The registrant had 10,761,684 shares of common
stock outstanding as of April 8, 2019. The aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant
as of June 30, 2018 was approximately $4.2 million as computed by reference to the closing price of such common stock on
The OTC Markets on such date.
PART
I
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
Overview
Adhera
Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly known as Marina Biotech, Inc.) and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, MDRNA Research, Inc. (“MDRNA”),
Cequent Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Cequent”), Atossa Healthcare, Inc. (“Atossa”), and IThenaPharma, Inc.
(“IThena”) (collectively “Adhera,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” or
“us”) is an emerging specialty pharmaceutical company that leverages innovative distribution models and technologies
to improve the quality of care for patients in the United States suffering from chronic and acute diseases. We are focused on
fixed dose combination (“FDC”) therapies in hypertension, with plans to expand the portfolio of drugs we commercialize
to include other therapeutic areas.
Our
mission is to provide effective and patient centric treatment for hypertension and resistant hypertension while actively seeking
additional assets that can be commercialized through our proprietary Total Care System (“TCS”). At the core of our
TCS system is DyrctAxess, our patented technology platform. DyrctAxess is designed to offer enhanced efficiency, control and access
to the information necessary to empower patients, physicians and manufacturers to achieve optimal care.
We
began marketing Prestalia
®
, a single-pill FDC of perindopril arginine (“perindopril”) and amlodipine
besylate (“amlodipine”) in June of 2018. By combining Prestalia, DyrctAxess and an independent pharmacy network, we
have created a proprietary system for drug adherence and the effective treatment of hypertension, improving the distribution of
FDC hypertensive drugs, such as our FDA-approved product Prestalia, as well as improving the distribution of devices for therapeutic
drug monitoring (“TDM”) (e.g., blood pressure monitors), as well as patient counseling and prescription reminder services.
We are focused on demonstrating the therapeutic and commercial value of TCS through the commercialization of Prestalia. Prestalia
was developed in coordination with Servier, a French pharmaceutical conglomerate, that sells the formulation outside the United
States under the brand names Coveram
®
and/or Viacoram
®
. Prestalia was approved by the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in January 2015 and is distributed through our DyrctAxess platform which, as noted
above, we acquired in 2017.
We have discontinued all
significant clinical development and are evaluating disposition options for all of our development assets, including: (i) our
next generation celecoxib program drug candidates for the treatment of acute and chronic pain, IT-102 and IT-103; (ii) CEQ508,
an oral delivery of small interfering RNA (“siRNA”) against beta-catenin, combined with IT-102 to suppress polyps
in the precancerous syndrome and orphan indication Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (“FAP”); (iii) CEQ508 combined with
IT-103 to treat Colorectal Cancer; (iv) CEQ608 and CEQ609, an oral delivery of IL-6Ra tkRNAi against irritable bowel disease (IBD)
gene targets, which could significantly reduce colon length and abolish the IL-6Rα message in proximal ileum; (v) Claudin-2
strains which (CEQ631 and CEQ632) significantly reduce Claudin-2 mRNA expression and protein levels in the colon as well as attenuation
of the disease phenotype and enhance survival; (vi) MIP3a therapeutic strains CEQ631 and CEQ632 which also resulted in
a significant reduction in sum pathology scores and reduction in MIP3a mRNA expression. We plan to license or divest these development
assets since they no longer align with our focus on the treatment of hypertension.
As
our strategy is to be a commercial pharmaceutical company, we will drive a primary corporate focus on revenue generation through
our commercial assets, with a focus on developing our technology and TCS. We intend to create value through the continued commercialization
of our FDA-approved product, Prestalia, while continuing to develop and leverage our TCS to further strengthen our commercial
presence.
Background
On November 15,
2016, Adhera entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger with IThenaPharma, Inc., a Delaware corporation, IThena Acquisition
Corporation, a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of IThena (“Merger Sub”), and Vuong Trieu, Ph.D.
as the IThena representative (the “Merger Agreement”), pursuant to which, among other things, Merger Sub merged with
and into IThena, with IThena surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Adhera (such transaction, the “Merger”). As
a result of the Merger, the former holders of IThena common stock immediately prior to the completion of the Merger owned approximately
65% of the issued and outstanding shares of Adhera common stock immediately following the completion of the Merger.
Adhera
was incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware under the name Nastech Pharmaceutical Company on September 23, 1983,
and IThena was incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on September 3, 2014. IThena is deemed to be the accounting
acquirer in the Merger, and thus the historical financial statements of IThena will be treated as the historical financial statements
of our company and will be reflected in our quarterly and annual reports for periods ending after the effective time of the Merger.
Accordingly, beginning with our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, we started to report the
results of IThena and Adhera and their respective subsidiaries on a consolidated basis.
Prior
to the Merger, Adhera’s pipeline consisted of oligonucleotide-based therapeutics. That pipeline included CEQ508, a product
in clinical development for the treatment of FAP, for which Adhera received both Orphan Drug Designation and Fast Track Designation
from the FDA, as well as preclinical programs for the treatment of type 1 myotonic dystrophy and Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
The IThena pipeline of celecoxib FDCs is now incorporated into the combined company.
As
noted above, given our current business focus, we plan to divest many of the pre-Merger assets of Adhera and IThena as soon as
reasonably practicable. In conjunction with that strategy, in September 2017 we divested our SMARTICLES asset as it is no longer
a strategic fit, as described under “Partnering and Licensing Agreements - Novosom” below.
Subsequent
to the Merger, we executed on our strategy to become a commercial stage pharmaceutical company by acquiring Prestalia from Symplmed
in June 2017. Prestalia is an FDA-approved and marketed anti-hypertensive drug. Prestalia is an FDC of perindopril arginine, which
is an ACE inhibitor, and amlodipine besylate, which is a calcium-channel blocker (CCB) and is indicated as a first line therapy
for hypertension control.
The
acquisition of Prestalia transitioned our company from a clinical stage company to a commercial organization. Prestalia was approved
by the FDA in January 2015 and has been marketed in select U.S. states since then by Symplmed. Prestalia sales saw a solid growth
through September of 2016, via new patient acquisition and strong patient retention. Due to funding circumstances experienced
by Symplmed, further sales promotion of Prestalia were ceased by the end of 2016, and in June 2017 we acquired the Prestalia
assets from Symplmed. Our current focus is dedicated to the promotion and commercialization of Prestalia.
Need
for Future Financing
We
will require additional funds to implement the growth strategy for our business. We have, in the past, raised additional capital
to supplement our commercialization, clinical development and operational expenses. We will need to raise additional funds required
through equity financing, debt financing, strategic alliances or other sources, which may result in further dilution in the equity
ownership of our shares. There can be no assurance that additional financing will be available when needed or, if available, that
it can be obtained on commercially reasonable terms. If we are not able to obtain the additional financing on a timely basis as
required, or generate significant material revenues from operations, we will not be able to meet our other obligations as they
become due and will be forced to scale down or perhaps even cease our operations.
Hypertension
Market
Hypertension
(HTN) affects approximately 1 billion people worldwide and the number of patients is projected to increase to 1.56 billion people
by 2025 [http://www.world-heart-federation.org/cardiovascular-health/cardiovascular-disease-risk-factors/hypertension/]. While
HTN can be controlled with drugs and lifestyle changes in the majority of patients, uncontrolled or resistant HTN is a significant
unmet clinical need in 22% of the HTN population [Persell, S. D. (2011). Prevalence of Resistant Hypertension in the United States,
2003-2008. Hypertension, 57: 1076-108]. Resistant HTN is defined as the failure to reach controlled BP with at least a three-drug
regimen at optimal dosage, including at least one diuretic [The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention,
Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: The JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003;289:2560–72.]. Approximately 22%
of the 1 billion HTN patients worldwide are affected by resistant HTN. Assuming a 4% penetration rate and an estimated price of
$100 per 30 pills, there is over a $1 billion resistant HTN market. The recent clinical failure of renal denervation means limited
competition “Despite meeting primary safety endpoints, SYMPLICITY HTN-3 – the pivotal U.S. trial examining renal denervation
for treatment-resistant hypertension – has fallen short of its secondary efficacy goals and failed to reach its primary
efficacy endpoint as announced earlier this year by the study’s sponsor.” [SYMPLICITY HTN-3: Renal Artery Denervation
Fails for Resistant HTN. March 29, 2014]. Without renal denervation, there are limited treatment options for resistant HTN except
for potentially adding chlorthalidone and spironolactone if there is an underlying fluid retention problem.
As
defined by the American Heart Association Scientific Statement on Resistant Hypertension in 2008, resistant hypertension refers
to patients having uncontrolled BP (>140/90mmHg) despite use of three or more antihypertensive medications, including a diuretic.
The prevalence of resistant hypertension from various cohorts is estimated to be around 10–20% of patients being treated
for hypertension [Mohammed Siddiqui and David A. Calhoun. Refractory versus resistant hypertension. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens
2017, 26:14–19]. As would be expected with a history of poorly controlled, often severe hypertension, patients with resistant
hypertension have a worse cardiovascular disease prognosis, including coronary heart disease, stroke, congestive heart failure,
and peripheral artery disease, compared with patients with more easily controlled hypertension. Similarly, patients with resistant
hypertension are more likely to develop chronic kidney disease. Not surprisingly, given this increased cardiovascular risk, having
resistant hypertension is associated with an overall higher mortality compared with nonresistant hypertension [Mohammed Siddiqui
and David A. Calhoun. Refractory versus resistant hypertension. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2017, 26:14–19].
In
the U.S., 37 of the 50 states have a hypertension rate of greater than 30% of their residents. According to JNC VII (Joint national
committee on hypertension), only 1/3 of patients will be controlled by a single product, meaning that 2/3 of all patients will
require more than one class of medication to control their high blood pressure (reference https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9626/).
First line therapy, initial treatment for all hypertension patients should include either a CCB, ACEi, Angiotensin receptor blocker
or diuretic.
The hypertension market
will continue to be large, but with the proliferation of generics, the branded pharmaceutical participation in sales and
promotion will likely continue to decline. For our company, the opportunity exists to promote a branded combination, comprised
of the two highest prescribed categories in hypertension. Only one product of a similar type, an ACEi and Amlodipine (the CCB
that controls over 90% of the CCB market) has ever been promoted and sold in the U.S. That product, Lotrel®, had peak sales
of $1.3 billion in the U.S. alone. This level of sales was experienced by Novartis in 2008 and achieved when there were over 15
large pharmaceutical companies, including Wyeth, Novartis, AstraZeneca, King, Forrest, Takeda, Merck, Sanofi and multiple others
fighting for share of voice and positioning with patients and physicians. Currently, only two companies other than us compete
in the hypertension market in the U.S., Allergan, selling a beta blocker, Bystolic, with over $500 million in sales in 2015, and
Arbor, selling an Angiotensin Receptor Blocker, Edarbi and EdarbiChlor – an FDC of Edarbi and chlortahlidone. The edarbi
franchise is selling in excess of $100 million annually.
The benchmark for our
hypertension product, Prestalia, is Lotrel. Lotrel is the only FDC of an ACEi and amlodipine and is currently responsible as a
brand and generic combined for a total prescription volume in excess of 11 million annually. The product is not promoted, and
through analysis of the Prestalia clinical data in market research, Prestalia has been termed by physicians as ‘better than
Lotrel’. The success of the Lotrel brand was driven by the combination of two classes of medication that had not only shown
the ability to reduce blood pressure but, via the Camelot study for amlodipine and the HOPE and Europa study for ramipril and
perindopril, the ability to lower cardiovascular events beyond the effect of lowering blood pressure. The potential success of
Prestalia in the U.S. is further supported by the data outside the U.S., which has shown that our worldwide partner, Servier,
has produced in excess of €400 million in annual sales of perindopril and amlodipine as an FDC.
In summary, as one looks
at the opportunity for our Prestalia product, there are three key concepts:
1)
|
The
market of patient opportunity continues to grow, and the top two dispensed categories are ACEi and Amlodipine;
|
2)
|
The
competitive landscape regarding promotion to physicians leaves Prestalia as one of the few branded, patent-protected
products; and
|
|
|
3)
|
The
category of ACEi/CCB combination has been validated through the success of Lotrel with $1.3 billion in peak sales, and further
validated for Prestalia with sales by Servier in excess of €400 million outside the U.S.
|
Total
Care Platform for Hypertension
Adherence
to medications is a major challenge that clinicians often face in treating hypertension. An increasing number of studies show
TDM is reliable for detecting medication nonadherence in patients who seem to have resistant hypertension (RH) [Jung O, Gechter
JL, Wunder C, et al. Resistant hypertension? Assessment of adherence by toxicological urine analysis. J Hypertens. 2013; 31:766–774;
Ceral J, Habrdova V, Vorisek V, Bima M, Pelouch R, Solar M. Difficult-to-control arterial hypertension or uncooperative patients?
The assessment of serum antihypertensive drug levels to differentiate non-responsiveness from non-adherence to recommended therapy.
Hypertens Res. 2011; 34:87–90.]. Strauch et al. [Strauch B, Petrak O, Zelinka T, et al. Precise assessment of noncompliance
with the antihypertensive therapy in patients with resistant hypertension using toxicological serum analysis. J Hypertens 2013;
31:2455–2461] found medication nonadherence among a cohort of patients with resistant hypertension to be 47%, also having
directly measured drug or appropriate metabolite levels by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. In fact, Brinker
et al [Stephanie Brinker et al., Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Facilitates Blood Pressure Control in Resistant Hypertension. J Am
Coll Cardiol. 2014 March 4; 63(8): 834–835] found that over one-half (54%) of patients who underwent TDM were found to be
nonadherent to treatment and when patients were informed of their undetectable serum drug levels and provided additional counseling,
BP control was markedly improved without increasing treatment intensity.
To this effect, we have
developed a TCS consisting of four pillars to achieve improved compliance and therefore targeted BP: 1) FDCs. We believe hypertension
is most effectively treated with combination therapy. Furthermore, hypertensive patients frequently suffer from other diseases
such as hypercholesterolemia, arthritis, diabetes, dementia, Alzheimer, etc. Their pill burden can be upward of 10-15 pills per
day. Any reduction in pill burden would increase compliance. 2) Monitoring- TDM as well as BP monitoring has been shown to improve
compliance. With our current bpCareConnect, patients are provided with a BP monitoring system which allows both patients and health
care provider to track treatment progress. We plan to upgrade the system to include cardiac monitoring devices as we further refine
and enhance our platform. 3) Our program has healthcare practitioners and pharmacists call the patients and remind them to refill
their prescriptions. This results in a refill rate ranging from 59.5% - 95%,
1
which is higher than the industry standard of 50%. This low turnover of patients allows us to build prescriptions
rapidly during our launch of Prestalia. Together, this TCS will transform care for hypertension and, in addition, could
support patients dealing with other chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypercholesterolemia. Below is the summary of our TCS,
which focuses on patient compliance to achieve target BP control.
The demand for improved
adherence will continue to drive the development of FDCs, which is one of the pillars for our TCS. The need for FDCs in the TCS
for hypertensive patients is shown below. Combination therapy administered as an FDC has superior efficacy and better tolerance,
which is supplemented by higher adherence. Therefore, healthcare providers should not be reluctant to prioritize the use
of FDCs over up-titration and switching strategies for addressing efficacy-related issues, particularly if a patient has a history
of poor adherence. Compared with free-drug combinations (where each BP drug is administered as a single pill), the use of FDCs
of hypertensive agents is associated with a significant improvement in compliance and persistence with therapy and with possible
beneficial trends on BP levels and reported adverse effects [Gupta AK et al., Compliance, Safety, and Effectiveness of Fixed-Dose
Combinations of antihypertensive agents. A meta-analysis. Hypertension 2010; 55:399-407]. A meta-analysis showed that BP reduction
by using two drugs in combination is approximately five times greater than doubling the dose of one drug [Krousel-Wood M et al.,
Medication adherence: a key factor in achieving blood pressure control and good clinical outcomes in hypertensive patients.
In this context, Prestalia is ideally suited to the TCS because 1) it is approved for first line therapy; 2) clinical data
has shown that it can achieve rapid and sustained BP reduction; and 3) it is approved only in three strengths – therefore
simplifying dose titration versus complicated dose titration scheme of single agent and then double agent.
1
The refill rate is calculated monthly by dividing the cumulative number of existing patients by the total cumulative number
of original patients since launch in June 2018.
To
further expand our pipeline of FDCs, we plan to continue to acquire, in-license, or internally develop FDCs that lend themselves
to the TCS, as resources allow, and opportunities arise.
We
intend to initially advance sales of Prestalia in the U.S. through the TCS.
Prestalia
Acquired in June 2017,
Prestalia is a commercially available product. We are currently integrating the distribution, marketing and sales platform of
the acquired assets into our company. This is being done concurrently with efforts to mobilize a sales force and build
on the existing patient/prescription base of Prestalia and build a strong revenue base. The non-U.S. market for FDCs of ACE inhibitor
and CCB is over $300 million and we believe that this market is underserved in the U.S.
Prestalia
was developed in conjunction with Les Laboratories, Servier. It was launched in October of 2015 and was driven to 1,615 prescriptions
per month with only 10 sales representatives. It is approved in three doses: 3.5/2.5, 7/5 and 14/10 and is promoted worldwide
ex-US as Coveram and/or Viacoram by Servier with >$400 million annual turnover from perindopril franchise, WW, for Servier.
Prestalia
is a unique FDC drug that simplified dose titration to only three dose strengths. Prestalia is approved for fist line hypertension
and titration can be done with just Prestalia with only three dose levels to adjust unlike performing titration of each drug alone
where there are at least three strengths for each drug requiring titrating through at least six different strengths and strength
combinations. Lisinopril alone has six dose strengths. Per package insert information: Initiate treatment at 3.5/2.5 mg, once
daily. Adjust dose according to blood pressure goals waiting 1 to 2 weeks between titration steps. DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS:
Tablets (perindopril arginine/amlodipine): 3.5/2.5 mg, 7/5 mg and14/10 mg.
Prestalia
is one of a few products with an active component to demonstrate event reduction across the CV continuum. In aggregate there was
reduction in cardiovascular morbidity-mortality in randomized clinical trials with more than 54,000 patients. Various clinical
trials have shown that despite lowering blood pressure not all drugs effectively reduce heart attack, stroke and death. In the
CAMELOT trial, which compared amlodipine vs. enalapril – another ACEI – for 24 months, there was 31% vs 15% fewer
events with amlodipine. In the EUROPA trial, using perindopril, compared to placebo in 12,000 ACS (64% had previous MI) reduced
CV events by 20%. Post-hoc analysis of EUROPA showed that for subjects on any CCB for 4.2 years and either on perindopril or placebo,
the event rate was 46% less for patients on perindopril and CCB than for patients on a CCB and placebo.
Commercialization
Plan
The
two main challenges to the uptake of a drug are getting physicians to prescribe it and getting insurance reimbursement for its
use. Prior to its acquisition by our company, Prestalia had achieved a patient base of approximately 1,500 patients and approximately
400 prescribers; over two years. With the demonstrated history of physician acceptance and steady acceptance by insurers, combined
with the fact that combination of ACEi and CCB are well characterized and understood, we believe that our ability to penetrate
the market is heavily influenced by the number of people we are able to engage to assist in our commercialization efforts.
In
terms of execution, we are taking a targeted approach capitalizing on geographies with favorable conditions for Prestalia, including
a high degree of hypertension within the territory. Our targeting efforts from the physician perspective are focused on
identifying high prescribers of FDC therapy that includes ACEi and CCB use, along with those physicians writing ACE/Diuretic combinations.
An additional key to our targeting will be high prescribers of each of these as concomitant monotherapy, or individual use. This
approach will allow us to focus our message on physicians that are already committed to the components, and do not require a clinical
communication to convert them from use of other classes of medications.
To ensure that we convert
the highest percentage of prescriptions generated to new patients, along with keeping our existing patients on medication, we
have an expansive patient co-pay support program through our pharmacy partners. This program will be specifically dedicated
to ensuring that all patients receive medication, covered or not, so that we can ensure patients and physicians are satisfied,
as well as put us in a position to continue expanding insurance coverage.
Partnering
and Licensing Agreements
Les
Laboratoires Servier
As
a result of the Asset Purchase Agreement that we entered into with Symplmed Pharmaceuticals LLC in June 2017, Symplmed Pharmaceuticals
assigned to us all of its rights and obligations under that certain Amended and Restated License and Commercialization Agreement
by and between Symplmed Pharmaceuticals and Les Laboratoires Servier (“Servier”) dated January 2012. Pursuant to the
License Agreement, we have an exclusive license from Servier to manufacture, have manufactured, develop, promote, market, distribute
and sell Prestalia in the U.S. (and its territories and possessions) in consideration of the regulatory and sales-based milestone
payments, and royalty payments based on net sales, described therein.
Oncotelic
Inc.
On
July 17, 2017, we entered into a License Agreement with Oncotelic, Inc. pursuant to which, among other things, we provided to
Oncotelic a license to our SMARTICLES platform for the delivery of antisense DNA therapeutics, as well as a license to our conformationally
restricted nucleotide (“CRN”) technology with respect to TGF-Beta. Dr. Trieu, a former director and executive officer
of our company, is the principal stockholder and Chief Executive Officer of Oncotelic. The License Agreement with Oncotelic has
been terminated as per the Omnibus Settlement Agreement that we entered into on October 1, 2018 with, Dr. Trieu, Oncotelic Inc.
and certain other parties affiliated with Dr. Trieu.
Lipomedics
Inc.
On
February 6, 2017, we entered into a License Agreement with LipoMedics, Inc. pursuant to which, among other things, we provided
to LipoMedics a license to our SMARTICLES platform for the delivery of nanoparticles including small molecules, peptides, proteins
and biologics. On the same date, we also entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with LipoMedics pursuant to which we issued to
LipoMedics 86,206 shares of our common stock for a total purchase price of $250,000. Under the terms of the License Agreement,
we could receive up to $90 million in success-based milestones based on commercial sales of licensed products. In addition, if
LipoMedics determines to pursue further development and commercialization of products under the License Agreement, LipoMedics
agreed, in connection therewith, to purchase shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $500,000, with the
purchase price for each share of common stock being the greater of $2.90 or the volume weighted average price of our common stock
for the thirty (30) trading days immediately preceding the date on which LipoMedics notifies us that it intends to pursue further
development or commercialization of a licensed product. Dr. Trieu, a former director and executive officer of our company, is
the Chairman of the Board and Chief Operating Officer of LipoMedics.
Autotelic
LLC
On
November 15, 2016, we entered into a License Agreement with Autotelic LLC pursuant to which (A) we licensed to Autotelic LLC certain
patent rights, data and know-how relating to FAP and nasal insulin, for human therapeutics other than for oncology-related therapies
and indications, and (B) Autotelic LLC licensed to us certain patent rights, data and know-how relating to IT-102 and IT-103,
in connection with individualized therapy of pain using a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and an anti-hypertensive without
inducing intolerable edema, and treatment of certain aspects of proliferative disease, but not including rights to IT-102/IT-103
for TDM guided dosing for all indications using an Autotelic Inc. TDM Device. We also granted a right of first refusal to Autotelic
LLC with respect to any license by us of the rights licensed by or to us under the License Agreement in any cancer indication
outside of gastrointestinal cancers. As per the Omnibus Settlement Agreement that we entered into on October 1, 2018 with Dr.
Trieu, Autotelic LLC and certain other parties affiliated with Dr. Trieu, the License Agreement shall continue, provided that
Autotelic LLC shall be licensee and have a license to, without representation or warranty, nasal apomorphine and nasal scopolamine
and related intellectual property in addition to nasal insulin, and Autotelic LLC shall not be a licensee or have a license to
FAP or CEQ508 and related intellectual property.
Autotelic
BIO
On
January 11, 2018, we entered into a binding agreement with Autotelic BIO (“ATB”) pursuant to which, among other things,
and subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions on or prior to January 15, 2019, we shall grant to ATB a perpetual exclusive
right of development and marketing of our IT-103 product candidate, which is a fixed dose combination of celecoxib and Olmesartan
medoxomil, at the currently approved dose/approved indications only for celecoxib for combined hypertension and arthritis only,
with such right extending throughout the entire world (excluding the United States and Canada, and the territories of such countries).
The grant of the license would be memorialized in a definitive license agreement to be entered into between the parties. On October
1, 2018, as per the Omnibus Settlement Agreement that was entered into on October 1, 2018 with Dr. Trieu, ATB and certain other
parties affiliated with Dr. Trieu, we and ATB agreed to terminate this arrangement.
Hongene
Biotechnology
In
September 2015, Adhera entered into a license agreement with Hongene, a leader in process development and analytical method development
of oligonucleotide therapeutics, regarding the development and supply of certain oligonucleotide constructs using our CRN technology.
We could receive double digit percentage royalties on the sales of research reagents using our CRN technology.
MiNA
On
December 17, 2014, we entered into a license agreement with MiNA Therapeutics, Inc. (“MiNA”) regarding the development
and commercialization of small activating RNA-based therapeutics utilizing MiNA’s proprietary oligonucleotides and our SMARTICLES
nucleic acid delivery technology. MiNA will have full responsibility for the development and commercialization of any products
arising under the agreement. MiNA paid an upfront fee of $0.5 million in January 2015 and an accelerated milestone payment of
$200,000 in November 2015. We could receive up to an additional $49 million in clinical and commercialization milestone payments,
as well as royalties on sales, based on the successful development of MiNA’s potential product candidates.
Rosetta
On
April 1, 2014, we entered into a strategic alliance with Rosetta to identify and develop microRNA- (“miRNA”) based
products designed to diagnose and treat various neuromuscular diseases and dystrophies. Under the terms of the alliance, Rosetta
will apply its industry leading miRNA discovery expertise for the identification of miRNAs involved in the various dystrophy diseases.
If the miRNA is determined to be correlative to the disease, Rosetta may further develop the miRNA into a diagnostic for patient
identification and stratification. If the miRNA is determined to be involved in the disease pathology and represents a potential
therapeutic target, Adhera may develop the resulting miRNA-based therapeutic for clinical development. The alliance is exclusive
as it relates to neuromuscular diseases and dystrophies, with both companies free to develop and collaborate outside this field
both during and after the terms of the alliance.
Novartis
On
August 2, 2012, we and Novartis entered into a worldwide, non-exclusive License Agreement for the CRN technology for the development
of both single and double-stranded oligonucleotide therapeutics. Novartis made a $1.0 million one-time payment for the non-exclusive
license. In addition, in March 2009, we granted to Novartis a worldwide, non-exclusive, irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free,
fully paid-up license, with the right to grant sublicenses, to the DiLA2-based siRNA delivery platform in consideration of a one-time,
non-refundable fee of $7.25 million. Novartis may terminate this agreement immediately upon written notice.
Monsanto
On May 3, 2012, we and
Monsanto entered into a worldwide exclusive Intellectual Property License Agreement for our delivery and chemistry technologies.
We and Monsanto also entered into a Security Agreement pursuant to which we granted to Monsanto a security interest in that portion
of our IP that is the subject of the License Agreement in order to secure the performance of our obligations under the
License Agreement. Monsanto paid $1.5 million in initiation fees and may be required to pay royalties on product sales in the
low single digit percentages. Monsanto may terminate the License Agreement at any time in whole or as to any rights granted thereunder
upon three months’ prior written notice.
Novosom
On
July 27, 2010, we acquired the intellectual property of Novosom for SMARTICLES. As per the terms of the acquisition agreement
(the “Original Purchase Agreement”), we were required to pay to Novosom an amount equal to 30% of the value of each
upfront (or combined) payment actually received in respect of the license of liposomal-based delivery technology or related product
or disposition of the liposomal-based delivery technology by us, up to $3.3 million, which amount was to be paid in shares of
common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, at our discretion. On September 8, 2017, we entered into an
Intellectual Property Purchase Agreement (the “IP Purchase Agreement”) with Novosom pursuant to which we sold to Novosom
substantially all of our intellectual property estate relating to SMARTICLES (the “Smarticles IP”), including that
acquired pursuant to the Original Purchase Agreement, for an aggregate purchase price of $1.00. As per the IP Purchase Agreement,
we will retain rights to any future payments that may be due to us pursuant to those agreements that we entered into with third
parties pursuant to which we provided to such third parties certain licenses and rights with respect to the Smarticles IP, including
milestone and royalty payments, if any, and Novosom relinquished any rights that it may have under the Original Purchase Agreement
to any portion of such payments.
Valeant
Pharmaceuticals
On
March 23, 2010, we acquired intellectual property related to the CRN chemistry from Valeant Pharmaceuticals North America (“Valeant”).
Subject to meeting certain milestones triggering the obligation to make any such payments, we may be obligated to make a product
development milestone payment of $5.0 million and $2.0 million within 180 days of FDA approval of an NDA for our first and second
CRN related product, respectively. To date, we have not made any such milestone payments but have milestone obligations of $0.1
million based on CRN licenses to date. Valeant is entitled to receive earn-outs based upon a percentage in the low single digits
of future commercial sales and earn-outs based upon a percentage in the low double digits of future revenue from sublicensing.
We are required to pay Valeant an annual amount equal to $50,000 per assigned patent which shall be creditable against other payment
obligations. The term of our financial obligations under the agreement shall end, on a country-by-country basis, when there no
longer exists any valid claim in such country. We may terminate the agreement upon 30-day notice, or upon 10-day notice in the
event of adverse results from clinical studies.
Proprietary
Rights and Intellectual Property
We
rely primarily on patents and contractual obligations with employees and third parties to protect our proprietary rights. We have
sought, and intend to continue to seek, appropriate patent protection for important and strategic components of our proprietary
technologies by filing patent applications in the U.S. and certain foreign countries. There can be no assurance that any of our
patents will guarantee protection or market exclusivity for our products and product candidates. We also use license agreements
both to access external technologies and to convey certain intellectual property rights to others. Our financial success will
be dependent in part on our ability to obtain commercially valuable patent claims and to protect our intellectual property rights
and to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others. As of December 31, 2018, we owned or controlled the U.S.
and foreign granted and allowed patents, and the pending patent applications, to protect our proprietary technologies,
as set forth in the table below.
Jurisdiction
|
|
Number of Granted /
Allowed Patents
|
|
|
Number of Pending Patents
Applications
|
|
China
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Brazil
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Slovania, Sweden, Spain, Switzerland, U.K.
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Canada
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Israel
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
India
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Republic of Korea
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
European Patent Office
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Japan
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
United States
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
New Zealand
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
The
patents listed in the table above expire from 2023 to 2030, subject to any potential patent term extensions and/or supplemental
protection certificates that would extend the terms of the patents in countries where such extensions may become available.
Further,
as discussed elsewhere in this report, we have licensed rights to our FDA-approved product, Prestalia, from Les Laboratoires Servier
as a result of our acquisition of assets from Symplmed Pharmaceuticals in June 2017. The patents listed in the FDA Orange Book
as having claims covering Prestalia, U.S. Patent No. 6,696,481 and 7,846,961, expire in 2023 and 2027, respectively.
Manufacturing
We
do not have any manufacturing facilities or personnel. We rely on contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”) to
produce our products in accordance with applicable provisions of the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practice (“GMP”)
regulations. The manufacture of pharmaceuticals is subject to extensive GMP regulations, which impose various procedural and documentation
requirements and govern all areas of record keeping, production processes and controls, personnel and quality control.
Sales
and Marketing
We
began our commercial sales effort in second quarter of 2018 and promote our product through a sales force of 20 territory managers.
During the second and third quarters of 2018, we collaborated with a third-party sales force to market Prestalia to health care
professionals. During the third quarter of 2018, we initiated a plan to insource the sales force, which was largely completed
during the first quarter of 2019. Our team is comprised of a complete support staff internally, and we also partner with numerous
specialty vendors to increase our effectiveness and efficiency.
Competition
The
biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary
products. The key competitive factors affecting the success of our products and product candidates are their efficacy,
safety, convenience, price, the level of generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party
payors. While we believe that our technology, knowledge, experience and scientific resources provide us with certain competitive
advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical
and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions. Our products,
and any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize, will compete with existing therapies and new therapies
that may become available in the future.
Many
of the companies against which we are competing or against which we may compete in the future have significantly greater financial
and other resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, product acquisition, preclinical testing, conducting
clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the biopharmaceutical
industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage
companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established
companies. These competitors also compete, or may compete, with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management
personnel, as well as in acquiring technologies and products complementary to, or that may be necessary for, our programs.
The
commercial opportunity for our product candidates could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize
drugs or therapies that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive
than any drugs that we may acquire or develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their product
candidates more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market
position before we are able to enter the market. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers
or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of generic drugs.
Government
Regulation
Government
authorities in the U.S. and other countries extensively regulate the research, development, testing, manufacture, labeling, promotion,
advertising, distribution and marketing, among other things, of drugs and pharmaceutical products. Our Prestalia product is, and
all of the products that we may seek to commercialize are expected to be, regulated as drug products.
In
the U.S., the FDA regulates drug products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”), and other laws
within the Public Health Service Act. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements, both before and after approval, may
subject us to administrative and judicial sanctions, such as a delay in approving or refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications,
warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, and/or
criminal prosecutions. Before our drug products are marketed, they must be approved by the FDA. The steps required before a novel
drug product is approved by the FDA include: (1) pre-clinical laboratory, animal, and formulation tests; (2) submission to the
FDA of an Investigational New Drug Application (“IND”) for human clinical testing, which must become effective before
human clinical trials may begin; (3) adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of
the product for each indication for which approval is sought; (4) submission to the FDA of a New Drug Application (“NDA”);
(5) satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the drug product is produced
to assess compliance with cGMP and FDA review; and finally (6) approval of an NDA.
Pre-clinical
tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies. The results of
the pre-clinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND,
which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. An IND will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt
by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions, such as the conduct of the trials as outlined in the
IND. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding FDA concerns or questions before clinical trials
can proceed. There can be no assurance that submission of an IND will result in FDA authorization to commence clinical trials.
Once an IND is in effect, each clinical trial to be conducted under the IND must be submitted to the FDA, which may or may not
allow the trial to proceed.
Clinical
trials involve the administration of the investigational drug to human subjects under the supervision of qualified physician-investigators
and healthcare personnel. Clinical trials are typically conducted in three defined phases, but the phases may overlap or be combined.
Phase 1 usually involves the initial administration of the investigational drug or biologic product to healthy individuals to
evaluate its safety, dosage tolerance and pharmacodynamics. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population, with
the disease or condition for which the test material is being developed, to evaluate dosage tolerance and appropriate dosage;
identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks; and preliminarily evaluate the effectiveness of the drug or biologic
for specific indications. Phase 3 trials usually further evaluate effectiveness and test further for safety by administering the
drug or biologic candidate in its final form in an expanded patient population. To the extent that we engage in any product development
activities, our product development partners, the FDA, or we may suspend clinical trials, if any, at any time on various grounds,
including any situation where we or our partners believe that patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or are
obtaining no medical benefit from the test material.
Assuming
successful completion of the required clinical testing, the results of the pre-clinical trials and the clinical trials, together
with other detailed information, including information on the manufacture and composition of the product, are submitted to the
FDA in the form of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. Before approving an application,
the FDA will usually inspect the facilities where the product is manufactured and will not approve the product unless cGMP compliance
is satisfactory. If the FDA determines the NDA is not acceptable, the FDA may outline the deficiencies in the NDA and often will
request additional information. If the FDA approves the NDA, certain changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications,
manufacturing changes or additional labeling claims are subject to further FDA review and approval. The testing and approval process
require substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be sure that any approval will be granted on a timely
basis, if at all.
Under
the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which
is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals
in the U.S. and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the U.S. a drug
for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that drug. Orphan drug designation must be
requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its
potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the
first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which
means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA, to market the same drug for the same indication,
except in very limited circumstances, for seven years. The FDA granted orphan drug designation to CEQ508 for the treatment of
FAP in December 2010. As of the date of this report, we have suspended development activities regarding CEQ508, as well as our
other programs relating to RNA interference.
In
addition, regardless of the type of approval, we and our partners are required to comply with a number of FDA requirements both
before and after approval with respect to any products that we may develop, acquire or commercialize. For example, we and our
partners are required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA, and to comply with certain
requirements concerning advertising and promotion for products. In addition, quality control and manufacturing procedures must
continue to conform to cGMP after approval, and the FDA periodically inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with
cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including
production and quality control to comply with cGMP. In addition, discovery of problems, such as safety problems, may result in
changes in labeling or restrictions on a product manufacturer or NDA holder, including removal of the product from the market.
In
addition to FDA regulations for the marketing of pharmaceutical products, there are various other state and federal laws that
may restrict business practices in the biopharmaceutical industry. These include the following:
●
|
The
federal Medicare and Medicaid Anti-Kickback laws, which prohibit persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering,
receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce either the referral of an individual,
or furnishing or arranging for a good or service, for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as
the Medicare and Medicaid programs;
|
●
|
Other
Medicare laws, regulations, rules, manual provisions and policies that prescribe the requirements for coverage and payment
for services performed by our customers, including the amount of such payment;
|
●
|
The
federal False Claims Act which imposes civil and criminal liability on individuals and entities who submit, or cause to be
submitted, false or fraudulent claims for payment to the government;
|
●
|
The
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”), which prohibits certain payments made to foreign government officials;
|
●
|
State
and foreign law equivalents of the foregoing and state laws regarding pharmaceutical company marketing compliance, reporting
and disclosure obligations;
|
●
|
The
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), which among other things changes access to healthcare products
and services; creates new fees for the pharmaceutical and medical device industries; changes rebates and prices for health
care products and services; and requires additional reporting and disclosure; and
|
●
|
HIPAA,
as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH), which imposes requirements
on certain types of people and entities relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health
information, and requires notification to affected individuals and regulatory authorities of certain breaches of security
of individually identifiable health information;
|
If
our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws, regulations, rules or policies or any other law or governmental
regulation, or if interpretations of the foregoing change, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines,
exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.
To the extent that any
of our products are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for
instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws, and implementation
of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or transfers of value to healthcare professionals. Currently
none of our products are sold outside the United States.
Coverage
and Reimbursement
The
commercial success of our product candidates and our ability to commercialize any approved product candidates successfully will
depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payers provide coverage
for and establish adequate reimbursement levels for our therapeutic product candidates. In the United States, government authorities
and third-party payers are increasingly imposing additional requirements and restrictions on coverage, attempting to limit reimbursement
levels or regulate the price of drugs and other medical products and services, particularly for new and innovative products and
therapies, which often has resulted in average selling prices lower than they would otherwise be. For example, in the United States,
federal and state governments reimburse covered prescription drugs at varying rates generally below average wholesale price. Federal
programs also impose price controls through mandatory ceiling prices on purchases by federal agencies and federally funded hospitals
and clinics and mandatory rebates on retail pharmacy prescriptions paid by Medicaid and Tricare. These restrictions and limitations
influence the purchase of healthcare services and products. Legislative proposals to reform healthcare or reduce costs under government
programs may result in lower reimbursement for our product candidates or exclusion of our product candidates from coverage. Moreover,
the Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payers and other governmental payers develop
their coverage and reimbursement policies.
In
addition, the increased emphasis on managed healthcare in the United States will put additional pressure on product pricing, reimbursement
and utilization, which may adversely affect our future product sales and results of operations. These pressures can arise from
rules and practices of managed care groups, competition within therapeutic classes, availability of generic equivalents, judicial
decisions and governmental laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and healthcare reform, coverage and reimbursement
policies and pricing in general. The cost containment measures that healthcare payers and providers are instituting and any healthcare
reform implemented in the future could significantly reduce our revenues from the sale of any approved products. We cannot provide
any assurances that we will be able to obtain and maintain third-party coverage or adequate reimbursement for our product candidates
in whole or in part.
Impact
of Healthcare Reform on Coverage, Reimbursement, and Pricing
The
Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (“the MMA”) imposed new requirements for the
distribution and pricing of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in
prescription drug plans offered by private entities that provide coverage of outpatient prescription, pharmacy drugs pursuant
to federal regulations. Part D plans include both standalone prescription drug benefit plans and prescription drug coverage as
a supplement to Medicare Advantage plans. Unlike Medicare Part A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. In general, Part
D prescription drug plan sponsors have flexibility regarding coverage of Part D drugs, and each drug plan can develop its own
drug formulary that identifies which drugs it will cover and at what tier or level. However, Part D prescription drug formularies
must include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in
each category or class, with certain exceptions. Any formulary used by a Part D prescription drug plan must be developed and reviewed
by a pharmacy and therapeutic committee. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for
any products that we commercialize. However, any negotiated prices for our future products covered by a Part D prescription drug
plan will likely be discounted, thereby lowering the net price realized on our sales to pharmacies. Moreover, while the MMA applies
only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations
in setting their own payment rates. Any reduction in payment that results from Medicare Part D may result in a similar reduction
in payments from non-governmental payers.
The
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides funding for the federal government to compare the effectiveness of different
treatments for the same illness. A plan for the research will be developed by the Department of Health and Human Services, the
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Institutes for Health, and periodic reports on the status of the research
and related expenditures will be made to Congress. Although the results of the comparative effectiveness studies are not intended
to mandate coverage policies for public or private payers, it is not clear what effect, if any, the research will have on the
sales of any product, if any such product or the condition that it is intended to treat is the subject of a study. It is also
possible that comparative effectiveness research demonstrating benefits in a competitor’s product could adversely affect
the sales of our product candidates. If third-party payers do not consider our product candidates to be cost-effective compared
to other available therapies, they may not cover our product candidates, once approved, as a benefit under their plans or, if
they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a profitable basis.
The
United States is considering enacting or have enacted a number of additional legislative and regulatory proposals to change the
healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payers in the
United States, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare
costs, improving quality and expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of
these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives, including, most recently, the Affordable Care
Act (the “ACA”), which became law in March 2010 and substantially changes the way healthcare is financed by both governmental
and private insurers. Among other cost containment measures, the ACA establishes an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that
manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents; a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount
program; expansion of Medicaid benefits and a new formula that increases the rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid
Drug Rebate Program; and expansion of the 340B drug discount program that mandates discounts to certain hospitals, community centers
and other qualifying providers. In the future, there may continue to be additional proposals relating to the reform of the United
States healthcare system, some of which could further limit the prices we are able to charge or the amounts of reimbursement available
for our product candidates once they are approved.
For
example, members of Congress and the Trump administration have expressed an intent to pass legislation or adopt executive orders
to fundamentally change or repeal parts of the ACA. While Congress has not passed repeal legislation to date, the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act of 2017 includes a provision repealing the individual insurance coverage mandate included in ACA, effective January 1,
2019. Further, on January 20, 2017, an Executive Order was signed directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities
under the ACA to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the ACA that would impose
a fiscal burden on states, individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical
devices. On October 13, 2017, an Executive Order was signed terminating the cost-sharing subsidies that reimburse insurers under
the ACA. Several state Attorneys General filed suit to stop the administration from terminating the subsidies, but their request
for a restraining order was denied by a federal judge in California on October 25, 2017. In addition, the Centers for Medicare
and Medicaid Services (CMS) has recently proposed regulations that would give states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks
for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits
required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 among other things, amends
the ACA effective January 1, 2019, to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut
hole.” In July 2018, the CMS published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain ACA
qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the ACA risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of federal
district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. Moreover, CMS issued a final rule in
2018 that will give states greater flexibility, starting in 2020, in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small
group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold
through such marketplaces. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or the Texas District
Court Judge, ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was
repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. While the Texas
District Court Judge issued an order staying the judgment pending appeal in December 2018, and both the Trump Administration and
CMS have stated the ruling will have no immediate impact, it is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals and other efforts
to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA and our business. Congress may consider other legislation to replace elements
of the ACA. The implications of the ACA, its possible repeal, any legislation that may be proposed to replace the ACA, or the
political uncertainty surrounding any repeal or replacement legislation for our business and financial condition, if any, are
not yet clear.
The
costs of prescription pharmaceuticals in the U.S. recently has also been the subject of considerable discussion in the U.S., and
members of Congress and the Trump administration have stated that they will address such costs through new legislative and administrative
measures. To date, there have been several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation
designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer
patient programs, reduce the costs of drugs under Medicare and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug
products. At the federal level, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to pursue new
legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. The Trump administration released a “Blueprint,”
or plan, to reduce the cost of drugs. The Trump administration’s Blueprint contains certain measures that the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services is already working to implement. For example, on October 25, 2018, CMS issued an Advanced Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, or ANPRM, indicating it is considering issuing a proposed rule in the spring of 2019 on a model called
the International Pricing Index. This model would utilize a basket of other countries’ prices as a reference for the Medicare
program to use in reimbursing for drugs covered under Part B. The ANPRM also included an updated version of the Competitive Acquisition
Program, as an alternative to current “buy and bill” payment methods for Part B drugs. Such a proposed rule could
limit our product pricing and have material adverse effects on our business.
Individual
state legislatures have become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control
pharmaceutical and biological product pricing. Some of these measures include price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts,
restrictions on certain product access, marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed
to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional health care authorities and individual
hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included
in their prescription drug and other health care programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for our products, once
approved, or put pressure on our product pricing.
We
cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. Further federal and state legislative and regulatory
developments are likely, and we expect ongoing initiatives in the U.S. to increase pressure on drug pricing. Such reforms could
have an adverse effect on anticipated revenues from our products, including Prestalia, and may affect our overall financial condition
and ability to commercialize our products.
Exclusivity
and Approval of Competing Products Hatch
-
Waxman Patent Exclusivity
In
seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent with claims that cover the
applicant’s product or a method of using the product. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application
for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known
as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential competitors in support of approval of
an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”) or 505(b)(2) NDA. Generally, an ANDA provides for marketing of a drug
product that has the same active ingredients in the same strengths, dosage form and route of administration as the listed drug
and has been shown to be bioequivalent through
in vitro
or
in vivo
testing or otherwise to the listed drug. ANDA
applicants are not required to conduct or submit results of preclinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness
of their drug product, other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing. Drugs approved in this way are commonly referred
to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written
for the reference listed drug. 505(b)(2) NDAs generally are submitted for changes to a previously approved drug product, such
as a new dosage form or indication.
The
ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant is required to provide a certification to the FDA in the product application concerning any patents
listed for the approved product in the FDA’s Orange Book, except for patents covering methods of use for which the applicant
is not seeking approval. Specifically, the applicant must certify with respect to each patent that:
●
|
the
required patent information has not been filed;
|
●
|
the
listed patent has expired;
|
●
|
the
listed patent has not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or
|
●
|
the
listed patent is invalid, unenforceable, or will not be infringed by the new product.
|
Generally,
the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA cannot be approved until all listed patents have expired, except when the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant
challenges a listed patent or if the listed patent is a patented method of use for which approval is not being sought. A certification
that the proposed product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents or that such patents are invalid
or unenforceable is called a Paragraph IV certification. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents or does not indicate
that it is not seeking approval of a patented method of use, the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA application will not be approved until
all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.
If
the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice
of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the application has been accepted for filing by the FDA.
The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification.
The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days after the receipt of notice of the Paragraph IV certification automatically
prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement
of the lawsuit, a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant or other period determined by a court.
Hatch
-
Waxman
Non
-
Patent Exclusivity
Market
and data exclusivity provisions under the FDCA also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications for competing
products. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent data exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant
to gain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any
other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the therapeutic activity of the
drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another
company that contains the previously approved active moiety. However, an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA may be submitted after four years
if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement.
The
FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, 505(b)(2) NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA or 505(b)(2)
NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant, are
deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application or supplement. Three-year exclusivity may be awarded for
changes to a previously approved drug product, such as new indications, dosages, strengths or dosage forms of an existing drug.
This three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions of use associated with the new clinical investigations and, as a general
matter, does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for generic versions of the original, unmodified drug
product. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA; however, an applicant submitting
a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled
clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.
Product
Liability
We
currently have product liability insurance that we believe is appropriate for our stage of development, including the marketing
and sale of Prestalia. Any product liability insurance we have or may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential
liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may
be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims
that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Environmental
Compliance
To the extent that we
engage in research and development, which activities are not currently being actively pursued by us, such activities may
involve the controlled use of potentially harmful biological materials as well as hazardous materials, chemicals and various radioactive
compounds. We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of
these materials and specific waste products. We are also subject to numerous environmental, health and workplace safety laws and
regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures, exposure to blood-borne pathogens and the handling of bio-hazardous
materials. The cost of compliance with these laws and regulations could be significant and may adversely affect capital expenditures
to the extent we are required to procure expensive capital equipment to meet regulatory requirements. At this time, we are not
conducting any R&D activities that require compliance with federal, state or local laws.
Employees
As
of April 8, 2019, we had 24 employees, of whom one is an officer of our company. None of our employees are covered by collective
bargaining agreements. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good. In addition to our employees, from time to
time as circumstances have required, we have engaged, and anticipate that we will continue to engage, competent third-party consultants
to supplement the existing employee resources of our company including with respect to our accounting and financial reporting
functions.
Company
Information
We
are a reporting company and are required to file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information
with the SEC. You may read and copy these reports, proxy statements and other information at the SEC’s Public Reference
Room at 100 F Street N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 or e-mail the SEC at publicinfo@sec.gov
for more information on the operation of the public reference room. Our SEC filings are also available at the SEC’s website
at http://www.sec.gov. Our Internet address is http://www.adherathera.com. There we make available, free of charge, our Annual
Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to those reports, as soon
as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish such material to, the SEC.
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
Investing
in our securities has a high degree of risk. Before making an investment in our securities, you should carefully consider the
following risks, as well as the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial
statements and related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties of which we are
unaware or that we believe are not material at this time could also materially adversely affect our business, financial condition
or results of operations. In any case, the value of our securities could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
See also the information contained under the heading “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” elsewhere
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Risks
Relating To Our Financial Condition and Business Operations
Our
current cash and other sources of liquidity are not sufficient to fund our intended operations beyond June 2019. If additional
capital is not available, we may have to curtail or cease operations, or take other actions that could adversely impact our shareholders.
Our
business does not generate the cash necessary to finance our operations. We incurred net operating losses of approximately $15.8
million and $6.1 million in the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. We will require significant additional capital
to:
|
●
|
ramp
up commercialization efforts with respect to our FDA-approved Prestalia product;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
acquire
and/or develop additional FDA-approved products, and commercialize such products;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
fund
research and development activities relating to our current and future product candidates;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
obtain
regulatory approval for our current and future product candidates;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
pursue
licensing opportunities for our technologies, products and product candidates to the extent that we move forward with such
activities;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
protect
our intellectual property;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
attract
and retain highly-qualified personnel;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
respond
effectively to competitive pressures; and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
acquire
complementary businesses or technologies.
|
Our
future capital needs depend on many factors, including:
|
●
|
the
scope, duration and expenditures associated with and research, development and commercialization efforts that we may undertake;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
continued
scientific progress in our programs;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
outcome of potential partnering or licensing transactions, if any;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
competing
technological developments;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
our
proprietary patent position, if any, in our products; and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
regulatory approval process for our products.
|
We
will need to raise additional funds through public or private equity offerings, debt financings or additional strategic alliances
and licensing arrangements to achieve our proposed business objectives. We may not be able to obtain additional financing on terms
favorable to us, if at all. General market conditions, as well as market conditions for companies at our stage of development,
may make it difficult for us to seek financing from the capital markets, and the terms of any financing may adversely affect the
holdings or the rights of our stockholders. For example, if we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, further dilution
to our stockholders will result, which may substantially dilute the value of their investment. In addition, as a condition to
providing additional funds to us, future investors may demand, and may be granted, rights superior to those of existing stockholders.
Debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants that could limit our flexibility to conduct future business activities
and, in the event of insolvency, could be paid before holders of equity securities received any distribution of corporate assets.
We may be required to relinquish rights to our technologies or drug candidates, or grant licenses through alliance, joint venture
or agreements on terms that are not favorable to us, in order to raise additional funds. If adequate funds are not available,
we may have to further delay, reduce or eliminate one or more of our planned activities with respect to our business, or terminate
our operations. These actions would likely reduce the market price of our common stock.
We
have no history of profitability and there is a potential for fluctuation in operating results.
We
have experienced significant operating losses since inception. We currently have limited revenues from product sales, and although
we are generating revenues from the sale of our Prestalia product, the amount of such revenues is uncertain. We expect that the
continued operation of our business will cause us to continue to experience losses in the near term as we pursue our commercialization
efforts with respect to Prestalia and continue our acquisition and development plans with respect to other products. See “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements”, as well as the financial statements included herein.
We
are engaged in the business of acquiring and commercializing therapeutic products. These activities, together with our sales,
marketing, general and administrative expenses, as well as the significant research and development activities that we previously
conducted, have resulted in operating losses in the past, and there can be no assurance that we can achieve profitability in the
future. Our ability to achieve profitability depends on our ability to commercialize, acquire and develop approved pharmaceutical
products, obtain necessary regulatory approvals, and manufacture, distribute, market and sell drug products. We cannot assure
you of the success of any of these activities or predict if or when we will ever become profitable.
If
we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital, we may seek to merge with or be acquired by another entity, or to sell our
assets to another entity, and that transaction may adversely affect our business and the value of our securities.
If
we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital to continue our business or to execute on our business plan, we may seek
to merge or combine with, or otherwise be acquired by, another entity with a stronger cash position, complementary work force,
or product portfolio or for other reasons. There are numerous risks associated with merging, combining or otherwise being acquired,
whether in whole or in part. These risks include, among others, incorrectly assessing the quality of a prospective acquirer or
merger-partner, encountering greater than anticipated costs in integrating businesses, facing resistance from employees and being
unable to profitably deploy the assets of the new entity. The operations, financial condition, and prospects of the post-transaction
entity depend in part on our and our acquirer/merger-partner’s ability to successfully integrate the operations related
to our products, product candidates, business and technologies. We may be unable to integrate operations successfully or to achieve
expected cost savings, and any cost savings that are realized may be offset by losses in revenues or other charges to operations.
As a result, our stockholders may not realize the full value of their investment.
We
are dependent on our key personnel, and if we are unable to retain such personnel, or to attract and retain other highly qualified
personnel, then we may be unable to successfully develop our business.
Our
ability to compete in the highly competitive pharmaceutical industry depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified
personnel. We are dependent on our management, financial and sales personnel including Nancy R. Phelan, our Chief Executive Officer.
Eric Teague, former Chief Financial Officer, has been retained to provide services in connection with the filing of this document.
There can be no assurance that we will be able to retain the services of any of the foregoing persons, or of any of our other
current and future personnel, regardless of whether or not we have entered into employment agreements with such persons.
If
we are unable to attract or retain qualified personnel, or if we are unable to adequately replace such personnel if we lose their
services for any reason, our business could be seriously harmed. In addition, if we have to replace any of these individuals,
we may not be able to replace the knowledge that they have about our operations.
If we make strategic
acquisitions of products, technologies or other businesses, we will incur a variety of costs and potential liabilities
and might never realize the anticipated benefits.
We have limited experience
in independently identifying acquisition candidates and integrating the operations of acquisition candidates with our company.
If appropriate opportunities become available, and we have sufficient resources to do so, we might attempt to acquire approved
products, additional drug candidates, technologies or businesses that we believe are a strategic fit with our business. To date,
the most significant acquisition relevant to our current business strategy was our acquisition of assets relating to Prestalia
and DyrctAxes from Symplmed in June and July 2017. If we pursue any transaction of that sort in the future, the process
of negotiating the acquisition and integrating an acquired product, drug candidate, technology or business, and the product
sales and distribution networks relating to such acquired assets, might result in operating difficulties, expenditures and
potential liabilities, and might require significant management attention that would otherwise be available for ongoing development
of our business, whether or not any such transaction is ever consummated. Moreover, we might never realize the anticipated benefits
of any acquisition. Future acquisitions could result in, among other things, dilutive issuances of equity securities, the incurrence
of debt, contingent liabilities, or impairment expenses related to goodwill, and impairment or amortization expenses related to
other intangible assets, which could harm our financial condition.
Failure
of our internal control over financial reporting could harm our business and financial results.
Our
management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting. Internal control
over financial reporting is a process to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting for external
purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Internal control over financial reporting
includes maintaining records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect our transactions; providing reasonable assurance
that transactions are recorded as necessary for preparation of the financial statements; providing reasonable assurance that receipts
and expenditures of our assets are made in accordance with management authorization; and providing reasonable assurance that unauthorized
acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements would be prevented
or detected on a timely basis. Any failure to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting could
limit our ability to report our financial results accurately and timely or to detect and prevent fraud.
In
connection with the evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018 that was undertaken by
management in connection with the preparation of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, management
determined that our lack of a sufficient complement of personnel with an appropriate level of knowledge and experience in the
performance of an audit of a public company that is commensurate with our financial reporting requirements constituted a material
weakness as of December 31, 2018. To remediate the foregoing material weakness, we hired additional experienced accounting and
other personnel to assist with filings and financial record keeping and took additional steps to improve our financial reporting
systems and enhance our existing policies, procedures and controls. Despite these remedial measures undertaken during 2018, we
were not be able to adequately address the weaknesses that we identified, and thus management determined that the weaknesses still
existed as of December 31, 2018.
We
depend on our information technology and infrastructure.
We
rely on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of information technology systems to manage our operations, to process, transmit
and store electronic and financial information, and to comply with regulatory, legal and tax requirements. We also depend on our
information technology infrastructure for electronic communications among our personnel, contractors, consultants and vendors.
System failures or outages could compromise our ability to perform these functions in a timely manner, or could result in the
loss of information, which could harm our ability to conduct business or delay our financial reporting. Such failures could materially
adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.
In
addition, we depend on third parties and applications on virtualized (cloud) infrastructure to operate and support our information
systems. These third parties vary from multi-disciplined to boutique providers. Failure by these providers to adequately deliver
the contracted services could have an adverse effect on our business, which in turn may materially adversely affect our operating
results and financial condition. All information systems, despite implementation of security measures, are vulnerable to disability,
failures or unauthorized access. If our information systems were to fail or be breached, such failure or breach could materially
adversely affect our ability to perform critical business functions and sensitive and confidential data could be compromised.
Our
business and operations could suffer in the event of system failures.
Our
internal computer systems and those of our contractors, consultants and partners are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses,
unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Such events could cause
interruption of our operations and could result in a material disruption of our development programs and commercialization efforts.
For example, the loss of pre-clinical trial data or data from completed or ongoing clinical trials for our product candidates,
if any, could result in delays in our regulatory filings and development efforts and significantly increase our costs. To the
extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to our data, or inappropriate disclosure of
confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and our business operations could be delayed.
We
may be unable to adequately protect our information technology systems from cyber-attacks, which could result in the disclosure
of confidential information, damage our reputation, and subject us to significant financial and legal exposure.
Cyber-attacks
are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect. Cyber-attacks
could include wrongful conduct by hostile foreign governments, industrial espionage, the deployment of harmful malware, denial-of-service,
and other means to threaten data confidentiality, integrity and availability. A successful cyber-attack could cause serious negative
consequences for our company, including the disruption of operations, the misappropriation of confidential information (including
patient information) and trade secrets, and the disclosure of corporate strategic plans and results. To date, we have not experienced
threats to our data and information technology systems. However, although we devote resources to protect our information technology
systems, we realize that cyber-attacks are a threat, and there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent information security
breaches that would result in business, legal or reputational harm to us, or would have a material adverse effect on our operating
results and financial condition.
Risks
Related to the Development and Regulatory Approval of Drug Products
The
development of pharmaceutical products is uncertain and may never lead to marketable products.
The
future success of our operations will depend on the successful development or acquisition by us of products for commercialization.
The products that we may seek to acquire or develop may not demonstrate in patients the chemical and pharmacological properties
ascribed to them in laboratory studies, and they may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective or harmful
ways. We may make significant expenditures acquiring or developing product candidates that have minimal, if any, commercial success.
If we are unable to develop or acquire a sufficient number of successful drug products to finance our ongoing operations, we may
be required to change the scope and direction of, or cease pursuing, our intended business operations.
If
we or our partners are unable to acquire or develop, and commercialize products, our business will be adversely affected.
A
key element of our business strategy is to develop or acquire, and thereafter commercialize, a portfolio of pharmaceutical products.
Whether or not any product candidates are ultimately identified, research programs that we may develop to identify product candidates
will require substantial technical, financial and human resources. These research programs may initially show promise in identifying
potential product candidates, yet fail to yield a successful commercial product for many reasons, including the following:
|
●
|
competitors
may develop alternatives that render our product candidates obsolete;
|
|
●
|
a
product candidate may not have a sustainable intellectual property position in major markets;
|
|
●
|
a
product candidate may, after additional studies, be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate
it is unlikely to be effective;
|
|
●
|
a
product candidate may not receive regulatory approval;
|
|
●
|
a
product candidate may not be capable of production in commercial quantities at an acceptable cost, or at all; or
|
|
●
|
a
product candidate may not be accepted by patients, the medical community or third-party payors.
|
To
the extent that we undertake any R&D activities regarding our current or future development assets, clinical trials of such
assets would be expensive and time-consuming, and the results of any of these trials would be uncertain.
Before
obtaining regulatory approval for the sale of any product candidates that we may attempt to develop, we and our partners must
conduct expensive and extensive pre-clinical tests and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of such product
candidates. Pre-clinical and clinical testing is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and the historical failure rate for
product candidates is high. The length of time generally varies substantially according to the type of drug, complexity of clinical
trial design, regulatory compliance requirements, intended use of the drug candidate and rate of patient enrollment for the clinical
trials.
A
failure of one or more pre-clinical studies or clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. We and our partners may experience
numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, the pre-clinical testing and the clinical trial process that could delay
or prevent the receipt of regulatory approval or the commercialization of our product candidates, or that could render such process
substantially more expensive, including:
|
●
|
regulators
may not authorize us to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
pre-clinical
tests or clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we or a partner may decide, or a regulator may
require us, to conduct additional pre-clinical testing or clinical trials, or we or a partner may abandon projects that were
previously expected to be promising;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
enrollment
in clinical trials may be slower than anticipated or participants may drop out of clinical trials at a higher rate than anticipated,
in each case for a variety of reasons, resulting in significant delays;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
third
party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations in a timely manner;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
product
candidates may have very different chemical and pharmacological properties in humans than in laboratory testing and may interact
with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective or harmful ways;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
suspension or termination of clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including if the participants are being exposed to
unacceptable health risks or if such trials are not being conducted in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
regulators,
including the FDA, may require that clinical research be held, suspended or terminated for various reasons, including noncompliance
with regulatory requirements;
|
|
●
|
the
costs of clinical trials (or the components thereof) may be greater than anticipated;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
supply or quality of drug candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials may be insufficient or inadequate;
and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
product
candidates may not have the desired effects or may include undesirable side effects or the product candidates may have other
unexpected characteristics.
|
Further,
even if the results of pre-clinical studies or clinical trials are initially positive, it is possible that different results will
be obtained in the later stages of drug development or that results seen in clinical trials will not continue with longer term
treatment. Drugs in late stages of clinical development may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having
progressed through initial clinical testing. For example, positive results in early phase 1 or phase 2 clinical trials may not
be repeated in larger phase 2 or phase 3 clinical trials. It is expected that all of the drug candidates that may be developed
by us or our partners will be prone to the risks of failure inherent in drug development. The clinical trials of any or all of
the drug candidates of us or our partners could be unsuccessful, which would prevent the commercialization of these drugs. The
FDA conducts its own independent analysis of some or all of the pre-clinical and clinical trial data submitted in a regulatory
filing and often comes to different and potentially more negative conclusions than the analysis performed by the drug sponsor.
To the extent that we move forward with R&D activities for our current and future development assets, the failure to develop
safe, commercially viable drugs approved by the FDA or another applicable regulatory body would impair our ability to generate
product sales and sustain our operations. In addition, significant delays in pre-clinical studies and clinical trials will impede
the regulatory approval process, the commercialization of drug candidates and the generation of revenue, as well as substantially
increase development costs.
Any
product candidates that we may develop may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could halt their development,
prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential or result in significant negative consequences.
It
is possible that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may not agree with any future assessment of the safety profile of any
product candidates that we may develop. Undesirable side effects caused by any of our product candidates could cause us or our
partners to interrupt, delay or discontinue development of our product candidates, could result in a clinical hold on any clinical
trial, or could result in the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities.
This, in turn, could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates and generating revenues from their sale. In addition,
if any of our products cause serious or unexpected side effects or are associated with other safety risks after receiving marketing
approval, a number of potential significant negative consequences could result, including: (i) regulatory authorities may withdraw
their approval of the product; (ii) we may be required to recall the product, change the way it is administered, conduct additional
clinical trials or change the labeling of the product; (iii) the product may be rendered less competitive and sales may decrease;
(iv) our reputation may suffer generally both among clinicians and patients; (v) regulatory authorities may require certain labeling
statements, such as warnings or contraindications or limitations on the indications for use, or impose restrictions on distribution
in connection with approval, if any; or (vi) we may be required to change the way the product is administered or conduct additional
preclinical studies or clinical trials.
Any
one or a combination of these events could prevent us from obtaining approval and achieving or maintaining market acceptance of
the affected product candidates that we may develop or could substantially increase the costs and expenses of commercializing
such product candidates, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenues from the sale of the product.
Even
if regulatory approvals are obtained for any of the products that we may develop or acquire, including our approved Prestalia
product, such products will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review. If we or a partner fail
to comply with continuing U.S. and foreign regulations, the approvals to market drugs could be lost and our business would be
materially adversely affected.
Following
any initial FDA or foreign regulatory approval of any drugs we or a partner may develop, including Prestalia, such drugs will
continue to be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory review, including the review of adverse drug experiences and clinical
results that are reported after such drugs are made available to patients. This would include results from any post marketing
studies or vigilance required as a condition of approval. The manufacturer and manufacturing facilities used to make any drug
candidates will also be subject to periodic review and inspection by regulatory authorities, including the FDA. The discovery
of any new or previously unknown problems with the product, manufacturer or facility may result in restrictions on the drug or
manufacturer or facility, including withdrawal of the drug from the market. Marketing, advertising and labeling also will be subject
to regulatory requirements and continuing regulatory review. The failure to comply with applicable continuing regulatory requirements
may result in fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approval, product recalls and seizures, operating restrictions and
other adverse consequences.
We
and our partners are subject to extensive U.S. and foreign government regulation regarding the development and commercialization
of pharmaceutical products.
We,
our present and future collaborators, and the drug products developed by us or in collaboration with partners are subject to extensive
regulation by governmental authorities in the U.S. and other countries. Failure to comply with applicable requirements could result
in, among other things, any of the following actions: warning letters, fines and other civil penalties, unanticipated expenditures,
delays in approving or refusal to approve a product, product recall or seizure, interruption of manufacturing or clinical trials,
operating restrictions, injunctions and criminal prosecution.
Our
products cannot be marketed in the U.S. without FDA approval or clearance, and they cannot be marketed in foreign countries without
applicable regulatory approval. Obtaining regulatory approval requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and may
be subject to both expected and unforeseen delays, including, without limitation, citizen’s petitions or other filings with
the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authority. There can be no assurance that any approval will be granted on a timely basis,
if at all, or that delays will be resolved favorably or in a timely manner. If our products are not approved in a timely fashion,
or are not approved at all, our business and financial condition may be adversely affected.
In
addition, both before and after regulatory approval, we, our collaborators and our products are subject to numerous requirements
by the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities covering, among other things, testing, manufacturing, quality control, labeling,
advertising, promotion, distribution and export. These requirements may change, and additional government regulations may be promulgated
that could affect us, our collaborators or our products. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation
that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the U.S. or abroad. There can be no assurance that
neither we nor any of our partners will be required to incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations in the
future or that such laws or regulations will not have a material adverse effect upon our business and prospects.
We
may use hazardous chemicals and biological materials in our business. Any disputes relating to improper use, handling, storage
or disposal of these materials could be time-consuming and costly.
To
the extent that we engage in any research and development activities, in which activities are not currently being actively pursued
by us, such activities may involve the use of hazardous and biological, potentially infectious, materials. Such use would subject
us to the risk of accidental contamination or discharge or any resultant injury from these materials. Federal, state and local
laws and regulations govern the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specific waste products.
We could be subject to damages, fines or penalties in the event of an improper or unauthorized release of, or exposure of individuals
to, these hazardous materials, and our liability could be substantial. The costs of complying with these current and future environmental
laws and regulations may be significant.
To
the extent that we engage in research and development activities, we may also be subject to numerous environmental, health and
workplace safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures, exposure to blood-borne pathogens and
the handling of biohazardous materials. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may
be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials. Additional
federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting our operations may be adopted in the future. We may incur substantial
costs to comply with, and substantial fines or penalties if we violate, any of these laws or regulations.
Risks
Related to our Dependence on Third Parties
We
are dependent upon Prestalia for our ability to generate revenue from the sale of products, and we are dependent upon Les Laboratoires
Servier for our rights to Prestalia.
Our
ability to generate revenue from the sale of drug products is currently entirely dependent upon sales of Prestalia. Prestalia
is the only product to which we have rights that has been approved for sale. We do not anticipate that any of our other product
candidates would be approved for sale in the near term, if at all, as currently we are not expending resources on the development
of any other product candidates, though we may acquire rights to approved products as a result of our product acquisition efforts.
Our rights to Prestalia derive from the license and commercialization agreement between our company and Les Laboratoires Servier.
If such license and commercialization agreement were to be terminated or materially modified for any reason, or if our rights
to Prestalia were to be reduced or eliminated for any reason other than the termination of the license and commercialization agreement,
our revenues and business operations would be materially adversely affected, which would likely have a significant impact on the
trading price of our common stock.
We
may become dependent on our collaborative arrangements with third parties for a substantial portion of our revenue, and our development
and commercialization activities may be delayed or reduced if we fail to initiate, negotiate or maintain successful collaborative
arrangements.
We
are, in part, dependent on partners to develop and commercialize products that we may seek to commercialize and to provide the
regulatory compliance, sales, marketing and distribution capabilities required for the success of our business. If we fail to
secure or maintain successful collaborative arrangements, our development and commercialization activities will be delayed, reduced
or terminated, and our revenues could be materially and adversely impacted.
The
potential future milestone and royalty payments and cost reimbursements from certain of our collaboration agreements could provide
an important source of financing for our business activities, thereby facilitating the development and commercialization of our
products. These collaborative agreements might be terminated either by us or by our partners upon the satisfaction of certain
notice requirements. Our partners may not be precluded from independently pursuing competing products and drug delivery approaches
or technologies. Even if our partners continue their contributions to our collaborative arrangements, of which there can be no
assurance, they may nevertheless determine not to actively pursue the development or commercialization of any resulting products.
Our partners may fail to perform their obligations under the collaborative arrangements or may be slow in performing their obligations.
In addition, our partners may experience financial difficulties at any time that could prevent them from having available funds
to contribute to these collaborations. If our collaborators fail to conduct their commercialization, regulatory compliance, sales
and marketing or distribution activities successfully and in a timely manner, or if they terminate or materially modify their
agreements with us, the development and commercialization of one or more product candidates could be delayed, curtailed or terminated.
An
interruption in the supply of raw and bulk materials needed for the development and manufacture of our products could cause product
development and/or sales to be slowed or stopped.
We
and our partners may obtain supplies of critical raw and bulk materials used in research and development efforts, or in order
to manufacture our approved products, from several suppliers, and long-term contracts may not be in place with any or all of these
suppliers. There can be no assurance that sufficient quantities of product candidates or approved products could be manufactured
if our suppliers are unable or unwilling to supply such materials. Any delay or disruption in the availability of raw or bulk
materials could slow or stop research and development, or sales, of the relevant product.
We
will rely on third parties to conduct clinical trials, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing
to meet established timelines for the completion of such clinical trials.
If
we move forward with any research and development activities with respect to our current and future development assets, for which
we have no current plans, we anticipate that we will be dependent on contract research organizations, third-party vendors and
investigators for performing or managing pre-clinical testing and clinical trials related to drug discovery and development efforts.
These parties will not be employed by us or our partners, and neither we nor our partners will be able to control the amount or
timing of resources that they devote to our programs. If they fail to devote sufficient time and resources to our drug development
programs or if their performance is substandard, it will delay, and potentially materially adversely affect, the development and
commercialization of our products. Moreover, these parties also may have relationships with other commercial entities, some of
which may compete with us and our partners. If they assist our competitors, it could harm our competitive position.
If
we or our partners lose our relationship with any one or more of these parties after development efforts are commenced, there
could be a significant delay in both identifying another comparable provider and then contracting for its services. An alternative
provider may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we locate an alternative provider, is it likely that this
provider may need additional time to respond to our needs and may not provide the same type or level of service as the original
provider. In addition, any alternative provider will be subject to current Good Laboratory Practices (“cGLP”) and
similar foreign standards and neither we nor our partners have control over compliance with these regulations by these providers.
Consequently, if these providers do not adhere to these practices and standards, the development and commercialization of any
products that we may seek to develop could be delayed.
We
have limited manufacturing experience or resources, and we must incur significant costs to develop this expertise or rely on third
parties to manufacture our products.
We
have no manufacturing experience, and thus depend on a limited number of third parties, who might not be able to deliver in a
timely manner, on acceptable terms, or at all. There are a limited number of manufacturers that supply the materials needed for
the development of our products and product candidates. There are risks inherent in pharmaceutical manufacturing that could affect
the ability of our contract manufacturers to meet our delivery requirements or provide adequate amounts of material to meet our
needs. To fulfill our supply requirements, we may also need to secure alternative suppliers.
The
manufacturing process for any of our products is subject to the FDA approval process, and we or our partners will need to contract
with manufacturers who can meet all applicable FDA requirements on an ongoing basis. If we are unable to obtain or maintain contract
manufacturing for these product candidates or approved products, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, we may not be able
to successfully develop and commercialize our products.
To
the extent that we enter into manufacturing arrangements with third parties, we will depend on these third parties to perform
their obligations in a timely manner and consistent with regulatory requirements, including those related to quality control and
quality assurance. The failure of a third-party manufacturer to perform its obligations as expected could adversely affect our
business in a number of ways.
If
a third-party manufacturer with whom we contract fails to perform its obligations, we may be forced to manufacture the materials
ourselves, for which we may not have the capabilities or resources or enter into an agreement with a different third-party manufacturer,
which we may not be able to do on acceptable terms, if at all. In addition, if we are required to change manufacturers for any
reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards
and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively
affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget, or to sell approved products in sufficient
quantities. Furthermore, a manufacturer may possess technology related to the manufacture of our product candidates or approved
products that such manufacturer owns independently. This would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain
a license from such manufacturer in order to have another third party manufacture our products.
Risks
Related to our Intellectual Property and Other Legal Matters
If
we are unable to adequately protect our proprietary technology from legal challenges, infringement or alternative technologies,
our competitive position may be hurt, and our operating results may be negatively impacted.
Our
business is based upon the development, acquisition and commercialization of pharmaceutical products, and we rely on the issuance
of patents, both in the U.S. and internationally, for protection against competitive technologies. Although we believe we exercise
the necessary due diligence in our patent filings, our proprietary position is not established until the appropriate regulatory
authorities actually issue a patent, which may take several years from initial filing or may never occur.
Moreover,
even the established patent positions of pharmaceutical companies are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual
issues. Although we believe our issued patents are valid, third parties may infringe our patents or may initiate proceedings challenging
the validity or enforceability of our patents. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its claim scope, validity or enforceability.
Challenges raised in patent infringement litigation we initiate or in proceedings initiated by third parties may result in determinations
that our patents have not been infringed or that they are invalid, unenforceable or otherwise subject to limitations. In the event
of any such determinations, third parties may be able to use the discoveries or technologies claimed in our patents without paying
us licensing fees or royalties, which could significantly diminish the value of these discoveries or technologies. As a result
of such determinations, we may be enjoined from pursuing commercialization of products or may be required to obtain licenses,
if available, to the third-party patents or to develop or obtain alternative technology. Responding to challenges initiated by
third parties may require significant expenditures and divert the attention of our management and key personnel from other business
concerns.
Furthermore,
it is possible that others will infringe or otherwise circumvent our issued patents and that we will be unable to fund the cost
of litigation against them or that we would elect not to pursue litigation. In addition, enforcing our patents against third parties
may require significant expenditures regardless of the outcome of such efforts. We also cannot assure you that others have not
filed patent applications for technology covered by our pending applications or that we were the first to invent the technology.
There may also exist third party patents or patent applications relevant to our products that may block or compete with the technologies
covered by our patent applications and third parties may independently develop IP similar to our patented IP, which could result
in, among other things, interference proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to determine priority of invention.
In
addition, we may not be able to protect our established and pending patent positions from competitive technologies, which may
provide more effective therapeutic benefit to patients and which may therefore make our products, technology and proprietary position
obsolete.
We
also rely on copyright and trademark protection, trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and licensing opportunities.
In an effort to maintain the confidentiality and ownership of our trade secrets and proprietary information, we have typically
required our employees, consultants, advisors and others to whom we disclose confidential information to execute confidentiality
and proprietary information agreements. However, it is possible that these agreements may be breached, invalidated or rendered
unenforceable, and if so, there may not be an adequate corrective remedy available. Furthermore, like many companies in our industry,
we may from time to time hire personnel formerly employed by other companies involved in one or more areas similar to the activities
we conduct. In some situations, our confidentiality and proprietary information agreements may conflict with, or be subject to,
the rights of third parties with whom our employees, consultants or advisors have prior employment or consulting relationships.
Although we have typically required our employees and consultants to maintain the confidentiality of all confidential information
of previous employers, we or these individuals may be subject to allegations of trade secret misappropriation or other similar
claims as a result of their prior affiliations. Finally, others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary
information and techniques, or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets. Our failure to protect our proprietary information
and techniques may inhibit or limit our ability to exclude certain competitors from the market and execute our business strategies.
If
we are unable to adequately protect our proprietary intellectual property from legal challenges, infringement or alternative technologies,
we will not be able to compete effectively in the pharmaceutical industry.
Because
intellectual property rights are of limited duration, expiration of intellectual property rights and licenses will negatively
impact our operating results.
Intellectual property
rights, such as patents and license agreements based on those patents, generally are of limited duration. Therefore, the expiration
or other loss of rights associated with IP and IP licenses, including those covering Prestalia, can negatively impact our
business, and the future sales of our products.
Our
patent applications may be inadequate in terms of priority, scope or commercial value.
We
apply for patents covering our discoveries and technologies as we deem appropriate and as our resources permit. However, we or
our partners or licensors may fail to apply for patents on important discoveries or technologies in a timely fashion or at all.
Also, our pending patent applications may not result in the issuance of any patents. These applications may not be sufficient
to meet the statutory requirements for patentability, and therefore we may be unable to obtain enforceable patents covering the
related discoveries, technologies, or products we may want to commercialize. In addition, because patent applications are maintained
in secrecy for approximately 18 months after filing, other parties may have filed patent applications relating to inventions before
our applications covering the same or similar inventions. In addition, foreign patent applications are often published initially
in local languages, and until an English language translation is available it can be impossible to determine the significance
of a third-party invention. Any patent applications filed by third parties may prevail over our patent applications or may result
in patents that issue alongside patents issued to us, leading to uncertainty over the scope of the patents or the freedom to practice
the claimed inventions.
Although
we have acquired and in-licensed a number of issued patents, the discoveries, technologies or products covered by these patents
may have limited therapeutic or commercial value. Also, issued patents may not provide commercially meaningful protection against
competitors. Other parties may be able to design around our issued patents or independently develop products having effects similar
or identical to our patented product candidates or approved products. In addition, the scope of our patents is subject to considerable
uncertainty and competitors or other parties may obtain similar patents of uncertain scope.
We
have depended on technologies we license, and if we lose the right to license such technologies or we fail to license new technologies
in the future, our ability to develop or commercialize new or existing products would be harmed.
We
have depended on licenses from third parties for certain of our technologies, products and product candidates. If our license
with respect to any of these technologies or products is terminated for any reason, the development and/or commercialization of
the products contemplated by the licenses would be delayed, or suspended altogether, while we seek to license similar products
or technology (which licenses may not be available on commercially acceptable terms or at all) or develop new non-infringing products
or technology. If our existing license is terminated, the development and/or commercialization of the products contemplated by
the licenses could be delayed or terminated and we may not be able to negotiate additional licenses on acceptable terms, if at
all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
We
may be required to defend lawsuits or pay damages for product liability claims.
Our
business exposes us to potential product liability risks that are inherent in the development and marketing of pharmaceutical
products. The risk exists even with respect to those drugs that are approved by regulatory agencies for commercial distribution
and sale and are manufactured in facilities licensed and regulated by regulatory agencies. Product liability claims could result
in an FDA investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our products, the manufacturing processes and facilities with respect
to our products, and our marketing programs, and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, or suspension
or withdrawal of approvals. Any product liability claims, regardless of their merits, could be costly, divert management’s
attention, delay or prevent completion of our development and commercialization programs, and adversely affect our reputation,
the demand for our products and our stock price. We currently have product liability insurance that we believe is appropriate
for our stage of development, including the marketing and sale of Prestalia. Any product liability insurance we have or may obtain
may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance
is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect
us against losses caused by product liability claims that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our
Prestalia product is currently involved in a paragraph IV challenge. Our failure to resolve the challenge in the manner currently
proposed, or to expand our product offerings prior to the date before the challenger launches a generic version of Prestalia to
derive meaningful revenues from such additional product offerings, could materially adversely affect us and our business operations.
Our
Prestalia product is currently involved in a paragraph IV challenge regarding patents issued to perindopril arginine. This challenge,
which is currently pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (No. 1:17-cv-00276), is captioned
Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. v. Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Les Laboratoires Servier. The challengers (Apotex Inc. and Apotex
Corp. (“Apotex”)) have filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking FDA approval to market a generic version
of Prestalia and included a Paragraph (IV) certification. In the litigation, Apotex seeks a declaratory judgment that no valid
claims of the two patents Symplmed listed in the FDA Orange Book as having claims covering Prestalia, U.S. Patent No. 6,696,481
and 7,846,961, will be infringed by the Apotex proposed generic version of Prestalia and that the claims of those patents are
invalid. The challenge is designed to provide Apotex with an opportunity to enter the market with a generic version of Prestalia,
ahead of the expiration of the patents with claims covering that product. Apotex entered into negotiations with Symplmed Pharmaceuticals,
LLC (which entity sold its assets relating to Prestalia to us in June 2017, including its License and Commercialization Agreement
with Les Laboratories Servier) and Les Laboratories Servier (which entity owns or controls intellectual property rights relating
to pharmaceutical products containing as an active pharmaceutical ingredient perindopril in combination with other active pharmaceutical
ingredients, which rights have been licensed to Symplmed Pharmaceuticals) to resolve the challenge in the second quarter of 2017,
and such parties, along with us, have come to a general agreement on terms that will result in a delay to the challengers’
ability to enter the market with a generic version of Prestalia, while still providing the challenger with the right to enter
the market prior to the expiration of the patent covering such product. The term sheet memorializing such terms is pending execution
in a final settlement agreement. In the meantime, the District Court has entered an order extending the time for the defendants
to respond to Apotex’s Complaint. Resolution of the Apotex litigation continues with alignment from all parties, including
Servier, Apotex, Symplmed and Adhera. Necessary extensions have been agreed upon and final resolution is anticipated this year.
However,
there can be no assurance that the paragraph IV challenge will be resolved without litigation or resolved on the terms currently
proposed. There also cannot be any assurance that our plans to commercialize Prestalia (or any of the products that we may license
from our partners or that we may develop internally) and expand our product offerings and the revenue generated therefrom so as
to lessen our reliance on sales of Prestalia will be achieved. Any failure of our expectations regarding the resolution of the
paragraph IV challenge and the expansion of our commercial activities (and the revenues to be derived therefrom) could have a
material adverse effect on us, our prospects and our results of operations.
Risks
Related to our Industry
If
we or any of our partners, consultants, collaborators, manufacturers, vendors or service providers fail to comply with healthcare
laws and regulations, or legal obligations related to privacy, data protection and information security, we or they could be subject
to enforcement actions, which could result in penalties and affect our ability to develop, market and sell our products and may
harm our reputation.
We
are or may in the future be subject to federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations pertaining to, among other things,
fraud and abuse and patients’ rights, in addition to legal obligations related to privacy, data protection and information
security. These laws and regulations include:
|
●
|
the
U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from soliciting, receiving or
providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce either the referral of an individual for a healthcare item or service,
or the purchasing or ordering of an item or service, for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program such
as Medicare or Medicaid;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
U.S. federal false claims and civil monetary penalties laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, which prohibit,
among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting or causing to be presented, claims for payment by government
funded programs such as Medicare or Medicaid that are false or fraudulent, and which may apply to us by virtue of statements
and representations made to customers or third parties;
|
|
●
|
the
U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which created additional federal criminal statutes
that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud healthcare
programs;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
HIPAA,
as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH), which imposes requirements
on certain types of people and entities relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health
information, and requires notification to affected individuals and regulatory authorities of certain breaches of security
of individually identifiable health information;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies
for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, to report annually
to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians,
other healthcare providers and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians and other healthcare
providers and their immediate family members, which is published in a searchable form on an annual basis; and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
state
laws comparable to each of the above federal laws, such as, for example, anti-kickback and false claims laws that may be broader
in scope and also apply to commercial insurers and other non-federal payors, requirements for mandatory corporate regulatory
compliance programs, and laws relating to patient data privacy and security. Other state laws require pharmaceutical companies
to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated
by the federal government; require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value
to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; and state and foreign laws 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 such health care laws and regulations, we may be subject to penalties, including
administrative, civil and criminal penalties, monetary damages, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of
our operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, or exclusion from participation
in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, any of which
could adversely affect our financial results. Although effective compliance programs can mitigate the risk of investigation and
prosecution for violations of these laws, these risks cannot be entirely eliminated. Any action against us for an alleged or suspected
violation could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and could divert our management’s attention from the operation
of our business, even if our defense is successful. In addition, achieving and sustaining compliance with applicable laws and
regulations may be costly to us in terms of money, time and resources.
If
we fail to comply with applicable laws or regulations, we could be subject to enforcement actions, which could affect our ability
to develop, market and sell Prestalia, or any other future products, successfully and could harm our reputation and lead to reduced
acceptance of our products by the market.
Moreover,
the laws and regulations applicable to our industry are subject to change, and while we currently may be compliant, that could
change due to changes in interpretation, prevailing industry standards of the legal structure.
Any
drugs that we are currently commercializing, or that we may commercialize in the future, may become subject to unfavorable pricing
regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which could have a material adverse effect
on our business and financial results.
Our
ability to commercialize any products successfully, including Prestalia, will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and
adequate reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities,
private health insurers and other third-party payors. In many jurisdictions, a product must be approved for reimbursement before
it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government
or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to the payor supporting scientific,
clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products.
It is possible that our
current approved product and any other future products that we bring to the market may not be considered cost-effective, and the
amount reimbursed for any products may be insufficient to allow us to sell such products on a competitive basis, or at a price
that allows us to be profitable. Increasingly, the third-party payors, such as government and private insurance plans, who reimburse
patients or healthcare providers, are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices
and are seeking to reduce the prices charged or the amounts reimbursed for pharmaceutical products. If the coverage provided for
any products we develop or commercialize is inadequate in light of our development, sales and other costs, our return on investment
could be adversely affected.
There
may be significant delays in obtaining coverage for newly-approved products, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes
for which the drug is approved by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage does not imply
that any drug will be reimbursed in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture,
sale and distribution. Interim payments for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not
be made permanent.
Reimbursement
may be based on payments allowed for lower-cost products that are already reimbursed, may be incorporated into existing payments
for other services and may reflect budgetary constraints or imperfections in Medicare data. Net prices for products may be reduced
by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of
laws that presently restrict imports of products from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States.
Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates.
However, no uniform policy requirement for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the United
States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage
determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support
for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied
consistently or obtained in the first instance. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement rates from
both government-funded and private payors for Prestalia as well as for new drugs that we develop, for which we obtain regulatory
approval and/or that we seek to commercialize could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise
capital and our financial condition.
We
believe that the efforts of governments and third-party payors to contain or reduce the cost of healthcare and legislative and
regulatory proposals to broaden the availability of healthcare will continue to affect the business and financial condition of
pharmaceutical companies. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal and state
legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under
Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement
methodologies for drugs. A number of other legislative and regulatory changes in the healthcare system in the United States have
been proposed or enacted in recent months and years, and such efforts have expanded substantially in recent years. These developments
have included prescription drug benefit legislation that was enacted and took effect in January 2006, healthcare reform legislation
subsequently enacted by certain states, and major healthcare reform legislation that was passed by Congress and enacted into law
in the United States in 2010. Future developments could, directly or indirectly, affect our ability to sell our products at a
favorable price.
For
example, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act
(ACA), contains provisions that affect companies in the pharmaceutical industry and other healthcare related industries by imposing
additional costs and changes to business practices. Provisions affecting pharmaceutical companies include the following:
|
●
|
mandatory
rebates for drugs sold into the Medicaid program were increased, and the rebate requirement
was extended to drugs used in risk-based Medicaid managed care plans;
|
|
●
|
the
340B Drug Pricing Program under the Public Health Services Act was extended to require
mandatory discounts for drug products sold to certain critical access hospitals, cancer
hospitals and other covered entities;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
expansion
of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
expansion
of entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service pharmaceutical pricing
program;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
a
new Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in,
and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such
research;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
pharmaceutical
companies are required to offer discounts on brand-name drugs to patients who fall within
the Medicare Part D coverage gap, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”;
and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
pharmaceutical
companies are required to pay an annual non-tax-deductible fee to the federal government
based on each company’s market share of prior year total sales of branded products
to certain federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, Department of Veterans
Affairs and Department of Defense. We do not expect this annual assessment to have a
material impact on our financial condition.
|
The
financial impact of the U.S. healthcare reform legislation over the next few years will depend on a number of factors, including,
without limitation, the policies reflected in implementing regulations and guidance, and changes in sales volumes for products
affected by the new system of rebates, discounts and fees. This legislation may also have a positive impact on our future net
sales, if any, by increasing the aggregate number of persons with healthcare coverage in the U.S.
Members
of Congress and the Trump administration have expressed an intent to pass legislation or adopt executive orders to fundamentally
change or repeal parts of the ACA. While Congress has not passed repeal legislation to date, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017
includes a provision repealing the individual insurance coverage mandate included in ACA, effective January 1, 2019. Further,
on January 20, 2017, an Executive Order was signed directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the
ACA to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the ACA that would impose a fiscal
burden on states, individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices.
On October 13, 2017, an Executive Order was signed terminating the cost-sharing subsidies that reimburse insurers under the ACA.
Several state Attorneys General filed suit to stop the administration from terminating the subsidies, but their request for a
restraining order was denied by a federal judge in California on October 25, 2017. In addition, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS) has recently proposed regulations that would give states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers
in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under
the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 among other things, amends the ACA effective
January 1, 2019, to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole.”
In July 2018, the CMS published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain ACA qualified health
plans and health insurance issuers under the ACA risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of federal district court
litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. Moreover, CMS issued a final rule in 2018 that will
give states greater flexibility, starting in 2020, in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces,
which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces.
On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or the Texas District Court Judge, ruled
that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. While the Texas District Court Judge
issued an order staying the judgment pending appeal in December 2018, and both the Trump Administration and CMS have stated the
ruling will have no immediate impact, it is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals and other efforts to repeal and replace
the ACA will impact the ACA and our business. Congress may consider other legislation to replace elements of the ACA. The implications
of the ACA, its possible repeal, any legislation that may be proposed to replace the ACA, or the political uncertainty surrounding
any repeal or replacement legislation for our business and financial condition, if any, are not yet clear.
The
costs of prescription pharmaceuticals in the U.S. recently has also been the subject of considerable discussion in the U.S., and
members of Congress and the Trump administration have stated that they will address such costs through new legislative and administrative
measures. To date, there have been several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation
designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer
patient programs, reduce the costs of drugs under Medicare and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug
products. At the federal level, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to pursue new
legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. The Trump administration released a “Blueprint,”
or plan, to reduce the cost of drugs. The Trump administration’s Blueprint contains certain measures that the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services is already working to implement. For example, on October 25, 2018, CMS issued an Advanced Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, or ANPRM, indicating it is considering issuing a proposed rule in the spring of 2019 on a model called
the International Pricing Index. This model would utilize a basket of other countries’ prices as a reference for the Medicare
program to use in reimbursing for drugs covered under Part B. The ANPRM also included an updated version of the Competitive Acquisition
Program, as an alternative to current “buy and bill” payment methods for Part B drugs. Such a proposed rule could
limit our product pricing and have material adverse effects on our business.
Individual
state legislatures have become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control
pharmaceutical and biological product pricing. Some of these measures include price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts,
restrictions on certain product access, marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed
to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional health care authorities and individual
hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included
in their prescription drug and other health care programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for our products, once
approved, or put pressure on our product pricing.
The
pharmaceutical market is intensely competitive. If we are unable to compete effectively with existing drugs and commercialization
platforms, and existing and new treatment methods and technologies, we may be unable to commercialize successfully any drugs that
we develop or acquire.
The
pharmaceutical market is intensely competitive and rapidly changing. Many large pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions,
governmental agencies and other public and private research organizations are pursuing the development of drugs or treatments
for the same diseases and conditions that we are targeting or expect to target, and they may be developing patient adherence platforms
that are substantially similar to our Total Care platform. Many of our competitors have:
|
●
|
much
greater financial, technical and human resources than we have at every stage of the discovery, development, manufacture, acquisition
and commercialization of products;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
more
extensive experience in pre-clinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and in manufacturing,
marketing and selling pharmaceutical products;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
additional
products that have been approved or are in late stages of development; and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
collaborative
arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions.
|
Our
products or adherence platforms may face intense competition from drugs or treatments that have already been approved and accepted
by the medical community for the treatment of the conditions for which we may develop or commercialize drugs or treatments, or
from new drugs or technologies that enter the market. We believe a significant number of drugs are currently under development,
and may become commercially available in the future, for the treatment of conditions for which we and our partners may try to
develop or commercialize drugs. These drugs may be more effective, safer, less expensive, or marketed and sold more effectively,
than any products we and our partners develop or commercialize.
We
anticipate that we and our partners will face competition based on many different factors regarding products or platforms that
we develop or commercialize, including:
|
●
|
safety
and effectiveness of such products;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
ease
with which such products or platforms can be administered or utilized, and the extent to which patients accept such products
or platforms;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
timing
and scope of regulatory approvals for these products;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
availability
and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
price;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
reimbursement
coverage; and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
patent
position.
|
Our
competitors may develop or commercialize products or treatments with significant advantages over any products we develop or commercialize
based on any of the factors listed above or on other factors. Our competitors may therefore be more successful in commercializing
their products than we are, which could adversely affect our competitive position and business. Competitive products or treatments
may make any products we develop or commercialize obsolete or noncompetitive before we can recover the expenses of developing,
acquiring and/or commercializing our products. Such competitors could also recruit our future employees, which could negatively
impact our level of expertise and the ability to execute on our business plan. Furthermore, we also face competition from existing
and new treatment methods that reduce or eliminate the need for drugs, such as the use of advanced medical devices. The development
of new medical devices, technologies or other treatment methods for the conditions we are targeting could make our products or
adherence platforms noncompetitive, obsolete or uneconomical.
Risks
Related to our Common Stock
The
trading price of our common stock has been volatile, and investors in our common stock may experience substantial losses.
The
trading price of our common stock has been volatile and may become volatile again in the future. The trading price of our common
stock could decline or fluctuate in response to a variety of factors, including:
|
●
|
our
general financial condition and ability to maintain sufficient capital to continue operations;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
our
ability to enter into and maintain collaborative arrangements with third parties;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
our
ability to meet the performance estimates of securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
changes
in buy/sell recommendations by securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
negative
results from clinical and pre-clinical trials;
|
|
●
|
fluctuations
in our periodic operating results;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
reverse
splits or increases in authorized shares;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
substantial
sales of our equity securities;
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
general
stock market conditions; or
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
other
economic or external factors.
|
The
stock markets in general, and the markets for the securities of companies of our size and in our industry in particular, have
experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These broad
market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.
A
former director and executive officer controls a large percentage of the outstanding shares of our common stock (without giving
effect to the conversion of voting preferred stock), and thus can influence our corporate actions.
As
of the date of this report, Dr. Vuong Trieu, a former director and executive officer of our company, directly or indirectly beneficially
owns approximately 59.7% of the issued and outstanding shares of our common stock (without giving effect to the conversion of
any shares of our preferred stock other than such shares of preferred stock as may be directly or indirectly owned by Dr. Trieu),
which percentage would be reduced to approximately 13.8% after giving effect to the as-converted voting rights of the holders
of our outstanding preferred stock (but without giving effect to the exercise of any presently exercisable options or warrants
directly or indirectly held by Dr. Trieu). Accordingly, and subject to the voting rights of our outstanding classes of preferred
stock, Dr. Trieu individually can influence many, if not most, of our corporate actions.
We
may not be able to achieve secondary trading of our stock in certain states because our common stock is not nationally traded.
Because
our common stock is not listed for trading on a national securities exchange, our common stock is subject to the securities laws
of the various states and jurisdictions of the U.S. in addition to federal securities law. This regulation covers any primary
offering we might attempt and all secondary trading by our stockholders. If we fail to take appropriate steps to register our
common stock or qualify for exemptions for our common stock in certain states or jurisdictions of the U.S., the investors in those
jurisdictions where we have not taken such steps may not be allowed to purchase our stock or those who presently hold our stock
may not be able to resell their shares without substantial effort and expense. These restrictions and potential costs could be
significant burdens on our stockholders.
Our
common stock is quoted on the OTCQB, which may limit the ability of our stockholders to sell their securities and may cause volatility
in the price of our common stock.
Our
common stock is currently quoted on the OTCQB. Securities quoted on the OTCQB often experience a lack of liquidity as compared
to securities trading on a national securities exchange. Such securities also have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations
in recent years, which have particularly affected the market prices of many smaller companies like ours. We anticipate that our
common stock will be subject to the lack of liquidity and this volume and price volatility that is characteristic of the OTCQB.
Our
common stock is considered a “penny stock,” and thereby is subject to additional sale and trading regulations that
may make it more difficult to sell.
Our
common stock is considered to be a “penny stock” since it does not qualify for one of the exemptions from the definition
of “penny stock” under Section 3a51-1 of the Exchange Act. The principal result or effect of being designated a “penny
stock” is that securities broker-dealers participating in sales of our common stock are subject to the “penny stock”
regulations set forth in Rules 15-2 through 15g-9 promulgated under the Exchange Act. For example, Rule 15g-2 requires broker-dealers
dealing in penny stocks to provide potential investors with a document disclosing the risks of penny stocks and to obtain a manually
signed and dated written receipt of the document at least two business days before effecting any transaction in a penny stock
for the investor’s account.
Moreover,
Rule 15g-9 requires broker-dealers in penny stocks to approve the account of any investor for transactions in such stocks before
selling any penny stock to that investor. This procedure requires the broker-dealer to (i) obtain from the investor information
concerning his or her financial situation, investment experience and investment objectives; (ii) reasonably determine, based on
that information, that transactions in penny stocks are suitable for the investor and that the investor has sufficient knowledge
and experience as to be reasonably capable of evaluating the risks of penny stock transactions; (iii) provide the investor with
a written statement setting forth the basis on which the broker-dealer made the determination in (ii) above; and (iv) receive
a signed and dated copy of such statement from the investor, confirming that it accurately reflects the investor’s financial
situation, investment experience and investment objectives. Compliance with these requirements may make it more difficult and
time consuming for holders of our common stock to resell their shares to third parties or to otherwise dispose of them in the
market or otherwise.
Various
restrictions in our charter documents and Delaware law could prevent or delay a change in control of our company that is not supported
by our board of directors.
We
are subject to a number of provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law that may discourage, delay or prevent a merger,
acquisition or change of control that a stockholder may consider favorable. These anti-takeover provisions include:
|
●
|
advance
notice procedures for nominations of candidates for election as directors and for stockholder proposals to be considered at
stockholders’ meetings; and
|
|
|
|
|
●
|
the
Delaware anti-takeover statute contained in Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law.
|
Section
203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law prohibits a merger, consolidation, asset sale or other similar business combination
between us and any stockholder of 15% or more of our voting stock for a period of three years after the stockholder acquires 15%
or more of our voting stock, unless (1) the transaction is approved by our board of directors before the stockholder acquires
15% or more of our voting stock, (2) upon completing the transaction the stockholder owns at least 85% of our voting stock outstanding
at the commencement of the transaction, or (3) the transaction is approved by our board of directors and the holders of 66 2/3%
of our voting stock, excluding shares of our voting stock owned by the stockholder.
We
have never paid dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable
future.
We
have not paid any dividends on our common stock and do not expect to do so in the foreseeable future. In addition, the terms of
any financing arrangements that we may enter into may restrict our ability to pay any dividends. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
we are required to pay and/or accrue dividends on our Series E and Series F convertible preferred stock.
A
significant number of shares of our common stock are subject to options, warrants and conversion rights. The issuance of these
shares, which in some cases may occur on a cashless basis, will dilute the interests of other security holders and may depress
the price of our common stock.
At
December 31, 2018, there were outstanding warrants to purchase up to approximately 36.3 million shares common stock. If any of
these warrants are exercised on a cashless basis, we will not receive any cash as a result of such exercises. At December 31,
2018, there were also outstanding 100 shares of Series C Preferred Stock, which shares are convertible into 66,666 shares of common
stock at an assumed conversion price of $7.50 per share of common stock, 40 shares of Series D Stock, which shares are convertible
into 50,000 shares of common stock at an assumed conversion price of $4.00 per share of common stock, 3,488 shares of Series E
Stock, which shares are convertible into approximately 35 million shares of common stock at an assumed conversion price of $0.50
per share of common stock (without giving effect to any dividends on such shares of preferred stock that would increase the stated
value of such shares) and 381 shares of Series F Stock, which shares are convertible into approximately 3.8 million shares of
common stock at an assumed conversion price of $0.50 per share of common stock (without giving effect to any dividends on such
shares of preferred stock that would increase the stated value of such shares). In addition, we may issue a significant number
of additional shares of common stock (and securities convertible into or exercisable for common stock) from time to time to finance
our operations, to fund potential acquisitions, or in connection with additional stock options or restricted stock granted to
our employees, officers, directors and consultants. The issuance of common stock (or securities convertible into or exercisable
for common stock), and the exercise or conversion of securities exercisable for or convertible into common stock, will have a
dilutive impact on other stockholders and could have a material negative effect on the market price of our common stock.
There
are outstanding a significant number of shares available for future sales under Rule 144.
Many
shares of our common stock (including shares issuable upon conversion of outstanding shares of preferred stock or upon exercise
of outstanding warrants) may be deemed “restricted shares” and, in the future, may be sold in compliance with Rule
144 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Any sales of such shares of our
common stock under Rule 144 could have a depressive effect on the market price of our common stock. In general, under Rule 144,
a person who is not deemed to have been an affiliate of ours at any time during the three months preceding a sale, and who has
beneficially owned restricted securities within the meaning of Rule 144 for at least six months (including any period of consecutive
ownership of preceding non-affiliated holders) would be entitled to sell those shares, subject only to the availability of current
public information about us. A non-affiliated person who has beneficially owned restricted securities within the meaning of Rule
144 for at least one year would be entitled to sell those shares without regard to the provisions of Rule 144. A person who is
deemed to be an affiliate of ours and who has beneficially owned restricted securities within the meaning of Rule 144 for at least
six months would be entitled to sell within any three-month period a number of shares that does not exceed the greater of one
percent of the then outstanding shares of our common stock or the average weekly trading volume of our common stock during the
four calendar weeks preceding such sale. Such sales are also subject to certain manner of sale provisions, notice requirements
and the availability of current public information about us.
Our
Board of Directors has the ability to issue “blank check” Preferred Stock.
Our Certificate of Incorporation
authorizes the issuance of up to 100,000 shares of “blank check” preferred stock, with such designation rights and
preferences as may be determined from time to time by our Board of Directors. At December 31, 2018, 1,880 shares of preferred
stock were available for designation and issuance. Our Board is empowered, without shareholder approval, to issue
shares of preferred stock with dividend, liquidation, conversion, voting or other rights which could adversely affect the voting
power or other rights of the holders of our common stock. In the event of such issuances, the preferred stock could be utilized,
under certain circumstances, as a method of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control of our company. Although
we have no present intention to issue any additional shares of our preferred stock in the immediate future, there can be no assurance
that we will not do so in the future.
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
Not
Applicable.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
We
have entered into a Standard Form Office Lease with ROC III Fairlead Imperial Center, LLC, as landlord, pursuant to which we lease
our corporate headquarters located at 4721 Emperor Boulevard, Suite 350, Durham, North Carolina 27703 for a term of 37 months
starting on October 1, 2018. Our base monthly rent for such space is currently $6,457.92, which amount will increase to $7,057
for the final month of the term. Other than the lease for our corporate headquarters, we do not own or lease any real property
or facilities that are material to our current business operations. As we expand our business operations, we may seek to lease
additional facilities of our own in order to support our operational and administrative needs under our current operating plan.
There can be no assurance that such facilities will be available, or that they will be available on suitable terms. Our inability
to obtain such facilities could have a material adverse effect on our future plans and operations.
ITEM
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Paragraph
IV Challenge
Our
Prestalia product is currently involved in a paragraph IV challenge regarding patents issued to perindopril arginine. This challenge,
which is currently pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (No. 1:17-cv-00276), is captioned
Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. v. Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Les Laboratoires Servier. The challengers (Apotex Inc. and Apotex
Corp. (“Apotex”)) have filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking FDA approval to market a generic version
of Prestalia and included a Paragraph (IV) certification. In the litigation, Apotex seeks a declaratory judgment that no valid
claims of the two patents Symplmed listed in the FDA Orange Book as having claims covering Prestalia, U.S. Patent No. 6,696,481
and 7,846,961, will be infringed by the Apotex proposed generic version of Prestalia and that the claims of those patents are
invalid. The challenge is designed to provide Apotex with an opportunity to enter the market with a generic version of Prestalia,
ahead of the expiration of the patents with claims covering that product. Apotex entered into negotiations with Symplmed Pharmaceuticals,
LLC (which entity sold its assets relating to Prestalia to us in June 2017, including its License and Commercialization Agreement
with Les Laboratories Servier) and Les Laboratories Servier (which entity owns or controls intellectual property rights relating
to pharmaceutical products containing as an active pharmaceutical ingredient perindopril in combination with other active pharmaceutical
ingredients, which rights have been licensed to Symplmed Pharmaceuticals) to resolve the challenge in the second quarter of 2017,
and such parties, along with us, have come to a general agreement on terms that will result in a delay to the challengers’
ability to enter the market with a generic version of Prestalia, while still providing the challenger with the right to enter
the market prior to the expiration of the patent covering such product. The term sheet memorializing such terms is pending execution
in a final settlement agreement. In the meantime, the District Court has entered an order extending the time for the defendants
to respond to Apotex’s Complaint. Resolution of the Apotex litigation continues with alignment from all parties, including
Servier, Apotex, Symplmed and Adhera. Necessary extensions have been agreed upon and final resolution is anticipated this year.
General
Currently,
there is no material litigation pending against our company other than as disclosed above. From time to time, we may become a
party to litigation and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of our business. Although the results of such litigation
and claims in the ordinary course of business cannot be predicted with certainty, we believe that the final outcome of such matters
will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. Regardless of outcome,
litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.
ITEM
4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not
applicable.
PART
III
ITEM
10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
As of April 8,
2019, the number of members of our Board of Directors is fixed at six (6). The members of our Board of Directors as of such date
are as follows:
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Director
Since
|
Uli
Hacksell, Ph.D.
|
|
68
|
|
Chairman
of the Board
|
|
July
2018
|
Nancy
R.Phelan
|
|
50
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer, Secretary and a director
|
|
October
2018
|
Isaac
Blech
(2)(3)
|
|
69
|
|
Director
|
|
November
2017
|
Tim
Boris
(1)(2)(3)
|
|
50
|
|
Director
|
|
April
2018
|
Erik
Emerson
|
|
48
|
|
Director
|
|
April
2018
|
Donald
A. Williams
(1)(2)(3)
|
|
60
|
|
Director
|
|
September
2014
|
(1)
Member of Audit Committee.
(2)
Member of Compensation Committee.
(3)
Member of Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
The
biographies of each director below contain information regarding the person’s service as a director, business experience,
director positions held currently or at any time during the last five years, and information regarding involvement in certain
legal or administrative proceedings, if applicable.
Uli
Hacksell, Ph.D. –
Dr. Hacksell has served as a director of our company, and as the Chairman of our Board of Directors,
since July 1, 2018. Dr. Hacksell has served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Cerecor Inc. since May 2015 and as President
and Chief Executive Officer of Cerecor Inc. from January 2016 to August 2017. From September 2000 to March 2015, Dr. Hacksell
served as the Chief Executive Officer and as a director of ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. From February 1999 to September 2000, he
served as the Executive Vice President of Drug Discovery of ACADIA. Previously, Dr. Hacksell held various senior executive positions
at Astra AB, a pharmaceutical company, including Vice President of Drug Discovery and Technology, and President of Astra Draco
AB, one of Astra’s largest research and development subsidiaries. He also served as Vice President of CNS Preclinical R&D
at Astra Arcus, another Astra subsidiary. Earlier in his career, Dr. Hacksell held the positions of Professor of Organic Chemistry
and Department Chairman at Uppsala University in Sweden and served as Chairman and Vice Chairman of the European Federation of
Medicinal Chemistry. Dr. Hacksell received his Master of Pharmacy and a Ph.D. in Medicinal Chemistry from Uppsala University.
Our Board of Directors believes that Dr. Hacksell brings to the board substantial leadership skills and scientific background
that are helpful in its discussions for determining the company’s growth strategy and business plans.
Nancy
R. Phelan
– Ms. Phelan has served as our Chief Executive Officer and Secretary since April 4, 2019, and as a director
of our company since October 2018. Ms. Phelan is an accomplished senior executive and thought leader with over 20 years’
success in the healthcare and biotech industries. She is a passionate and compassionate leader of high performing teams with deep
expertise in designing effective customer marketing strategies and building commercial capabilities that drive performance. From
July 2017 until September 2018, Ms. Phelan served as Senior Vice President, Commercial Growth at Outcome Health, where her responsibilities
included driving innovation and commercial growth for the world’s largest platform for actionable health intelligence. Ms.
Phelan has also served since January 2018 as an Executive Advisor before transitioning to Chief Business Officer in October 2018
until April, 2019 for Innate Biologics, (a pioneer in targeting, preventing and treating inflammation), and remains an Executive
Advisor; since April, 2018 as an Independent Board Member for FemmePharma Consumer Healthcare, since August, 2018 as an Advisory
Board Member for Eved, (a technology platform for B2B payment and meetings and events Transparency), since May, 2018 as a member
of the Pharma Digital Health Roundtable Steering Committee, since March 2019 as a member of the Board of Managers of HATCH@Takeda,
and from September 2018 until March 2019 as a member of the Commercial Advisory Board of The Medicines Company. From September
2011 until December 2016, Ms. Phelan held roles of increasing responsibility for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (“BMS”),
including Vice President, U.S. Customer Strategy and Operations and Head, Worldwide Commercial Operations. Prior to her time at
BMS, from October 2004 until September 2011, Ms. Phelan held leadership roles in global and U.S. marketing at Wyeth, which was
acquired by Pfizer Inc. in 2009, including Executive Director in Commercial Development, and established a best in class customer
and digital marketing organization. Ms. Phelan received a BA with Honors from Franklin & Marshall College and completed coursework
in Villanova University’s MBA program.
Isaac Blech
–
Mr. Blech became a director of our company on November 22, 2017. Mr. Blech currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors
of each of Contrafect Corporation, a biotech company specializing in novel methods to treat infectious disease, and SpendSmart
Networks, Inc., a national full-service mobile and loyalty marketing agency. Mr. Blech also serves on the Boards of Directors
of each of Edge Therapeutics, Inc., a CNS company developing new treatments for conditions such as brain trauma, Aridis Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. and X4 Pharmaceuticals. Previously, Mr. Blech served on the Board of Directors of Aevi Genomics Medicine from
2011 to 2017, of InspireMD, Inc. from 2016 to 2017, of root9B Holdings, Inc. from 2011 to 2017, of Cerecor, Inc. from 2011
to 2019, and of Diffusion Pharmaceuticals, Inc from 2016 to 2018. Mr. Blech was a founder of some of the world’s leading
biotechnology companies, such as Celgene Corporation, ICOS Corporation, Pathogenesis Corporation, Nova Pharmaceutical Corporation
and Genetic Systems Corporation. These companies are responsible for major advances in oncology, infectious disease and cystic
fibrosis. Mr. Blech received a B.A. from Baruch College. We believe that Mr. Blech’s experience as a director of numerous
public biotechnology companies gives him the qualifications, skills and financial expertise to serve on our Board.
Tim
Boris
– Mr. Boris has served as a director of our company since April 2018. Mr. Boris is an experienced General Counsel
and business executive who has served on or been legal advisor to executive and leadership teams in multiple industries. Mr. Boris
currently serves as General Counsel for Elucida Oncology, Inc. (a private biotech company focused on cancer diagnostics and treatment
via a proprietary nanoparticle platform) and also serves on its Board of Directors. He previously served as the President of SpendSmart
Networks, Inc. from April 19, 2016 until March 2017, and he also served as the General Counsel and Secretary of SpendSmart Networks,
Inc. from January 20, 2015 and February 21, 2015, respectively, until March 2017. Mr. Boris previously served as Vice President
of Legal Affairs and General Counsel for Restorgenex Corporation (currently Diffusion Pharmaceuticals) from August 2011 until
January 19, 2015. He received a Bachelor’s of Business Administration from the University of Michigan, Ross School of Business
and a juris doctorate from the University of San Diego School of Law.
Erik
Emerson
– Mr. Emerson has served as a director of our company since April 2018, and he served as the Chief Commercial
Officer of our company from June 2017 until January 2019. Mr. Emerson has served as the Chief Executive Officer and President
of Symplmed Pharmaceuticals since he founded that company in 2013. During his time at Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, Mr. Emerson led
that company to the submission, approval and commercial launch of Prestalia, and to the eventual sale of such assets to our company
in June 2017. He also spearheaded the development and launch of Symplmed’s DyrctAxess technology, a patented software designed
to manage prescription fulfillment and patient monitoring. DyrctAxess has demonstrated a significant impact on patient conversion
to treatment, long-term compliance and overall patient retention. Prior to founding Symplmed, Mr. Emerson served as the head of
Commercial Development at XOMA from 2010 to 2013, and as Director of Marketing at Gilead Sciences from 2007 to 2010. Mr. Emerson
began his career at King Pharmaceuticals in sales, sales training and marketing. Mr. Emerson graduated from the University of
Oregon with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science with a specialization in Administration and Organization.
Donald
A. Williams
– Mr. Williams has served as a director of our company since September 2014. Mr. Williams is a 35-year veteran
of the public accounting industry, retiring in 2014. Mr. Williams spent 18 years as an Ernst & Young (EY) Partner and then
seven years as a partner with Grant Thornton (GT). Mr. Williams’ career focused on private and public companies in the technology
and life sciences sectors. During the last seven years at GT, he served as the National Leader of GT’s life sciences practice
and the managing partner of the San Diego Office. He was the lead partner for both EY and GT on multiple initial public offerings;
secondary offerings; private and public debt financings; as well as numerous mergers and acquisitions. From 2001 to 2014, Mr.
Williams served on the board of directors and is past president and chairman of the San Diego Venture Group and has served on
the board of directors of various charitable organizations in the communities in which he has lived. Beginning in 2015, Mr. Williams
has served as a director of Alphatec Holdings, Inc. (and its wholly-owned operating subsidiary, Alphatec Spine, Inc.). Beginning
in 2016, Mr. Williams has served as a director of Akari Therapeutics PLC, and beginning in March 2017 Mr. Williams has served
as a director (and currently also as the Chair of the Remuneration Committee) of ImpediMed Limited. Mr. Williams served as a director
of Proove Biosciences, Inc., a private company, from January 2015 until May 2017. Mr. Williams is a graduate of Southern Illinois
University with a B.S. degree.
Executive
Officers of Our Company
Biographical
information concerning our Chief Executive Officer, who also serves as a member of our Board of Directors, is set forth above.
As of the date of this report, we do not have any executive officers other than our CEO.
Directors’
Qualifications
In
selecting a particular candidate to serve on our Board of Directors, we consider the needs of our company based on particular
experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills that we believe would be advantageous for our Board members to have and would
qualify such candidate to serve on our Board given our business profile and the environment in which we operate. The table below
sets forth such experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills, and identifies the ones that each director and director nominee
possess.
Attributes
|
|
Mr.
Blech
|
|
|
Mr.
Boris
|
|
Mr.
Emerson
|
|
Dr.
Hacksell
|
|
Mr.
Williams
|
|
Ms.
Phelan
|
Financial
Experience
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
Public
Board Experience
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
|
Industry
Experience
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
Scientific
Experience
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
Experience
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
Corporate
Governance Experience
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
Capital
Markets Experience
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
Management
Experience
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
Arrangements
Regarding Director Nominations
Messrs.
Emerson and Boris were initially identified to serve as a member of our Board by the holders of a majority of the shares of our
Series E Preferred Stock sold in our private placement on April 16, 2018 pursuant to the director designation right provided in
the subscription agreements that we entered into with the purchasers of our securities in connection with such private placement.
Family
Relationships
There
are no familial relationships between any of our executive officers and directors.
Director
or Officer Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings
Our
directors and executive officers were not involved in any legal proceedings as described in Item 401(f) of Regulation S-K in the
past ten years, other than the fact that Mr. Williams had served as a member of the Board of Directors of Proove Biosciences,
Inc., a private company, from January 2015 until May 2017, which entity went into receivership in approximately September 2017.
Audit
Committee
Our Audit Committee consists
of Mr. Williams (chair) and Mr. Boris. Ms. Phelan previously served on our Audit Committee until her appointment as our Chief
Executive Officer. The Audit Committee authorized and approved the engagement of the independent registered public accounting
firm, reviewed the results and scope of the audit and other services provided by the independent registered public accounting
firm, reviewed our financial statements, reviewed and evaluated our internal control functions, approved or established pre-approval
policies and procedures for all professional audit and permissible non-audit services provided by the independent registered public
accounting firm and reviewed and approved any proposed related party transactions.
Code
of Ethics
We
have adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to all of our employees and officers, and the members of our Board
of Directors. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is available on our corporate website at www.adherathera.com. You can access
the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics on our website by first clicking “About Adhera Therapeutics” and then “Corporate
Governance.” Printed copies are available upon request without charge. Any amendment to or waiver of the Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics will be disclosed on our website promptly following the date of such amendment or waiver.
Section
16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section
16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires our executive officers and directors, and persons who own more
than 10% of a registered class of our equity securities (“Reporting Persons”), to file reports of ownership and changes
in ownership with the SEC. Based solely on our review of the reports filed by Reporting Persons, and written representations from
certain Reporting Persons that no other reports were required for those persons, we believe that, during the year ended December
31, 2018, the Reporting Persons met all applicable Section 16(a) filing requirements, other than that: (A) the Form 3 that was
to be filed by Nancy R. Phelan regarding her appointment as a member of our Board of Directors on October 1, 2018 was filed on
October 24, 2018; and (B) the Form 4 that was to be filed by Vuong Trieu, a former director and executive officer of our company,
regarding the repurchase by our company of 500,000 shares of our common stock from Dr. Trieu on October 1, 2018 pursuant to the
Omnibus Settlement Agreement that we entered into with Dr. Trieu and certain of his affiliates was filed on October 4, 2018.
ITEM
11. Executive Compensation.
The
following table sets forth information regarding compensation earned during 2018 and 2017 by our principal executive officers
and our other most highly compensated executive officers as of the end of the 2018 fiscal year (“Named Executive Officers”).
Name and Principal Position
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Salary
($)
|
|
|
Bonus
($)
|
|
|
Stock
Awards
($)
(1)
|
|
|
Option
Awards
($)
(1)
|
|
|
All Other
Compensation
($)
|
|
|
Total
($)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert C. Moscato, Jr.,
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
190,673
|
|
|
|
6,923
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
219,271
|
(3)
|
|
|
18,682
|
|
|
|
435,549
|
|
former CEO and Secretary
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Teague,
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
77,188
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
65,707
|
(5)
|
|
|
6,885
|
|
|
|
149,780
|
|
former CFO
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vuong Trieu,
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
31,846
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,136
|
(8)
|
|
|
299,375
|
|
|
|
335,357
|
|
former Executive Chairman
and Interim CEO
(6)(7)
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
11,249
|
(8)
|
|
|
147,769
|
|
|
|
159,018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph W. Ramelli,
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
68,824
|
(10)
|
|
|
85,194
|
|
|
|
194,018
|
|
former CEO
(9)
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
107,157
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
14,000
|
(10)
|
|
|
11,249
|
(10)
|
|
|
5,933
|
|
|
|
138,339
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Erik Emerson,
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
106,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
164,453
|
(13)
|
|
|
26,944
|
|
|
|
297,647
|
|
Director & former
CCO
(11)
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
228,000
|
(12)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,710
|
|
|
|
229,710
|
|
|
(1)
|
Represents
the aggregate grant date fair value of the award computed in accordance with the provisions
of FASB ASC Topic 718. The assumptions used in calculating the aggregate grant date fair
value of the awards reported in this column are set forth in Note 9 to our consolidated
financial statements included in this report.
|
|
(2)
|
Mr.
Moscato was appointed to serve as our Chief Executive Officer on June 18, 2018, and he
was appointed to serve as our Secretary on October 23, 2018. Mr. Moscato resigned as
an officer and as a director of our company effective April 4, 2019. Benefits paid to
Mr. Moscato include health insurance benefits and fees for membership in a professional
development organization, which are reflected in the column “All Other Compensation”
in the table above. In June 2018, we made a payment to Mr. Moscato in the amount of $6,923
as a special bonus in consideration for services provided to our company prior
to the commencement of his employment term.
|
|
(3)
|
On
July 10, 2018, we granted to Mr. Moscato options to purchase up to 1,500,000 shares of
common stock at an exercise price of $0.66 per share. Due to the fact that we have determined
that the conditions for payment of the 2018 Revenue Bonus and the 2018 Stock Price Bonus
(each as defined in the Moscato Agreement (as defined below)) have not been satisfied,
options to purchase up to an aggregate of 500,000 shares of our common stock have not
vested and have been forfeited to the company. Further, in connection with Mr. Moscato’s
separation from our company, we agreed to accelerate the vesting of options to purchase
up to 250,000 shares of our common stock that would have vested on July 10, 2019, and
unvested options to purchase up to an aggregate of 500,000 shares of our common stock
that would have vested on July 10, 2020 and July 10, 2021, respectively, were forfeited
and cancelled by us.
|
|
(4)
|
Mr.
Teague was appointed to serve as our Chief Financial Officer on September 24, 2018, and
he resigned as our Chief Financial Officer effective March 22, 2019. Benefits paid to
Mr. Teague include health insurance benefits, which are reflected in the column “All
Other Compensation” in the table above.
|
|
(5)
|
On
September 24, 2018, we granted to Mr. Teague options to purchase up to 450,000 shares
of common stock at an exercise price of $0.55 per share. Due to the fact that we have
determined that we have not achieved either the 2018 Revenue Target or the 2018 Stock
Price Target (each as defined in the Teague Agreement (as defined below)), options to
purchase up to an aggregate of 50,000 shares of our common stock have not vested and
have been forfeited to the company. All of the remaining options that we granted to Mr.
Teague that have vested will expire on or about June 20, 2019 as a result of Mr. Teague’s
separation from our company.
|
|
(6)
|
Dr. Trieu served as our Executive Chairman
effective June 30, 2017 and as our Interim Chief Executive Officer effective May 2, 2018, from each of which positions he resigned
effective June 18, 2018. Dr. Trieu also resigned as a member of our Board of Directors effective October 1, 2018. During 2017,
Dr. Trieu earned $102,769 under the Master Services Agreement between our company and Autotelic Inc. and $45,000 as fees for serving
as a member of our Board of Directors, of which Board fees $11,250 was accrued and payable as of December 31, 2017. Both of the
foregoing amounts are included as “All Other Compensation” in the table above for 2017. Dr. Trieu’s accrued
Board fees as of December 31, 2017 were converted into 2.25 shares of our Series E Convertible Preferred Stock and warrants to
purchase 16,875 shares of our common stock on April 16, 2018 in connection with the closing of our private placement of such securities.
During 2018, we paid Autotelic Inc, of which entity Dr. Trieu serves as Chief Executive Officer, under the Master Services
Agreement, $795,228. Additionally, we paid Dr. Trieu $33,750 as fees for serving as a member of our Board of Directors and
$5,625 in cash to offset taxes related to the Series E Preferred Stock and Warrant Issuance for settlement of accrue Board Fees
of which both of the foregoing amounts are included as “All Other Compensation” in the table above for 2018. Dr. Trieu
also earned a salary of $31,846 for serving as our Interim Chief Executive Officer during a portion of 2018. Pursuant to the Settlement
Agreement that we entered into with Dr. Trieu on October 1, 2018 in connection with his separation from our company, we made a
payment to Dr. Trieu in the amount of $10,000 in consideration for certain releases provided to us by Dr. Trieu and certain of
his affiliates, and we purchased from Dr. Trieu for cancellation an aggregate of 500,000 shares of our common stock for a purchase
price of $250,000 (which amounts are included as “All Other Compensation” in the table above for 2018).
|
|
(7)
|
In
addition to the compensation provided to Dr. Trieu as set forth in the table above, we also
paid to Falguni Trieu, the spouse of Dr. Trieu, $18,925 during the 2017 fiscal year and $28,333
during the 2018 fiscal year, and during 2017 we also granted to Ms. Trieu options to purchase
up to 4,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $1.80, in her capacity as our
Director of Business Development. The options granted to Ms. Trieu have expired due to her
separation from our company.
|
|
(8)
|
On
January 3, 2017, we granted to Dr. Trieu options to purchase up to 8,100 shares of our common
stock at an exercise price of $1.70 per share. On January 3, 2018, we granted to Dr. Trieu
options to purchase up to 3,800 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $1.56 per
share. All of the foregoing options have expired as a result of Dr. Trieu’s separation
from our company.
|
|
(9)
|
Mr.
Ramelli served as the interim Chief Executive Officer of Adhera Therapeutics from June 10,
2016 until December 8, 2016, at which time he became Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Ramelli
resigned as an officer of our company on May 2, 2018. In connection with his separation from
our company, we made severance payments to Mr. Ramelli in the aggregate amount of $60,000
to be paid over a six (6) month period. Benefits paid to Mr. Ramelli include health insurance
benefits, which are reflected in the column “All Other Compensation” in the table
above.
|
|
(10)
|
On
January 3, 2017, we granted to Mr. Ramelli options to purchase up to 8,100 shares of common
stock at an exercise price of $1.70 per share, and on February 2, 2017, we granted to Mr.
Ramelli 10,000 restricted shares of common stock. All of the options described above in this
footnote expired on August 2, 2018 as a result of Mr. Ramelli’s resignation. On May
2, 2018, in connection with Mr. Ramelli’s separation from our company, we granted to
Mr. Ramelli options to purchase up to 100,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price
of $0.98.
|
|
(11)
|
Mr.
Emerson was appointed to serve as our Chief Commercial Officer in June 2017. Mr. Emerson was
appointed to serve as a member of our Board of Directors on April 27, 2018. On January 15,
2019, Mr. Emerson resigned as our Chief Commercial Officer. Benefits paid to Mr. Emerson include
health insurance benefits, which are reflected in the column “All Other Compensation”
in the table above.
|
|
(12)
|
On
June 5, 2017, we granted 60,000 restricted shares of common stock to Mr. Emerson, which
shares vested on December 5, 2017.
|
|
(13)
|
On
July 10, 2018, we granted to Mr. Emerson options to purchase up to 1,125,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of
$0.66 per share. Due to the fact that we have determined that the performance targets with respect to the vesting of 375,000
of such options have not been satisfied, such options have not vested and have been forfeited to the company. In connection
with Mr. Emerson’s resignation as our Chief Commercial Officer in January 2019, we agreed to accelerate the vesting
of options to purchase up to 562,500 shares of our common stock that would have vested on July 10, 2019, July 10, 2020, and
July 10, 2021, respectively.
|
Narrative
Disclosures Regarding Compensation; Employment Agreements
We
have entered into employment agreements or offer letters with four of our Named Executive Officers. The terms and conditions of
each of the foregoing arrangements are summarized below.
Robert
Moscato Employment Agreement
In
connection with Mr. Moscato’s appointment as Chief Executive Officer, we and Mr. Moscato entered into an employment agreement
dated June 18, 2018 (the “Moscato Agreement”), which provides for a three year term. A copy of the Moscato Agreement
was filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 18, 2018. Mr. Moscato resigned as an officer and as a director
of our company effective April 4, 2019.
Mr.
Moscato’s base salary under the Moscato Agreement is initially $360,000 per year, subject to review and adjustment by the
Board from time to time. We also agreed to pay to Mr. Moscato, within ten (10) days following the execution of the Moscato Agreement,
a one-time payment in the amount of $6,923, in full payment and consideration for all services that Mr. Moscato provided to us
prior to the date of the Moscato Agreement.
If
the total amount of sales recognized by our company less the sum of any returns, rebates, chargebacks and distribution discounts
(“Net Product Revenue”) for the portion of the 2018 fiscal year starting on June 18, 2018 and ending on the last day
of the 2018 fiscal year (the “Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year”) equals or exceeds $1.2 million, as determined by our auditors,
then we shall pay to Mr. Moscato a bonus (the “2018 Revenue Bonus”) equal to $100,000 multiplied by a fraction, the
numerator of which is the number of days in the Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year during which Mr. Moscato is an employed in good standing
with our company and the denominator of which is 365. Also, if the daily volume weighted average price of our common stock is
not less than $2.00 per for a sixty (60) consecutive day period beginning on any day within the Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year, then
we shall pay to Mr. Moscato a bonus (the “2018 Stock Price Bonus”) equal to $100,000 multiplied by a fraction, the
numerator of which is the number of days in the Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year during which Mr. Moscato is an employee in good standing
with our company and the denominator of which is 365. Since the conditions for payment of the 2018 Revenue Bonus and the 2018
Stock Price Bonus were not satisfied, we are not obligated to make such payments to Mr. Moscato.
Starting
in 2019, Mr. Moscato was eligible for an annual discretionary cash bonus with a target of 50% of his base salary, subject to his
achievement of any applicable performance targets and goals established by the Board.
Pursuant
to the Moscato Agreement, we granted to Mr. Moscato options to purchase up to 1,500,000 shares of our common stock, which options
vest as follows: (i) options to purchase up to 250,000 shares of common stock vested on the grant date of the options; (ii) options
to purchase up to 250,000 shares of common stock (for an aggregate of 750,000 shares of common stock) vest on each of the first,
second and third anniversary of the grant date; (iii) options to purchase up to 250,000 shares of common stock vest on the date
that we determine that Mr. Moscato has earned the 2018 Revenue Bonus; and (iv) options to purchase up to 250,000 shares of common
stock vest on the date that we determine that Mr. Moscato has earned the 2018 Stock Price Bonus. Since the conditions for payment
of the 2018 Revenue Bonus and the 2018 Stock Price Bonus have not been satisfied, the options to purchase up to an aggregate of
500,000 shares of our common stock described in clauses (iii) and (iv) of the immediately preceding sentence have not vested and
have been forfeited to the company. In connection with Mr. Moscato’s separation from our company, we agreed to accelerate
the vesting of options to purchase up to 250,000 shares of our common stock that would have vested on July 10, 2019, and options
to purchase up to an aggregate of 500,000 shares of our common stock that would have vested on July 10, 2020 and July 10, 2021,
respectively, were forfeited and cancelled by us.
Mr.
Moscato was eligible to participate in our other employee benefit plans as in effect from time to time on the same basis as are
generally made available to other senior executives of our company.
In
the event that Mr. Moscato’s employment was terminated by us without “Cause” or by Mr. Moscato for “Good
Reason” (each as defined in the Moscato Agreement), in each case subject to Mr. Moscato entering into and not revoking a
separation agreement in a form acceptable to our company, Mr. Moscato would have been eligible to receive:
●
|
accrued
benefits under the Moscato Agreement through the termination date, including base salary
and unreimbursed business expenses;
|
●
|
severance
payments equal to his then-current base salary for the Severance Period (i.e., a period
equal to (i) twelve (12) months or (ii) in the event we terminated Mr. Moscato’s
employment for any reason other than Cause within six (6) months following a Change of
Control (as defined in the Moscato Agreement), eighteen (18) months);
|
●
|
vesting
of all options granted to Mr. Moscato under the Moscato Agreement that would have vested
during the Severance Period had he remained employed with our company through the end
of the Severance Period; and
|
●
|
if
Mr. Moscato timely elected and remained eligible for continued coverage under COBRA,
the COBRA premiums necessary to continue the health insurance coverage in effect for
Mr. Moscato and his covered dependents prior to the date of termination, until the end
of the Severance Period.
|
In
the event that Mr. Moscato’s employment was terminated by us for Cause, by Mr. Moscato other than for Good Reason, or as
a result of Mr. Moscato’s death or permanent disability, Mr. Moscato (or his estate, if applicable) would have been entitled
to receive accrued benefits under the Moscato Agreement through the termination date, including base salary and unreimbursed business
expenses.
As
per the Moscato Agreement, following his separation from our company, Mr. Moscato is subject to a confidentiality covenant and
a 24-month non-solicitation covenant.
Mr.
Moscato resigned as an officer and as a director of our company on April 4, 2019, and in connection with such resignation, we
entered into a Settlement Agreement with Mr. Moscato (the “Settlement Agreement”). Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement,
Mr. Moscato executed and delivered a general release of claims in favor of our company, agreed to be bound by a 12-month non-competition
covenant relating to hypertension products and affirmed his obligations to be bound by the other restrictive covenants contained
in the Moscato Agreement.
Also pursuant to the Settlement
Agreement, we (A) agreed to make severance payments to Mr. Moscato in the aggregate amount of $360,000, with $90,000 to be paid
immediately and with the remaining amount to be paid over a nine-month period thereafter in accordance with normal payroll
practices (with accelerated payment if we complete a bona fide capital raising transaction yielding gross proceeds to us in the
amount of not less than $4,000,000 (a “Financing Event”) prior to the one year anniversary of the Settlement Agreement);
(B) agreed that options to purchase up to 250,000 shares of our common stock that were granted to Mr. Moscato on July 10, 2018
and that were to vest on July 10, 2019, shall vest in full immediately (the “Accelerated Options”); (C) agreed that
the period during which Mr. Moscato would be able to exercise the Accelerated Options and the options to purchase up to 250,000
shares of our common stock that were granted to Mr. Moscato on July 10, 2018 and that vested on such date shall be extended to
one year following the date of the Settlement Agreement; (D) agreed that we would upon request, and subject to certain conditions,
purchase from an entity controlled by Mr. Moscato, for a purchase price of $200,000, such number of shares of our Series F Convertible
Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase shares of our common stock as were purchased by such entity from us on July 12, 2018,
if we complete a Financing Event prior to the one year anniversary of the Settlement Agreement; (E) agreed to reimburse Mr. Moscato
for premiums that he pays with respect to COBRA coverage for a period of one year following the date of the Settlement Agreement;
and (F) executed and delivered a general release of claims in favor of Mr. Moscato.
Eric
Teague Employment Agreement
In
connection with Mr. Teague’s appointment as Chief Financial Officer, we and Mr. Teague entered into an employment agreement
dated September 24, 2018 (the “Teague Agreement”). A copy of the Teague Agreement was filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our
Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 24, 2018. Mr. Teague resigned as our Chief Financial Officer effective March
22, 2019.
Mr.
Teague’s base salary under the Teague Agreement, which provides for a three-year term, was initially $285,000 per year,
subject to review and adjustment by our company from time to time. On January 15, 2019, the Board increased Mr. Teague’s
base salary to $305,000 per year.
Starting
in 2019, Mr. Teague was eligible for an annual discretionary cash bonus with a target of 35% of his base salary, subject to his
achievement of any applicable performance targets and goals. If we determine that we have achieved the 2018 Revenue Target (as
described below), then we shall pay to Mr. Teague an amount equal to $21,000 in 2019 within 30 days of our public reporting of
our 2018 final results. If we determine that we have achieved the 2018 Stock Price Target (as described below), then we shall
pay to Mr. Teague an amount equal to $21,000 in 2019. Since we have determined that we have not achieved either the 2018 Revenue
Target or the 2018 Stock Price Target, we are not obligated to make the related bonus payments to Mr. Teague.
Pursuant
to the Teague Agreement, we granted to Mr. Teague options to purchase up to 450,000 shares of our common stock, which options
vest as follows: (i) options to purchase up to 100,000 shares of common stock vest on the grant date of the options; (ii) options
to purchase up to 100,000 shares of common stock (for an aggregate of 300,000 shares of common stock) vest on each of the first,
second and third anniversary of the grant date; (iii) options to purchase up to 25,000 shares of common stock vest on the date
that we determine that the “2018 Revenue Target” (as described below) is achieved; and (iv) options to purchase up
to 25,000 shares of common stock vest on the date that we determine that the “2018 Stock Price Target” (as described
below) is achieved. Since we have determined that we have not achieved either the 2018 Revenue Target or the 2018 Stock Price
Target, the options to purchase up to an aggregate of 50,000 shares of our common stock described in clauses (iii) and (iv) of
the immediately preceding sentence have not vested and have been forfeited to the company. To the extent vested, the options described
in clauses (i) and (ii) of the immediately preceding sentence will expire on or about June 22, 2019, as a result of Mr. Teague’s
separation from our company.
The
2018 Revenue Target requires that our gross revenue (i.e., the total amount of sales recognized by our company from June 18, 2018
through December 31, 2018 (such period, the “Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year”), less the sum of any returns, rebates, chargebacks
and distribution discounts) for the Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year equals or exceeds $1.2 million, as determined by our auditors. The
2018 Stock Price Target requires that the daily volume weighted average price of our common stock is not less than $2.00 per share
for a 60 consecutive day period beginning on any day within the Prorated 2018 Fiscal Year.
Mr.
Teague was eligible to participate in our other employee benefit plans as in effect from time to time on the same basis as are
generally made available to other senior executives of our company.
In
the event that Mr. Teague’s employment was terminated by us without “Cause” (as defined in the Teague Agreement)
or by Mr. Teague with “Good Reason” (as defined in the Teague Agreement), subject to Mr. Teague entering into and
not revoking a separation agreement in a form acceptable to us, Mr. Teague would have been eligible to receive:
●
|
accrued
benefits under the Teague Agreement through the termination date, including base salary
and unreimbursed business expenses;
|
●
|
severance
payments equal to his then-current base salary for the Severance Period (i.e., a period
equal to (i) twelve (12) months or (ii) in the event we terminated Mr. Teague’s
employment for any reason other than Cause within six (6) months following a Change of
Control (as defined in the Teague Agreement), eighteen (18) months);
|
●
|
vesting
of all options granted to Mr. Teague under the Teague Agreement that would have vested
during the Severance Period had he remained employed with our company through the end
of the Severance Period; and
|
●
|
if
Mr. Teague timely elected and remained eligible for continued coverage under COBRA, the
COBRA premiums necessary to continue the health insurance coverage in effect for Mr.
Teague and his covered dependents prior to the date of termination, until the end of
the Severance Period.
|
In
the event that Mr. Teague’s employment was terminated for any reason other than by us without “Cause” or by
Mr. Teague with “Good Reason”, Mr. Teague (or his estate, if applicable) was entitled to receive accrued benefits
under the Teague Agreement through the termination date, including base salary and unreimbursed business expenses.
As
per the Teague Agreement, Mr. Teague is subject to a confidentiality covenant, a 12-month non-competition covenant and a 24-month
non-solicitation covenant.
Erik
Emerson Offer Letter
On
June 5, 2017, we entered into an employment offer letter (the “Emerson Letter”) with Erik Emerson, the President and
Chief Executive Officer of Symplmed, pursuant to which we agreed to hire Mr. Emerson to serve as our Chief Commercial Officer.
As compensation for his services as Chief Commercial Officer, we agreed to pay to Mr. Emerson an annual base salary of $150,000,
and Mr. Emerson was entitled to receive a discretionary bonus as determined by our Board of Directors in an amount up to 40% of
his base salary, with the payment of such bonus to be based on the achievement of such milestones as shall be determined by the
Board following good faith consultation with Mr. Emerson. A copy of the Emerson Letter was filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K dated June 22, 2017, and a copy of Amendment No.1 to the Emerson Letter was filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K dated June 22, 2017.
In
connection with the Emerson Letter, we granted to Mr. Emerson 60,000 restricted shares of our common stock under our 2014 Long-Term
Incentive Plan, all of which vested on the six (6) month anniversary of the date of grant. We also granted to Mr. Emerson, on
July 10, 2018, options to purchase up to 1,125,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.66 per share.
In
connection with the Emerson Letter, Mr. Emerson agreed: (i) to a non-solicitation covenant regarding our employees, independent
contractors, customers, vendors and clients; and (ii) not to provide services to certain of our clients, customers or business
partners (and prospective clients, customers and business partners), in each case, during such time as Mr. Emerson is employed
by us and for a period of twelve (12) months immediately thereafter.
Mr.
Emerson resigned as our Chief Commercial Officer effective January 15, 2019. In connection with his resignation, among other things,
Mr. Emerson executed and delivered a general release of claims in favor of our company and affirmed his obligations to be bound
by the restrictive covenants contained in the Emerson Letter (including the Confidentiality, Restrictive Covenant and Intellectual
Property Agreement attached thereto), and we: (i) agreed to make severance payments to Mr. Emerson in the amount of $86,250 (with
$43,125 to be paid immediately and $43,125 to be paid on March 1, 2019); (ii) agreed that options to purchase up to an aggregate
of 562,500 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.66 that were granted to Mr. Emerson in July 2018 and that were to
vest in equal annual installments in July 2019, July 2020 and July 2021 shall vest in full immediately; and (iii) executed and
delivered a general release of claims in favor of Mr. Emerson. In addition, Mr. Emerson agreed that for twelve (12) months following
the date of his resignation, he would not engage in a business relating to the commercialization of Prestalia (or a pharmaceutical
or therapeutic product that addresses substantially the same market) or that utilizes our DyrctAxess / Prestalia Direct platforms
(or platforms that are substantially similar to, or that use substantially the same technology as is utilized by, such platforms).
Joseph
Ramelli Offer Letter
On
February 2, 2017, we entered into an employment letter (the “Ramelli Letter”) with Joseph W. Ramelli, our former Chief
Executive Officer. As compensation for his service as Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Ramelli received a monthly base salary of $10,000,
and he was also entitled to receive a discretionary bonus as determined by our Board of Directors. A copy of the Ramelli Letter
was filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 2, 2017.
In
connection with the Ramelli Letter, we granted to Mr. Ramelli 10,000 restricted shares of common stock under our 2014 Long-Term
Incentive Plan, which shares vested on February 6, 2017.
In
connection with the Ramelli Letter, Mr. Ramelli agreed: (i) to a non-solicitation covenant regarding our employees, independent
contractors, customers, vendors and clients; and (ii) not to provide services to certain of our clients, customers or business
partners (and prospective clients, customers and business partners), in each case, during such time as Mr. Ramelli is employed
by us and for a period of twelve (12) months immediately thereafter.
Mr.
Ramelli resigned as our Chief Executive Officer effective May 2, 2018. In connection with his resignation, Mr. Ramelli released
our company from all claims arising prior to the date of his resignation and affirmed his obligations to be bound by the restrictive
covenants contained in the Ramelli Letter, and we: (i) agreed to make severance payments to Mr. Ramelli in the amount of $60,000
to be paid over a six (6) month period; and (ii) granted to Mr. Ramelli fully-vested options, exercisable for a period of five
years from the grant date, to purchase up to 100,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price equal to $0.98 per share
of common stock.
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End
2018
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-end Table
The
following table sets forth information regarding the outstanding equity awards held by our Named Executive Officers as of the
end of our 2018 fiscal year:
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
|
|
|
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
|
|
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
|
|
|
Option
Exercise
Price
|
|
|
Option
Expiration
|
|
Number
of
Shares
or
Units
of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
|
|
|
Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock
That
Have Not
Vested
|
|
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units
or Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
|
|
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market
or Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
Date
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Moscato
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
1,250,000
|
(1)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.66
|
|
|
7/10/28
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Teague
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
350,000
|
(2)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.55
|
|
|
9/24/28
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Erik Emerson
|
|
|
187,500
|
|
|
|
937,500
|
(3)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.66
|
|
|
7/10/28
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph Ramelli
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.98
|
|
|
5/2/23
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
(1)
|
In
connection with Mr. Moscato’s resignation as an officer and as a director of our
company, we agreed to accelerate the vesting of options to purchase up to 250,000 shares
of our common stock that would have vested on July 10, 2019, and options to purchase
up to an aggregate of 500,000 shares of our common stock that would have vested on July
10, 2020 and July 10, 2021, respectively, were forfeited and cancelled by us. Further,
due to the fact that we have determined that the conditions for payment of the 2018 Revenue
Bonus and the 2018 Stock Price Bonus (each as defined in the Moscato Agreement) have
not been satisfied, options to purchase up to an aggregate of 500,000 shares of our common
stock have not vested and have been forfeited to the company.
|
(2)
|
Due
to the fact that we have determined that we have not achieved either the 2018 Revenue
Target or the 2018 Stock Price Target (each as defined in the Teague Agreement), options
to purchase up to an aggregate of 50,000 shares of our common stock have not vested and
have been forfeited to the company.
|
|
|
(3)
|
In
connection with Mr. Emerson’s resignation as our Chief Commercial Officer on January
15, 2019, we agreed that options to purchase up to an aggregate of 562,500 shares of
common stock at an exercise price of $0.66 that were granted to Mr. Emerson in July 2018
and that were to vest in equal annual installments in July 2019, July 2020 and July 2021
shall vest in full immediately. Further, due to the fact that we have determined that
we have not achieved net product revenue in the amount of not less than $1.2 million
for the portion of the 2018 fiscal year following June 18, 2018, and that we have determined
that the daily VWAP of our common stock was not less than $2.00 per share for a sixty
consecutive day period beginning on any calendar day during the 2018 fiscal year on or
after June 18, 2018, options to purchase up to an aggregate of 375,000 shares of our
common stock have not vested and have been forfeited to the company, as per the terms
of the July 10, 2018 option grant to Mr. Emerson.
|
Option
Re-pricings
We
have not engaged in any option re-pricings or other modifications to any of our outstanding equity awards to our Named Executive
Officers during fiscal year 2018.
Compensation
of Directors
2018
Director Compensation Table
The
following Director Compensation Table sets forth information concerning compensation for services rendered by our independent
directors for fiscal year 2018.
Name
|
|
Fees Earned
or
Paid
in Cash
($)
|
|
|
Stock
Awards
($)
|
|
|
Option
Awards
($)
(1)
|
|
|
All Other
Compensation
($)
|
|
|
Total
($)
|
|
Isaac Blech
(2)(8)
|
|
$
|
49,167
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
4,136
|
|
|
$
|
5,625
|
|
|
$
|
58,928
|
|
Uli Hacksell
(3)(4)
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
325,903
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
400,903
|
|
Timothy Boris
(5)
|
|
|
36,372
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
36,372
|
|
Nancy Phelan
(6)
|
|
|
11,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
11,250
|
|
Donald Williams
(2)(8)
|
|
|
52,500
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,136
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
101,636
|
|
Philippe Calais
(2)(7)
|
|
|
22,500
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
58,333
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
80,833
|
|
Philip
C. Ranker
(2)(7)(8)
|
|
|
22,500
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
140,923
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
208,423
|
|
Total:
|
|
$
|
269,289
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
533,431
|
|
|
|
95,625
|
|
|
$
|
898,345
|
|
|
(1)
|
Represents
the aggregate grant date fair value under FASB ASC Topic 718 of options to purchase shares of our common stock granted during
2018.
|
|
(2)
|
On
January 3, 2018, we granted to each of our directors serving on the Board at such time (i.e., Mr. Blech, Mr. Williams, Dr.
Trieu, Dr. Calais and Mr. Ranker) options to purchase up to an aggregate of 3,800 shares of common stock at an exercise price
of $1.56 per share. The options described in this footnote that were granted to Dr. Trieu, Dr. Calais and Mr. Ranker expired
following their separation from our company.
|
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Dr.
Hacksell was appointed to serve as a member of the Board, and as the Chairman of the Board, effective July 1, 2018. We agreed
to pay to Dr. Hacksell in his capacity as Chairman of the Board: (i) base compensation in the amount of $150,000 per year;
(ii) a bonus payment in the amount of $25,000 if we achieve net product revenue of not less than $1.2 million for the portion
of the 2018 fiscal year following July 1, 2018; and (iii) a bonus payment in the amount of $25,000 if the daily VWAP of our
common stock is not less than $2.00 per share for a sixty consecutive day period beginning on any calendar date during
the 2018 calendar year on or after July 1, 2018. The bonus amounts described in items (ii) and (iii) above for the 2018 fiscal
year were not earned, and thus no bonus payment was made to Dr. Hacksell. During 2018, $50,000 of base compensation was paid
to Dr. Hacksell and $25,000 was accrued and payable as of December 31, 2018.
|
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
On
July 10, 2018, we granted to Dr. Hacksell options to purchase up to an aggregate of 1,000,000 shares of our common stock,
of which: (i) options to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock are exercisable immediately; (ii) options to purchase 125,000
shares of common stock are exercisable on each of July 1, 2019 and July 1, 2020; (iii) options to purchase 125,000 shares
of common stock shall vest on such date, if any, as we pay to Dr. Hacksell a bonus in the amount of $25,000 if we achieve
net product revenue in the amount of not less than $1.2 million for the portion of the 2018 fiscal year following July 1,
2018; and (iv) options to purchase 125,000 shares of common stock shall vest on such date, if any, as we pay to Dr. Hacksell
a bonus in the amount of $25,000 if the daily VWAP of our common stock is not less than $2.00 per share for a sixty consecutive
day period beginning on any calendar date during the 2018 fiscal year on or after July 1, 2018. Due to the fact that vesting
conditions set forth in items (iii) and (iv) have not been satisfied, such options have not vested and have been forfeited
to the company.
|
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
Mr.
Boris was appointed to serve as a member of the Board effective April 27, 2018.
|
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
Ms.
Phelan was appointed to serve as a member of the Board effective October 1, 2018. She was later appointed to serve as our
Chief Executive Officer and Secretary effective April 4, 2019.
|
|
|
|
|
(7)
|
Each
of Dr. Calais and Mr. Ranker resigned as a member of our Board effective May 2, 2018. In connection with their resignations:
(i) each of Mr. Ranker and Dr. Calais released our company from all claims arising prior to the date of his resignation; (ii)
we granted to Mr. Ranker fully-vested options to purchase up to 200,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price equal
to $0.98 per share of common stock; and (iii) we granted to Dr. Calais fully-vested options to purchase up to 80,000 shares
of our common stock at an exercise price equal to $0.98 per share of common stock. The options described in (ii) and (iii)
above are exercisable for a period of five years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
|
(8)
|
On
April 16, 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock and warrants,
we issued to Messrs. Blech, Ranker, Trieu and Williams an aggregate of 40.5 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
and warrants to purchase up to 303,750 shares of common stock to satisfy accrued and unpaid fees owed to such directors for
service to our company as members of our Board of Directors during the period ending on December 31, 2017 in the aggregate
amount of approximately $202,500. We also made a cash payment to Messrs. Blech, Ranker, and Williams to offset taxes owed
as a result of the issuance of the aforementioned securities in the amounts set forth in the column titled “All Other
Compensation”.
|
As
of December 31, 2018, Dr. Hacksell held options to purchase up to 1,000,000 shares of our common stock, Mr. Blech held options
to purchase up to 477,257 shares of our common stock, Mr. Williams held options to purchase up to 29,200 shares of our common
stock, Mr. Ranker held options to purchase up to 200,000 shares of our common stock and Dr. Calais held options to purchase up
to 80,000 shares of our common stock. Neither Mr. Boris nor Ms. Phelan held any options to purchase shares of our common stock.
The options held by Mr. Moscato and Mr. Emerson, each of whom is a Named Executive Officer of our company, as of December 31,
2018, are described in the 2018 Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Table above.
Each of Mr. Moscato, Mr.
Emerson and Dr. Trieu, each of whom served as a director and as an executive officer of our company during our 2018 fiscal year,
have not been included in the Director Compensation Table because they are a Named Executive Officer of our company,
and all compensation paid to them during 2018 is reflected in the Summary Compensation Table above.
Director
Compensation Program
Our compensation program
for directors for the 2018 fiscal year consisted of: (i) an annual grant of 5-year options to purchase up to 3,800 shares of common
stock, which options vest 50% immediately and 50% after one year (provided, that no option grants were made to Mr. Boris
or Ms. Phelan, and separate grants were instead made to Messrs. Moscato, Hacksell and Emerson in connection with their
service to our company); and (ii) an annual cash payment of $45,000 per year, payable quarterly. Beginning on August 1, 2018,
in addition to the annual fee described in item (ii) of the immediately preceding sentence, we agreed to pay to: (A) the Chair
of the Audit Committee an annual amount of $15,000; (B) the Chair of the Compensation Committee an annual amount of $7,000; (C)
each member of the Audit Committee (other than the Chair) an annual amount equal to $7,000; and (D) each member of the Compensation
Committee (other than the Chair) an annual amount equal to $3,000, in each case to be paid quarterly in advance.
Further,
as noted in Notes 3 and 4 to the Director Compensation Table above: (i) we agreed to pay to Dr. Hacksell in his capacity as Chairman
of the Board (A) base compensation in the amount of $150,000 per year; (B) a bonus payment in the amount of $25,000 if we achieve
net product revenue of not less than $1.2 million for the portion of the 2018 fiscal year following July 1, 2018; and (C) a bonus
payment in the amount of $25,000 if the daily VWAP of our common stock is not less than $2.00 per share for a sixty (60) consecutive
day period beginning on any calendar date during the 2018 calendar year on or after July 1, 2018; and (ii) we granted to Dr. Hacksell
on July 10, 2018 options to purchase up to an aggregate of 1,000,000 shares of our common stock, of which (A) options to purchase
500,000 shares of common stock are exercisable immediately; (B) options to purchase 125,000 shares of common stock are exercisable
on each of July 1, 2019 and July 1, 2020; (C) options to purchase 125,000 shares of common stock shall vest on such date, if any,
as we pay to Dr. Hacksell the bonus described in item (i)(B) above; and (D) options to purchase 125,000 shares of common stock
shall vest on such date, if any, as we pay to Dr. Hacksell the bonus described in item (i)(C) above. Due to the fact that the
conditions for the payment of the bonus amounts described in items (i)(B) and (i)(C) of the immediately preceding sentence, and
the conditions for the vesting of the options described in items (ii)(C) and (ii)(D) of the immediately preceding sentence, were
not satisfied, such bonus payments were not made and such options have been forfeited, as applicable.
ITEM
12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
The
following table sets forth certain information regarding the ownership of our common stock as of April 8, 2019 (the “Determination
Date”) by: (i) each current director of our company and each director nominee; (ii) each of our Named Executive Officers;
(iii) all current executive officers and directors of our company as a group; and (iv) all those known by us to be beneficial
owners of more than five percent (5%) of our common stock.
Beneficial
ownership and percentage ownership are determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC. Under these rules, beneficial ownership
generally includes any shares as to which the individual or entity has sole or shared voting power or investment power and includes
any shares that an individual or entity has the right to acquire beneficial ownership of within 60 days of the Determination Date,
through the exercise of any option, warrant or similar right (such instruments being deemed to be “presently exercisable”).
In computing the number of shares beneficially owned by a person and the percentage ownership of that person, shares of our common
stock that could be issued upon the exercise of presently exercisable options and warrants are considered to be outstanding. These
shares, however, are not considered outstanding as of the Determination Date when computing the percentage ownership of each other
person.
To
our knowledge, except as indicated in the footnotes to the following table, and subject to state community property laws where
applicable, all beneficial owners named in the following table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares
shown as beneficially owned by them. Percentage of ownership is based on 10,761,684 shares of common stock outstanding as of the
Determination Date. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each person in the table below is c/o Adhera Therapeutics,
Inc., 4721 Emperor Boulevard, Suite 350, Durham, North Carolina 27703. No shares identified below are subject to a pledge.
Name
|
|
Number of
Shares
|
|
|
Percent of
Shares
Outstanding
(%)
|
|
Officers and Directors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert C. Moscato, Jr., Former CEO, Secretary and Director
|
|
|
1,200,000
|
(1)
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
Uli Hacksell, Ph.D., Chairman of the Board
|
|
|
500,000
|
(2)
|
|
|
4.4
|
%
|
Isaac Blech, Director
|
|
|
1,990,863
|
(3)
|
|
|
15.6
|
%
|
Donald A. Williams, Director
|
|
|
344,200
|
(4)
|
|
|
3.1
|
%
|
Erik Emerson, Director
|
|
|
810,000
|
(5)
|
|
|
7.0
|
%
|
Nancy Phelan, CEO, Secretary and Director
|
|
|
400,000
|
(6)
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
Tim Boris, Director
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Eric Teague, Former CFO
|
|
|
200,000
|
(7)
|
|
|
1.8
|
%
|
Vuong Trieu, Ph.D., Former Director and Interim CEO
|
|
|
10,709,005
|
(8)
|
|
|
59.7
|
%
|
Joseph W. Ramelli, former CEO
|
|
|
100,000
|
(9)
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
All directors and executive officers as a group (6 persons)
|
|
|
4,045,063
|
(10)
|
|
|
27.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Five Percent (5%) Holders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Autotelic LLC
|
|
|
2,312,356
|
(11)
|
|
|
21.5
|
%
|
*
Beneficial ownership of less than 1.0% is omitted.
|
(1)
|
Consists
of (i) presently exercisable options to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock held by Mr.
Moscato; (ii) presently exercisable warrants to purchase 300,000 shares of common stock held
by an entity of the general partner of which Mr. Moscato is majority member and manager; and
(iii) 400,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the conversion of 40 shares of Series F
Preferred Stock held by an entity of the general partner of which Mr. Moscato is the majority
member and manager.
|
|
(2)
|
Consists
of presently exercisable options to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock.
|
|
(3)
|
Consists
of presently exercisable options to purchase 145,838 shares of common stock held by Mr. Blech,
presently exercisable warrants to purchase 16,875 shares of common stock held by Mr. Blech
and 22,500 shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of 2.25 shares of Series E Preferred
Stock held by Mr. Blech. Also includes presently exercisable warrants to purchase 773,850
shares of common stock held by a trust affiliated with Mr. Blech and 1,031,800 shares of common
stock issuable upon conversion of 103.18 shares of Series E Preferred Stock held by a trust
affiliated by Mr. Blech.
|
|
(4)
|
Consists
of presently exercisable options to purchase 29,200 shares of common stock, presently exercisable
warrants to purchase 135,000 shares of common stock and 180,000 shares of common stock issuable
upon conversion of 18 shares of Series E Preferred Stock.
|
|
(5)
|
Includes
presently exercisable options to purchase 750,000 shares of common stock.
|
|
(6)
|
Consists of presently exercisable options to purchase 400,000 shares of common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
(7)
|
Consists
of presently exercisable options to purchase 200,000 shares of common stock.
|
|
(8)
|
Includes
presently exercisable warrants to purchase 1,135,425 shares of common stock held by Dr. Trieu
and 1,513,900 shares of common stock issuable upon the conversion of 151.39 shares of Series
E Preferred Stock held by Dr. Trieu. Also includes 2,312,356 shares held by Autotelic LLC,
of which entity Dr. Trieu serves as Chief Executive Officer, and 86,207 shares held by LipoMedics
Inc., of which entity Dr. Trieu serves as Chairman of the Board and Chief Operating Officer.
Also includes the following shares held by Autotelic Inc., of which entity Dr. Trieu serves
as Chairman of the Board: (i) 525,536 shares of common stock; (ii) presently exercisable warrants
to purchase 2,706,965 shares of common stock; and (iii) 1,815,900 shares of common stock issuable
upon the conversion of 181.59 shares of Series E Preferred Stock.
|
|
(9)
|
Consists
of presently exercisable options to purchase 100,000 shares of common stock.
|
|
(10)
|
See
the information contained in footnotes (2) – (6) above.
|
|
(11)
|
Information
based on a Schedule 13D filed with the SEC on November 23, 2016.
|
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The
following table provides aggregate information as of the end of the 2018 fiscal year with respect to all of the compensation plans
under which our common stock is authorized for issuance, including our 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan and our 2018 Long-Term Incentive
Plan:
|
|
Number of
Securities to be
Issued Upon
Exercise of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants and
Rights (a)
|
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise Price
of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants, and
Rights (b)
|
|
|
Number of
Securities
Remaining
Available for
Future
Issuance Under
Equity
Compensation
Plans
(Excluding
Securities
Reflected in
Column(a)) (c)
|
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
(1)
|
|
|
4,457,807
|
|
|
$
|
0.81
|
|
|
|
2,472,193
|
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
380,000
|
|
|
$
|
0.98
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Total
|
|
|
4,837,807
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
|
|
2,472,193
|
|
|
(1)
|
Consists
of: (i) 640,207 shares of common stock underlying awards made pursuant to our 2014 Stock Incentive Plan and (ii) 3,817,600
shares of common stock underlying awards made pursuant to our 2018 Long-Term Incentive Plan.
|
ITEM
13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.
Approval
for Related Party Transactions
It
is our practice and policy to comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations regarding related-person transactions. Our
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics requires that all employees, including officers and directors, disclose to the CEO the nature
of any company business that is conducted with any related party of such employee, officer or director (including any immediate
family member of such employee, officer or director, and any entity owned or controlled by such persons). If the transaction involves
an officer or director of our company, the CEO must bring the transaction to the attention of the Audit Committee or, in the absence
of an Audit Committee the full Board, which must review and approve the transaction in writing in advance. In considering such
transactions, the Audit Committee (or the full Board, as applicable) takes into account the relevant available facts and circumstances.
Related
Party Transactions
Transactions
with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D.
We
entered into the following transactions with Dr. Trieu, who previously served as an executive officer and a director of our company,
and/or entities that are controlled by him or with which he is affiliated, that require disclosure under Item 404(a) of Regulation
S-K promulgated under the Exchange Act: (A) we and Dr. Trieu were parties to a Line Letter dated November 15, 2016 pursuant to
which Dr. Trieu offered to us an unsecured line of credit in an amount not to exceed $540,000, to be used for operating expenses
(the outstanding principal balance of which line of credit, plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon, converted into shares of
our Series E Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase shares of our common stock upon the closing of our private placement of
such securities on April 16, 2018); (B) Dr. Trieu is the Chief Executive Officer of Autotelic LLC, with which entity we entered
into a License Agreement dated November 15, 2016; (C) Dr. Trieu is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Autotelic Inc., with
which entity we entered into a Master Services Agreement dated November 15, 2016 (which agreement was terminated effective October
31, 2018), and which entity offered to us an unsecured line of credit in an amount not to exceed $500,000 in April 2017 (the outstanding
principal balance of which line of credit, plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon, converted into shares of our Series E Preferred
Stock and warrants to purchase shares of our common stock upon the closing of our private placement of such securities on April
16, 2018); (D) Dr. Trieu is the Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Operating Officer of LipoMedics Inc., with which
entity we entered into a License Agreement and a Stock Purchase Agreement, each dated February 6, 2017; (E) Dr. Trieu is the Chairman
of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Oncotelic Inc., with which entity we entered into a License Agreement
dated July 17, 2017 (which agreement has been terminated); and (F) Dr. Trieu is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Autotelic
Inc., which entity owns approximately 19% of the issued and outstanding shares of the common stock of Autotelic BIO, with which
entity we entered into a binding term sheet on January 11, 2018 regarding the licensing of our IT-103 product candidate (which
binding term sheet has been cancelled).
Each
of the foregoing agreements is described immediately below. Immediately following the completion of the merger between IThenaPharma
Inc. (“IThena”) and Adhera Therapeutics on November 15, 2016, Autotelic LLC owned approximately 25.8% of the issued
and outstanding shares of our common stock and Autotelic Inc. owned approximately 5.9% of the issued and outstanding shares of
our common stock.
On
October 1, 2018, we entered into an Omnibus Settlement Agreement with Dr. Trieu, Autotelic Inc., Autotelic LLC, Autotelic BIO,
Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. (the “Omnibus Settlement Agreement”), pursuant to which, among other things,
Dr. Trieu resigned as a member of our Board of Directors effective immediately.
Line
Letter with Dr. Trieu
On
November 15, 2016, we entered into a Line Letter with Dr. Trieu for an unsecured line of credit in an amount not to exceed $540,000,
all of which was drawn down. The unpaid principal balance of the line of credit, together with accrued and unpaid interest thereon,
converted into 114.63 shares of our Series E Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase up to 859,725 shares of our common stock
upon the closing of our private placement of such securities on April 16, 2018. As a result of the conversion of the line of credit,
all of our obligations to Dr. Trieu thereunder have been satisfied and the line of credit is no longer outstanding.
Autotelic
LLC License Agreement
On
November 15, 2016, we entered into a License Agreement with Autotelic LLC pursuant to which (A) we licensed to Autotelic LLC certain
patent rights, data and know-how relating to FAP and nasal insulin, for human therapeutics other than for oncology-related therapies
and indications, and (B) Autotelic LLC licensed to us patent rights, data and know-how relating to IT-102 and IT-103, in connection
with individualized therapy of pain using a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and an anti-hypertensive without inducing intolerable
edema, and treatment of certain aspects of proliferative disease, but not including rights to IT-102/IT-103 for Therapeutic Drug
Monitoring (TDM) guided dosing for all indications using an Autotelic Inc. TDM Device. We also granted a right of first refusal
to Autotelic LLC with respect to any license by us of the rights licensed by or to us under the License Agreement in any cancer
indication outside of gastrointestinal cancers. As per the Omnibus Settlement Agreement, the License Agreement shall continue,
provided that Autotelic LLC shall be licensee and have a license to, without representation or warranty, nasal apomorphine and
nasal scopolamine and related intellectual property in addition to nasal insulin, and Autotelic LLC shall not be a licensee or
have a license to FAP or CEQ508 and related intellectual property.
Master
Services Agreement
On
November 15, 2016, we entered into a Master Services Agreement (the “MSA”) with Autotelic Inc., pursuant to which
Autotelic Inc. agreed to provide certain business functions and services from time to time at our request. In April 2018, and
in connection with the closing of our private placement of our Series E Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase shares of our
common stock, we entered into a Compromise and Settlement Agreement with Autotelic Inc. pursuant to which we agreed to issue to
Autotelic Inc. an aggregate of 162.59 shares of our Series E Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase up to 2,564,465 shares of
our common stock to satisfy accrued and unpaid fees in the aggregate amount of approximately $812,967, and other liabilities,
owed to Autotelic Inc. as of March 31, 2018 pursuant to the MSA. We also made payments to Autotelic, Inc. in the aggregate amount
of $266,278 during 2018 for services rendered under the MSA after March 31, 2018. The MSA was terminated effective as of October
31, 2018.
Line
Letter with Autotelic Inc.
On
April 4, 2017, we entered into a Line Letter with Autotelic Inc. for an unsecured line of credit in an amount not to exceed $500,000,
to be used for operating expenses. The balance under the line was $93,662, including accrued interest of $2,847 as of December
31, 2017. The unpaid principal balance of the line of credit, together with accrued and unpaid interest thereon, converted into
19 shares of our Series E Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase up to 142,500 shares of our common stock upon the closing of
our private placement of such securities on April 16, 2018. As a result of the conversion of the line of credit, all of our obligations
to Autotelic Inc. thereunder have been satisfied and the line of credit is no longer outstanding.
Arrangements
with LipoMedics
On
February 6, 2017, we entered into a License Agreement with LipoMedics, Inc. pursuant to which, among other things, we provided
to LipoMedics a license to our SMARTICLES platform for the delivery of nanoparticles including small molecules, peptides, proteins
and biologics. On the same date, we also entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with LipoMedics pursuant to which we issued to
LipoMedics an aggregate of 86,206 shares of our common stock for a total purchase price of $250,000. The License Agreement remains
in effect.
Arrangements
with Oncotelic
On
July 17, 2017, we entered into a License Agreement with Oncotelic pursuant to which, among other things, we provided to Oncotelic
a license to our SMARTICLES platform for the delivery of antisense DNA therapeutics, as well as a license to our conformationally
restricted nucleotide technology with respect to TGF-Beta. Under the terms of the License Agreement, Oncotelic also agreed to
purchase 49,019 shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $250,000 ($5.10 per share), with such purchase and
sale to be made pursuant to a Stock Purchase Agreement to be entered into between us and Oncotelic within thirty (30) days following
the date of the License Agreement. Oncotelic has not completed the purchase of the stock and we have not been able to reach a
definitive agreement, as such we have terminated the agreement.
Arrangements
with Autotelic BIO
On
January 11, 2018, we entered into a binding agreement with Autotelic BIO (“ATB”) pursuant to which, among other things,
and subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions on or prior to January 15, 2019, we would grant to ATB a perpetual exclusive
right of development and marketing of our IT-103 product candidate, at the currently approved dose/approved indications only for
celecoxib (100 mg, 200mg and 400mg) for combined hypertension and arthritis only, with such right extending throughout the entire
world (excluding the United States and Canada, and the territories of such countries). The grant of the license would be memorialized
in a definitive license agreement to be entered into between the parties following the satisfaction of the applicable conditions.
This agreement was terminated pursuant to the terms of the Omnibus Settlement Agreement.
Transactions
with Larn Hwang, Ph.D.
Dr.
Hwang, our former Chief Scientific Officer, also served as the Chief Scientific Officer of Autotelic Inc., with which entity we
entered into the MSA described above under “Related Party Transactions – Transactions with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D. –
Master Services Agreement” and the Line Letter described above under “Related Party Transactions – Transactions
with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D. – Line Letter with Autotelic Inc.” Dr. Hwang was also the Chief Scientific Officer of Oncotelic,
Inc., with which entity we entered into the License Agreement described above under “Related Party Transactions –
Transactions with Vuong Trieu, P.D. – Arrangements with Oncotelic”.
Transactions
with Mihir Munsif
Each
of Mr. Munsif, our former Chief Operating Officer, and Autotelic Inc., of which entity Mr. Munsif served as an executive officer,
owned approximately 5.9% of our issued and outstanding shares of common stock immediately following the completion of the merger
between Adhera Therapeutics and IThena. In addition, we and Autotelic Inc. are parties to the MSA described above under “Related
Party Transactions – Transactions with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D. – Master Services Agreement”, and on April 4, 2017
we entered into the Line Letter with Autotelic Inc. described above under “Related Party Transactions – Transactions
with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D. – Line Letter with Autotelic Inc.” In addition, on February 6, 2017, we and Lipomedics, Inc.,
of which entity Mr. Munsif served as an executive officer, entered into the License Agreement and the Stock Purchase Agreement
described above under “Related Party Transactions – Transactions with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D. – Arrangements with
Lipomedics”.
Investment
by Isaac Blech Trust
On
November 22, 2017, we entered into a Note Purchase Agreement with a trust affiliated with Isaac Blech pursuant to which we issued
to such trust a secured convertible promissory note in the principal amount of $500,000. The unpaid principal balance of the note,
together with accrued and unpaid interest thereon, automatically converted into 103.7 shares of Series E Preferred Stock and warrants
to purchase up to 777,750 shares of our common stock upon the closing of our private placement on April 16, 2018. As a result,
all of our obligations to the holder of the note have been satisfied and the note is no longer outstanding. Mr. Blech became a
member of our Board of Directors on November 22, 2017.
Transactions
with BioMauris, LLC / Erik Emerson
During
the year ended December 31, 2018, the company paid a total of $572,381 for services provided by BioMauris, LLC, of which Erik
Emerson, our former Chief Commercial Officer and a current director of Adhera, is Executive Chairman. A total of
$23,585 was due BioMauris, LLC as of December 31, 2018. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2018, we paid a
total to BioMauris, LLC of $62,576 related to Acutus Medical, which entity owns an equity interest in BioMauris, LLC.
Independence
of the Board of Directors
The
Board of Directors utilizes NASDAQ’s standards for determining the independence of its members. In applying these standards,
the Board considers commercial, industrial, banking, consulting, legal, accounting, charitable and familial relationships, among
others, in assessing the independence of directors, and must disclose any basis for determining that a relationship is not material.
The Board has determined that four out of six of its current members, namely Isaac Blech, Tim Boris, Uli Hacksell, and Donald
A. Williams, are independent directors within the meaning of the NASDAQ independence standards. In making these independence determinations,
the Board did not exclude from consideration as immaterial any relationship potentially compromising the independence of any of
the above directors.
ITEM
14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services.
The
Board of Directors of the Company appointed Squar Milner LLP (“Squar”) as our independent registered public accounting
firm (the “Independent Auditor”) for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018. Squar has served as our independent
registered public accounting firm since December 8, 2016. The following table sets forth the fees billed to the Company for professional
services rendered by Squar for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017:
Services
|
|
2018
|
|
|
2017
|
|
Audit Fees (1)
|
|
$
|
85,500
|
|
|
$
|
180,000
|
|
Audit-Related fees (2)
|
|
|
1,507
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
Tax fees (3)
|
|
|
18,166
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Total fees
|
|
$
|
105,173
|
|
|
$
|
182,000
|
|
(1)
Audit Fees
–
These consisted of the aggregate fees for professional services rendered in connection with (i) the
audit of our annual financial statements, (ii) the review of the financial statements included in our Quarterly Reports on Form
10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, June 30 and September 30, (iii) consents and comfort letters issued in connection with equity
offerings and (iv) services provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.
(2)
Audit-Related Fees
–
These consisted principally of the aggregate fees related to audits that are not included Audit
Fees.
(3)
Tax Fees – We incurred $18,166 in fees to our independent registered public accounting firm for professional services
rendered in connection with tax compliance, tax planning and federal and state tax advice for the years ended December 31, 2018
and December 31, 2017.
Pre-Approval
Policies and Procedures
The
Audit Committee has the authority to appoint or replace our independent registered public accounting firm (subject, if applicable,
to stockholder ratification). The Audit Committee is also responsible for the compensation and oversight of the work of the independent
registered public accounting firm (including resolution of disagreements between management and the independent registered public
accounting firm regarding financial reporting) for the purpose of preparing or issuing an audit report or related work. The independent
registered public accounting firm was engaged by, and reports directly to, the Audit Committee.
The
Audit Committee pre-approves all audit services and permitted non-audit services (including the fees and terms thereof) to be
performed for us by our independent registered public accounting firm, subject to the de minimis exceptions for non-audit services
described in Section 10A(i)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act and Rule 2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) of Regulation S-X, provided that all such excepted
services are subsequently approved prior to the completion of the audit. In the event pre-approval for such audit services and
permitted non-audit services cannot be obtained as a result of inherent time constraints in the matter for which such services
are required, the Chairman of the Audit Committee had been granted the authority to pre-approve such services, provided that the
estimated cost of such services on each such occasion does not exceed $15,000, and the Chairman of the Audit Committee reported
for ratification such pre-approval to the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting. We have complied with the procedures
set forth above, and the Audit Committee has otherwise complied with the provisions of its charter.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 AND 2017
Note
1 – organization and business operations
Adhera
Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly known as Marina Biotech, Inc.) and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, MDRNA Research, Inc. (“MDRNA”),
Cequent Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Cequent”), Atossa Healthcare, Inc. (“Atossa”), and IThenaPharma, Inc.
(“IThena”) (collectively “Adhera,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” or
“us”) is an emerging specialty pharmaceutical company that leverages innovative distribution models and technologies
to improve the quality of care for patients in the United States suffering from chronic and acute diseases. We are focused on
fixed dose combination (“FDC”) therapies in hypertension, with plans to expand the portfolio of drugs we commercialize
to include other therapeutic areas.
Our
mission is to provide effective and patient centric treatment for hypertension and resistant hypertension while actively seeking
additional assets that can be commercialized through our proprietary Total Care System (“TCS”). At the core of our
TCS system is DyrctAxess, our patented technology platform. DyrctAxess is designed to offer enhanced efficiency, control and access
to the information necessary to empower patients, physicians and manufacturers to achieve optimal care.
We
began marketing Prestalia
®
, a single-pill FDC of perindopril arginine (“perindopril”) and amlodipine
besylate (“amlodipine”) in June of 2018. By combining Prestalia, DyrctAxess and an independent pharmacy network, we
have created a proprietary system for drug adherence and the effective treatment of hypertension, improving the distribution of
FDC hypertensive drugs, such as our FDA-approved product Prestalia, as well as improving the distribution of devices for therapeutic
drug monitoring (“TDM”) (e.g., blood pressure monitors), as well as patient counseling and prescription reminder services.
We are focused on demonstrating the therapeutic and commercial value of TCS through the commercialization of Prestalia. Prestalia
was developed in coordination with Servier, a French pharmaceutical conglomerate, that sells the formulation outside the United
States under the brand names Coveram
®
and/or Viacoram
®
. Prestalia was approved by the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in January 2015 and is distributed through our DyrctAxess platform which, as noted
above, we acquired in 2017.
We have discontinued all
significant clinical development and are evaluating disposition options for all of our development assets, including: (i) our
next generation celecoxib program drug candidates for the treatment of acute and chronic pain, IT-102 and IT-103; (ii) CEQ508,
an oral delivery of small interfering RNA (“siRNA”) against beta-catenin, combined with IT-102 to suppress polyps
in the precancerous syndrome and orphan indication Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (“FAP”); (iii) CEQ508 combined with
IT-103 to treat Colorectal Cancer; (iv) CEQ608 and CEQ609, an oral delivery of IL-6Ra tkRNAi against irritable bowel disease (IBD)
gene targets, which could significantly reduce colon length and abolish the IL-6Rα message in proximal ileum; (v) Claudin-2
strains which (CEQ631 and CEQ632) significantly reduce Claudin-2 mRNA expression and protein levels in the colon as well as attenuation
of the disease phenotype and enhance survival; (vi) MIP3a therapeutic strains CEQ631 and CEQ632 which also resulted in
a significant reduction in sum pathology scores and reduction in MIP3a mRNA expression. We plan to license or divest these development
assets since they no longer align with our focus on the treatment of hypertension.
As
our strategy is to be a commercial pharmaceutical company, we will drive a primary corporate focus on revenue generation through
our commercial assets, with a focus on developing our technology and TCS. We intend to create value through the continued commercialization
of our FDA-approved product, Prestalia, while continuing to develop and leverage our TCS to further strengthen our commercial
presence.
On
November 15, 2016, Adhera entered into, and consummated the transactions contemplated by, an Agreement and Plan of Merger between
and among IThenaPharma, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“IThena”), IThena Acquisition Corporation, a Delaware corporation
and wholly-owned subsidiary of Adhera (“Merger Sub”), and a representative of the stockholders of IThena (the “Merger
Agreement”), pursuant to which IThena merged into Merger Sub (the “Merger”).
In the second quarter
of 2018, we raised approximately $12.2 million, net of fees and expenses, from a private placement of our newly created Series
E Convertible Preferred Stock. In July and November 2018, we raised approximately $1.7 million net of fees and expenses, from
a private placement of our newly created Series F Convertible Preferred Stock. The use of funds from the raise was used for the
commercialization of Prestalia, funding working capital, capital expenditure needs, payment of certain liabilities and other general
corporate requirements. We plan to license or divest our other pharmaceutical assets and halt any other development programs,
since they no longer align with our focus on the treatment of hypertension.
Change
of Company Name and OTC Markets Symbol
On
October 4, 2018, we filed a Certificate of Amendment to our Restated Certificate of Incorporation with the Secretary of
State of the State of Delaware to change the name of our company from “Marina Biotech, Inc.” to “Adhera Therapeutics,
Inc.” The change of name was effective October 9, 2018.
Following
the name change from Marina Biotech, Inc. to Adhera Therapeutics, Inc., our common stock, par value $0.006 per share, began
trading on the OTCQB tier of the OTC Markets under the symbol “ATRX”.
NOTE
2 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis
of Presentation
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The summary of significant accounting policies presented below is designed
to assist in understanding the Company’s financial statements. Such financial statements and accompanying notes are the
representations of Company’s management, who is responsible for their integrity and objectivity.
Principles
of Consolidation
The consolidated financial
statements include the accounts of Adhera Therapeutics, Inc. and the wholly-owned subsidiaries, IThena, Cequent,
MDRNA, and Atossa, and eliminate any inter-company balances and transactions.
Reverse
Stock Split
In
August 2017, we filed a Certificate of Amendment of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to effect a one-for-ten
reverse split of our issued and outstanding shares of common stock. Our common stock commenced trading on the OTCQB tier of the
OTC Markets on a split-adjusted basis on Thursday, August 3, 2017. Unless indicated otherwise, all share and per share information
included in these financial statements and Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements give effect to the reverse split.
Going
Concern and Management’s Liquidity Plans
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the basis that we will continue as a going concern, which
contemplates realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. At December 31, 2018,
we had a significant accumulated deficit of approximately $26 million and working capital of approximately $2.5 million. For the
year ended December 31, 2018, we had a loss from operations of approximately $15.8 million and negative cash flows from operations
of approximately $9.6 million. Our operating activities consume the majority of our cash resources. We anticipate that we will
continue to incur operating losses as we execute our commercialization plans for Prestalia, as well as strategic and business
development initiatives. In addition, we have had and will continue to have negative cash flows from operations, at least into
the near future. We have previously funded, and plan to continue funding, our losses primarily through the sale of common and
preferred stock, combined with or without warrants, the sale of notes, cash generated from the out-licensing or sale of our licensed
assets and, to a lesser extent, equipment financing facilities and secured loans. However, we cannot be certain that we will be
able to obtain such funds required for our operations at terms acceptable to us or at all.
In April and May 2018,
we raised approximately $12.2 million net proceeds from a private placement of shares of our Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
and warrants to purchase shares of our common stock. Further, in July 2018, we raised an additional $1.4 million net proceeds
from the private placement of our Series F Convertible Preferred Stock. On November 9, 2018, we sold 73 shares of our Series F
Preferred Stock for total net proceeds of approximately $0.31 million. For our assessment as of December 31, 2018,
we have considered the amount raised and we will continue to reassess our ability to address the going concern. We will continue
to attempt to obtain future financing or engage in strategic transactions which may require us to curtail our operations. We cannot
predict, with certainty, the outcome of our actions to generate liquidity, including the availability of additional equity or
debt financing, or whether such actions would generate the expected liquidity as currently planned.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of the accompanying consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reported period. Significant
areas requiring the use of management estimates include valuation allowance for accounts receivable and deferred income tax assets,
legal contingencies and fair value of financial instruments. Actual results could differ materially from such estimates under
different assumptions or circumstances.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
The
Company considers all highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents.
There are no cash equivalents as of December 31, 2018 or 2017.
The
Company deposits its cash with major financial institutions and may at times exceed the federally insured limit. At December 31,
2018, the Company had a cash balance of approximately $3.7 million in excess of the federal insurance limit.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
We
consider the fair value of cash, accounts payable, due to related parties, notes payable, notes payable to related parties, accounts
receivable and accrued liabilities not to be materially different from their carrying value. These financial instruments have
short-term maturities. We follow authoritative guidance with respect to fair value reporting issued by the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (“FASB”) for financial assets and liabilities, which defines fair value, provides guidance for measuring
fair value and requires certain disclosures. The guidance does not apply to measurements related to share-based payments. The
guidance discusses valuation techniques, such as the market approach (comparable market prices), the income approach (present
value of future income or cash flow), and the cost approach (cost to replace the service capacity of an asset or replacement cost).
The guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value
into three broad levels. The following is a brief description of those three levels:
Level
1:
|
Observable
inputs such as quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
|
|
|
Level
2:
|
Inputs
other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. These include quoted
prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets and quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities
in markets that are not active.
|
|
|
Level
3:
|
Unobservable
inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore developed using estimates and assumptions developed by us, which
reflect those that a market participant would use.
|
Our
cash is subject to fair value measurement and is determined by Level 1 inputs. We measure the liability for committed stock issuances
with a fixed share number using Level 1 inputs. There were no liabilities measured at fair value as of December 31, 2018 or 2017.
Goodwill
and Intangible Assets
The
Company periodically reviews the carrying value of intangible assets, including goodwill, to determine whether impairment may
exist. Goodwill and certain intangible assets are assessed annually, or when certain triggering events occur, for impairment using
fair value measurement techniques. These events could include a significant change in the business climate, legal factors, a decline
in operating performance, competition, sale or disposition of a significant portion of the business, or other factors. Specifically,
goodwill impairment is determined using a two-step process. The first step of the goodwill impairment test is used to identify
potential impairment by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. The Company
uses level 3 inputs and a discounted cash flow methodology to estimate the fair value of a reporting unit. A discounted cash flow
analysis requires one to make various judgmental assumptions including assumptions about future cash flows, growth rates, and
discount rates. The assumptions about future cash flows and growth rates are based on the Company’s budget and long-term
plans. Discount rate assumptions are based on an assessment of the risk inherent in the respective reporting units. If the fair
value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is considered not impaired and the second
step of the impairment test is unnecessary. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step
of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. The second step of the goodwill
impairment test compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill.
If the carrying amount of the reporting unit’s goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss
is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount
of goodwill recognized in a business combination. That is, the fair value of the reporting unit is allocated to all of the assets
and liabilities of that unit (including any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business
combination and the fair value of the reporting unit was the purchase price paid to acquire the reporting unit.
On
September 30, 2018, the Company determined that goodwill was impaired and, as a result, a loss on impairment of $3,502,831
was recognized for the year ended December 31, 2018. The impairment determination was primarily a result of the decision to
divest of assets that no longer align with the Company’s strategic objectives. There was no such loss on impairment for
the year ended December 31, 2017.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
We
review all of our long-lived assets for impairment indicators throughout the year and perform detailed testing whenever impairment
indicators are present. In addition, we perform detailed impairment testing for indefinite-lived intangible assets, at least annually,
at December 31. When necessary, we record charges for impairments. Specifically:
●
|
For
finite-lived intangible assets, such as developed technology rights, and for other long-lived assets, we compare the undiscounted
amount of the projected cash flows associated with the asset, or asset group, to the carrying amount. If the carrying amount
is found to be greater, we record an impairment loss for the excess of book value over fair value. In addition, in all cases
of an impairment review, we re-evaluate the remaining useful lives of the assets and modify them, as appropriate; and
|
|
|
●
|
For
indefinite-lived intangible assets, such as acquired in-process R&D assets, each year and whenever impairment indicators
are present, we determine the fair value of the asset and record an impairment loss for the excess of book value over fair
value, if any.
|
On
September 30, 2018, the Company determined that the intangible asset from the merger was impaired and, as a result, a loss on
impairment of $1,291,200 was recognized for the year ended December 31, 2018. The impairment determination was primarily a result
of the decision to divest of assets that no longer align with the Company’s strategic objectives. There was no such loss
on impairment for the year ended December 31, 2017.
On
December 31, 2018, the Company determined that a portion of the remaining intangible asset balance was impaired, resulting in
an additional loss on impairment of $381,685, and a total impairment of approximately $1,672,885 for the year ended December 31,
2018.
Revenue
Recognition
The
Company has adopted the new revenue recognition guidelines in accordance with ASC 606,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers
(ASC 606), effective with the quarter ended March 31, 2018.
The
Company sells its medicines primarily to wholesale distributors and specialty pharmacy providers. These customers subsequently
resell the Company’s medicines to health care patients. In addition, the Company enters into arrangements with health care
providers and payers that provide for government-mandated or privately-negotiated discounts and allowances related to the Company’s
medicines. Revenue is recognized when performance obligations under the terms of a contract with a customer are satisfied. The
majority of the Company’s contracts have a single performance obligation to transfer medicines. Accordingly, revenues from
medicine sales are recognized when the customer obtains control of the Company’s medicines, which occurs at a point in time,
typically upon delivery to the customer. Revenue is measured as the amount of consideration the Company expects to receive in
exchange for transferring medicines and is generally based upon a list or fixed price less allowances for medicine returns, rebates
and discounts. The Company sells its medicines to wholesale pharmaceutical distributors and pharmacies under agreements with payment
terms typically less than 90 days.
During
the year ended December 31, 2018, management determined certain costs related to the sales of Prestalia, specifically, costs associated
with free product, should be classified as cost of goods sold and not revenue reductions. For the year ended December 31, 2018,
the Company recognized approximately $59,000 for such items. Consistent with the accounting during the third quarter of 2018,
the Company recorded an estimate of unrealized revenue reductions, and the related liability, for bottles sold to pharmacies but
not yet prescribed.
Medicine
Sales Discounts and Allowances
The
nature of the Company’s contracts gives rise to variable consideration because of allowances for medicine returns, rebates
and discounts. Allowances for medicine returns, rebates and discounts are recorded at the time of sale to wholesale pharmaceutical
distributors and pharmacies. The Company applies significant judgments and estimates in determining some of these allowances.
If actual results differ from its estimates, the Company will be required to make adjustments to these allowances in the future.
The Company’s adjustments to gross sales are discussed further below.
Distribution
Service Fees
The
Company includes distribution service fees paid to its wholesalers for distribution and inventory management services as a reduction
to revenue. The Company calculates accrued distribution service fee estimates using the most likely amount method. The Company
accrues estimated distribution fees based on contractually determined amounts, typically as a percentage of revenue. Accrued distribution
service fees are included in “accrued expenses” on the consolidated balance sheet.
Patient
Access Programs
The
Company offers discounts to patients under which the patient receives a discount on his or her prescription. In circumstances
when a patient’s prescription is rejected by a third-party payer, the Company will pay for the full cost of the prescription.
The Company reimburses pharmacies for this discount directly or through third-party vendors. The Company reduces gross sales by
the amount of actual co-pay and other patient assistance in the period based on the invoices received. The Company also records
an accrual to reduce gross sales for estimated co-pay and other patient assistance on units sold to distributors or pharmacies
that have not yet been prescribed/dispensed to a patient. The Company calculates accrued co-pay and other patient assistance fee
estimates using the expected value method. The estimate is based on contract prices, estimated percentages of medicine that will
be prescribed to qualified patients, average assistance paid based on reporting from the third-party vendors and estimated levels
of inventory in the distribution channel. Accrued co-pay and other patient assistance fees are included in “accrued expenses”
on the consolidated balance sheet. Patient assistance programs include both co-pay assistance and fully bought down prescriptions.
Sales
Returns
Consistent
with industry practice, the Company maintains a return policy that allows customers to return medicines within a specified period
prior to and subsequent to the medicine expiration date. Generally, medicines may be returned for a period beginning six months
prior to its expiration date and up to one year after its expiration date. The right of return expires on the earlier of one year
after the medicine expiration date or the time that the medicine is dispensed to the patient. The majority of medicine returns
result from medicine dating, which falls within the range set by the Company’s policy and are settled through the issuance
of a credit to the customer. The Company calculates sales returns using the expected value method. The estimate of the provision
for returns is based upon industry experience. This period is known to the Company based on the shelf life of medicines at the
time of shipment. The Company records sales returns in “accrued expenses” and as a reduction of revenue.
Shipping
Fees
The
Company includes fees incurred by pharmacies for shipping medicines to patients as a reduction to revenue. The Company calculates
accrued shipping fee estimates using the expected value method. The Company records accrued shipping fees in “accrued expenses”
on the consolidated balance sheet.
Customers
Concentration
The
Company sells its prescription drug (Prestalia) directly to specialty contracted retail pharmacies and indirectly
through wholesalers. For the year ended December 31, 2018, the Company’s three largest customers accounted for approximately
37%, 32%, and 17%, respectively, of the Company’s total gross sales. The Company works with a third-party pharmacy
network manager to attract, retain, and manage the Company’s pharmacy customers and distribution channels. Approximately
68% of 2018 gross sales were made to customers associated with or related to the Company’s third-party pharmacy network
manager. The Company had no significant sales for the year ended December 31, 2017.
Licensing
Agreements
In
terms of licensing agreements entered into by the Company, they typically include payment of one or more of the following: non-refundable,
up-front license fees; development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments; payments for manufacturing supply services;
and royalties on net sales of licensed products. Each of these payments results in license, collaboration and other revenues,
except for revenues from royalties on net sales of licensed products, which are classified as royalty revenues. The core principle
of ASC 606 is to recognize revenues when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the
consideration that is expected to be received in exchange for those goods or services.
During
the year ended December 31, 2018, Adhera entered into a Licensing Agreement, whereby Adhera granted exclusive rights to the Company’s
DiLA
2
delivery system in exchange for an upfront payment of approximately $200,000 and further potential future consideration
dependent upon event and sales-based milestones. Under the terms of the agreement, Adhera has agreed to assign ownership of the
intellectual property associated with the DiLA
2
delivery system to the purchaser. The Company has not completed, and
will not complete, certain performance obligations under the agreement and accordingly has classified the $200,000 payment in
accrued liabilities as of December 31, 2018.
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In
May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). Under the provisions of ASU 2014-09,
entities should recognize revenue in an amount that reflects the consideration to which they expect to be entitled to in exchange
for goods and services provided. ASU 2014-09 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The
Company adopted the provisions of this standard effective January 1, 2018.
In
February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU No. 2016-02”). Under ASU No. 2016-02, an
entity is required to recognize right-of-use assets and lease liabilities on its balance sheet and disclose key information about
leasing arrangements. For leases with a term of twelve months or less, the lessee is permitted to make an accounting policy election
not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities by class of underlying assets. ASU No. 2016-02 becomes effective for the Company
beginning in the first quarter of 2019. The guidance can be applied using either a modified retrospective approach at the beginning
of the earliest period presented, or at the beginning of the period in which it is adopted. The Company will adopt this standard
in the first quarter of 2019, using a modified retrospective approach at the adoption date through a cumulative-effect adjustment
to retained earnings. The Company does not expect the adoption will have a material impact on its consolidated statement of operations.
However, the new standard requires the Company to establish approximately $250,000 of liabilities and corresponding right-of-use
assets of approximately $242,000 on its consolidated balance sheet for operating leases on rented office properties that existed
as of the January 1, 2019, adoption date. The Company also expects to elect to not recognize lease assets and liabilities for
leases with a term of twelve months or less.
Net
Income (Loss) per Common Share
Basic
net income (loss) per common share (after giving effect of the one for ten reverse stock split) is computed by dividing the net
income (loss) by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period, excluding any unvested restricted
stock awards. Diluted net income (loss) per share includes the effect of common stock equivalents (stock options, unvested restricted
stock, and warrants) when, under either the treasury or if-converted method, such inclusion in the computation would be dilutive.
Net income (loss) is adjusted for the dilutive effect of the change in fair value liability for price adjustable warrants, if
applicable. The following number of shares have been excluded from diluted net (loss) since such inclusion would be anti-dilutive:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
options outstanding
|
|
|
5,613,057
|
|
|
|
745,707
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
36,267,329
|
|
|
|
2,559,612
|
|
Shares
to be issued upon conversion of notes payable
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
319,617
|
|
Restricted
common stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Series
E Preferred Stock
|
|
|
34,880,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Series
F Preferred Stock
|
|
|
3,810,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Total
|
|
|
80,570,386
|
|
|
|
3,624,936
|
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
The
Company applies the provisions of ASC 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation (“ASC 718”), which requires the measurement
and recognition of compensation expense for all stock-based awards made to employees, including employee stock options, in the
statements of operations.
For
stock options issued to employees and members of the board of directors for their services, the Company estimates the grant date
fair value of each option using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The use of the Black-Scholes option pricing model requires
management to make assumptions with respect to the expected term of the option, the expected volatility of the common stock consistent
with the expected life of the option, risk-free interest rates and expected dividend yields of the common stock. For awards subject
to service-based vesting conditions, including those with a graded vesting schedule, the Company recognizes stock-based compensation
expense equal to the grant date fair value of stock options on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period, which
is generally the vesting term. Forfeitures are recorded as they are incurred as opposed to being estimated at the time of grant
and revised.
Income
Taxes
Deferred
tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement
carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets, including tax loss and
credit carry forwards, and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in
which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of
a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date.
The
Company accounts for income taxes using the asset and liability method to compute the differences between the tax basis of assets
and liabilities and the related financial amounts, using currently enacted tax rates.
NOTE
3 – Inventory
Inventory
consists of raw material and finished goods stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value with cost determined
on a first-in, first-out basis. The Company reviews the composition of inventory at each reporting period in order to identify
obsolete, slow-moving, quantities in excess of expected demand, or otherwise non-saleable items.
Inventory consisted of the following as of December
31, 2018 and 2017:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw
Materials
|
|
$
|
147,139
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Finished
Goods
|
|
|
94,319
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Inventory,
Net
|
|
$
|
241,458
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
During
the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company recorded a related charge to cost of goods sold for obsolete inventory
of $123,711 and $0, respectively.
NOTE
4 – PREPAID AND OTHER ASSETS
Prepaid
expenses and other assets at December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017 included prepaid insurance of $179,145 and $0, respectively,
and deposits with third-party co-pay program managers of $158,000 and $0, respectively. The deposits with co-pay program managers
are used to fund patient’s insurance co-pay support, for a specified period of time, with any unused amounts refunded to
the Company.
Note
5 - Intangible Assets
Acquisition
of Prestalia & DyrctAxess
In
June 2017, we entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Symplmed Pharmaceuticals LLC
(“Symplmed”) pursuant to which we purchased from Symplmed, for aggregate consideration of approximately $620,000 (consisting
of $300,000 in cash plus the assumption of certain liabilities of Symplmed in the amount of approximately $320,000), Symplmed’s
assets relating to a single-pill FDC of perindopril arginine and amlodipine besylate known as Prestalia® (“Prestalia”),
that has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of hypertension. In addition, as part of the transactions contemplated by
the Purchase Agreement: (i) Symplmed agreed to transfer to us, not later than 150 days following the closing date, the New Drug
Applications for the approval of Prestalia as a new drug by the FDA; and (ii) Symplmed assigned to us all of its rights and obligations
under that certain Amended and Restated License and Commercialization Agreement by and between Symplmed and Les Laboratoires Servier
(“Servier”) dated January 2012, pursuant to which Symplmed has an exclusive license from Servier to manufacture, have
manufactured, develop, promote, market, distribute and sell Prestalia in the U.S. (and its territories and possessions) in consideration
of regulatory and sales-based milestone payments and royalty payments based on net sales. Management has determined that this
acquisition was deemed an asset purchase under FASB ASC 805.
The
purchase price of $620,000 was allocated based on a preliminary estimate of the fair value of the assets acquired and was included
in intangible assets as of December 31, 2017. During the year ended December 31, 2018, the allocation of the purchase price was
finalized which resulted in $160,800 of the price being allocated to raw materials received from Symplmed, and the remaining $459,200
being allocated to intangible assets.
Further,
we hired a Chief Commercial Officer, who was the President and Chief Executive Officer of Symplmed, which appointment became effective
in June 2017. We also agreed in such offer letter to issue 60,000 restricted shares of our common stock under our 2014 Long-Term
Incentive Plan to our Chief Commercial Officer, with all of such shares vesting on the six (6) month anniversary of the date of
grant. These shares were fully vested on December 31, 2017. This Chief Commercial Officer resigned in January 2019.
In
furtherance of the acquisition and commercialization of Prestalia, in July 2017 we acquired from Symplmed and its wholly-owned
subsidiary, Symplmed Technologies, LLC, certain of the intellectual property assets related to the patented technology platform
known as DyrctAxess, also known as Total Care, that offers enhanced efficiency, control and information to empower patients, physicians
and manufacturers to help achieve optimal care for $75,000 in cash.
Intangible
Asset Summary
The
following table summarizes the balances as of December 31, 2018 of the identifiable intangible assets acquired, their useful life,
and annual amortization, prior to impairment:
|
|
Net Book Value
December 31, 2018
|
|
|
Remaining
Estimated
Useful Life
(Years)
|
|
|
Annual
Amortization
Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible asset - Prestalia
|
|
|
324,705
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
|
94,177
|
|
Intangible asset - DyrctAxess
|
|
|
67,187
|
|
|
|
12.59
|
|
|
|
5,357
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
391,892
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
99,534
|
|
On
September 30, 2018, the Company determined that the intangible asset from the Merger was impaired and, as a result, a loss on
impairment of approximately $1,291,200. On December 31, 2018, the Company determined that the remaining balance was impaired,
resulting in an additional loss on impairment of $381,685, and a total impairment of $1,672,885 for the year ended December 31,
2018.
Amortization
expense was $330,396 and $450,903 for the year ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
Note
6 - Related Party Transactions
Due
to Related Party
The
Company and other related entities have had a commonality of ownership and/or management control, and as a result, the reported
operating results and /or financial position of the Company could significantly differ from what would have been obtained if such
entities were autonomous.
The
Company had a Master Services Agreement (“MSA”) with Autotelic Inc., a related party that is partly-owned by one of
the Company’s former Board members, namely Vuong Trieu, Ph.D., effective November 15, 2016. Autotelic Inc. currently owns
less than 5% of the Company. The MSA stated that Autotelic Inc. will provide business functions and services to the Company and
allowed Autotelic Inc. to charge the Company for these expenses paid on its behalf. The MSA included personnel costs allocated
based on amount of time incurred and other services such as consultant fees, clinical studies, conferences and other operating
expenses incurred on behalf of the Company. The MSA required a 90-day written termination notice in the event either party requires
to terminate such services. We and Autotelic Inc. agreed to terminate the MSA effective October 31, 2018. Dr. Trieu resigned as
a director of our company effective October 1, 2018.
During
the period commencing November 15, 2016 (the “Effective Date”) and ending on the date that the Company had completed
an equity offering of either common or preferred stock in which the gross proceeds therefrom is no less than $10 million (the
“Equity Financing Date”), the Company paid Autotelic the following compensation: cash in an amount equal to the actual
labor cost (paid on a monthly basis), plus 100% markup in warrants for shares of the Company’s common stock with a strike
price equal to the fair market value of the Company’s common stock at the time said warrants were issued. The Company also
paid Autotelic for the services provided by third party contractors plus 20% mark up. The warrant price per share was calculated
based on the Black-Scholes model.
After
the Equity Financing Date, the Company paid Autotelic Inc. a cash amount equal to the actual labor cost plus 100% mark up of provided
services and 20% mark up of provided services by third party contractors or material used in connection with the performance of
the contracts, including but not limited to clinical trial, non-clinical trial, Contract Manufacturing Organizations (“CMO”),
FDA regulatory process, Contract Research Organizations (“CRO”) and Chemistry and Manufacturing Controls (“CMC”).
In
accordance with the MSA, Autotelic Inc. billed the Company for personnel and service expenses Autotelic Inc. incurred on behalf
of the Company. For the year ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, Autotelic Inc. billed a total of $795,228 and $791,889, respectively,
including personnel costs of $531,794 and $558,098, respectively. An unpaid balance of $4,392 and $730,629 is included in due
to related party in the accompanying balance sheet as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we entered into a Compromise and Settlement
Agreement with Autotelic Inc. pursuant to which we agreed to issue to Autotelic Inc. an aggregate of 162.59 shares of Series E
Preferred Stock to settle accounts payable of $812,967 and Warrants to purchase up to 1,345,040 shares of common stock to satisfy
accrued and unpaid fees in the aggregate amount of approximately $739,772, and other liabilities, owed to Autotelic Inc. as of
March 31, 2018 pursuant to the MSA. The securities that were issued to Autotelic Inc., which were issued upon the closing described
above, have the same terms and conditions as the securities that were issued to investors in the offering (See Note 6). The warrants
have a five-year term, an initial exercise price of $0.55, and have a fair value of $1,494,469 resulting in a loss on settlement
of debt of $754,697, which is included in the loss on settlement in the consolidated statements of operations.
Resignation
and Appointment of Officer and Directors
On
April 27, 2018, our Board of Directors (the “Board”) increased the size of the entire Board from five (5) directors
to seven (7) directors, and it appointed each of Erik Emerson and Tim Boris to fill the vacancies created thereby.
In
May 2018, each of Philip C. Ranker and Philippe P. Calais, Ph.D. resigned as members of the Board, and all committees thereof,
effective immediately. In connection with their resignations: (i) each of Mr. Ranker and Dr. Calais released us from all claims
arising prior to the date of his resignation; (ii) we granted to Mr. Ranker fully-vested options to purchase up to 200,000 shares
of our common stock at an exercise price equal to $0.98 per share of common stock; and (iii) we granted to Dr. Calais fully-vested
options to purchase up to 80,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price equal to $0.98 per share of common stock. The
foregoing options are exercisable for a period of five years from the grant date.
In
May 2018, the Board accepted the resignation of Joseph W. Ramelli, our Chief Executive Officer, whereby Mr. Ramelli resigned as
an officer of our company, and as a director and/or officer of any and all subsidiaries of our company, effective immediately,
to pursue other opportunities. In connection with his resignation, Mr. Ramelli released us from all claims arising prior to the
date of his resignation and affirmed his obligations to be bound by the restrictive covenants contained in the employment agreement
between Mr. Ramelli and our company dated February 2, 2017, and we: (i) agreed to make severance payments to Mr. Ramelli in the
amount of $60,000 to be paid over a six (6) month period; and (ii) granted to Mr. Ramelli fully-vested options, exercisable for
a period of five years from the grant date, to purchase up to 100,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price equal to
$0.98 per share of common stock. In May 2018, the Board appointed Vuong Trieu, a director of the Company and former Executive
Chairman, to serve as our Interim Chief Executive Officer, to replace Mr. Ramelli, effective with Mr. Ramelli’s departure.
In his capacity as Interim Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Trieu received a salary in the amount of $20,000 per month.
On
June 18, 2018, the Board appointed Robert C. Moscato, Jr., to serve as our Chief Executive Officer effective immediately. In connection
with the appointment of Mr. Moscato as Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Trieu resigned as Interim Chief Executive Officer, and also
from his position as Executive Chairman of our company, effective immediately.
On
June 18, 2018, the Board appointed Uli Hacksell, Ph.D.to serve as a member of the Board, and as Chairman of the Board, effective
July 1, 2018. Dr. Hacksell agreed to devote half of his business time to Adhera.
On
June 28, 2018, the Board appointed Mr. Moscato to serve as a member of the Board, effective July 1, 2018.
On
September 24, 2018, we entered into an employment agreement with R. Eric Teague pursuant to which Mr. Teague began serving as
our Chief Financial Officer. In connection with the appointment of Mr. Teague as our Chief Financial Officer, Amit Shah, our prior
Chief Financial Officer, resigned from such position, effective September 24, 2018.
Mr.
Teague, Mr. Moscato, and Mr. Emerson resigned subsequent to December 31, 2018 (See Note 13 - Subsequent Events).
Issuance
of Preferred Stock and Warrants to Directors
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we entered into Compromise and Settlement
Agreements with four of the then current members of our Board of Directors and one former member of our Board of Directors pursuant
to which we agreed to issue to such directors an aggregate of 58.25 shares of Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase
up to 436,875 shares of common stock to satisfy accrued and unpaid fees owed to such directors for service as members of the Board
of Directors during the period ending on December 31, 2017 in the aggregate amount of approximately $291,250. The securities that
were issued to the directors, which were issued upon the closing of our private placement described above, have the same terms
and conditions as the securities that were issued to investors in the offering. Additionally, we paid an aggregate of $95,000
to assist in tax liabilities arising from these transactions.
Omnibus
Settlement Agreement with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D. and Affiliated Entities
On
October 1, 2018, we entered into an Omnibus Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D.,
our former interim Chief Executive Officer, Executive Chairman and Chairman of the Board, Autotelic Inc., Autotelic LLC, Autotelic
BIO, Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. At the same time, and in connection therewith, we also entered into an Agreement and
Release with each of Dr. Trieu and Falguni Trieu (the “Individual Releases”) and entered into an Agreement and Release
with each of Autotelic Inc., Autotelic LLC, Autotelic BIO, Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. (collectively, the “Entity
Releases”). We also delivered a release (the “Company Release”) to Dr. Trieu, Ms. Trieu, Autotelic Inc., Autotelic
LLC, Autotelic BIO, Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, we agreed to make a payment to
Dr. Trieu in the amount of $10,000 in consideration for Dr. Trieu entering into the Individual Releases between Dr. Trieu and
our company. Dr. Trieu also agreed to sell, and we agreed to purchase, from Dr. Trieu for cancellation an aggregate of 500,000
shares of our common stock in consideration of an aggregate purchase price of $250,000. Additionally, each of Dr. Trieu, Autotelic
Inc., Autotelic LLC, Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. agreed to certain restrictions on sale, transfer or assignment of our
common stock.
Furthermore:
(i) we and Autotelic Inc. agreed that the Master Services Agreement, dated as of November 15, 2016, by and between our company
and Autotelic Inc., shall be terminated as of October 1, 2018; (ii) we and Autotelic BIO agreed that the Term Sheet, entered into
as of January 11, 2018, by and between our company and Autotelic BIO, shall be terminated immediately; (iii) we and Oncotelic,
Inc. confirmed that the License Agreement, dated July 17, 2017, by and between our company and Oncotelic Inc. was terminated effective
May 15, 2018; and (iv) we and Lipomedics, Inc. agreed that the License Agreement, dated as of February 6, 2016, by and between
our company and Lipomedics, Inc. would remain in effect.
Under
the Settlement Agreement, we and Autotelic LLC agreed with respect to the License Agreement, dated as of November 15, 2016, by
and between our company and Autotelic LLC, that such License Agreement shall continue, provided that Autotelic LLC shall be licensee
and have a license to, without representation or warranty, nasal apomorphine and nasal scopolamine and related intellectual property
in addition to nasal insulin, and Autotelic LLC shall not be a licensee or have a license to Familial Adenomatous Polyposis or
CEQ508 and related intellectual property.
Pursuant
to the Individual Releases, each of Dr. Trieu and Ms. Trieu, our former Director of Business Development and the spouse of Dr.
Trieu, agreed to release us from all claims arising prior to the date of the Release Agreements. Pursuant to the Entity Releases,
each of Autotelic Inc., Autotelic LLC, Autotelic BIO, Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. agreed to release us from all claims
arising prior to the date of the applicable Entity Release. Pursuant to the Company Release, we agreed to release each of Dr.
Trieu, Ms. Trieu, Autotelic Inc., Autotelic LLC, Autotelic BIO, Oncotelic, Inc. and LipoMedics, Inc. from all claims arising prior
to the date of the Company Release.
Transactions
with BioMauris, LLC/Erik Emerson
During the year ended
December 31, 2018, we paid a total of $572,381 for services provided by BioMauris, LLC, of which Erik Emerson, our former Chief
Commercial Officer and a current director of Adhera, is Executive Chairman. A total of $23,585 was due BioMauris, LLC as
of December 31, 2018. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2018, we paid a total to BioMauris, LLC of $62,576
related to Acutus Medical, which entity owns an equity interest in BioMauris, LLC.
Transactions
Involving Robert Moscato
During
the year ended December 31, 2018, we paid a total of $15,983 to an entity owned and operated by the wife of Robert Moscato,
our former CEO, which entity rendered interior design services to our company.
Note
7 - Notes Payable
Following
is a breakdown of notes payable as of December 31, 2018 and 2017:
|
|
December 31,
2018
|
|
|
December 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
97,523
|
|
Convertible notes payable
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
346,700
|
|
Total notes payable
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
444,223
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable - related parties
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
93,662
|
|
Convertible notes payable - related parties (net of debt discount of $0 and $113,170 as of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,368,378
|
|
Total notes payable - related parties
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
1,462,040
|
|
Note
Payable - Service Provider
In
December 2016, we entered into an Agreement and Promissory Note with a law firm for past services performed totaling $121,523.
The note called for monthly payments of $6,000 per month, beginning with an initial payment on March 31, 2017. The note was unsecured
and non-interest bearing. The note was paid in full in May 2018. The balance due on the note was $0 and $97,523 as of December
31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
Note
Purchase Agreement and Amendment
In
July 2017, we entered into an amendment agreement (the “Amendment Agreement”) with the holders (such holders, the
“June 2016 Noteholders”) of the promissory notes that we issued in June 2016 to Noteholders (the “2016 Notes”)
with respect to the 2016 Notes and the warrants to purchase shares of our common stock that are held by the June 2016 Noteholders
and that were originally issued pursuant to a certain Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement dated as of February 10, 2012 by and
among Adhera, MDRNA, Cequent and the purchasers identified on the signature pages thereto (as amended from time to time), to,
among other things, extend the maturity date of the 2016 Notes to December 31, 2017, to provide for the issuance of consideration
securities at a cost of $375,000 (“Consideration Securities”) and to extend the price protection applicable to certain
of the warrants held by the June 2016 Noteholders with respect to dilutive offerings afforded thereunder to February 10, 2020.
Refer to our Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2017 for a more detailed discussion and additional terms for the 2016
Notes.
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we issued to the June 2016 Noteholders an
aggregate of 71.46 shares of Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase up to 535,950 shares of common stock as a result
of the conversion of the 2016 Notes. As a result of the conversion of the 2016 Notes and the issuance of the securities to the
June 2016 Noteholders, the entire unpaid principal balance of the 2016 Notes, and the accrued and unpaid interest thereon, has
been satisfied in full, and such notes are no longer outstanding.
In
addition, in April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we issued to the June 2016
Noteholders an aggregate of 75 shares of Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase up to 562,500 shares of common stock
in full and complete satisfaction of our obligations to issue $375,000 worth of Consideration Securities to the June 2016 Noteholders
pursuant to the Amendment Agreement.
As
of December 31, 2018 and 2017, the accrued interest expense on the 2016 Notes amounted to $0 and $46,700, respectively, with a
total balance of principal and interest of $0 and $346,700, respectively.
2017
Bridge Note Financing
In
June 2017, we issued convertible promissory notes (the “2017 Notes”) in the aggregate principal amount of $400,000
to 10 investors pursuant to a Note Purchase Agreement (the “Note Purchase Agreement”) that we entered into with such
investors (the “June 2017 Noteholders”). The 2017 Notes bear interest at a rate of five percent (5%) per annum and
are due and payable at any time on or after the earlier of (i) June 1, 2018 and (ii) the occurrence of an event of default (as
defined in the Note Purchase Agreement). Our then Executive Chairman and our Chief Science Officer were each investors in the
2017 Notes.
As
of December 31, 2018 and 2017, the accrued interest expense on the 2017 Notes amounted to $0 and $11,365, respectively, with a
total balance of principal and interest of $0 and $411,365, respectively, and is included in notes payable - related parties on
the accompanying balance sheet.
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we issued to the June 2017 Noteholders an
aggregate of 74.17 shares of Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase up to 505,705 shares of common stock (and also
paid to such holders an aggregate of $56 thousand in cash) as full and complete satisfaction of the unpaid principal balance (and
accrued but unpaid interest thereon) owed by us to the June 2017 Noteholders under the 2017 Notes. As a result of the conversion
of the 2017 Notes and the issuance of the securities to the June 2016 Noteholders (and payment of cash), the entire unpaid principal
balance of the 2017 Notes, and the accrued and unpaid interest thereon, has been satisfied in full, and such notes are no longer
outstanding.
Convertible
Notes Payable
In
July 2016, IThena issued convertible promissory notes with an aggregate principal balance of $50,000 to certain related-party
investors. Borrowings under each of these convertible notes bore interest at 3% per annum and these notes mature on December 31,
2018. Upon the completion of certain funding events, IThena had the right to convert the outstanding principal amount of these
notes into shares of IThena’s common stock. The notes were assumed by Autotelic Inc. on November 15, 2016 as part of its
acquisition of the technology asset (IT-101).
In
November 2017, the Company issued a convertible promissory note with a related party (a trust affiliated with Isaac Blech, a member
of our Board of Directors) for $500,000 (the “Blech Note”), with annual interest at 8%, maturing on March 31, 2018,
and convertible at the price equal to any financing transaction involving the sale by the Company of its equity securities yielding
aggregate gross proceeds to the Company of not less than $5 million. The note included warrants issued to the placement agent
to purchase 66,667 shares of the Company’s common stock, with a 5-year term and an exercise price of $0.75.
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we issued to the trust an aggregate of 103.18
shares of Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase up to 777,750 shares of common stock as a result of the conversion
of the Blech Note in the original principal amount of $500,000. As a result of the conversion of the Blech Note and the issuance
of the securities to the holder thereof, the entire unpaid principal balance of the Blech Note, and the accrued and unpaid interest
thereon, has been satisfied in full, and the Blech Note is no longer outstanding. The securities that were issued to the holder
of the Blech Note have the same terms and conditions as the securities that were issued to investors in the offering.
The
Blech Note included a debt discount of $162,210 consisting of loan costs of $50,000 and the fair value of the warrants of $112,210.
Total amortization of this debt discount was $113,171 for the year ended December 31, 2018, with a remaining unamortized value
of $0. Total principal and interest was $0 and $504,274 as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, and is included in notes
payable - related parties on the accompanying balance sheet.
Convertible
Notes Payable, Dr. Trieu
In
connection with the Merger, Adhera entered into a Line Letter dated November 15, 2016 with Dr. Trieu for an unsecured line of
credit in an amount not to exceed $540,000, to be used for current operating expenses. Dr. Trieu has advanced the full $540,000
under the Line Letter as of December 31, 2017. The line of credit was convertible at any time into shares of the Company’s
common stock at a price of $1.77 per share.
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we issued to Dr. Trieu 114.63 shares of
Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase up to 859,725 shares of common stock as full and complete satisfaction of the
unpaid principal balance (and accrued but unpaid interest thereon) owed by us to Dr. Trieu under the Line of Credit. As such,
the Line of Credit was terminated in April 2018.
Accrued
interest on the Line Letter was $0 and $25,836 as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, and is included in notes payable
- related parties on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
Line
Letter with Autotelic, Inc.
In
April 2017, the Company entered into a Line Letter with Autotelic Inc. for an unsecured line of credit in an amount not to exceed
$500,000, to be used for current operating expenses. Autotelic Inc. is a stockholder of IThenaPharma that became the holder of
525,535 shares of Adhera common stock as a result of the Merger, and an entity of which Dr. Trieu serves as Chairman of the Board.
Autotelic Inc. was to consider requests for advances under the Line Letter until September 1, 2017. Autotelic Inc. had the right
at any time for any reason in its sole and absolute discretion to terminate the line of credit available under the Line Letter
or to reduce the maximum amount available thereunder without notice. Advances made under the Line Letter bear interest at the
rate of five percent (5%) per annum, are evidenced by the Demand Promissory Note issued to Autotelic Inc., and are due and payable
upon demand by Autotelic, Inc. Autotelic Inc. advanced funds after September 1, 2017 but is no longer considering additional requests
for advances as of December 31, 2017.
In
April 2018, and in connection with the closing of our private placement on that date, we issued to Autotelic Inc. 19 shares of
Series E Preferred Stock and Warrants to purchase up to 142,500 shares of common stock as full and complete satisfaction of the
unpaid principal balance (and accrued but unpaid interest thereon) owed by us to Autotelic Inc. under the Line of Credit, of which
$90,816 had been drawn down as of the date of the closing described above. As such, in April 2018, the line of credit with Autotelic
Inc was terminated.
The
balance under the line was $0 and $93,662, respectively, including accrued interest of $0 and $2,847 as of December 31, 2018 and
2017, respectively, and is included in notes payable - related parties on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
Note
8 - Stockholders’ Equity
Preferred
Stock
Adhera
has authorized 100,000 shares of preferred stock for issuance and has designated 1,000 shares as Series B Preferred Stock (“Series
B Preferred”) and 90,000 shares as Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock (“Series A Preferred”). No
shares of Series B Preferred or Series A Preferred are outstanding. In March 2014, Adhera designated 1,200 shares as Series C
Convertible Preferred Stock (“Series C Preferred”). In August 2015, Adhera designated 220 shares as Series D Convertible
Preferred Stock (“Series D Preferred”). In April 2018, Adhera designated 3,500 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred
Stock (“Series E Preferred”). In July 2018, Adhera designated 2,200 shares of Series F Convertible Preferred Stock
(“Series F Preferred”).
Series
C Preferred
Each
share of Series C Preferred has a stated value of $5,000 per share, has a $5,100 liquidation preference per share, has voting
rights of 666.67 votes per share, and is convertible into shares of common stock at a conversion price of $7.50 per share. In
September 2017, an investor converted 270 shares of Series C Preferred stock into 180,000 shares of our common stock.
In
June 2018, an investor converted 650 shares of Series C Preferred stock into 433,334 shares of our common stock.
As
of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, 100 and 750 shares, respectively, of Series C Preferred remained outstanding.
Series
D Preferred
In
August 2015, Adhera entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with certain investors pursuant to which Adhera sold 220 shares
of Series D Preferred and warrants to purchase up to 344,000 shares of Adhera’s common stock at an initial exercise price
of $4.00 per share before August 2021, for an aggregate purchase price of $1.1 million. Each share of Series D Preferred has a
stated value of $5,000 per share, has a liquidation preference of $300 per share, has voting rights of 1,250 votes per share and
is convertible into shares of common stock at a conversion price of $4.00 per share. The Series D Preferred is initially convertible
into an aggregate of 275,000 shares of Adhera’s common stock, subject to certain limitations and adjustments, has a 5% stated
dividend rate, is not redeemable and has voting rights on an as-converted basis.
In
May 2018, an investor converted 20 shares of Series D Preferred into 25,000 shares of common stock.
As
of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, 40 and 60 shares, respectively, of Series D Preferred remained outstanding.
Series
E Convertible Preferred Stock Private Placement
In
April and May 2018, we entered into Subscription Agreements with certain accredited investors and conducted a closing pursuant
to which we sold 2,812 shares of our Series E Preferred, at a purchase price of $5,000 per share of Series E Preferred. Each share
of Series E Preferred is initially convertible into shares of our common stock at a conversion price of $0.50 per share of common
stock. In addition, each investor received a 5-year warrant (the “Warrants”, and collectively with the Series E Preferred,
the “Securities”) to purchase 0.75 shares of common stock for each share of common stock issuable upon the conversion
of the Series E Preferred purchased by such investor at an initial exercise price equal to $0.55 per share of common stock, subject
to adjustment thereunder. The Series E Preferred accrues 8% dividends per annum and are payable in cash or stock at the Company’s
discretion. The Series E Preferred has voting rights, dividend rights, liquidation preferences, conversion rights and anti-dilution
rights as described in the Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of the Preferred Stock, which we
filed with the Secretary of State of Delaware in April 2018. The Warrants have full-ratchet anti-dilution protection, are exercisable
for a period of five years and contain customary exercise limitations.
We
received net proceeds of approximately $12.2 million from the sale of the Series E Preferred, after deducting placement agent
fees and estimated expenses payable by us of approximately $2.0 million associated with such closing. We intend to use the proceeds
of the offering for funding our commercial operations to the sale and promotion of our Prestalia product, working capital needs,
capital expenditures, the repayment of certain liabilities and other general corporate purposes. In connection with the private
placement described above, we also issued to the placement agent for such private placement a Warrant to purchase 2,958,460 shares
of our common stock.
In
October 2018, an investor converted 2 shares of Series E Preferred into 20,000 shares of our common stock.
We
accrued dividends on the Series E Preferred of $974,247 for the year ended December 31, 2018. No similar dividends were accrued
in 2017.
Series
F Convertible Preferred Share Private Placement
In
July 2018, we entered into Subscription Agreements with certain accredited investors and conducted a closing pursuant to which
we sold 308 shares of our Series F Preferred, at a purchase price of $5,000 per share of Series F Preferred. Each share of Series
F Preferred is initially convertible into shares of our common stock at a conversion price of $0.50 per share of common stock.
In addition, each investor received a 5-year warrant (the “Warrants”, and collectively with the Preferred Stock, the
“Securities”) to purchase 0.75 shares of common stock for each share of common stock issuable upon the conversion
of the Series F Preferred purchased by such investor at an initial exercise price equal to $0.55 per share of common stock, subject
to adjustment thereunder. The Series F Preferred accrues 8% dividends per annum and are payable in cash or stock at the Company’s
discretion. The Series F Preferred has voting rights, dividend rights, liquidation preferences, conversion rights and anti-dilution
rights as described in the Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of the Preferred Stock, which we
filed with the Secretary of State of Delaware in July 2018. The Warrants have full-ratchet anti-dilution protection, are exercisable
for a period of five years and contain customary exercise limitations.
We
received proceeds of approximately $1.4 million from the sale of the Securities, after deducting placement agent fees and
estimated expenses payable by us of approximately $180,000 associated with such closing. We intend to use the proceeds of the
offering for funding our commercial operations to the sale and promotion of our Prestalia product, working capital needs, capital
expenditures, the repayment of certain liabilities and other general corporate purposes. In connection with the private placement
described above, we also issued to the placement agent for such private placement a Warrant to purchase 308,000 shares of our
common stock. The Warrant has a five-year term and an exercise price of $0.55 per share.
On November 9, 2018, we
entered into Subscription Agreements with certain accredited investors and conducted a closing pursuant to which we sold 73 shares
of our Series F Preferred Stock, at a purchase price of $5,000 per share of Preferred Stock. Each share of Series F Preferred
is initially convertible into shares of our common stock at a conversion price of $0.50 per share of common stock. In addition,
each investor received a 5-year warrant to purchase 0.75 shares of common stock for each share of common stock issuable upon the
conversion of the Series F Preferred purchased by such investor at an initial exercise price equal to $0.55 per share of common
stock, subject to adjustment thereunder. We received total net proceeds of approximately $0.31 million from the issuance of the
securities described above, after deducting placement agent fees and estimated expenses payable by us associated with such closing.
In connection with the private placement described above, we also issued to the placement agent for such private placement a Warrant
to purchase 73,000 shares of our common stock. The Warrant has a five-year term and an exercise price of $0.55 per share.
We
accrued dividends on the Series F Preferred of $89,894 for the year ended December 31, 2018. No similar dividends were accrued
in 2017.
Stock
Option Grants
In
July 2018, we granted our Chief Executive Officer, Robert Moscato, Jr., 1,500,000 stock options; Uli Hacksell, Ph. D., the Chairman
of our Board, 1,000,000 stock options, Erik Emerson, our Chief Commercial Officer, 1,125,000 stock options, and Jay Schwartz,
our SVP of Commercial Operations, 250,000 stock options.
In
September 2018, we granted our Chief Financial Officer, Eric Teague, 450,000 stock options.
Subsequent
to December 31, 2018, Mr. Moscato, Mr. Emerson, and Mr. Teague resigned (See Note 13 – Subsequent Events). All vested
options held by Mr. Teague are set to expire 90 days after his resignation date and all vested options held by Mr. Moscato are
set to expire 12 months after his resignation date.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2018, we granted an aggregate of 260,000 stock options to employees.
Common
Stock
Our
common stock currently trades on the OTCQB tier of the OTC Markets under the symbol “ATRX”. We currently have 10,761,684
shares of our common stock outstanding.
Stock
Issuances
In addition to the common
stock and preferred stock issuances described above, we issued the following shares of common stock during the year ended December
31, 2018.
As
discussed in Note 11, in May 2018, we issued to Novosom 51,988 shares of our common stock as additional consideration pursuant
to the Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of July 27, 2010, between our company and Novosom. Such shares were due to Novosom as
a result of the receipt by our company of a license fee under the License Agreement that we entered into with Lipomedics Inc.
in February 2017.
As
discussed in Note 10 in April 2018, we entered into a Stipulation of Settlement with Vaya Pharma and issued a total of 210,084
shares of our common stock with a fair value of $250,000.
In
May 2018, an investor converted 20 shares of Series D Preferred into 25,000 shares of common stock.
In
June 2018, an investor converted 650 shares of Series C Preferred stock into 433,334 shares of our common stock.
In
October 2018, an investor converted 2 shares of Series E convertible preferred stock into 20,000 shares of our common stock.
As
discussed in Note 6, on October 1, 2018, we entered into a Settlement Agreement with Vuong Trieu, Ph.D., our former interim Chief
Executive Officer, Executive Chairman and Chairman of our Board of Directors, which included the Company repurchasing 500,000
shares of our common stock from Dr. Trieu for $250,000.
Warrants
As
of December 31, 2018, there were 36,267,329 warrants outstanding, with a weighted average exercise price of $0.79 per share, and
annual expirations as follows:
Expiring in 2019
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
Expiring in 2020
|
|
|
1,189,079
|
|
Expiring in 2021
|
|
|
343,750
|
|
Expiring in 2022
|
|
|
66,667
|
|
Expiring in 2023
|
|
|
33,729,180
|
|
Expiring thereafter
|
|
|
338,653
|
|
|
|
|
36,267,329
|
|
The above includes 29,135,560
warrants issued in April and May 2018 in connection with our Series E Preferred Stock offering with a fair value of $31,106,896
and 3,238,500 warrants issued with our Series F Preferred Stock offering with a fair value of $1,492,464 which are reflected in
additional paid-in capital and additional paid in capital-warrants on the accompanying consolidated statement of stockholders’
equity. The warrants have a five-year term and an initial exercise price of $0.55. There was no expense related to these
warrants.
Additionally, the above
includes 1,345,040 warrants issued to Autotelic, Inc. in April 2018 to satisfy accrued and unpaid fees in the aggregate amount
of approximately $739,772, and other liabilities, owed to Autotelic Inc. as of March 31, 2018. The warrants have a five-year term,
an initial exercise price of $0.55, and have a fair value of $1,494,469 resulting in a loss on settlement of liability
of $754,697.
The
above includes price adjustable warrants totaling 1,895,013.
A
total of 339,702 warrants expired during the year ended December 31, 2018.
Note
9 - Stock Incentive Plans
Stock
Options
The following table
summarizes stock option activity for the year-ended December 31, 2018:
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
Outstanding, December 31, 2017
|
|
|
745,707
|
|
|
$
|
8.84
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
4,984,000
|
|
|
|
0.66
|
|
Options expired / forfeited
|
|
|
(116,650
|
)
|
|
|
54.29
|
|
Outstanding, December 31, 2018
|
|
|
5,613,057
|
|
|
|
0.83
|
|
Exercisable, December 31, 2018
|
|
|
1,636,664
|
|
|
$
|
0.93
|
|
The
following table summarizes additional information on Adhera’s stock options outstanding at December 31, 2018:
|
|
|
Options
Outstanding
|
|
|
Options
Exercisable
|
|
Range
of
Exercise
Prices
|
|
|
Number
Outstanding
|
|
|
Weighted-
Average Remaining Contractual Life (Years)
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|
|
Number
Exercisable
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|
|
$0.31
- $0.98
|
|
|
|
4,965,000
|
|
|
|
8.66
|
|
|
$
|
0.64
|
|
|
|
1,467,500
|
|
|
$
|
0.73
|
|
|
$1.00
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
2.88
|
|
|
$
|
1.00
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
$
|
1.00
|
|
|
$1.50
- $1.80
|
|
|
|
493,207
|
|
|
|
8.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
|
134,314
|
|
|
$
|
1.78
|
|
|
$2.60
- $8.20
|
|
|
|
135,200
|
|
|
|
3.52
|
|
|
$
|
2.77
|
|
|
|
15,200
|
|
|
$
|
4.48
|
|
|
$10.70
- $22.00
|
|
|
|
12,650
|
|
|
|
0.75
|
|
|
$
|
10.92
|
|
|
|
12,650
|
|
|
$
|
10.92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
|
|
5,613,057
|
|
|
|
8.97
|
|
|
$
|
0.83
|
|
|
|
1,636,664
|
|
|
$
|
0.93
|
|
Weighted-Average
Exercisable Remaining Contractual Life (Years) 8.03
In
January 2018, the Company granted a total of 19,000 stock options to directors and officers for services. The options have an
exercise price of $1.56 and a five-year term.
In
May 2018, the Company granted a total of 380,000 stock options to departing directors and officers for services. The options have
an exercise price of $0.98 and a five-year term.
In
July 2018, we granted our Chief Executive Officer, 1,500,000 stock options; Uli Hacksell, Ph.D., the Chairman of our Board, 1,000,000
stock options; and Erik Emerson, our Chief Commercial Officer, 1,125,000 stock options at an exercise prices of $0.66 per share
with a 10-year term.
In
July 2018, we granted our SVP of Commercial Operations 250,000 stock options at an exercise price of $0.575 per share with a 10-year
term.
In
September 2018 we granted our Chief Financial Officer 450,000 stock options at an exercise price of $0.55 per share with a 10-year
term.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2018, we granted an aggregate of 260,000 stock options to employees at exercise prices ranging
from $0.31 to $0.53 per share with a 10-year term. The options vest at a rate of one-third at the end of each annual anniversary
over three years from the grant date.
As
of December 31, 2018, we had $1,185,627 of total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested stock options. Total
expense related to stock options was $1,445,138 and $178,784 for the year ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
As
of December 31, 2018, the intrinsic value of options outstanding or exercisable was $0 as there were no options outstanding with
an exercise price less than $0.28, the per share closing market price of our common stock at that date.
Note
10 - Intellectual Property and Collaborative Agreements
Novosom
Agreements
In
July 2010, Adhera entered into an asset purchase agreement with Novosom Verwaltungs GmbH (“Novosom”), pursuant to
which Adhera acquired intellectual property for Novosom’s SMARTICLES-based liposomal delivery system. In May 2018, we issued
to Novosom 51,988 shares of our common stock, with a fair value of $75,000, as additional consideration pursuant to the Asset
Purchase Agreement. Such shares were due to Novosom as a result of the receipt by our company of a license fee under the License
Agreement that we entered into with Lipomedics Inc. in February 2017.
Arrangements
with LipoMedics
In February 2017, we entered
into a License Agreement (the “License Agreement”) with LipoMedics, pursuant to which, among other things, we provided
to LipoMedics a license to our SMARTICLES platform for further development of Lipomedics’s proprietary phospholipid nanoparticles
that can deliver protein, small molecule drugs, and peptides. On the same date, we also entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement
with LipoMedics pursuant to which we issued to LipoMedics an aggregate of 86,207 shares of our common stock for a total purchase
price of $250,000.
Under
the terms of the License Agreement, we could receive success-based milestones based on commercial sales of licensed products.
In addition, if LipoMedics determines to pursue further development and commercialization of products under the License Agreement,
LipoMedics agreed, in connection therewith, to purchase shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $500,000,
with the purchase price for each share of common stock being the greater of $2.90 or the volume weighted average price of our
common stock for the thirty (30) trading days immediately preceding the date on which LipoMedics notifies us that it intends to
pursue further development or commercialization of a licensed product.
If
LipoMedics breaches the License Agreement, we shall have the right to terminate the License Agreement effective sixty (60) days
following delivery of written notice to LipoMedics specifying the breach, if LipoMedics fails to cure such material breach within
such sixty (60) day period.
Vuong
Trieu, Ph.D. is the Chairman of the Board and Chief Operating Officer of LipoMedics.
Arrangements
with Oncotelic Inc.
In
July 2017, we entered into a License Agreement (the “License Agreement”) with Oncotelic, Inc. (“Oncotelic”)
pursuant to which, among other things, we provided to Oncotelic a license to our SMARTICLES platform for the delivery of antisense
DNA therapeutics, as well as a license to our conformationally restricted nucleotide (“CRN”) technology with respect
to TGF-Beta. Under the terms of the License Agreement, Oncotelic also agreed to purchase 49,019 shares of our common stock for
an aggregate purchase price of $0.25 million ($5.10 per share), with such purchase and sale to be made pursuant to a Stock Purchase
Agreement to be entered into between us and Oncotelic within thirty (30) days following the date of the License Agreement. Oncotelic
has not completed the purchase of the stock and we have not been able to reach to a definitive agreement, as such we have terminated
the agreement.
Agreement
with Autotelic BIO
On
January 11, 2018, we entered into a binding agreement with Autotelic BIO (“ATB”) pursuant to which, among other things,
and subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions on or prior to January 15, 2019, we shall grant to ATB a perpetual exclusive
right of development and marketing of our IT-103 product candidate, which is a fixed dose combination of celecoxib and olmesartan
medoxomil, at the currently approved dose/approved indications only for celecoxib for combined hypertension and arthritis only,
with such right extending throughout the entire world (excluding the United States and Canada, and the territories of such countries).
The grant of the license would be memorialized in a definitive license agreement to be entered into between the parties. On October
1, 2018, we and ATB agreed to terminate this arrangement.
Autotelic
LLC, an entity that owns approximately 22% of the issued and outstanding shares of our common stock and of which Dr. Trieu serves
as Chief Executive Officer, owns approximately 19% of the issued and outstanding shares of the common stock of ATB.
License
of DiLA
2
Assets
On
March 16, 2018, Adhera entered into a Licensing Agreement, whereby Adhera granted exclusive rights to the company’s DiLA
2
delivery system in exchange for an upfront payment of $200,000 and further potential future consideration dependent upon
event and sales-based milestones. Under the terms of the agreement, Adhera has agreed to assign ownership of the intellectual
property associated with the DiLA
2
delivery system to the purchaser. The Company has not completed, and will not complete,
certain performance obligations under the agreement and accordingly has classified the $200,000 payment in accrued liabilities
as of December 31, 2018.
Asset
Purchase Agreement
In
July 2017, Adhera entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement with Symplmed Pharmaceuticals LLC and its wholly-owned subsidiary Symplmed
Technologies, LLC pursuant to which the Company purchased from the Sellers, for an aggregate purchase price of $75,000 in cash,
certain specified assets of the Sellers relating to the Sellers’ patented technology platform known as DyrctAxess that offers
enhanced efficiency, control and information to empower patients, physicians and manufacturers to help achieve optimal care (see
Note 5).
Note
11 - Commitments and Contingencies
Amendment
to Agreement with Windlas Healthcare Private Limited
On
August 17, 2017, we entered into an amendment (the “Amendment”) of that certain Pharmaceutical Development Agreement
dated as of March 30, 2017 by and between Windlas Healthcare Private Limited (“Windlas”) and our company (the “Development
Agreement”), relating to the development by Windlas of certain pharmaceutical products to be used for conducting clinical
trials or for regulatory submissions, as more fully described therein. Pursuant to the Amendment, we and Windlas agreed to amend
the Development Agreement to reflect our agreement to issue to Windlas, and Windlas’ agreement to accept from us, in lieu
of cash payments with respect to forty percent (40%) of the total amount reflected on invoices sent from time to time by Windlas
to us, shares of our common stock having an aggregate value equal to forty percent (40%) of such invoiced amount (with the remaining
portion of the invoiced amount being paid in cash). The maximum value of common stock that may be issued to Windlas pursuant to
the Development Agreement (as modified by the Amendment) is $2 million. The parties also agreed that the foregoing payment arrangement
would apply to any Contract Manufacturing and Supply Agreement (or similar agreement) relating to the manufacturing of commercial
batches of the products covered by the Development Agreement that may be entered into between the parties.
Litigation
Because
of the nature of our activities, we are subject to claims and/or threatened legal actions, which arise out of the normal course
of business. Other than the disclosure below, as of the date of this filing, we are not aware of any pending lawsuits against
us, our officers or our directors.
Paragraph IV Challenge
Our Prestalia product
is currently involved in a paragraph IV challenge regarding patents issued to perindopril arginine. This challenge, which is currently
pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (No. 1:17-cv-00276), is captioned Apotex Inc. and Apotex
Corp. v. Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Les Laboratoires Servier. The challengers (Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. (“Apotex”))
have filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking FDA approval to market a generic version of Prestalia and included a Paragraph
(IV) certification. In the litigation, Apotex seeks a declaratory judgment that no valid claims of the two patents Symplmed listed
in the FDA Orange Book as having claims covering Prestalia, U.S. Patent No. 6,696,481 and 7,846,961, will be infringed by the
Apotex proposed generic version of Prestalia and that the claims of those patents are invalid. The challenge is designed to provide
Apotex with an opportunity to enter the market with a generic version of Prestalia, ahead of the expiration of the patents with
claims covering that product. Apotex entered into negotiations with Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, LLC (which entity sold its assets
relating to Prestalia to us in June 2017, including its License and Commercialization Agreement with Les Laboratories Servier)
and Les Laboratories Servier (which entity owns or controls intellectual property rights relating to pharmaceutical products containing
as an active pharmaceutical ingredient perindopril in combination with other active pharmaceutical ingredients, which rights have
been licensed to Symplmed Pharmaceuticals) to resolve the challenge in the second quarter of 2017, and such parties, along with
us, have come to a general agreement on terms that will result in a delay to the challengers’ ability to enter the market
with a generic version of Prestalia, while still providing the challenger with the right to enter the market prior to the expiration
of the patent covering such product. The term sheet memorializing such terms is pending execution in a final settlement agreement.
In the meantime, the District Court has entered an order extending the time for the defendants to respond to Apotex’s Complaint.
Resolution of the Apotex litigation continues with alignment from all parties, including Servier, Apotex, Symplmed and Adhera.
Necessary extensions have been agreed upon and final resolution is anticipated this year.
We
had been named on a complaint filed in New York State as a defendant in the matter entitled
Vaya Pharma, Inc. v. Symplmed Technologies,
Inc., Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Erik Emerson and Marina Biotech, Inc.
While this complaint had been filed in the Supreme
Court of the State of New York, we had not been legally served. The complaint alleged, in relevant part, that: (i) the sale by
Symplmed Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of its assets related to its Prestalia product, and the sale by Symplmed Technologies, Inc. of
its assets related to its DyrctAxess platform, should be set aside pursuant to New York law as they were consummated without fair
consideration to the sellers (the “Symplmed Defendants”), and thereby had the effect of fraudulently depriving the
creditors of the Symplmed Defendants, including Vaya Pharma, Inc., of funds that could have been used to pay their debts; and
(ii) we were liable, as successor, for any and all claims by Vaya Pharma, Inc. against the Symplmed Defendants, though pursuant
to the agreement we are only contractually responsible for liabilities that accrue after the parties entered into the agreement
for Prestalia and any liabilities that existed prior to the agreement are contractually held by Symplmed. In April 2018, we entered
into a Stipulation of Settlement pursuant to which we issued to Vaya Pharma in April, 2018, 210,084 shares of our common stock
with a fair value of $250,000, which shares were issued in April of 2018. We accrued $0 and $250,000, as of December 31, 2018
and 2017, respectively, and such amount was included in accrued expenses on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
Leases
We
have entered into a Standard Form Office Lease with ROC III Fairlead Imperial Center, LLC, as landlord, pursuant to which we lease
our corporate headquarters located at 4721 Emperor Boulevard, Suite 350, Durham, North Carolina 27703 for a term of 37 months
starting on October 1, 2018. Our base monthly rent for such space is currently $6,457.92, which amount will increase to $7,057
for the final month of the term. Other than the lease for our corporate headquarters, we do not own or lease any real property
or facilities that are material to our current business operations. As we expand our business operations, we may seek to lease
additional facilities of our own in order to support our operational and administrative needs under our current operating plan.
NOTE
12 - INCOME TAXES
We
have identified our federal and California state tax returns as “major” tax jurisdictions. The periods our income
tax returns are subject to examination for these jurisdictions are 2014 through 2016. We believe our income tax filing positions
and deductions will be sustained on audit, and we do not anticipate any adjustments that would result in a material change to
our financial position. Therefore, no liabilities for uncertain income tax positions have been recorded.
At
December 31, 2017, we had available net operating loss carry-forwards for federal income tax reporting purposes of approximately
$332 million and had available tax credit carry-forwards for federal tax reporting purposes of approximately $10.6 million, which
are available to offset future taxable income. Portions of these carry-forwards will expire through 2038 if not otherwise utilized.
We have not performed a formal analysis, but we believe our ability to use such net operating losses and tax credit carry-forwards
is subject to annual limitations due to change of control provisions under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code,
which significantly impacts our ability to realize these deferred tax assets.
Our net deferred tax assets,
liabilities and valuation allowance as of December 31, 2018 and 2017 are summarized as follows:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
2017
|
|
Deferred
tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
operating loss carryforwards (a)
|
|
$
|
4,109,956
|
|
|
$
|
2,075,529
|
|
Tax
credit carryforwards (a)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
2,799,217
|
|
|
|
3,107,094
|
|
Share
based compensation
|
|
|
435,770
|
|
|
|
297,893
|
|
Other
|
|
|
248,654
|
|
|
|
389,146
|
|
Total
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
7,593,597
|
|
|
|
5,869,662
|
|
Valuation
allowance
|
|
|
(7,539,944)
|
|
|
|
(5,354,880
|
)
|
Net
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
53,653
|
|
|
|
514,782
|
|
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible
assets
|
|
|
(53,653)
|
|
|
|
(514,782
|
)
|
Net
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
(a) reflects
estimated change of control limitation under Section 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code as of December 31, 2016 due to reverse
merger on November 15, 2016.
We
record a valuation allowance in the full amount of our net deferred tax assets since realization of such tax benefits has been
determined by our management to be less likely than not. The valuation allowance increased $2,185,064 and $1,436,089 during 2018
and 2017, respectively.
In
2018 and 2017, there was income tax expense of $0 and $800, respectively, due to IThena’s income tax due the state of California.
As
of the date of this filing, the Company has not filed its 2018 or 2017 federal and state corporate income tax returns. The Company
expects to file these documents as soon as practicable.
The
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the Act) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The Act reduces the US federal corporate tax rate from 35% to
21% and will require the Company to re-measure certain deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the rates at which they are
anticipated to reverse in the future, which is generally 21%. The Company adopted the new rate as it relates to the calculations,
of deferred tax amounts as of December 31, 2017.
Note
13 - Subsequent Events
Except
for the event(s) discussed below, there were no subsequent events that required recognition or disclosure. The Company evaluated
subsequent events through the date the financial statements were issued and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Compensation
Increase and Option Grant for Chief Financial Officer
On
January 15, 2019, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Company approved an increase of the base salary to be
paid to the Chief Financial Officer of the Company (our “CFO”), from $285,000 per year to $305,000 per year, effective
immediately. The Board also granted to our CFO options to purchase up to an aggregate of 100,000 shares of the common stock of
the Company at an exercise price of $0.32 per share, with 25,000 options being exercisable immediately and with 25,000 options
vesting on each of the first, second and third anniversary of the grant date.
Resignation
of Chief Commercial Officer
On
January 15, 2019, the Board accepted the resignation of the Chief Commercial Officer of the Company (our “former CCO”),
effective immediately. He will remain as a member of the Board. Simultaneous with his resignation as our CCO, the Company
and our former CCO entered into a Consulting Agreement dated as of January 15, 2019 pursuant to which our former CCO
agreed to provide certain consulting services regarding the Company’s FDA-approved Prestalia product for a fee of $3,000
per month.
Resignation
of Chief Financial Officer
On
March 11, 2019, our CFO submitted his resignation as our CFO and from any other positions (whether as an officer, director or
otherwise) that he may hold with the Company or any of its subsidiaries, effective March 22, 2019. The Company anticipates that
he will be available to assist in the transition of his ongoing activities on behalf of the Company to his successor following
the effective date of his resignation. His services have been retained for the preparation and filing of this document.
Resignation
and Appointment of Chief Executive Officer
On
April 4, 2019, the Company entered into an employment agreement with our new CEO, Nancy R. Phelan, effective immediately, who was
also appointed to serve as Secretary of the Company. In connection with the appointment of our new CEO and Secretary, Robert C.
Moscato, Jr. resigned from such positions, and also from his position as a member of the Board of Directors of the Company effective
immediately.
The
Employment Agreement provides for a three-year term and a base salary of $360,000 per year, which is subject to review and adjustment
by the Board from time to time. Our new CEO shall be eligible for an annual discretionary cash bonus with a target of 50% of her
base salary, subject to her achievement of any applicable performance targets and goals established by the Board. We granted
to our new CEO options to purchase an aggregate of 1,500,000 shares of our common stock, of which 400,000 are exercisable immediately,
600,000 vest on a monthly basis over a two year period beginning on April 4, 2020, and 500,000 vest upon the achievement of certain
product sales and stock price targets.