability to utilize our NOLs to offset taxable income in the future. Nor is it clear how various states will respond to the Tax Act, the FFCR Act or the CARES Act. In addition, state NOLs generated in one state cannot be used to offset income generated in another state. For these reasons, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes.

​

Table of Contents

In addition, our ability to utilize the NOLs and R&D credits is subject to the rules of Sections 382 and 383, respectively, of the Code. Those sections generally restrict the use of NOLs and R&D credits after an “ownership change.” An ownership change occurs if, among other things, the stockholders (or specified groups of stockholders) who own or have owned, directly or indirectly, 5% or more of a corporation’s common stock or are otherwise treated as 5% stockholders under Section 382 of the Code and the United States Treasury Department regulations promulgated thereunder increase their aggregate percentage ownership of that corporation’s stock by more than 50 percentage points over the lowest percentage of the stock owned by these stockholders over the applicable testing period. In the event of an ownership change, Section 382 imposes an annual limitation on the amount of taxable income a corporation may offset with NOL carryforwards and Section 383 imposes an annual limitation on the amount of tax a corporation may offset with business credit (including the R&D credit) carryforwards. Any unused annual limitation may be carried over to later years until the applicable expiration date for the respective NOL or R&D credit carryforwards. We have completed several financings since our inception, which may have resulted in an ownership change as defined by Sections 382 and 383 of the Code, or could result in an ownership change in the future, but we have not completed an analysis of whether a limitation as noted above exists. As of December 31, 2020, we have not performed a Section 382 study yet, but we will complete an appropriate analysis before our tax attributes are utilized.

​

Increases in authorized shares may be required for future financings or other strategic transactions. We have previously experienced difficulties obtaining quorum for our annual meetings and achieving the number of votes required for increases in authorized shares.

​

We may seek the additional capital necessary to fund our operations through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, and collaborative and licensing arrangements. We have limited capital and in order for us to execute on our business plan and remain viable as a going concern, we must have the flexibility to engage in capital raising transactions until we are able to generate sufficient revenue and cash flow. Investors in prior transactions have purchased our common stock or our derivative securities, such as warrants, for which we must reserve unissued common stock. We therefore may need to increase the number of authorized shares of common stock that will enable us to issue common stock or securities convertible or exercisable into common stock to investors and other strategic partners, and as a result enable us to engage in capital raising transactions and other strategic transactions involving the issuance of equity securities.

​

Such increases to our authorized common stock require shareholder approval. Our 2019 annual meeting of stockholders was initially postponed due to a lack of quorum, and we were able to successfully achieve quorum and the votes required to pass the proposal to increase the number of authorized shares only after announcing a new record date for the meeting, which was held in January 2020. Our 2020 annual meeting of stockholders was held in August 2020, and we were able to achieve quorum and obtain the number of necessary votes to approve an increase in our authorized common stock, without having to postpone the meeting. Although we were able to achieve quorum and obtain the number of necessary votes for an increase in authorized common stock in our January 2020 meeting and our August 2020 meeting, we cannot guarantee that we won’t experience future difficulties in obtaining quorum for our annual meetings or difficulties in obtaining the necessary votes required to pass proposals such as increases in authorized shares. In such events, we will be limited in our efforts to raise additional capital, and our operations, financial condition and our ability to continue as a going concern may be materially and adversely affected.

​

Acquisitions of companies, businesses, or technologies may substantially dilute our stockholders and increase our operating losses.

​

We continue to actively evaluate business partnerships and acquisitions of businesses, technologies, or intellectual property rights that we believe would be necessary, useful, or complementary to our current business. Any such acquisition may require assimilation of the operations, products or product candidates, and personnel of the acquired business and the training and integration of its employees, and could substantially increase our operating costs, without any offsetting increase in revenue. We may also acquire the right to use certain intellectual property through licensing agreements, which could substantially increase our operating costs. Acquisitions and licensing agreements may not provide the intended technological, scientific or business benefits and could disrupt our operations and divert our limited resources and management’s attention from our current operations, which could harm our existing product development efforts. While we may use cash or equity to finance a future acquisition or licensing agreement, it is likely we would issue equity securities as a significant portion or all of the consideration in any acquisition. The issuance of equity securities for an acquisition could be substantially dilutive to our stockholders. Any investment made in, or funds advanced to, a potential acquisition target could also significantly, adversely affect our results of operations and could

Table of Contents

further reduce our limited capital resources. Any acquisition or action taken in anticipation of a potential acquisition or other change in business activities could substantially depress the price of our stock. In addition, our results of operations may suffer because of acquisition related costs, or the post-acquisition costs of funding the development of an acquired technology or product candidates or operations of the acquired business, or due to amortization or impairment costs for acquired goodwill and other intangible assets.

​

Risks Related to the Development, Regulatory Approval, and Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

​

We are wholly dependent on the success of 1 product candidate, the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. Even if we are able to complete clinical development and obtain favorable clinical results, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize, our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant.

​

We currently have only 1 product candidate, the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, in clinical development, and our business depends almost entirely on the successful clinical development, regulatory approval, and commercialization of that product candidate, which may never occur. We currently have no products available for sale, generate no revenues from sales of any products, and we may never be able to develop marketable products. Our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant will require substantial additional clinical development, testing, manufacturing process development, and regulatory approval before we are permitted to commence its commercialization. Before obtaining regulatory approval via the HDE pathway for the commercial sale of any product candidate, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that the product candidate does not pose an unreasonable or significant risk of illness or injury, and that the probable benefit to health outweighs the risk of injury or illness from its use, taking into account the probable risks and benefits of currently available devices or alternative forms of treatment. Alternatively, if we were to seek premarket approval, or PMA, for our product candidate, that would require demonstration that the product is safe and effective for use in each target indication. This process can take many years. Of the large number of medical devices in development in the United States, only a small percentage successfully complete the regulatory approval process required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA and are commercialized. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the requisite capital to continue to fund our development and clinical programs, we may be unable to successfully develop or commercialize our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant or any other product candidate.

​

The clinical trials of any of our current or future product candidates are, and the manufacturing and marketing of any such product candidates will be, subject to extensive and rigorous review and regulation by the FDA and other government authorities in the United States and in other countries where we intend to test and, if approved, market such product candidates.

​

Clinical trials involve a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier nonclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of future trial results.

​

The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of new medical devices do not necessarily predict the results of later-stage clinical trials. The design of our clinical trials is based on many assumptions about the expected effects of our product candidates, and if those assumptions are incorrect, the trials may not produce results to support regulatory approval. We are currently pursuing marketing approval via the HDE regulatory pathway which requires us to show the device does not pose an unreasonable or significant risk of illness or injury, and that the probable benefit of health outweighs the risk of injury or illness from its use. Preliminary results may not be confirmed upon full analysis of the detailed results of an early clinical trial. Product candidates in later stages of clinical development may fail to show safety and probable benefit sufficient to support intended use claims despite having progressed through initial clinical testing. The data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere. It is also possible that patients enrolled in clinical trials will experience adverse events or unpleasant side effects that are not currently part of the product candidate’s profile. Because of the uncertainties associated with clinical development and regulatory approval, we cannot determine if or when we will have an approved product ready for commercialization or achieve sales or profits.

​

Table of Contents

We must obtain FDA approval before we can sell any of our products in the United States and approval of similar regulatory authorities in countries outside the United States before we can sell our products in such countries. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our products if such approval is denied or delayed.

​

The development, manufacture, and marketing of our products are subject to government regulation in the United States and other countries. In the United States and most foreign countries, we must complete rigorous preclinical testing and extensive human clinical trials that demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a product in order to apply for regulatory approval to market the product. If the FDA grants regulatory approval of a product, the approval may be limited to specific indications or limited with respect to its distribution. Expanded or additional indications for approved devices may not be approved, which could limit our potential revenues. Foreign regulatory authorities may apply similar or additional limitations or may refuse to grant any approval. Consequently, even if we believe that preclinical and clinical data are sufficient to support regulatory approval for our products, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may not ultimately grant approval for commercial sale in any jurisdiction. If our product candidates are not approved, our ability to generate revenues will be limited and our business will be adversely affected.

​

We are currently pursuing an HDE regulatory pathway in the United States for our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant. The HDE requires that there is no other comparable device available to provide therapy for a condition and requires sufficient information for the FDA to determine that the device does not pose an unreasonable or significant risk of illness or injury, and that the probable benefit to health outweighs the risk of injury or illness from its use. The amended protocol for The INSPIRE Study, which was approved in February 2016, established an OPC, which is a measure of study success used in clinical studies designed to demonstrate safety and probable benefit in support of an HDE approval. The OPC for The INSPIRE Study is currently defined as 25% or more of the patients in the study demonstrating an improvement of at least 1 AIS grade by 6 months post-implantation. While we expect The INSPIRE Study to serve as 1 source of data used to support HDE approval in the future, we will not complete full enrollment of that study. In addition, although The INSPIRE Study is structured with the OPC as the primary component for demonstrating probable benefit, the OPC is not the only variable that the FDA would evaluate when reviewing a future HDE application.

​

The FDA had previously recommended that we include a randomized, concurrent control arm in the study and we have proposed and received approval for the INSPIRE 2.0 Study. The primary endpoint is defined as the proportion of patients achieving an improvement of at least 1 AIS grade at 6 months post-implantation. The definition of study success is that the difference in the proportion of subjects who demonstrate an improvement of at least 1 grade on AIS assessment at the 6-month primary endpoint follow-up visit between the Scaffold Arm and the Comparator Arm must be equal to or greater than 20%. While our INSPIRE 2.0 Study is structured with a definition of study success requiring a minimum difference between groups in the percentage of subjects achieving improvement, that success definition is not the only factor that the FDA would evaluate in the future HDE application. Moreover, there can be no assurance that the INSPIRE 2.0 Study will be successfully completed.

​

Approval is not guaranteed if the OPC is met for The INSPIRE Study or the definition of study success is met for the INSPIRE 2.0 Study, and even if the OPC or definition of study success are not met, the FDA may approve a medical device if probable benefit is supported by a comprehensive review of all clinical endpoints and preclinical results, as demonstrated by the sponsor’s body of evidence.

​

In addition, as 1 source of comparator data, we completed the CONTEMPO Registry Study, utilizing existing databases and registries to develop a historical comparator that, to the extent possible, matches patients to those patients enrolled in The INSPIRE Study. Analysis of data from the CONTEMPO Registry Study may suggest a higher threshold for evidencing probable benefit. For example, ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) conversion rates at approximately 6 months post-injury across the three registries used in CONTEMPO varied from 16.7% – 23.4%, which are higher than the approximately 15.5% conversion rate from the historical registries that were the basis for the selection of the current OPC for The INSPIRE Study.

​

Even if we successfully complete the INSPIRE 2.0 Study, we cannot be certain that the FDA will agree that this study, together with the CONTEMPO Registry Study, provides sufficient information for the FDA to determine that the device does not pose an unreasonable or significant risk of illness or injury, and that the probable benefit to health outweighs the risk of injury or illness from its use.

​

Table of Contents

In the event our clinical data is not acceptable to the FDA, our ability to obtain approval under the HDE pathway may be delayed or may not be feasible. If the FDA does not approve our product candidates in a timely fashion, or at all, our business and financial condition will be adversely affected.

​

The 21st Century Cures Act increased the upper population limit for an HDE from 4,000 to 8,000, which allows us to potentially request an expansion of our current HUD to include additional patient populations beyond our current HUD for complete SCI. If we choose to pursue such an expansion, this may cause our application to be delayed or cause the FDA to request additional information. In addition, our current study is not designed to support approval beyond complete SCI. Thus, expansion would require additional studies. We cannot be certain that we will be able to increase the potential population that we might be able to treat based on the HDE pathway. If any of these events occur, our business and financial condition will be adversely affected.

​

There are risks associated with pursuing FDA approval via an HDE pathway, including the possibility that the approval could be withdrawn in the future if the FDA subsequently approves another device for the same intended use, as well as limitations on the ability to profit from sales of the product.

​

If the FDA subsequently approves a PMA or clears a 510(k) for the HUD or another comparable device with the same indication, the FDA may withdraw the HDE. Once a comparable device becomes legally marketed through PMA or 510(k) clearance to treat or diagnose the disease or condition in question, there may no longer be a need for the HUD and so the HUD may no longer meet the requirements of section 520(m)(2)(B) of the FDCA.

​

Except in certain circumstances, products approved under an HDE cannot be sold for an amount that exceeds the costs of research and development, fabrication, and distribution of the device (i.e., for profit). Currently, under section 520(m)(6)(A)(i) of the FDCA, as amended by the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, a HUD is only eligible to be sold for profit after receiving HDE approval if the device (1) is intended for the treatment or diagnosis of a disease or condition that occurs in pediatric patients or in a pediatric subpopulation, and such device is labeled for use in pediatric patients or in a pediatric subpopulation in which the disease or condition occurs; or (2) is intended for the treatment or diagnosis of a disease or condition that does not occur in pediatric patients or that occurs in pediatric patients in such numbers that the development of the device for such patients is impossible, highly impracticable, or unsafe. If an HDE-approved device does not meet either of the eligibility criteria, the device cannot be sold for profit. With enactment of the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017, Congress provided that the exemption for HUD / HDE profitability is available as long as the request for an exemption is submitted before October 1, 2022.

​

Some of our future products may be viewed by the FDA as combination products and the review of combination products is often more complex and more time consuming than the review of other types of products.

​

Our future products may be regulated by the FDA as combination products. For a combination product, the FDA must determine which center or centers within the FDA will review the product candidate and under what legal authority the product candidate will be reviewed. The process of obtaining FDA marketing clearance or approval is lengthy, expensive, and uncertain, and we cannot be sure that any of our combination products, or any other products, will be cleared or approved in a timely fashion, or at all. In addition, the review of combination products is often more complex and more time consuming than the review of a product candidate under the jurisdiction of only 1 center within the FDA. We cannot be sure that the FDA will not select to have our combination products reviewed and regulated by only 1 FDA center and/or different legal authority, in which case the path to regulatory approval would be different and could be lengthier and more costly. If the FDA does not approve or clear our products in a timely fashion, or at all, our business and financial condition will be adversely affected.

​

We may face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing, or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do.

​

In general, the biotechnology industry is subject to intense competition and rapid and significant technological change. We have many potential competitors, including major drug companies, specialized biotechnology firms, academic institutions, government agencies, and private and public research institutions. Many of these competitors have significantly greater financial and technical resources than us, and superior experience and expertise in research and development, preclinical testing, design and implementation of clinical trials, regulatory processes and approval for products, production and manufacturing, and sales and marketing of approved products. Large and established companies compete in the biotechnology market. In particular, these companies have greater experience and expertise in

Table of Contents

securing government contracts and grants to support their research and development efforts, conducting testing and clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals to market products, manufacturing such products on a broad scale, and marketing approved products. Smaller or early-stage companies and research institutions may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly if they have collaborative arrangements with larger and more established biotechnology companies. We will also face competition from these parties in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites, and registering subjects for clinical trials.

In order to effectively compete, we will have to make substantial investments in development, clinical testing, manufacturing, and sales and marketing, or partner with 1 or more established companies. There is no assurance that we will be successful in having our products approved or gaining significant market share for any of our products. Our technologies and products also may be rendered obsolete or noncompetitive as a result of products introduced by our competitors.

​

The results of our clinical trials may not support our product candidate claims or may result in the discovery of adverse side effects.

​

Our ongoing research and development, preclinical testing, and clinical trial activities are subject to extensive regulation and review by numerous governmental authorities both in the United States and abroad. Clinical studies must be conducted in compliance with FDA regulations or the FDA may take enforcement action. The data collected from these clinical studies may ultimately be used to support market clearance for these products. Even if our clinical trials are completed as planned, we cannot be certain that their results will support our product candidate claims or that the FDA will agree with our conclusions regarding them. Success in preclinical studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and we cannot be sure that the later trials will replicate the results of prior trials and preclinical studies. The clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our product candidates are safe and effective for the proposed indicated uses, which could cause us to abandon a product candidate and may delay development of others. Any delay or termination of our clinical trials will delay the filing of our product submissions and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues. It is also possible that patients enrolled in clinical trials will experience adverse side effects that are not currently part of the product candidate’s profile.

​

If approved, our products will require market acceptance to be successful. Failure to gain market acceptance would impact our revenues and may materially impair our ability to continue our business.

​

Even if we receive regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, the commercial success of our products will depend on, among other things, their acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers such as health insurance companies, and other members of the medical community as a therapeutic and cost-effective alternative to competing products and treatments. Physicians and hospitals will need to establish training and procedures to utilize and implement our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant, and there can be no assurance that these parties will adopt the use of our device or develop sufficient training and procedures to properly utilize it. Market acceptance of, and demand for, any product that we may develop and commercialize will depend on many factors, both within and outside of our control. Payers may view new products or products that have only recently been launched or with limited clinical data available, as investigational, unproven, or experimental, and on that basis may deny coverage of procedures involving use of our products. If our product candidates fail to gain market acceptance, we may be unable to earn sufficient revenue to continue our business.

​

If we or our suppliers fail to comply with FDA regulatory requirements, or if we experience unanticipated problems with any approved products, these products could be subject to restrictions or withdrawal from the market.

​

Any product for which we obtain regulatory approval, and the manufacturing processes, reporting requirements, post-approval clinical data, and promotional activities for such product, will be subject to continued regulatory review and oversight by the FDA. In particular, we and our third-party suppliers will be required to comply with the FDA’s Quality System Regulations, or QSRs. These FDA regulations cover the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, control, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, sterilization, storage, and shipping of products. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements is subject to continual review and is monitored rigorously through periodic inspections by the FDA. If we, or our manufacturers, fail to adhere to QSR requirements, this could delay production of our product candidates and lead to fines, difficulties in obtaining regulatory clearances, recalls,

Table of Contents

enforcement actions, including injunctive relief or consent decrees, or other consequences, which could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

​

In addition, we and our suppliers are required to comply with Good Manufacturing Practices and Good Tissue Practices with respect to any human cells and biologic products we may develop, and International Standards Organization regulations for the manufacture of our products, and other regulations which cover the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, control, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, storage, and shipping of any product for which we obtain clearance or approval. Manufacturing may also be subject to controls by the FDA for parts of the combination products that the FDA may find are controlled by the biologics regulations.

​

The FDA audits compliance with the QSR and other similar regulatory requirements through periodic announced and unannounced inspections of manufacturing and other facilities. The failure by us or 1 of our suppliers to comply with applicable statutes and regulations administered by the FDA, or the failure to timely and adequately respond to any adverse inspectional observations or product safety issues, could result in any of the following enforcement actions:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Any of these sanctions could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations, and financial condition.

​

Our products and operations are subject to extensive governmental regulation both in the United States and abroad, and our failure to comply with applicable requirements could cause our business to suffer.

​

Our medical device and biologic products and operations are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and various other federal, state, and foreign governmental authorities. Government regulation of medical devices and biologic products is meant to assure their safety and effectiveness, and includes regulation of, among other things:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

​

​

The regulations to which we are subject are complex and have tended to become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could impede our ability to carry on or expand our operations and could result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales.

​

Before we can market or sell a new regulated medical device product in the United States, we must obtain clearance under Section 510(k) of the FDCA, approval of a PMA, or approval of an HDE, unless the device is specifically exempt from premarket review. Our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant is expected to be regulated by the FDA as a Class III medical device, requiring either PMA or HDE approval. A HUD designation was granted for the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant in 2013, opening the HDE pathway.

​

In the PMA process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, preclinical, clinical trial, manufacturing, and labeling data.

​

Modifications to products that are approved through an HDE or PMA generally need FDA approval. The process of obtaining an HDE or PMA is costly and generally takes from 1 to 3 years, or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA until an approval is obtained.

​

An HDE application is similar in form and content to a PMA and, although exempt from the effectiveness requirements of a PMA, an HDE does require sufficient information for the FDA to determine that the device does not pose an unreasonable or significant risk of illness or injury, and that the probable benefit to health outweighs the risk of injury or illness from its use. Like a PMA, changes to HDE devices generally need FDA approval.

​

Biological products must satisfy the requirements of the Public Health Services Act and its implementing regulations. In order for a biologic product to be legally marketed in the U.S., the product must have a biologics license applicable approved by the FDA. The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort, and financial resources, and each may take several years to complete.

​

The FDA can delay, limit, or deny clearance or approval of a product for many reasons, including:

​

​

​

​

In addition, the FDA may change its clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions that may prevent or delay approval or clearance of our products under development or impact our ability to modify our currently approved or cleared products on a timely basis.

​

Further, even after we have obtained the proper regulatory clearance or approval to market a product, the FDA may require us to conduct post-marketing studies. Failure to conduct required studies in a timely manner could result in

Table of Contents

the revocation of approval for the product that is subject to such a requirement and could also result in the recall or withdrawal of the product, which would prevent us from generating sales from that product in the United States.

​

Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could jeopardize our ability to sell our products and result in enforcement actions such as:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Any of these sanctions could result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations, and financial condition.

​

If our products, or the malfunction of our products, cause or contribute to a death or a serious injury before or after approval, we will be subject to medical device reporting regulations, which can result in voluntary corrective actions or agency enforcement actions.

​

Under the FDA medical device reporting regulations, medical device manufacturers with approved products are required to report to the FDA information that a device has or may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or has malfunctioned in a way that would likely cause or contribute to death or serious injury if the malfunction of the device or 1 of our similar devices were to recur. Any such serious adverse event involving our products could result in future voluntary corrective actions, such as recalls or customer notifications, or agency action, such as inspection or enforcement action. In the context of our ongoing clinical trial, we report adverse events to the FDA in accordance with IDE regulations and to other relevant regulatory authorities in accordance with applicable national and local regulations. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, and either pre- or post-market, needed to address any serious adverse events will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business, and may harm our reputation and financial results.

​

Our products, once approved, may in the future be subject to product recalls. A recall of our products, either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA, or the discovery of serious safety issues with our products, could have a significant adverse impact on us.

​

If our products are approved for commercialization, the FDA and similar foreign governmental authorities have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. In the case of the FDA, the decision to require a recall must be based on an FDA finding that there is reasonable probability that the device would cause serious injury or death. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us or 1 of our partners could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects, or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any of our commercialized

Table of Contents

products would divert managerial and financial resources and have an adverse effect on our reputation, results of operations, and financial condition, which could impair our ability to manufacture our products in a cost-effective and timely manner in order to meet our customers’ demands. We may also be subject to liability claims, be required to bear other costs, or take other actions that may have a negative impact on our future sales and our ability to generate profits.

​

If we obtain approval for our products, we may be subject to enforcement action if we engage in improper marketing or promotion of our products.

​

We are not permitted to promote or market our investigational products. After approval, our promotional materials and training methods must comply with FDA and other applicable laws and regulations, including the prohibition of the promotion of unapproved, or off-label, use. Surgeons may use our products off-label, as the FDA does not restrict or regulate a surgeon’s choice of treatment within the practice of medicine. However, if the FDA determines that our promotional materials or training constitutes promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance of an untitled letter, a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine, or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state, or foreign enforcement authorities might take action if they consider our promotional or training materials to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant fines or penalties under other statutory authorities, such as laws prohibiting false claims for reimbursement. In that event, our reputation could be damaged and adoption of the products could be impaired. In addition, the off-label use of our products may increase the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims are expensive to defend and could divert our management’s attention, result in substantial damage awards against us, and harm our reputation.

​

If we obtain approval for our products, their commercial success will depend in part upon the level of reimbursement we receive from third parties for the cost of our products to users.

​

The commercial success of any product will depend, in part, on the extent to which reimbursement for the costs of our products and related treatments will be available from third-party payers such as government health administration authorities, private health insurers, managed care programs, and other organizations. Adequate third-party insurance coverage may not be available for us to establish and maintain price levels that are sufficient for us to continue our business or for realization of an appropriate return on investment in product development.

​

Legislative or regulatory reform of the healthcare systems in which we operate may affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates and could adversely affect our business.

The government and regulatory authorities in the United States, the European Union, and other markets in which we plan to commercialize our product candidates may propose and adopt new legislation and regulatory requirements relating to the approval, CE or European Union marking, manufacturing, promotion, or reimbursement of medical device and biologic products. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted or applicable regulations, guidance, or interpretations changed, and what the impact of such changes, if any, may be. Such legislation or regulatory requirements, or the failure to comply with such, could adversely impact our operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

​

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory clearance or approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. Certain policies of the current or future administrations may impact our business and industry. For example, the Trump administration took several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, FDA’s ability to engage in routine oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. It is difficult to predict how these executive actions will be implemented (to the extent they are not reversed by the new Biden Administration), and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If these executive actions impose restrictions on FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

​

Table of Contents

For example, in the United States, legislative changes have been enacted in the past and further changes are proposed that would impact the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or the Affordable Care Act. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding. Beginning April 1, 2013, Medicare payments for all items and services, including drugs and biologics, were reduced by 2% under the sequestration (i.e., automatic spending reductions) required by the Budget Control Act of 2011, as amended by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. Subsequent legislation extended the 2% reduction, on average, to 2025. It is likely that federal and state legislatures within the United States and foreign governments will continue to consider changes to existing healthcare legislation. The Affordable Care Act has faced ongoing legal challenges, including litigation seeking to invalidate some of or all of the law or the manner in which it has been implemented. With the current Presidential administration and Congress, there have been, and may be additional, legislative changes affecting the Affordable Care Act, including repeal of certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. It remains to be seen, however, precisely what impact legislation to date and any future legislation will have on the availability of healthcare and containing or reducing healthcare costs. We cannot predict the reform initiatives that may be adopted in the future or whether initiatives that have been adopted will be repealed or modified. We cannot quantify or predict with any certainty the likely impact of the Affordable Care Act, its amendment or repeal, or any alternative or related legislation, or any implementation of any such legislation, on our business model, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

​

These and other legislative and regulatory changes that have been or may be proposed in the future may impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

​

We have limited experience manufacturing our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant for clinical-study scale and no experience for commercial scale.

​

To date, we have manufactured our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant on a small scale, including sufficient supply that is needed for our clinical studies. We may encounter unanticipated problems in the scale-up process that will result in delays in the manufacturing of the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant and therefore delay our clinical studies. During our clinical trials, we are subject to FDA regulations requiring manufacturing of our scaffolds with the FDA requirements for design controls and subject to inspections by regulatory agencies. Our failure to comply with applicable regulations may result in delays and interruptions to our product supply while we seek to secure another supplier that meets all regulatory requirements. If we are unable to scale up our manufacturing to meet requirements for our clinical studies, we may be required to rely on contract manufacturers. Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks to which we would not be subject if we manufactured the product ourselves, including the possible breach of the manufacturing agreements by the third parties because of factors beyond our control, and the possibility of termination or nonrenewal of the agreements by the third parties because of our breach of the manufacturing agreement or based on their own business priorities.

​

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

​

We license certain technology underlying the development of our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant from BCH and MIT, and the loss of the license would result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, and operating results and cause the market value of our common stock to decline.

​

We license technology from BCH and MIT that is integrated into our Neuro-Spinal Scaffold implant under an exclusive license. Under the license agreement, we have agreed to milestone payments and to meet certain reporting obligations. In the event that we were to breach any of the obligations under the agreement and fail to cure timely, BCH and MIT would have the right to terminate the agreement upon notice. In addition, BCH and MIT have the right to terminate our license upon the bankruptcy or receivership of the Company. If we are unable to continue to use or license this technology on reasonable terms, or if this technology fails to operate properly, we may not be able to secure alternatives in a timely manner and our ability to develop our products could be harmed.

​

If we cannot protect, maintain and, if necessary, enforce our intellectual property rights, our ability to develop and commercialize products will be adversely impacted.

​

Our success, in large part, depends on our ability to protect and maintain the proprietary nature of our technology. We and our licensors must prosecute and maintain our existing patents and obtain new patents. Some of our proprietary information may not be patentable, and there can be no assurance that others will not utilize similar or superior solutions to compete with us. We cannot guarantee that we will develop proprietary products that are patentable,

Table of Contents

and that, if issued, any patent will give a competitive advantage or that such patent will not be challenged by third parties. The process of obtaining patents can be time consuming with no certainty of success, as a patent may not issue or may not have sufficient scope or strength to protect the intellectual property it was intended to protect. We cannot assure you that our means of protecting our proprietary rights will suffice or that others will not independently develop competitive technology or design around patents or other intellectual property rights issued to us. Even if a patent is issued, it does not guarantee that it is valid or enforceable. Any patents that we or our licensors have obtained or obtain in the future may be challenged, invalidated, or unenforceable. If necessary, we may initiate actions to protect our intellectual property, which can be costly and time consuming.

​

If third parties successfully claim that we infringe their intellectual property rights, our ability to continue to develop and commercialize products could be delayed or prevented.

​

Third parties may claim that we or our licensors are infringing on or misappropriating their proprietary information. Other organizations are engaged in research and product development efforts that may overlap with our products. Such third parties may currently have, or may obtain in the future, legally blocking proprietary rights, including patent rights, in 1 or more products or methods under development or consideration by us. These rights may prevent us from commercializing products, or may require us to obtain a license from the organizations to use the technology. We may not be able to obtain any such licenses that may be required on reasonable financial terms, if at all, and cannot be sure that the patents underlying any such licenses will be valid or enforceable. There may be rights that we are not aware of, including applications that have been filed but not published that, when issued, could be asserted against us. These third parties could bring claims against us that would cause us to incur substantial expenses and, if successful, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if a patent infringement suit were brought against us, we could be forced to stop or delay research and development of the product that is the subject of the suit. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our trade secrets or other confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

​

Risks Related to our Dependence on Third Parties

​

We will depend upon strategic relationships to develop, exploit, and manufacture our products. If these relationships are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of these products.

​

The near and long-term viability of our products will depend, in part, on our ability to successfully establish new strategic collaborations with biotechnology companies, hospitals, insurance companies, and government agencies. Establishing strategic collaborations is difficult and time-consuming. Potential collaborators may reject collaborations based upon their assessment of our financial, regulatory, or intellectual property position. If we fail to establish a sufficient number of collaborations on acceptable terms, we may not be able to commercialize our products or generate sufficient revenue to fund further research and development efforts.

​

Even if we establish new collaborations, these relationships may never result in the successful development or commercialization of any of our product candidates for reasons both within and outside of our control.

​

There are a limited number of suppliers that can provide materials to us. Any problems encountered by such suppliers may detrimentally impact us.

​

We rely on third-party suppliers and vendors for certain of the materials used in the manufacture of our products or other of our product candidates. Any significant problem experienced by 1 of our suppliers could result in a delay or interruption in the supply of materials to us until such supplier resolves the problem or an alternative source of supply is located. Any delay or interruption could negatively affect our operations.

​

If the third parties on which we rely to conduct our laboratory testing, animal, and human clinical trials do not perform as contractually required or expected, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our products.

​

We have been, and will continue to be, dependent on third-party CROs, medical institutions, investigators, and contract laboratories to conduct certain activities related to our laboratory testing and animal and human clinical studies. We are responsible for confirming that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with our approved plan and

Table of Contents

protocol. Moreover, the FDA and foreign regulatory agencies require us to comply with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practices, for conducting, recording, and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the trial participants are adequately protected. Our reliance on these third parties does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or regulatory obligations or meet expected deadlines, if the third parties need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our preclinical development activities or clinical trials may be extended, delayed, suspended, or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval or successfully commercialize our products on a timely basis, if at all, and our business, operating results, and prospects may be adversely affected.

​

Risks Related to Employee Matters and Managing Growth

​

Our success depends on our ability to retain our management and other key personnel.

​

We depend on our senior management as well as key scientific personnel. We have implemented restructurings that have significantly reduced our workforce, leaving only key positions filled. On February 2, 2018, we appointed Richard Toselli M.D. as President, Chief Executive Officer, and a director. On January 14, 2019, we appointed Richard Christopher as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer. The loss of any members of senior management or key scientific personnel could harm our business and significantly delay or prevent the achievement of research, development, or business objectives. Competition for qualified employees is intense among biotechnology companies, and the loss of qualified employees, or an inability to attract, retain, and motivate additional highly skilled employees could hinder our ability to successfully develop marketable products.

​

Our future success also depends on our ability to identify, attract, hire, train, retain, and motivate other highly skilled scientific, technical, marketing, managerial, and financial personnel. Although we will seek to hire and retain qualified personnel with experience and abilities commensurate with our needs, there is no assurance that we will succeed despite our collective efforts. The loss of the services of any of our senior management or other key personnel could hinder our ability to fulfill our business plan and further develop and commercialize our products and services. Competition for personnel is intense, and any failure to attract and retain the necessary technical, marketing, managerial, and financial personnel would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

​

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

​

We have received confidential and proprietary information from collaborators, prospective licensees, and other third parties. In addition, we employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. We may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of these third parties or our employees’ former employers. We may also be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. We may be subject to ownership disputes in the future arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and employees.

​

Risks Related to Litigation and Legal Compliance

​

We may face, and in the past have faced, lawsuits, which could divert management’s attention and harm our business.

​

We may face, and in the past have faced, lawsuits, including class action or securities derivative lawsuits. The amount of time that is required to resolve these lawsuits is unpredictable and any lawsuits may divert management’s attention from the day-to-day operations of our business, which could adversely affect our business, results of

Table of Contents

operations, and cash flows. Any litigation or claim against us, even those without merit, may cause us to incur substantial costs, and could place a significant strain on our financial resources, divert the attention of management from our core business and harm our reputation.

​

We face potential product liability claims, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability and costs.

​

We will have exposure to claims for product liability. Product liability coverage for the healthcare industry is expensive and sometimes difficult to obtain. We may not be able to maintain such insurance on acceptable terms or be able to secure increased coverage if the commercialization of our products progresses, nor can we be sure that existing or future claims against us will be covered by our product liability insurance. Moreover, the existing coverage of our insurance policy or any rights of indemnification and contribution that we may have may not be sufficient to offset existing or future claims. A successful claim may prevent us from obtaining adequate product liability insurance in the future on commercially desirable terms, if at all. Even if a claim is not successful, defending such a claim would be time-consuming and expensive, may damage our reputation in the marketplace, and would likely divert our management’s attention.

​

We are subject to environmental, health, and safety laws. Failure to comply with such environmental, health, and safety laws could cause us to become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

​

We are subject to various environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations, including those relating to safe working conditions, laboratory, and manufacturing practices, the experimental use of animals and humans, emissions and wastewater discharges, and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances used in connection with our research. Any of these laws or regulations could cause us to incur additional expense or restrict our operations. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our research and development efforts.

​

Our relationships with customers and third party payers will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, program exclusion, contractual damages, reputational harm, and diminished profits and future earnings.

​

Healthcare providers, physicians, and third party payers will play a primary role in the recommendation and use of our products and any other product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with healthcare providers, physicians, and third party payers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell, and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

Some state laws require device companies to comply with the industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government and may require product manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures. State and foreign laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

​

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Any penalties, damages, fines, curtailment, or restructuring of our operations could adversely affect our financial results. If any such actions are instituted against us and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

​

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion of products from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil, or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

​

Our operations and reputation may be impaired if our information technology systems fail to perform adequately or if we are the subject of a data breach or cyber-attack.

​

Our information technology systems are important to operating our business. We rely on our information technology systems, some of which are or may be managed or hosted by or out-sourced to third party service providers, to manage our business data and other business processes. If we do not allocate and effectively manage the resources necessary to build, sustain, and protect appropriate information technology systems and infrastructure, or we do not effectively implement system upgrades or oversee third party service providers, our business or financial results could be negatively impacted. The failure of our information technology systems to perform as we anticipate could disrupt our business and could result in transaction or reporting errors and processing inefficiencies causing our business and results of operations to suffer.

​

Furthermore, our information technology systems may be vulnerable to cyber-attacks or other security incidents, service disruptions, or other system or process failures. Such incidents could result in unauthorized access to information including vendor, consumer or other company confidential data as well as disruptions to operations. We have experienced in the past, and expect to continue to experience, cybersecurity threats and incidents, although to date none has been material. To address the risks to our information technology systems and data, we maintain an information security program that includes updating technology, developing security policies and procedures, implementing and assessing the effectiveness of controls, conducting risk assessments of third-party service providers and designing business processes to mitigate the risk of such breaches. There can be no assurance that these measures will prevent or limit the impact of a future incident. Moreover, the development and maintenance of these measures

Table of Contents

requires continuous monitoring as technologies change and efforts to overcome security measures evolve. If we are unable to prevent or adequately respond to and resolve an incident, it may have a material, negative impact on our operations or business reputation, and we may experience other adverse consequences such as loss of assets, remediation costs, litigation, regulatory investigations, and the failure by us to retain or attract customers following such an event. Additionally, we rely on services provided by third-party vendors for certain information technology processes and functions, which makes our operations vulnerable to a failure by any one of these vendors to perform adequately or maintain effective internal controls.

​

Risks Related to Investment in Our Securities

​

The price of our common stock has been and may continue to be volatile, which could lead to losses by investors and costly securities litigation.

​

The trading price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could fluctuate in response to factors such as:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

The stock market is subject to significant price and volume fluctuations. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been initiated against such company. Litigation initiated against us, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and diversion of our management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business and financial condition.

​

In the foreseeable future, we do not intend to pay cash dividends on shares of our common stock so any investor gains will be limited to the value of our shares.

​

We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation, and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any gains to stockholders will therefore be limited to the increase, if any, in our share price.

​

In the event that we fail to satisfy any of the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market, our common stock may be delisted, which could affect our market price and liquidity.

​

Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market. For continued listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we will be required to comply with the continued listing requirements, including the minimum market capitalization standard, the corporate governance requirements and the minimum closing bid price requirement, among other requirements. For example, we have received deficiency letters due to the failure to maintain the minimum bid price and the failure to meet stockholder equity requirements, including the deficiency letter from the Listings Qualifications

Table of Contents

Department of the Nasdaq Stock Market letter we received on July 17, 2019 notifying us that, for the last 30 consecutive business days, the bid price for our common stock had closed below the minimum $1.00 per share requirement for continued inclusion on the Nasdaq Capital Market. On January 10, 2020, under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A)(ii), the Company provided written notice to Nasdaq of its intention to cure the deficiency, and on January 14, 2020, in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(2)(B), we were provided an additional 180 calendar day compliance period, or until July 13, 2020, to regain compliance with the bid price requirement. On February 11, 2020, to address the 2019 July deficiency letter, we implemented a 1-for-30 reverse stock split of our common stock and a proportionate reduction in our authorized common stock. On February 28, 2020, we received a letter (the “Compliance Letter”) from the Listing Qualifications department of Nasdaq notifying us that we have regained compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement, and therefore, Nasdaq considered the matter closed. On December 4, 2020, we received a deficiency letter from the Listings Qualifications Department of the Nasdaq Stock Market notifying us that, for the last 30 consecutive business days, the bid price for our common stock had closed below the minimum $1.00 per share requirement for continued inclusion on the Nasdaq Capital Market. On February 1, 2021, we received a letter (the “February 2021 Compliance Letter”) from the Listing Qualifications department of Nasdaq notifying us that we have regained compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement, and therefore, Nasdaq considered the matter closed. Even if we remain in compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement, we may decide to implement a reverse stock split to further ensure that we remain in compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement. Regardless, there can be no assurance that we will maintain compliance with the bid price requirement, or that we will continue to be in compliance with the other continued listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market.

​

In the event that we fail to regain compliance or satisfy any of the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market, our common stock may be delisted. If our securities are delisted from trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market, and we are not able to list our securities on another exchange our securities could be quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board or on the “pink sheets.” As a result, we could face significant adverse consequences including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

Anti‑takeover effects of certain provisions of our articles of incorporation and Nevada state law may discourage or prevent a takeover.

​

Our articles of incorporation divide our Board of Directors into 3 classes, with 3-year staggered terms. The classified board provision could increase the likelihood that, in the event an outside party acquired a controlling block of our stock, incumbent directors nevertheless would retain their positions for a substantial period, which may have the effect of discouraging, delaying, or preventing a change in control. In addition, Nevada has a business combination law, which prohibits certain business combinations between Nevada publicly traded corporations, or Nevada corporations that elect to be subject to the law, and “interested stockholders” for 2 years after the interested stockholder first becomes an interested stockholder, unless the corporation’s board of directors approves the transaction by which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder in advance, or the proposed combination in advance of the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder.

​

The proposed combination may be approved after the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder with preapproval by the board of directors and a vote at a special or annual meeting of stockholders holding at least 60% of the voting power not owned by the interested stockholder or his/her/ its affiliates or associates. After the 2 year moratorium period, additional stockholder approvals or fair value requirements must be met by the interested shareholder up to 4 years after the stockholder became an interested stockholder. In addition, we may become subject to Nevada’s control share laws. A corporation is subject to Nevada’s control share law if it has more than 200 stockholders, at least 100 of whom are stockholders of record and residents of Nevada, and if the corporation does business in Nevada,

Table of Contents

including through an affiliated corporation. This control share law may have the effect of discouraging corporate takeovers. Currently, we believe that we have less than 100 stockholders of record who are residents of Nevada, and are therefore not subject to the control share laws.

​

The provisions of our articles of incorporation and Nevada’s business combination and control share laws make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us and make a takeover more difficult to complete, even if such a transaction were in our stockholders’ interest or might result in a premium over the market price for our common stock.

​

Failure to maintain an effective system of internal controls could result in material misstatements of our financial statements or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations or fail to prevent fraud in which case, our stockholders could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which would harm our business and could negatively impact the price of our stock.

​

We are required to comply with the internal control evaluation and certification requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) and management is required to report annually on our internal control over financial reporting. Our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to formally attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of SOX until the date we have a public float of $75 million or greater and $100 million or greater in revenue.

​

If we fail to maintain effective internal controls and procedures for financial reporting, it could result in material misstatements in the annual or interim financial statements that would not be prevented or detected in a timely manner. We cannot assure you that material weaknesses or significant deficiencies will not occur in the future and that we will be able to remediate such weaknesses or deficiencies in a timely manner, which could impair our ability to accurately and timely report our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

​

We are a “smaller reporting company,” and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

​

We are considered a “smaller reporting company” under Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. We are therefore entitled to rely on certain reduced disclosure requirements, such as an exemption from providing selected financial data and executive compensation information. These exemptions and reduced disclosures in our SEC filings due to our status as a smaller reporting company also mean our auditors are not required to review our internal control over financial reporting and may make it harder for investors to analyze our results of operations and financial prospects. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our common stock prices may be more volatile. We will remain a smaller reporting company until our public float exceeds $250 million or our annual revenues exceed $100 million with a public float greater than $700 million.

​

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

​

We were incorporated on April 2, 2003, under the name of Design Source, Inc. On October 26, 2010, we acquired the business of InVivo Therapeutics Corporation, which was founded in 2005, and continued the existing business operations of InVivo Therapeutics Corporation as our wholly-owned subsidiary.

​

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

​

Our consolidated financial statements, which appear in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, which require that our management make certain assumptions and estimates and, in connection therewith, adopt certain accounting policies. Our significant accounting policies are set forth in Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies”, in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Of those policies, we believe that the policies discussed below may involve the highest degree of judgment and may be the most critical to an accurate reflection of our financial condition and results of operations.

​

Stock-Based Compensation

​

Our stock options are granted with an exercise price set at the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant. Our stock options generally expire 10 years from the date of grant and vest upon terms determined by our Board of Directors.

​

We recognize compensation costs resulting from the issuance of stock-based awards to employees, non-employees and directors as an expense in our statements of operations over the service period based on a measure of fair value for each stock-based award. The fair value of each option grant is estimated as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model and the fair value of each restricted stock award or restricted stock unit, which we refer to collectively as restricted securities, is determined based on the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant. The fair value is amortized as a compensation cost on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award, which is generally the vesting period. The expected term of any options granted under our stock plans is based on the average of the contractual term (generally, 10 years) and the vesting period (generally, 48 months). The risk-free rate is based on the yield of a U.S. Treasury security with a term consistent with the expected term of the option. The restricted securities generally vest over a three-year period, contingent on the recipient’s continued employment. See Note 9, “Shared-Based Compensation, Stock Options and Restricted Securities,” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10 K for more information about the assumptions underlying these estimates.

​

Research and Development Expense

​

Our research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred for the development of our product candidates, which include:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Our research and development costs are expensed as incurred. We are required to estimate our accrued research and development expenses. This process involves reviewing open contracts and purchase orders, communicating with our personnel to identify services that have been performed on our behalf and estimating the level of service performed

Table of Contents

and the associated costs incurred for the services when we have not yet been invoiced or otherwise notified of the actual costs. We make estimates of our accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date in our consolidated financial statements based on facts and circumstances known to us at that time. If the actual timing of the performance of services or the level of effort varies from our estimate, we adjust the accrued expense accordingly. Although we do not expect our estimates to be materially different from amounts actually incurred, our understanding of the status and timing of services performed relative to the actual status and timing of services performed may vary and may result in us reporting amounts that are too high or too low in any particular period. To date, we have not made any material adjustments to our prior estimates of accrued research and development expenses.

​

Recently Adopted Accounting Standards

​

In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” and subsequent amendments to the initial guidance: ASU 2018-19 “Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses”, ASU 2019-04 “Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments”, ASU 2019-05 “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses”, ASU 2019-11 “Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses”, ASU 2020-02 Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326) and Leases (Topic 842) and ASU 2020-03 Codification Improvements to Financial Instruments, (collectively, “Topic 326”). Topic 326 requires measurement and recognition of expected credit losses for financial assets held. Topic 326 is effective for all public business entities, excluding smaller reporting companies, for periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and all other entities beginning after December 15, 2022. We early adopted ASU No. 2016-13 and the related amending ASU’s on January 1, 2020, and the adoption did not have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or disclosures.

​

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13 - Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement which improves the disclosure requirements on fair value measurements in Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this ASU are effective for all entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. The amendments on changes in unrealized gains and losses, the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements, and the narrative description of measurement uncertainty should be applied prospectively for only the most recent interim or annual period presented in the initial fiscal year of adoption. All other amendments should be applied retrospectively to all periods presented upon their effective date. Early adoption is permitted upon issuance of this ASU. We adopted ASU No. 2018-13 on January 1, 2020, and the adoption did not have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or disclosures.

​

In November 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-08 “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718) and Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Codification Improvements - Share-Based Consideration Payable to a Customer.” ASU No. 2019-08 amends and clarifies ASU No. 2018-07, which we adopted on January 1, 2019, to require that an entity measure and classify share-based payment awards granted to a customer by applying the guidance in Topic 718. For entities that have already adopted the amendments in ASU No. 2018-07, the amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted. We adopted ASU No. 2019-08 on January 1, 2020, and the adoption did not have any impact on our financial position, results of operations or disclosures.

​

In December 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-12, Simplifications to Accounting for Income Taxes (Topic 740). The amendments in this ASU removes certain exceptions for recognizing deferred taxes for investments, performing intra-period allocation, and calculating income taxes in interim periods. This ASU also adds guidance to reduce complexity in certain areas, including deferred taxes for goodwill and allocating taxes for members of a consolidated group. This ASU is effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, and early adoption is permitted. We adopted ASU No. 2019-12 on January 1, 2020, and the adoption did not have any impact on our financial position, results of operations or disclosures.

​

New Accounting Pronouncements Not Yet Adopted

​

In January 2020, the FASB issued ASU No. 2020-01, Investments—Equity Securities (Topic 321), Investments—Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323), and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815). The

Table of Contents

amendments in this ASU clarify the interaction between the accounting for investments in equity securities, investment in equity method and certain derivatives instruments. The ASU is expected to reduce diversity in practice and increase comparability of the accounting for these interactions. The pronouncement is effective for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2021. ASU No. 2020-01 is effective for us beginning in fiscal 2022. We are currently in the process of evaluating the effects of this pronouncement on our financial statements.

​

In August 2020, the FASB issued ASU No. 2020-06 “Debt—Debt with Conversion and Other Options (Subtopic 470-20) and Derivatives and Hedging— Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity”, related to the measurement and disclosure requirements for convertible instruments and contracts in an entity's own equity. The pronouncement simplifies and adds disclosure requirements for the accounting and measurement of convertible instruments and the settlement assessment for contracts in an entity's own equity. This pronouncement is effective for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning in fiscal 2022. We are currently in the process of evaluating the effects of this pronouncement on our financial statements.

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

In April 2020, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the "April 2020 Purchase Agreement") with certain institutional investors (the "April 2020 Purchasers"), pursuant to which we agreed to sell and issue, in a registered direct offering, an aggregate of 1,715,240 shares of our common stock, at a purchase price per share of $1.75 (the "April 2020 Shares"). The April 2020 Shares were offered by us pursuant to a shelf registration statement on Form S-3, which was declared effective by SEC on November 14, 2019 (File No. 333-234353) and a prospectus supplement thereunder. Pursuant to the April 2020 Purchase Agreement, in a concurrent private placement, we also issued to the April 2020 Purchasers warrants (the "April 2020 Series C Warrants") to purchase up to 1,715,240 shares of our common stock (the "Private Placement" and together with the April 2020 Registered Offering, the "April 2020 Offerings"). The April 2020 Series C Warrants are exercisable immediately at an exercise price of $1.62 per share of common stock, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances, and expire on October 17, 2025. In connection with the April 2020 Offerings, we also issued to Wainwright warrants to purchase an aggregate of 111,491 shares of our common stock (the “April 2020 Placement Agent Warrants”) which represents a number of shares of common stock equal to 6.5% of the aggregate number of April 2020 Shares sold in the April 2020 Registered Offering, at an exercise price of $2.1875 per share with a term expiring on April 15, 2025. The net proceeds to us, after deducting Wainwright's placement agent fees and other offering expenses payable by us, were approximately $2.6 million. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we issued an aggregate of 35,000 shares of our common stock upon the exercise of certain of the April 2020 Series C Warrants for aggregate proceeds of $57 thousand. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we did not issue any shares as a result of April 2020 Placement Agent Warrants exercise activity.

​

In March 2020, we completed a registered public offering (the “March 2020 Offering”) in which we sold an aggregate of (i) 955,613 shares of our common stock, (the “March 2020 Shares”) and Series A Warrants exercisable for an aggregate of 955,613 shares of our common stock (the “March 2020 Series A Warrants”) at a combined public offering price of $2.75 per share and associated warrant and (ii) pre-funded Series B warrants exercisable for an aggregate of 1,589,842 shares of our common stock (the “March 2020 Series B Warrants”) and Series A Warrants exercisable for an aggregate of 1,589,842 shares of our common stock (also the “March 2020 Series A Warrants”) at a combined public offering price of $2.75 per pre-funded warrant and associated warrant. Each March 2020 Series A Warrant has an exercise price of $2.75 per share, is exercisable immediately and expires in March 2025. Each March 2020 Series B Warrant has an exercise price of $0.00001 per share, is exercisable immediately, and expires when exercised in full, subject to certain conditions. In connection with the March 2020 Offering, we issued, to Wainwright, the placement agent for the March 2020 Offering, warrants (the “March 2020 Placement Agent Warrants”) to purchase an aggregate of 165,455 shares of our common stock, which represents a number of shares of common stock equal to 6.5% of the aggregate number of shares of common stock and March 2020 Series B Warrants sold in the March 2020 Offering. The March 2020 Placement Agent Warrants have an exercise price of $3.4375 per share, are immediately exercisable and expire in March 2025. The net proceeds to us, after deducting Wainwright's placement agent fees and other offering expenses payable by us, were approximately $6.0 million. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we did not issue any shares as a result of the March 2020 Placement Agent Warrants or March 2020 Series A Warrants exercise activity. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we issued an aggregate of 1,577,114 shares of our common stock upon the exercise of certain of the pre-funded March 2020 Series B warrants for an immaterial amount, as they were substantially pre-funded.

​

In November 2019, we closed a public offering of an aggregate of 233,341 shares of our common stock, at an offering price of $3.60 per share (the offering, the “2019 Offering”). The net proceeds to us after deducting the placement agent fees and other offering expenses, were $367 thousand. In connection with the 2019 Offering, we issued to Wainwright, warrants (the “2019 Placement Agent Warrants”) to purchase an aggregate of 15,168 shares of our common stock. The 2019 Placement Agent Warrants have an exercise price of $4.50 per share, are immediately exercisable and expire in November 2024. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we did not issue any shares of common stock as a result of exercise activity related to the 2019 Placement Agent Warrants.

​

In November 2019, we entered into a Second Amendment to Warrant Agency Agreement and Warrants, (“the Second Ladenburg Warrant Amendment”), by and between us and Continental, as Warrant Agent, dated November 21, 2019, that amended the 2018 Series A warrants issued by us in the June 2018 underwritten public offering to reflect a reduced exercise price per share of $6.98 from $60.00. See Note 10 to our Consolidated Financial Statements for more information about the Second Ladenburg Warrant Amendment. During the year ended December 31, 2020 we issued an aggregate of 40,975 shares of common stock upon the exercise of certain of the 2018 Series A warrants for aggregate proceeds of $286 thousand.

Table of Contents

Cashflows

Net cash used in operating activities is comprised of our net losses, adjusted for non-cash expenses, and working capital requirements. Net cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $9.5 million compared to $10.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The $0.8 million decrease in net cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the same period in the prior year was primarily due to a decrease in our net loss of $2.8 million, a decrease in warrant modification expense of $0.7 million, a decrease in the change in accrued expenses and other liabilities of $0.4 million, a decrease in the change in accounts payable of $0.6 million and a decrease in the change in operating lease right-of-use liability of $0.2 million.

​

Net cash used in investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, was $41 thousand and $12 thousand, respectively attributable to purchases of capital equipment.

​

Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $22.4 million consisting of $22.1 million in proceeds from the issuance of common stock associated with the offerings in 2020 and $0.3 million in proceeds from the exercise of warrants. This compares to net cash of $0.3 million provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2019 consisting primarily of $0.4 million in proceeds from the issuance of common stock associated with the November 2019 underwritten public offering, offset by $0.1 million in loan repayments.

​

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

​

We do not have any off balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future material effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, or capital resources.

​

Inflation and Changing Prices

​

We do not believe that inflation has had, or will have, a material impact on our operating costs and earnings.

​

Commitments

​

See Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies,” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for information regarding our commitments.

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

See notes to the consolidated financial statements.

​

(Share and per share data reflects 1-for-30 reverse stock split effective February 11, 2020).

​

​

​

Table of Contents

See notes to the consolidated financial statements.

​

(Share and per share data reflects 1-for-30 reverse stock split effective February 11, 2020)

​

​

​

Table of Contents

See notes to the consolidated financial statements.

​

(Share and per share data reflects 1-for-30 reverse stock split effective February 11, 2020)

​

​

​

Table of Contents

See notes to the consolidated financial statements.

​

(Share and per share data reflects 1-for-30 reverse stock split effective February 11, 2020)

​

Table of Contents

InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corp.

​

Table of Contents

INSPIRE 2.0 Study, and may also have an adverse effect on the Company’s results of future operations, financial position, and liquidity, and even after the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided, the Company may continue to experience adverse impacts to its business as a result of any economic recession or depression that has occurred or may occur in the future.

​

Going Concern

​

The Company’s financial statements as of December 31, 2020 were prepared under the assumption that the Company will continue as a going concern. At December 31, 2020, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of $19.5 million. Subsequent to December 31, 2020, and as of February 25, 2021, the Company received $8.4 million upon the exercise of certain October 2020 Series A Warrants and October 2020 Placement Agent Warrants. Given the Company’s development plans, the Company estimates cash resources will be sufficient to fund its operations through the second quarter of 2023.

​

The Company’s ability to continue as a going concern depends on its ability to obtain additional equity or debt financing, attain further operating efficiencies, reduce expenditures, and, ultimately, to generate revenue. If the Company is unable to continue as a going concern, it may have to liquidate its assets and may receive less than the value at which those assets are carried on its audited financial statements, and it is likely that investors will lose all or part of their investment.

​

Reverse Stock Split

​

On February 11, 2020, the Company effected a reverse stock split of its common stock, par value $0.00001 per share, at a ratio of 1-for-30 (the “2020 Reverse Stock Split”). As a result of the 2020 Reverse Stock Split, (i) every 30 shares of the issued and outstanding common stock were automatically converted into one newly issued and outstanding share of common stock, without any change in the par value per share; (ii) the number of shares of common stock into which each outstanding warrant or option to purchase common stock is exercisable was proportionally decreased, and (iii) the number of authorized shares of common stock outstanding was proportionally decreased. Shares of common stock underlying outstanding stock options and other equity instruments convertible into common stock were proportionately reduced and the respective exercise prices, if applicable, were proportionately increased in accordance with the terms of the agreements governing such securities.

​

All of the Company’s historical share and per share information related to issued and outstanding common stock and outstanding options and warrants exercisable for common stock in these consolidated financial statements were adjusted, on a retroactive basis to reflect the 2020 Reverse Stock Split.

​

2020 Increase in Authorized Shares

​

In January 2020, the Company’s stockholders approved an amendment to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation to increase the number of shares of authorized Common Stock from 25,000,000 to 500,000,000 (without giving effect to the 2020 Reverse Stock Split). On February 11, 2020, the Company effected the 2020 Reverse Stock Split and the number of shares of authorized Common Stock was reduced to 16,666,667.

​

On August 4, 2020, the Company held its 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”). At the Annual Meeting, the Company’s stockholders approved an amendment to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation to increase the number of shares of authorized common stock from 16,666,667 to 50,000,000 shares.

​

2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

​

A summary of the significant accounting policies followed by the Company in the preparation of the financial statements is as follows:

​

Use of estimates

​

The process of preparing financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported

Table of Contents

amounts expensed during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates and changes in estimates may occur.

​

Basis of presentation and principles of consolidation

​

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of InVivo Therapeutics Holdings Corp. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, InVivo Therapeutics Corporation. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or U.S. GAAP.

​

Cash and cash equivalents

​

The Company considers only those investments that are highly liquid, readily convertible to cash, and that mature within 3 months from date of purchase to be cash equivalents. From time to time, the Company may have cash balances in financial institutions in excess of insurance limits. The Company has not experienced any losses related to these balances. Management believes it is not exposed to significant credit risk. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, cash equivalents were comprised primarily of money market funds.

​

Cash and cash equivalents consist of the following:

​

Restricted cash

​

Restricted cash as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 was $110 thousand and $114 thousand, respectively. Restricted cash as of December 31, 2020 included a $50 thousand security deposit related to the Company’s credit card account and a $60 thousand standby letter of credit in favor of a landlord (see Note 13).

​

Restricted cash as of December 31, 2019 included a $50 thousand security deposit related to the Company’s credit card account, $4 thousand related to 401(k) reserve account and a $60 thousand standby letter of credit in favor of a landlord (see Note 13).

​

Financial instruments

​

The carrying amounts reported in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets for cash, cash equivalents and accounts payable approximate fair value based on the short-term nature of these instruments.

​

Property and equipment

​

Property and equipment are carried at cost. Depreciation and amortization expense are recorded over the estimated useful lives of the assets using the straight-line method. A summary of the estimated useful lives is as follows:

​

​

Table of Contents

Warrant modifications

​

The Company treats a modification of the terms or conditions of an equity award in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 718-20-35-3 by treating the modification as an exchange of the original award for a new award. In substance, the entity repurchases the original instrument by issuing a new instrument of equal or greater value, incurring additional cost for any incremental value. Incremental cost shall be measured as the excess, if any, of the fair value of the modified award determined in accordance with the provisions of this Topic over the fair value of the original award immediately before its terms are modified, measured based on the share price and other pertinent factors at that date.

​

Research and development expenses

​

Costs incurred for research and development are expensed as incurred. Certain agreements require the Company to make pre-payments for clinical research organizations (“CROs”) services. As of December 31, 2020, the Company had $1.2 million in prepayments for CRO services of which $110 thousand is included in prepaid expense and other current assets balance on the balance sheet and the remaining $1.1 million is included within the other long term assets section of the balance sheet. As of December 31, 2019, the Company had $1.2 million in prepayments for CRO services of which $120 thousand is included in prepaid expense and other current assets balance on the balance sheet and the remaining $1.1 million is included within the other long term assets balance on the balance sheet.

​

Concentrations of credit risk

​

Financial instruments which potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of cash and cash equivalents. The Company maintains cash in commercial banks, which may at times exceed Federally Insured limits. The Company has not experienced any loss in such accounts. The Company believes it is not exposed to any significant credit risk on cash and cash equivalents.

​

Segment information

​

Operating segments are identified as components of an enterprise about which separate discrete financial information is available for evaluation by the chief operating decision maker, or decision making group, in making decisions regarding resource allocation and assessing performance. To date, the Company has viewed its operations and manages its business as principally one operating segment, which is developing and commercializing biopolymer scaffolding devices for the treatment of spinal cord injuries. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, all of the Company’s assets were located in one location in the United States.

​

Income taxes

​

For federal and state income taxes, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based upon temporary differences between the financial statement and the tax basis of assets and liabilities. Deferred income taxes are based upon prescribed rates and enacted laws applicable to periods in which differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is recorded when it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Accordingly, the Company provides a valuation allowance, if necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to amounts that are realizable. Tax positions taken or expected to be taken in the course of preparing the Company’s tax returns are required to be evaluated to determine whether the tax positions are “more-likely-than-not” of being sustained by the applicable tax authority.

​

Tax positions not deemed to meet a more-likely-than-not threshold would be recorded as a tax expense in 2020. There were no material uncertain tax positions that required accrual or disclosure to the financial statements as of December 31, 2020 or 2019. Tax years subsequent to 2017 remain open to examination by U.S. federal and state tax authorities.

​

Impairment of long-lived assets

​

The Company continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that carrying amounts of long-lived assets may not be recoverable. An impairment loss is recognized when expected cash flows are less than an asset’s carrying value. Accordingly, when indicators of impairment are present, the Company evaluates the

Table of Contents

carrying value of such assets in relation to the operating performance and future undiscounted cash flows of the underlying assets. The Company’s policy is to record an impairment loss when it is determined that the carrying value of the asset may not be recoverable.

​

Share-based payments

​

The Company accounts for all stock-based payment awards granted to employees and nonemployees using a fair value method. The Company’s stock-based payments include stock options and grants of common stock, including common stock subject to vesting. The measurement date for both employee and nonemployee awards is the date of grant, and stock-based compensation costs are recognized as expense over the employees’ requisite service period, which is the vesting period, on a straight-line basis. Stock-based compensation costs for nonemployees are recognized as expense over the vesting period on a straight-line basis. Stock-based compensation is classified in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss based on the department to which the related services are provided.

​

Derivative instruments

​

The Company generally does not use derivative instruments to hedge exposures to cash-flow or market risks. In the past certain of the Company’s issued and outstanding warrants to purchase common stock previously contained anti dilution provisions. These warrants did not meet the requirements for classification as equity and were thus recorded as derivative warrant liabilities. In such instances, net-cash settlement is assumed for financial reporting purposes, even when the terms of the underlying contracts do not provide for a net-cash settlement. Such financial instruments are initially recorded at fair value, with subsequent changes in fair value recorded to operations in each reporting period. If these instruments subsequently meet the requirements for classification as equity, the Company reclassifies the fair value to equity.

​

Net loss per common share

​

Basic and diluted net loss per share of common stock has been computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period. In a net loss period, options, warrants, unvested restricted stock units and convertible securities are anti-dilutive and therefore excluded from diluted loss per share calculations.

​

For the year ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, the following potentially dilutive securities were not included in the computation of net loss per share because the effect would be anti-dilutive: