UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
x |
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016.
¨ |
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. |
For the transition period from to .
Commission file number: 001-35347
Clovis Oncology, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware |
|
90-0475355 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
5500 Flatiron Parkway, Suite 100 Boulder, Colorado |
|
80301 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
(303) 625-5000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Not Applicable
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer |
x |
|
Accelerated filer |
o |
Non-accelerated filer |
o |
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Smaller reporting company |
o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x
The number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, as of April 29, 2016 was 38,385,660.
FORM 10-Q
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
3 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 1. |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations — for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss — for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets — as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows — for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 2. |
|
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 3. |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 4. |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
28 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 1. |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 1A. |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 2. |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 3. |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 4. |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 5. |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 6. |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
52 |
|
2
CLOVIS ONCOLOGY, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License and milestone revenue |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development |
|
|
74,608 |
|
|
|
56,750 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
9,827 |
|
|
|
6,751 |
|
Change in fair value of contingent purchase consideration |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
724 |
|
Total expenses |
|
|
84,951 |
|
|
|
64,225 |
|
Operating loss |
|
|
(84,951 |
) |
|
|
(64,225 |
) |
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(2,104 |
) |
|
|
(2,075 |
) |
Foreign currency gains (losses) |
|
|
(551 |
) |
|
|
3,247 |
|
Other income |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
(2,630 |
) |
|
|
1,183 |
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(87,581 |
) |
|
|
(63,042 |
) |
Income tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
4,181 |
|
|
|
(102 |
) |
Net loss |
|
$ |
(83,400 |
) |
|
$ |
(63,144 |
) |
Basic and diluted net loss per common share |
|
$ |
(2.17 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.86 |
) |
Basic and diluted weighted-average common shares outstanding |
|
|
38,360 |
|
|
|
34,011 |
|
See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements.
3
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Net loss |
|
$ |
(83,400 |
) |
|
$ |
(63,144 |
) |
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of tax |
|
|
3,513 |
|
|
|
(25,915 |
) |
Net unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities, net of tax |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
3,743 |
|
|
|
(25,827 |
) |
Comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(79,657 |
) |
|
$ |
(88,971 |
) |
See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except for share amounts)
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
220,373 |
|
|
$ |
278,756 |
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
225,117 |
|
|
|
249,832 |
|
Prepaid research and development expenses |
|
|
10,391 |
|
|
|
3,377 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
8,090 |
|
|
|
7,736 |
|
Total current assets |
|
|
463,971 |
|
|
|
539,701 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
5,108 |
|
|
|
4,946 |
|
Intangible assets |
|
|
105,689 |
|
|
|
101,500 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
61,775 |
|
|
|
59,327 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
8,031 |
|
|
|
7,912 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
644,574 |
|
|
$ |
713,386 |
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
14,100 |
|
|
$ |
11,260 |
|
Accrued research and development expenses |
|
|
52,642 |
|
|
|
53,011 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
7,199 |
|
|
|
11,305 |
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
73,941 |
|
|
|
75,576 |
|
Contingent purchase consideration |
|
|
25,710 |
|
|
|
24,661 |
|
Deferred income taxes, net |
|
|
30,476 |
|
|
|
31,133 |
|
Convertible senior notes |
|
|
280,192 |
|
|
|
279,885 |
|
Deferred rent, long-term |
|
|
1,592 |
|
|
|
1,481 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
411,911 |
|
|
|
412,736 |
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders' equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share; 10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value per share, 100,000,000 shares authorized at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015; 38,364,454 and 38,359,454 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
1,141,648 |
|
|
|
1,129,978 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(43,717 |
) |
|
|
(47,460 |
) |
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(865,306 |
) |
|
|
(781,906 |
) |
Total stockholders' equity |
|
|
232,663 |
|
|
|
300,650 |
|
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity |
|
$ |
644,574 |
|
|
$ |
713,386 |
|
See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements.
5
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(83,400 |
) |
|
$ |
(63,144 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share-based compensation expense |
|
|
10,965 |
|
|
|
8,682 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Amortization of premiums and discounts on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs |
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
Change in fair value of contingent purchase consideration |
|
|
1,049 |
|
|
|
(2,794 |
) |
Loss on disposal of property and equipment |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(4,145 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid and accrued research and development expenses |
|
|
(7,601 |
) |
|
|
7,776 |
|
Other operating assets |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(805 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
2,682 |
|
|
|
4,228 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
(3,984 |
) |
|
|
(3,286 |
) |
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
|
(83,738 |
) |
|
|
(48,405 |
) |
Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(604 |
) |
|
|
(816 |
) |
Purchases of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(142,216 |
) |
Maturities of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
24,396 |
|
|
|
(143,032 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the exercise of stock options and employee stock purchases |
|
|
705 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
705 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
(891 |
) |
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(58,383 |
) |
|
|
(191,135 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
278,756 |
|
|
|
482,677 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
220,373 |
|
|
$ |
291,542 |
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest |
|
$ |
3,594 |
|
|
$ |
3,714 |
|
See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements.
6
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. Nature of Business and Basis of Presentation
Clovis Oncology, Inc. (the “Company”) is a biopharmaceutical company focused on acquiring, developing and commercializing innovative anti-cancer agents in the United States, Europe and other international markets. The Company has and intends to continue to license or acquire rights to oncology compounds in all stages of development. In exchange for the right to develop and commercialize these compounds, the Company generally expects to provide the licensor with a combination of upfront payments, milestone payments and royalties on future sales. In addition, the Company generally expects to assume the responsibility for future drug development and commercialization costs. The Company currently operates in one segment. Since inception, the Company’s operations have consisted primarily of developing in-licensed compounds, evaluating new product acquisition candidates and general corporate activities.
In July 2015, the Company submitted a New Drug Application (“NDA”) regulatory filing and a Marketing Authorization Application (“MAA”) for rociletinib to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), respectively. Both the FDA and EMA subsequently accepted the respective filings.
On April 12, 2016, the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (“ODAC”) met to discuss approval of the NDA for rociletinib. The ODAC reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products used in the treatment of cancer and makes recommendations to the FDA. The Committee recommended that the FDA wait to see results from TIGER-3, the Company’s ongoing Phase III, randomized, controlled trial of rociletinib, before making a decision on approval of the treatment.
On May 5, 2016, the Company announced that it was notified by the FDA that it could expect to receive a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) for the rociletinib NDA on or before the Prescription Drug User Fee Act date of June 28, 2016. The FDA issues a CRL to indicate that their review of an application is complete and that the application is not ready for approval. In anticipation of receiving the CRL, the Company terminated enrollment in all ongoing sponsored clinical studies of rociletinib. The Company will continue to provide drug to patients whose clinicians recommend continuing rociletinib therapy. In addition, the Company has withdrawn its MAA for rociletinib currently on file with the EMA.
Basis of Presentation
All financial information presented includes the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
The unaudited financial statements of Clovis Oncology, Inc. included herein reflect all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, which in the opinion of management are necessary to fairly state our financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented. Interim results may not be indicative of the results that may be expected for the full year. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in audited financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto which are included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 for a broader discussion of our business and the opportunities and risks inherent in such business.
Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to prior year amounts to conform to the current year presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on the Company’s previously reported results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
7
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, expenses and revenue and related disclosures. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates, including estimates related to contingent purchase consideration, the allocation of purchase consideration, intangible asset impairment, clinical trial accruals and share-based compensation expense. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and other market-specific or other relevant assumptions that it believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from those estimates or assumptions.
Liquidity
The Company has incurred significant net losses since inception and has relied on its ability to fund its operations through debt and equity financings. Management expects operating losses and negative cash flows to continue for the foreseeable future. As the Company continues to incur losses, transition to profitability is dependent upon the successful development, approval and commercialization of its product candidates and achieving a level of revenues adequate to support the Company’s cost structure. The Company may never achieve profitability, and unless or until it does, the Company will continue to need to raise additional cash.
Management intends to fund future operations through additional private or public debt or equity offerings and may seek additional capital through arrangements with strategic partners or from other sources. Based on current estimates, management believes that existing working capital at March 31, 2016 is sufficient to meet the cash requirements to fund planned operations through at least the next 12 months, although there can be no assurance that this can, in fact, be accomplished.
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The Company’s significant accounting policies are described in Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In March 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” ASU No. 2016-09 requires all income tax effects of awards to be recognized in the income statement when the awards vest or are settled. The guidance also requires the presentation of excess tax benefits as an operating activity on the statement of cash flows rather than as a financing activity. This update is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted. Amendments related to the timing of when excess tax benefits are recognized should be applied using a modified retrospective transition method. An entity may elect to apply the amendments related to the presentation of excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows using either a prospective transition method or a retrospective transition method. The Company is currently evaluating its planned method of adoption and the impact the standard may have on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
3. EOS Acquisition
On November 19, 2013, the Company acquired all of the outstanding common and preferred stock of Ethical Oncology Science, S.p.A. (“EOS”) (now known as Clovis Oncology Italy S.r.l.). The Company paid $11.8 million in cash and issued $173.7 million of common stock at the acquisition date and may make additional future cash payments if certain lucitanib regulatory and sales milestones are achieved. The potential contingent milestone payments range from a zero payment, which assumes lucitanib fails to achieve any of the regulatory milestones, to approximately $195.7 million ($65.0 million and €115.0 million) if all regulatory and sales milestones are met, utilizing the translation rate at March 31, 2016. The Company recorded a liability for the estimated fair value of these payments, which totaled $25.7 million and $24.7 million at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.
4. Financial Instruments and Fair Value Measurements
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Available-for-Sale Securities
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with original maturities at the date of purchase of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents include bank demand deposits and money market funds that invest primarily in certificate of deposits, commercial paper and U.S. government and U.S. government agency obligations.
8
Marketable securities are considered to be available-for-sale securities and consist of U.S. Treasury securities. Available-for-sale securities are reported at fair value on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and unrealized gains and losses are included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Realized gains and losses, amortization of premiums and discounts and interest and dividends earned are included in other income (expense) on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The cost of investments for purposes of computing realized and unrealized gains and losses is based on the specific identification method. Investments with maturities beyond one year are classified as short-term based on management’s intent to fund current operations with these securities or to make them available for current operations.
A decline in the market value of a security below its cost that is deemed to be other than temporary is charged to earnings and results in the establishment of a new cost basis for the security. Factors evaluated to determine if an investment is other-than-temporarily impaired include significant deterioration in earnings performance, credit rating, asset quality or business prospects of the issuer; adverse changes in the general market conditions in which the issuer operates; and the Company’s intent and ability to hold the security until an anticipated recovery in value occurs.
Fair Value Measurements
Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (at exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value include:
Level 1: |
|
Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of money market investments. The Company does not have Level 1 liabilities. |
|
|
|
Level 2: |
|
Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. The Company’s Level 2 assets consist of U.S. treasury securities. The Company does not have Level 2 liabilities. |
|
|
|
Level 3: |
|
Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity. The Company does not have Level 3 assets. The contingent purchase consideration related to the undeveloped lucitanib product rights acquired with the purchase of EOS is a Level 3 liability. The fair value of this liability is based on unobservable inputs and includes valuations for which there is little, if any, market activity. See Note 3 of the Company’s 2015 Form 10-K for further discussion of the unobservable inputs and valuation techniques related to the contingent purchase consideration liability. |
The following table identifies the Company’s assets and liabilities that were measured at fair value on a recurring basis (in thousands):
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
||||
March 31, 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market |
|
$ |
201,467 |
|
|
$ |
201,467 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
225,117 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
225,117 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total assets at fair value |
|
$ |
426,584 |
|
|
$ |
201,467 |
|
|
$ |
225,117 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent purchase consideration |
|
$ |
25,710 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
25,710 |
|
Total liabilities at fair value |
|
$ |
25,710 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
25,710 |
|
December 31, 2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market |
|
$ |
251,037 |
|
|
$ |
251,037 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
249,832 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
249,832 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total assets at fair value |
|
$ |
500,869 |
|
|
$ |
251,037 |
|
|
$ |
249,832 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent purchase consideration |
|
$ |
24,661 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
24,661 |
|
Total liabilities at fair value |
|
$ |
24,661 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
24,661 |
|
9
There were no transfers between the Level 1 and Level 2 categories or into or out of the Level 3 category during the three months ended March 31, 2016.
The following table rolls forward the fair value of Level 3 instruments (significant unobservable inputs) (in thousands):
|
|
For the Three |
|
|
|
|
Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2016 |
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
24,661 |
|
Change in fair value |
|
|
516 |
|
Change in foreign currency gains and losses |
|
|
533 |
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
25,710 |
|
The change in the fair value of Level 3 instruments is included in change in fair value of contingent purchase consideration and foreign currency gains (losses) for changes in the foreign currency translation rate on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Financial instruments not recorded at fair value include the Company’s convertible senior notes. At March 31, 2016, the carrying amount of the convertible senior notes was $287.5 million, which represents the aggregate principal amount, and the fair value was $195.5 million. The fair value was determined using Level 2 inputs based on the indicative pricing published by certain investment banks or trading levels of the Notes, which are not listed on any securities exchange or quoted on an inter-dealer automated quotation system. See Note 9 for discussion of the convertible senior notes.
5. Available-for-Sale Securities
As of March 31, 2016, available-for-sale securities consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|||
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
||||
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Value |
|
||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
225,135 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
|
$ |
225,117 |
|
As of December 31, 2015, available-for-sale securities consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|||
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
||||
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Value |
|
||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
250,215 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
(383 |
) |
|
$ |
249,832 |
|
As of March 31, 2016, the fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale securities that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for less than 12 months were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
Gross |
|
||
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
||
|
|
Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
125,053 |
|
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
As of March 31, 2016, certain of the Company’s investments have been in an unrealized loss position for between five and six months. Based upon our evaluation of all relevant factors, we believe that the decline in fair value of securities held at March 31, 2016 below cost is temporary, and we intend to retain our investment in these securities for a sufficient period of time to allow for recovery of the fair value.
10
As of December 31, 2015, the fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale securities that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for less than 12 months were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
Gross |
|
||
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
||
|
|
Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
249,832 |
|
|
$ |
(383 |
) |
As of March 31, 2016, the amortized cost and fair value of available-for-sale securities by contractual maturity were (in thousands):
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Fair |
|
||
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Value |
|
||
Due in one year or less |
|
$ |
225,135 |
|
|
$ |
225,117 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
225,135 |
|
|
$ |
225,117 |
|
6. Other Current Assets
Other current assets were comprised of the following (in thousands):
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Receivable from partners |
|
$ |
3,671 |
|
|
$ |
3,241 |
|
Receivable from landlord |
|
|
1,277 |
|
|
|
1,153 |
|
Prepaid expenses - other |
|
|
1,195 |
|
|
|
1,023 |
|
Prepaid insurance |
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
1,231 |
|
Receivable - other |
|
|
915 |
|
|
|
889 |
|
Other |
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
8,090 |
|
|
$ |
7,736 |
|
7. Intangible Assets and Goodwill
Intangible acquired in-process research and development (“IPR&D”) assets and goodwill were established as part of the purchase accounting of EOS (see Note 3) and consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
IPR&D assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
101,500 |
|
|
$ |
212,900 |
|
Impairment of intangible asset (a) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(89,557 |
) |
Change in foreign currency gains (losses) |
|
|
4,189 |
|
|
|
(21,843 |
) |
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
105,689 |
|
|
$ |
101,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
59,327 |
|
|
$ |
66,055 |
|
Change in foreign currency gains (losses) |
|
|
2,448 |
|
|
|
(6,728 |
) |
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
61,775 |
|
|
$ |
59,327 |
|
|
(a) |
During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company recorded an $89.6 million impairment charge due to the Company’s and its development partner’s decision to terminate the development of lucitanib for lung cancer, as well as updates to the probability-weighted discounted cash flow assumptions for the breast cancer indication. |
Recurring amortization of the IPR&D assets will commence upon completion of the related research and development activities. IPR&D intangible assets are evaluated for impairment at least annually in the fourth quarter or more frequently if impairment indicators exist and any reduction in fair value would be recorded as impairment of intangible asset on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
11
As part of the acquisition of EOS, the Company recorded a deferred tax liability to recognize the difference between the book and tax basis of the assets and liabilities acquired. During the first quarter of 2016, the Company updated the annual effective tax rate to reflect a reduction in the statutory rate of the foreign jurisdiction, resulting in the recognition of a $3.6 million income tax benefit.
8. Other Accrued Expenses
Other accrued expenses were comprised of the following (in thousands):
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Accrued personnel costs |
|
$ |
5,829 |
|
|
$ |
8,250 |
|
Accrued expenses - other |
|
|
1,071 |
|
|
|
959 |
|
Accrued interest payable |
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
2,096 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
7,199 |
|
|
$ |
11,305 |
|
9. Convertible Senior Notes
On September 9, 2014, we completed a private placement of $287.5 million aggregate principal amount of 2.5% convertible senior notes due 2021 (the “Notes”) resulting in net proceeds to the Company of $278.3 million after deducting offering expenses. In accordance with the accounting guidance, the conversion feature did not meet the criteria for bifurcation, and the entire principal amount was recorded as a long-term liability on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The Notes are governed by the terms of the indenture between the Company, as issuer, and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as trustee. The Notes are senior unsecured obligations and bear interest at a rate of 2.5% per year, payable semi-annually in arrears on March 15 and September 15 of each year. The Notes will mature on September 15, 2021, unless earlier converted, redeemed or repurchased.
Holders may convert all or any portion of the Notes at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date. Upon conversion, the holders will receive shares of our common stock at an initial conversion rate of 16.1616 shares per $1,000 in principal amount of Notes, equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $61.88 per share. The conversion rate is subject to adjustment upon the occurrence of certain events described in the indenture, but will not be adjusted for any accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, following certain corporate events that occur prior to the maturity date or upon our issuance of a notice of redemption, we will increase the conversion rate for holders who elect to convert the Notes in connection with such a corporate event or during the related redemption period in certain circumstances.
On or after September 15, 2018, we may redeem the Notes, at our option, in whole or in part, if the last reported sale price of our common stock has been at least 150% of the conversion price then in effect for at least 20 trading days (whether or not consecutive) during any 30 consecutive trading day period ending not more than two trading days preceding the date on which we provide written notice of redemption at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes to be redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the redemption date. No sinking fund is provided for the Notes.
If we undergo a fundamental change, as defined in the indenture, prior to the maturity date of the Notes, holders may require us to repurchase for cash all or any portion of the Notes at a fundamental change repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the fundamental change repurchase date.
The Notes rank senior in right of payment to any of our indebtedness that is expressly subordinated in right of payment to the Notes; equal in right of payment to all of our liabilities that are not so subordinated; effectively junior in right of payment to any secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness; and structurally junior to all indebtedness and other liabilities (including trade payables) of our subsidiaries.
In connection with the issuance of the Notes, the Company incurred $9.2 million of debt issuance costs. The debt issuance costs are presented as a deduction from convertible senior notes on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and are amortized as interest expense over the expected life of the Notes using the effective interest method. The Company determined the expected life of the debt was equal to the seven-year term of the Notes. As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the balance of unamortized debt issuance costs was $7.3 million and $7.6 million, respectively.
12
The following table sets forth total interest expense recognized related to the Notes during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Contractual interest expense |
|
$ |
1,797 |
|
|
$ |
1,777 |
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs |
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
Total interest expense |
|
$ |
2,104 |
|
|
$ |
2,075 |
|
10. Stockholders’ Equity
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) consists of changes in foreign currency translation adjustments, which includes changes in a subsidiary’s functional currency, and unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities.
The accumulated balances related to each component of other comprehensive income (loss) are summarized as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
||
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Other |
|
|||
|
|
Translation |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|||
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
(Losses) |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
|||
Balance December 31, 2014 |
|
$ |
(24,448 |
) |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
(24,448 |
) |
Period change |
|
|
(22,629 |
) |
|
|
(383 |
) |
|
|
(23,012 |
) |
Balance December 31, 2015 |
|
|
(47,077 |
) |
|
|
(383 |
) |
|
|
(47,460 |
) |
Period change |
|
|
5,580 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
5,945 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
(2,067 |
) |
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
(2,202 |
) |
Balance March 31, 2016 |
|
$ |
(43,564 |
) |
|
$ |
(153 |
) |
|
$ |
(43,717 |
) |
The period change between March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 was primarily due to the currency translation of the IPR&D intangible assets, goodwill and deferred income taxes associated with the acquisition of EOS (see Note 3 and Note 7).
11. Share-Based Compensation
Share-based compensation expense for all equity based programs, including stock options, restricted stock units and the employee stock purchase plan, for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was recognized in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Research and development |
|
$ |
7,309 |
|
|
$ |
5,404 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
3,278 |
|
Total share-based compensation expense |
|
$ |
10,965 |
|
|
$ |
8,682 |
|
The Company did not recognize a tax benefit related to share-based compensation expense during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, as the Company maintains net operating loss carryforwards and has established a valuation allowance against the entire net deferred tax asset as of March 31, 2016.
13
The following table summarizes the activity relating to the Company’s options to purchase common stock for the three months ended March 31, 2016:
|
|
Number of Options |
|
|
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
|
|
Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term (Years) |
|
|
Aggregate Intrinsic Value (Thousands) |
|
||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2015 |
|
|
5,360,257 |
|
|
$ |
51.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
661,640 |
|
|
|
21.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(5,000 |
) |
|
|
11.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(378,852 |
) |
|
|
67.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2016 (a) |
|
|
5,638,045 |
|
|
$ |
46.98 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
$ |
7,440 |
|
Vested and expected to vest at March 31, 2016 |
|
|
5,346,922 |
|
|
$ |
46.43 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
$ |
7,440 |
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2016 |
|
|
2,845,256 |
|
|
$ |
36.04 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
$ |
7,438 |
|
|
(a) |
Includes 85,000 performance-based stock options granted to executives of the Company in the first quarter of 2015. Fifty-percent of the grant vests contingent on approval by the FDA to commercially distribute, sell or market rociletinib and fifty-percent of the grant vests contingent on approval by the FDA to commercially distribute, sell or market rucaparib. Stock compensation expense will be recognized when the condition for vesting is probable of being met. |
The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the pretax intrinsic value, based on our closing stock price of $19.20 as of March 31, 2016, which would have been received by the option holders had all option holders with in-the-money options exercised their options as of that date.
The following table summarizes information about our stock options as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015:
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Weighted-average grant date fair value per share |
|
$ |
15.24 |
|
|
$ |
49.75 |
|
Intrinsic value of options exercised |
|
$ |
46,400 |
|
|
$ |
5,087 |
|
Cash received from stock option exercises |
|
$ |
55,100 |
|
|
$ |
1,193 |
|
As of March 31, 2016, the unrecognized share-based compensation expense related to unvested options, adjusted for expected forfeitures, was $90.7 million and the estimated weighted-average remaining vesting period was 2.5 years.
During the first quarter of 2016, the Company issued restricted stock units (“RSUs”) to certain employees under the 2011 Stock Incentive Plan. The RSUs vest over either a two-year period or over a four-year period and are payable in shares of the Company’s common stock at the end of the vesting period. RSUs are measured based on the fair value of the underlying stock on the grant date. Shares issued on the vesting dates are net of the minimum statutory tax to be paid by the Company on behalf of its employees. As a result, the actual number of shares issued will be lower than the actual number of RSUs vested.
The following table summarizes the activity relating to the Company’s unvested RSUs for the three months ended March 31, 2016:
|
|
Number of Units |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value |
|
||
Unvested as of December 31, 2015 |
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Granted |
|
|
146,316 |
|
|
|
19.37 |
|
Vested |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(4,797 |
) |
|
|
19.37 |
|
Unvested as of March 31, 2016 |
|
|
141,519 |
|
|
$ |
19.37 |
|
Expected to vest after March 31, 2016 |
|
|
119,521 |
|
|
$ |
19.37 |
|
As of March 31, 2016, the unrecognized share-based compensation expense related to unvested RSUs, adjusted for expected forfeitures, was $2.3 million and the estimated weighted-average remaining vesting period was 2.5 years.
14
Rucaparib
In June 2011, the Company entered into a worldwide license agreement with Pfizer Inc. to acquire exclusive development and commercialization rights to rucaparib. This drug candidate is a small molecule inhibitor of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase, which the Company is developing for the treatment of selected solid tumors. Under the terms of the license agreement, the Company made a $7.0 million upfront payment to Pfizer. In April 2014, the Company initiated a pivotal registration study for rucaparib, which resulted in a $0.4 million milestone payment to Pfizer as required by the license agreement. This payment was recognized as acquired in-process research and development expense.
The Company is responsible for all development and commercialization costs of rucaparib. When and if commercial sales of rucaparib begin, we will pay Pfizer tiered royalties on our net sales. In addition, Pfizer is eligible to receive up to $258.5 million of further payments, in aggregate, if certain development, regulatory and sales milestones are achieved, including $20.75 million associated with the first approval of an NDA by the FDA.
Rociletinib
In May 2010, we entered into an exclusive worldwide license agreement with Avila Therapeutics, Inc. (now Celgene Avilomics Research, Inc., part of Celgene Corporation (“Celgene”)) to discover, develop and commercialize a covalent inhibitor of mutant forms of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene product. As a result of the collaboration contemplated by the agreement, rociletinib was identified as the lead inhibitor candidate, which we are developing under the terms of the license agreement. We are responsible for all non-clinical, clinical, regulatory and other activities necessary to develop and commercialize rociletinib.
We made an upfront payment of $2.0 million upon execution of the license agreement, a $4.0 million milestone payment in the first quarter of 2012 upon acceptance by the FDA of our Investigational New Drug application for rociletinib and a $5.0 million milestone payment in the first quarter of 2014 upon initiation of the Phase II study for rociletinib. In the third quarter of 2015, we made milestone payments totaling $12.0 million upon acceptance of the NDA and MAA for rociletinib by the FDA and EMA, respectively. We recognized all payments prior to commercial approval as acquired in-process research and development expense.
We are obligated to pay royalties on net sales of rociletinib based on the volume of annual net sales achieved. The Company is required to pay up to an additional aggregate of $98.0 million in development and regulatory milestone payments if certain clinical study objectives and regulatory filings, acceptances and approvals are achieved, including $15.0 million upon the first approval of an NDA by the FDA and $15.0 million upon the first approval of an MAA by the EMA. In addition, the Company is required to pay up to an aggregate of $120.0 million in sales milestone payments if certain annual sales targets are achieved.
Lucitanib
In connection with its acquisition of EOS (see Note 3), the Company gained rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib, an oral, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor. As further described below, EOS licensed the worldwide rights, excluding China, to develop and commercialize lucitanib from Advenchen Laboratories LLC (“Advenchen”). Subsequently, rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib in markets outside the U.S. and Japan were sublicensed by EOS to Les Laboratoires Servier (“Servier”) in exchange for upfront milestone fees, royalties on sales of lucitanib in the sublicensed territories and research and development funding commitments.
In October 2008, EOS entered into an exclusive license agreement with Advenchen to develop and commercialize lucitanib on a global basis, excluding China. The Company is obligated to pay Advenchen royalties on net sales of lucitanib based on the volume of annual net sales achieved. In addition, the Company is obligated to pay to Advenchen 25% of any consideration, excluding royalties, received pursuant to any sublicense agreements for lucitanib, including the agreement with Servier. In the first quarter of 2014, the Company recognized acquired in-process research and development expense of $3.4 million, which represents 25% of the sublicense agreement consideration of $13.6 million received from Servier upon the end of opposition and appeal of the lucitanib patent by the European Patent Office.
15
In September 2012, EOS entered into a collaboration and license agreement with Servier whereby EOS sublicensed to Servier exclusive rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib in all countries outside of the U.S., Japan and China. In exchange for these rights, EOS received an upfront payment of €45.0 million and is entitled to receive additional payments upon achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial milestones up to €90.0 million in the aggregate. In addition, the Company is entitled to receive sales milestone payments if specified annual sales targets for lucitanib are met, which, in the aggregate, could total €250.0 million. The Company is also entitled to receive royalties on sales of lucitanib by Servier.
The development, regulatory and commercial milestones represent non-refundable amounts that would be paid by Servier to the Company if certain milestones are achieved in the future. These milestones, if achieved, are substantive as they relate solely to past performance, are commensurate with estimated enhancement of value associated with the achievement of each milestone as a result of the Company's performance, which are reasonable relative to the other deliverables and terms of the arrangement, and are unrelated to the delivery of any further elements under the arrangement.
The Company and Servier are developing lucitanib pursuant to a development plan agreed to between the parties. Servier is responsible for all of the initial global development costs under the agreed upon plan up to €80.0 million. Cumulative global development costs, if any, in excess of €80.0 million will be shared equally between the Company and Servier. Based on current estimates, we expect that Servier’s €80.0 million funding commitment will be fulfilled in early 2017, and thereafter, we will share with Servier in future development costs pursuant to a mutually agreed upon global development plan. Reimbursements are recorded as a reduction to research and development expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Company recorded a $3.7 million and $3.2 million receivable at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively, for the reimbursable development costs incurred under the global development plan, which is included in other current assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. For both the three months ending March 31, 2016 and 2015, we incurred $3.6 million in research and development costs and recorded reductions in research and development expense of $3.6 million and $2.7 million, respectively, for reimbursable development costs due from Servier.
13. Net Loss Per Common Share
Basic net loss per share is calculated by dividing net loss by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted-average number of common share equivalents outstanding using the treasury-stock method for the stock options and RSUs and the if-converted method for the Notes. As a result of our net losses for the periods presented, all potentially dilutive common share equivalents were considered anti-dilutive and were excluded from the computation of diluted net loss per share.
The shares outstanding at the end of the respective periods presented in the table below were excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share due to their anti-dilutive effect (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
Common shares under option |
|
|
539 |
|
|
|
4,005 |
|
Convertible senior notes |
|
|
4,646 |
|
|
|
4,646 |
|
Total potential dilutive shares |
|
|
5,185 |
|
|
|
8,651 |
|
14. Commitments and Contingencies
Royalty and License Fee Commitments
The Company has entered into certain license agreements, as identified in Note 12, with third parties that include the payment of development and regulatory milestones, as well as royalty payments, upon the achievement of pre-established development, regulatory and commercial targets. The Company’s payment obligation related to these license agreements is contingent upon the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of the licensed products. Due to the nature of these arrangements, the future potential payments are inherently uncertain, and accordingly, no amounts have been recorded in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.
16
Development and Manufacturing Agreement Commitments
In February 2013, the Company entered into a development and manufacturing agreement with a third-party supplier for the production of the active ingredient for rucaparib. Under the Development and Manufacturing Agreement, the Company will provide the third-party supplier a rolling 24-month forecast that will be updated by the Company on a quarterly basis. The Company is obligated to order the quantity specified in the first 12 months of any forecast. As of March 31, 2016, $16.6 million of purchase commitments exist under this agreement.
Legal Proceedings
The Company and certain of its officers were named as defendants in several lawsuits, as described below. We cannot reasonably predict the outcome of these legal proceedings, nor can we estimate the amount of loss or range of loss, if any, that may result. An adverse outcome in these proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
On November 19, 2015, Steve Kimbro, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a purported class action complaint (the “Kimbro Complaint”) against Clovis and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The Kimbro Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased Clovis stock between October 31, 2013 and November 15, 2015. The Kimbro Complaint generally alleges that Clovis and certain of its officers violated federal securities laws by making allegedly false and misleading statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the potential for market success of rociletinib. The Kimbro Complaint seeks unspecified damages.
Also on November 19, 2015, a second purported shareholder class action complaint was filed by Sonny P. Medina, another purported Clovis shareholder, containing similar allegations to those set forth in the Kimbro Complaint, also in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (the “Medina Complaint”). The Medina Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased Clovis stock between May 20, 2014 and November 13, 2015. On November 20, 2015, a third complaint was filed by John Moran in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Moran Complaint”). The Moran Complaint contains similar allegations to those asserted in the Kimbro and Medina Complaints and purports to be asserted on behalf of a plaintiff class who purchased Clovis stock between October 31, 2013 and November 13, 2015.
On December 14, 2015, Ralph P. Rocco, a fourth purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (the “Rocco Complaint”). The Rocco Complaint contains similar allegations to those set forth in the previous complaints and purports to be asserted on behalf of a plaintiff class who purchased Clovis stock between October 31, 2013 and November 15, 2015.
On January 19, 2016, a number of motions were filed in both the District of Colorado and the Northern District of California seeking to consolidate the shareholder class actions into one matter and for appointment of a lead plaintiff. All lead plaintiff movants other than M. Arkin (1999) LTD and Arkin Communications LTD (the “Arkin Plaintiffs”) subsequently filed notices of non-opposition to the Arkin Plaintiffs’ application.
On February 2, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiffs filed a motion to transfer the Moran Complaint to the District of Colorado (the “Motion to Transfer”). Also on February 2, 2016, the defendants filed a statement in the Northern District of California supporting the consolidation of all actions in a single court, the District of Colorado. On February 3, 2016, the Northern District of California court denied without prejudice the lead plaintiff motions filed in that court pending a decision on the Motion to Transfer.
On February 16, 2016, the defendants filed a memorandum in support of the Motion to Transfer, and plaintiff Moran filed a notice of non-opposition to the Motion to Transfer. On February 17, 2016, the Northern District of California court granted the Motion to Transfer.
On February 18, 2016, the Medina court issued an opinion and order addressing the various motions for consolidation and appointment of lead plaintiff and lead counsel in the District of Colorado actions. By this ruling, the court consolidated the Medina, Kimbro and Rocco actions into a single proceeding. The court also appointed the Arkin Plaintiffs as the lead plaintiffs and Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman as lead counsel for the putative class.
17
On April 1, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiffs and the defendants filed a stipulated motion to set the schedule for the filing of a consolidated complaint in the Medina, Kimbro and Rocco actions (the “Consolidated Complaint”) and the responses thereto, including the defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint (the “Motion to Dismiss”), and to stay discovery and related proceedings until the District of Colorado issues a decision on the Motion to Dismiss. The stipulated motion was entered by the District of Colorado on April 4, 2016. Subject to a further agreed-upon extension by the parties, the Consolidated Complaint was filed on May 6, 2016, while the Motion to Dismiss is due on July 11, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiff’s opposition on August 19, 2016 and the defendants’ reply on September 7, 2016. On April 15, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiffs and the defendants filed a stipulated motion to consolidate the Moran action, now pending in the District of Colorado, with the Medina, Kimbro and Rocco actions.
The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the Kimbro, Medina, Moran and Rocco Complaints, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful.
On December 30, 2015, Jamie McCall, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a shareholder derivative complaint (the “McCall Complaint”) against certain officers and directors of Clovis in the Colorado District Court, County of Boulder. The McCall Complaint generally alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed to Clovis by participating in misrepresentation of the Company’s business operations and prospects. The McCall Complaint also alleges claims for abuse of control, gross mismanagement and unjust enrichment. The McCall Complaint seeks, among other things, an award of money damages, declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the alleged fiduciary breaches and other forms of equitable relief. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the McCall Complaint, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful.
On January 22, 2016, the Electrical Workers Local #357 Pension and Health & Welfare Trusts, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a purported class action complaint (the “Electrical Workers Complaint”) against Clovis and certain of its officers, directors, investors and underwriters in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo. The Electrical Workers Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased stock in Clovis’ July 8, 2015 follow-on offering. The Electrical Workers Complaint generally alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Act because the offering documents for the July 8, 2015 follow-on offering contained allegedly false and misleading statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the potential for market success of rociletinib. The Electrical Workers Complaint seeks unspecified damages.
On February 25, 2016, the defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and thereafter moved to transfer the case to the District of Colorado (“Motion to Transfer”). On March 2, 2016, the plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case to San Mateo County Superior Court (“Motion to Remand”). Following briefing on the Motion to Transfer and the Motion to Remand, the Northern District of California held a hearing on April 18, 2016 concerning the Motion to Remand, at the conclusion of which the court granted to the Motion to Remand. We expect that the court will deny the Motion to Transfer as moot. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the Electrical Workers Complaint, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful.
On February 19, 2016, Maris Sanchez, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a shareholder derivative complaint (the “Sanchez Complaint”) against certain officers and directors of Clovis in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The Sanchez Complaint generally alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed to Clovis by participating in misrepresentation of the Company’s business operations and prospects. The Sanchez Complaint also alleged claims for abuse of control and gross mismanagement. The Sanchez Complaint sought, among other things, an award of money damages. On March 11, 2016, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the Sanchez Complaint without prejudice. On March 14, 2016, the Sanchez action was terminated by the District of Colorado.
The Company has received requests for information from governmental agencies relating to the Company’s regulatory update announcement in November 2015 that the FDA requested additional clinical data on the efficacy and safety of rociletinib. The Company is cooperating with the inquiries.
15. Subsequent Events
The Company evaluated events up to the filing date of these interim financial statements and determined that no subsequent activity required disclosure.
18
Forward-Looking Information
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and the information incorporated herein by reference includes statements that are, or may be deemed, “forward-looking statements.” In some cases, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms “believes,” “estimates,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “intends,” “may,” “could,” “might,” “will,” “should,” “approximately” or, in each case, their negative or other variations thereon or comparable terminology, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. They appear in a number of places throughout this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and include statements regarding our intentions, beliefs, projections, outlook, analyses or current expectations concerning, among other things, our ongoing and planned non-clinical studies and clinical trials, the timing of and our ability to make regulatory filings and obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for our product candidates, the degree of clinical utility of our products, particularly in specific patient populations, expectations regarding clinical trial data, our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, prospects, growth and strategies, the industry in which we operate and the trends that may affect the industry or us.
By their nature, forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties because they relate to events, competitive dynamics and industry change and depend on the economic circumstances that may or may not occur in the future or may occur on longer or shorter timelines than anticipated. We caution you that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and that our actual results of operations, financial condition and liquidity and the development of the industry in which we operate may differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained herein.
Any forward-looking statements that we make in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q speak only as of the date of such statement, and we undertake no obligation to update such statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
You should also read carefully the factors described in the “Risk Factors” section of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to better understand the risks and uncertainties inherent in our business and underlying any forward-looking statements. You are advised, however, to consult any further disclosures we make on related subjects in our other reports filed with the SEC and on our website.
Overview
We are a biopharmaceutical company focused on acquiring, developing and commercializing innovative anti-cancer agents in the United States, Europe and other international markets. We generally target our development programs for the treatment of specific subsets of cancer populations and seek to simultaneously develop, with partners, companion diagnostics that direct our product candidates to the patients that are most likely to benefit from their use. We are currently developing two product candidates:
|
· |
Rucaparib, an oral inhibitor of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase that is currently in advanced clinical development for the treatment of ovarian cancer. We filed the first component of our rolling New Drug Application (“NDA”) with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for potential accelerated approval of rucaparib in the the U.S., and we intend to complete the NDA submission by the second quarter of 2016. We intend to submit our first E.U. regulatory application in the fourth quarter of 2016. |
|
· |
Lucitanib, an oral inhibitor of the tyrosine kinase activity of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR) 1-3, platelet-derived growth factor receptors (PDGFR) alpha and beta and fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) 1-3, which is in Phase II development for the treatment of breast cancer. |
In addition, we have a third product candidate, rociletinib. Rociletinib is an oral epidermal growth factor receptor (“EGFR”), mutant-selective covalent inhibitor for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in patients with activating EGFR mutations, as well as the dominant resistance mutation, T790M. On May 5, 2016, the Company announced that it was notified by the FDA that it could expect to receive a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) for the rociletinib NDA on or before the Prescription Drug User Fee Act date of June 28, 2016. The FDA issues a CRL to indicate that their review of an application is complete and that the application is not ready for approval. In anticipation of receiving the CRL, the Company terminated enrollment in all ongoing sponsored clinical studies of rociletinib. The Company will continue to provide drug to patients whose clinicians recommend continuing rociletinib therapy. In addition, the Company has withdrawn its Marketing Authorization Application for rociletinib currently on file with the European Medicines Agency.
19
We hold global development and commercialization rights for rucaparib and rociletinib. For lucitanib, we hold development and commercialization rights in the U.S. and Japan and have sublicensed rights to Europe and rest of world markets, excluding China, to Les Laboratoires (“Servier”).
To date, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to identifying and in-licensing product candidates, performing development activities with respect to those product candidates and the general and administrative support of these operations. To date, we have generated $13.6 million in license and milestone revenue, but have generated no product revenues. We have principally funded our operations using the net proceeds from the sale of convertible preferred stock, the issuance of convertible promissory notes, public offerings of our common stock and our convertible senior notes offering.
We have never been profitable and, as of March 31, 2016, we had an accumulated deficit of $865.3 million. We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, as we advance our product candidates through clinical development to seek regulatory approval and, if approved, commercialize such product candidates. Based on our current estimates, we believe that our cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities as of March 31, 2016 will allow us to fund activities through at least the next 12 months. We expect to finance future cash needs through a combination of public or private equity or debt offerings, collaborations, strategic alliances or other similar licensing arrangements. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy. We will need to generate significant revenues to achieve profitability, and we may never do so.
Product License Agreements
Rucaparib
In June 2011, we entered into a license agreement with Pfizer Inc. to acquire exclusive global development and commercialization rights to rucaparib. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreement, we made a $7.0 million upfront payment to Pfizer. In April 2014, the Company initiated a pivotal registration study for rucaparib, which resulted in a $0.4 million milestone payment to Pfizer as required by the license agreement. This payment was recognized as acquired in-process research and development expense.
We are responsible for all development and commercialization costs of rucaparib. When and if commercial sales of rucaparib begin, we will pay Pfizer tiered royalties on our net sales. In addition, Pfizer is eligible to receive up to $258.5 million of further payments, in aggregate, if certain development, regulatory and sales milestones are achieved, including $20.75 million associated with the first approval of an NDA by the FDA.
Rociletinib
In May 2010, we entered into an exclusive worldwide license agreement with Avila Therapeutics, Inc. (now Celgene Avilomics Research, Inc., part of Celgene Corporation (“Celgene”)) to discover, develop and commercialize a covalent inhibitor of mutant forms of the EGFR gene product. Rociletinib was identified as the lead inhibitor candidate under the license agreement. We are responsible for all non-clinical, clinical, regulatory and other activities necessary to develop and commercialize rociletinib.
We made an upfront payment of $2.0 million upon execution of the license agreement, a $4.0 million milestone payment in the first quarter of 2012 upon acceptance by the FDA of our Investigational New Drug application for rociletinib and a $5.0 million milestone payment in the first quarter of 2014 upon the initiation of the Phase II study for rociletinib. In the third quarter of 2015, we made milestone payments totaling $12.0 million upon acceptance of the NDA and MAA for rociletinib by the FDA and EMA, respectively. We recognized all payments prior to commercial approval as acquired in-process research and development expense.
We are obligated to pay royalties on net sales of rociletinib based on the volume of annual net sales achieved. We are required to pay up to an additional aggregate of $98.0 million in development and regulatory milestone payments if certain clinical study objectives and regulatory filings, acceptances and approvals are achieved, including $15.0 million upon the first approval of an NDA by the FDA and $15.0 million upon the first approval of an MAA by the EMA. In addition, we are required to pay up to an aggregate of $120.0 million in sales milestone payments if certain annual sales targets are achieved.
20
On November 19, 2013, the Company acquired all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Ethical Oncology Science, S.p.A. (“EOS”) (now known as Clovis Oncology Italy S.r.l.) and gained rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib, an oral, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor. As further described below, EOS licensed the worldwide rights, excluding China, to develop and commercialize lucitanib from Advenchen Laboratories LLC (“Advenchen”). Subsequently, rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib in markets outside the U.S. and Japan were sublicensed by EOS to Les Laboratoires Servier (“Servier”) in exchange for upfront milestone fees, royalties on sales of lucitanib in the sublicensed territories and research and development funding commitments.
In October 2008, EOS entered into an exclusive license agreement with Advenchen to develop and commercialize lucitanib on a global basis, excluding China. The Company is obligated to pay Advenchen royalties on net sales of lucitanib, based on the volume of annual net sales achieved. In addition, the Company is obligated to pay to Advenchen 25% of any consideration, excluding royalties, received pursuant to any sublicense agreements for lucitanib, including the agreement with Servier. In the first quarter of 2014, the Company recognized acquired in-process research and development expense of $3.4 million, which represents 25% of the sublicense agreement consideration of $13.6 million received from Servier upon the end of opposition and appeal of the lucitanib patent by the European Patent Office.
In September 2012, EOS entered into a collaboration and license agreement with Servier whereby EOS sublicensed to Servier exclusive rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib in all countries outside of the U.S., Japan and China. In exchange for these rights, EOS received an upfront payment of €45.0 million. We are entitled to receive additional payments upon achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial milestones up to an additional €90.0 million in the aggregate. In addition, the Company is entitled to receive sales milestone payments if specified annual sales targets for lucitanib are met, which, in the aggregate, could total €250.0 million. The Company is also entitled to receive royalties on net sales of lucitanib by Servier.
The Company and Servier are developing lucitanib pursuant to a development plan agreed to between the parties. Servier is responsible for the initial €80.0 million in global development costs under the agreed upon plan. Cumulative global development costs in excess of €80.0 million, if any, will be shared equally between the Company and Servier. Based on current estimates, we expect that Servier’s €80.0 million funding commitment will be fulfilled in early 2017, and thereafter, we will share with Servier in future development costs pursuant to a mutually agreed upon global development plan.
Financial Operations Overview
Revenue
To date, we have generated $13.6 million in license and milestone revenue related to our collaboration and license agreement with Servier. In the future, we may generate revenue from the sales of product candidates that are under development by the Company, as well as from milestone payments or royalties pursuant to our sublicense agreement with Servier. If we fail to successfully complete the regulatory review and development of our product candidates and, together with our partners, companion diagnostics or obtain regulatory approval for them, our ability to generate future revenue and our results of operations and financial position will be adversely affected.
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses consist of costs incurred for the development of our product candidates and companion diagnostics, which include:
|
· |
license fees and milestone payments related to the acquisition of in-licensed products, which are reported on our Consolidated Statements of Operations as acquired in-process research and development; |
|
· |
employee-related expenses, including salaries, benefits, travel and share-based compensation expense; |
|
· |
expenses incurred under agreements with contract research organizations and investigative sites that conduct our clinical trials; |
|
· |
the cost of acquiring, developing and manufacturing clinical trial materials; |
|
· |
costs associated with non-clinical activities and regulatory operations; |
21
|
· |
activities associated with the development of companion diagnostics for our product candidates. |
Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. License fees and milestone payments related to in-licensed products and technology are expensed if it is determined that they have no alternative future use. Costs for certain development activities, such as clinical trials and manufacturing of clinical supply, are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using data such as patient enrollment, clinical site activations or information provided to us by our vendors.
Product candidates in later stages of clinical development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later stage clinical trials. We expect research and development expenses in 2016 to increase over 2015.
The following table identifies research and development and acquired in-process research and development costs on a program-specific basis for our products under development. Personnel-related costs, depreciation and share-based compensation are not allocated to specific programs, as they are deployed across multiple projects under development and, as such, are separately classified as personnel and other expenses in the table below.
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|||||
Rucaparib Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development |
|
$ |
24,557 |
|
|
$ |
12,296 |
|
Rucaparib Total |
|
|
24,557 |
|
|
|
12,296 |
|
Rociletinib Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development |
|
|
20,594 |
|
|
|
28,845 |
|
Rociletinib Total |
|
|
20,594 |
|
|
|
28,845 |
|
Lucitanib Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development (a) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
935 |
|
Lucitanib Total |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
935 |
|
Personnel and other expenses |
|
|
29,477 |
|
|
|
14,674 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
74,608 |
|
|
$ |
56,750 |
|
|
(a) |
This amount reflects actual costs incurred less amounts due from Servier for reimbursable development expenses pursuant to the collaboration and license agreement described in Note 12 to our unaudited consolidated financial statements included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. |
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses consist principally of salaries and related costs for personnel in executive, finance, legal, investor relations, human resources and information technology functions. Other general and administrative expenses include facilities expenses, communication expenses, information technology costs, corporate insurance and professional fees for legal, consulting and accounting services.
Effective May 9, 2016, at Mr. Mahaffy’s request, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors approved his waiver of any annual base salary in excess of $1.00, plus the cost of the employee portion of any premiums to be paid pursuant to any health and welfare benefit plans maintained by the Company and any tax withholdings related to health and welfare benefits. Such waiver shall continue in effect until the earliest to occur of (i) the Company entering into a definitive agreement with respect to a transaction that if consummated would constitute a Change in Control (as defined in his Employment Agreement) or the public announcement of a proposal or transaction that if consummated would constitute a Change of Control, (ii) approval by the FDA to commercially distribute, sell or market rucaparib, and (iii) termination of his employment by the Company without Just Cause or by Mr. Mahaffy for Good Reason (each as defined in his Employment Agreement).
Acquired In-Process Research and Development Expenses
Acquired in-process research and development expenses consist of upfront payments to acquire a new drug compound, as well as subsequent milestone payments. Acquired in-process research and development payments are immediately expensed provided that the drug has not achieved regulatory approval for marketing and, absent obtaining such, approval, has no alternative future use.
22
Impairment of Intangible Asset
In connection with the acquisition of EOS, we recorded intangible assets to reflect the fair value of acquired in-process research and development (“IPR&D”) as of the acquisition date. The fair value was established based upon discounted cash flow models using assumptions related to the timing of development, probability of development and regulatory success, sales and commercialization factors and estimated product life.
The IPR&D intangible assets are treated as indefinite-lived intangible assets and are not amortized. Amortization of these assets will commence upon completion of the related research and development activities. IPR&D intangible assets are evaluated for impairment at least annually or more frequently if impairment indicators exist and any reduction in fair value would be recorded as impairment of intangible asset on the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Change in Fair Value of Contingent Purchase Consideration
In connection with the acquisition of EOS, we also recorded a purchase consideration liability equal to the estimated fair value of future payments that are contingent upon the achievement of various regulatory and sales milestones. Subsequent to the acquisition date, we re-measure contingent consideration arrangements at fair value each reporting period and record changes in fair value to change in fair value of contingent purchase consideration and foreign currency gains (losses) for changes in the foreign currency translation rate on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. Changes in fair value are primarily attributed to new information about the likelihood of achieving such milestones and the passage of time. In the absence of new information, changes to fair value reflect only the passage of time as we progress towards the achievement of future milestones.
Other Income and Expense
Other income and expense is primarily comprised of foreign currency gains and losses resulting from transactions with contract research organizations, investigational sites and contract manufacturers where payments are made in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. In addition, a significant portion of the contingent purchase consideration liability will be settled in Euro-denominated payments if certain future milestones are achieved and is subject to fluctuations in foreign currency rates. Other expense also includes interest expense recognized related to the Company’s convertible senior notes.
Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, expenses and revenue and related disclosures. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to contingent purchase consideration, the allocation of purchase consideration, intangible asset impairment, clinical trial accruals and share-based compensation. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
For a description of our critical accounting policies, please see Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015. There have not been any material changes to our critical accounting policies since December 31, 2015.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In March 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” ASU No. 2016-09 requires all income tax effects of awards to be recognized in the income statement when the awards vest or are settled. The guidance also requires the presentation of excess tax benefits as an operating activity on the statement of cash flows rather than as a financing activity. This update is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted. Amendments related to the timing of when excess tax benefits are recognized should be applied using a modified retrospective transition method. An entity may elect to apply the amendments related to the presentation of excess tax benefits on the statement of cash flows using either a prospective transition method or a retrospective transition method. The Company is currently evaluating its planned method of adoption and the impact the standard may have on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
23
Comparison of Three Months Ended March 31, 2016 and 2015:
The following table summarizes the results of our operations for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
Change 2016 vs. 2015 |
|
||||||||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
% |
|
||||
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development |
|
$ |
74,608 |
|
|
$ |
56,750 |
|
|
$ |
17,858 |
|
|
|
31 |
% |
General and administrative |
|
|
9,827 |
|
|
|
6,751 |
|
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
46 |
% |
Change in fair value of contingent purchase consideration |
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
(208 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
%) |
Total expenses |
|
|
84,951 |
|
|
|
64,225 |
|
|
|
20,726 |
|
|
|
32 |
% |
Operating loss |
|
|
(84,951 |
) |
|
|
(64,225 |
) |
|
|
(20,726 |
) |
|
|
32 |
% |
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(2,104 |
) |
|
|
(2,075 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
1 |
% |
Foreign currency gains (losses) |
|
|
(551 |
) |
|
|
3,247 |
|
|
|
(3,798 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
%) |
Other income |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
127 |
% |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
(2,630 |
) |
|
|
1,183 |
|
|
|
(3,813 |
) |
|
|
(322 |
%) |
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(87,581 |
) |
|
|
(63,042 |
) |
|
|
(24,539 |
) |
|
|
39 |
% |
Income tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
4,181 |
|
|
|
(102 |
) |
|
|
4,283 |
|
|
|
(4,199 |
%) |
Net loss |
|
$ |
(83,400 |
) |
|
$ |
(63,144 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,256 |
) |
|
|
32 |
% |
Research and Development Expenses. Research and development expenses increased during the three months ended March 31, 2016 compared to the same period in the prior year primarily due to increased development activities for the rucaparib program. Clinical trial costs for rucaparib were $5.2 million higher than the same quarter in the prior year primarily due to higher enrollment in the ARIEL2 and ARIEL3 studies in ovarian cancer. Development costs for rucaparib were $3.0 million higher than the first quarter of 2015 due to the advancement of our collaboration with Foundation Medicine, Inc. to develop a novel companion diagnostic test to identify patients most likely to respond to rucaparib. In addition, market research, disease education and other commercial product planning activities were $2.7 million higher than the same quarter in the prior year due to the preparation for the potential regulatory approval and commercial launch of rucaparib.
Clinical trial costs for rociletinib were $3.9 million lower than the first quarter in 2015 primarily due to the completion of enrollment for the TIGER-X study in non-small cell lung cancer. This decrease was partially offset by higher clinical trial costs for the TIGER-3 study, which began enrolling patients during the second quarter of 2015. In addition, clinical supply and related manufacturing development costs were $5.1 million lower than the first quarter in 2015 driven by timing of production to support our clinical studies.
Salaries, share-based compensation expense and other personnel-related costs were $14.5 million higher in the first quarter of 2016 driven by increased headcount to support our expanded development and commercial planning activities. During the third quarter of 2015, we completed the hiring of our U.S. sales and marketing and medical affairs organizations in preparation for the potential regulatory approval and commercial launch of rociletinib and rucaparib.
General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses increased during the three months ended March 31, 2016 compared to the same period in the prior year primarily due to $1.5 million higher legal expense, $0.4 million higher consulting fees and $0.3 million higher personnel costs.
Other Income (Expense), net. Other expense increased during the three months ended March 31, 2016 compared to the same period in the prior year. During the first quarter of 2016, the Company recognized $0.6 million of foreign currency losses compared with $3.2 million of foreign currency gains during the same period in 2015. The change in the foreign currency gains and losses was driven by fluctuations in the foreign currency rate utilized to translate our Euro-denominated contingent purchase consideration liabilities into U.S. dollars.
24
Income Taxes. Income tax benefit recognized during the first quarter of 2016 was primarily due to a reduction in the enacted corporate tax rate of a foreign jurisdiction in which the Company operates. During the first quarter of 2016, the net deferred tax items of a foreign subsidiary were adjusted to reflect the lower tax rate the Company anticipates will be realized in the future, resulting in a $3.6 million income tax benefit.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
To date, we have funded our operations through the public offering of our common stock and the private placement of convertible debt securities and preferred stock. At March 31, 2016, we had cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities totaling $445.5 million.
The following table sets forth the primary sources and uses of cash for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015:
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
||
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|||||
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
$ |
(83,738 |
) |
|
$ |
(48,405 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
24,396 |
|
|
|
(143,032 |
) |
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
705 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
(891 |
) |
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
(58,383 |
) |
|
$ |
(191,135 |
) |
Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities for all periods resulted primarily from our net losses adjusted for non-cash charges and changes in components of working capital. Net cash used in operating activities increased $35.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2016 compared to the prior year driven by higher rucaparib research and development costs associated with the expansion of the clinical trials, as well as the preparation for the potential commercial launch of rucaparib, and higher salaries, benefits and personnel-related costs resulting from higher headcount to support the expanded development activities and commercial planning for our product candidates.
Investing Activities
Net cash provided by investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2016 includes $25.0 million in maturities of available-for-sale securities. Net cash used in investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2015 includes $142.2 million in purchases of available-for-sale securities.
Financing Activities
Net cash provided by financing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and March 31, 2015 includes $0.7 million and $1.2 million, respectively, received from employee stock option exercises and stock purchases under the employee stock purchase plan.
Operating Capital Requirements
Assuming we successfully complete clinical trials and obtain requisite regulatory approvals, we do not anticipate commercializing any of our product candidates until at least the fourth quarter of 2016. As such, we anticipate that we will continue to generate significant losses for the foreseeable future as we incur expenses to complete our development activities for our programs, prepare for the potential commercial launch of our products and expand our general and administrative functions to support the growth in our research and development and commercial organizations.
As of March 31, 2016, we had cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities totaling $445.5 million and total current liabilities of $73.9 million. Based on current estimates, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities as of March 31, 2016 will allow us to fund our operating plan through at least the next 12 months. We expect to finance future cash flow needs through the public or private sale of equity or debt securities, collaborations, strategic alliances or other similar licensing arrangements. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of one or more of our product candidates. The sale of additional equity and debt securities may result in additional dilution to our shareholders.
25
In addition, if we raise additional funds through the issuance of debt securities or preferred stock, these securities may have rights senior to those of our common stock and could contain covenants that would restrict our operations. Furthermore, any such required additional capital may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all. If we were unable to obtain additional financing, we may be required to reduce the scope of, delay or eliminate some or all of our planned development and commercialization activities, which could harm our business.
Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with research, development and commercialization of pharmaceutical products, we are unable to estimate the exact amounts of our working capital requirements. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:
|
· |
the number and characteristics of the product candidates, companion diagnostics and indications we pursue; |
|
· |
the achievement of various development, regulatory and commercial milestones resulting in required payments to partners pursuant to the terms of our license agreements; |
|
· |
the scope, progress, results and costs of researching and developing our product candidates and related companion diagnostics and conducting clinical and non-clinical trials; |
|
· |
the timing of, and the costs involved in, obtaining regulatory approvals for our product candidates and companion diagnostics; |
|
· |
the cost of commercialization activities, if any, assuming our product candidates are approved for sale, including marketing and distribution costs; |
|
· |
the cost of manufacturing any of our product candidates we successfully commercialize; |
|
· |
the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patent claims, including litigation costs and the outcome of such litigation; and |
|
· |
the timing, receipt and amount of sales, if any, of our product candidates. |
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
For a discussion of our contractual obligations, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in our 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K. There have not been any material changes to such contractual obligations or potential milestone payments since December 31, 2015. For further information regarding the Company’s contractual obligations and commitments, see Note 14 to our unaudited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report.
26
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest rates. As of March 31, 2016, we had cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities of $445.5 million, consisting of bank demand deposits, money market funds and U.S. treasury securities. The primary objectives of our investment policy are to preserve principal and maintain proper liquidity to meet operating needs. Our investment policy specifies credit quality standards for our investments and limits the amount of credit exposure to any single issue, issuer or type of investment. Our primary exposure to market risk is interest rate sensitivity, which is affected by changes in the general level of U.S. interest rates, particularly because our investments are in short-term securities. Our available-for-sale securities are subject to interest rate risk and will decline in value if market interest rates increase. Due to the short-term duration of our investment portfolio and the low risk profile of our investments, an immediate 100 basis point change in interest rates would not have a material effect on the fair value of our portfolio.
We contract with contract research organizations, investigational sites and contract manufacturers globally where payments are made in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. In addition, a significant portion of the contingent purchase consideration liability will be settled with Euro-denominated payments if certain future milestones are achieved. We may be subject to fluctuations in foreign currency rates in connection with these agreements and future contingent payments. While we periodically hold foreign currencies, primarily Euro and pounds sterling, we do not use other financial instruments to hedge our foreign exchange risk. Transactions denominated in currencies other than the functional currency are recorded based on exchange rates at the time such transactions arise. As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, approximately 5% and 3%, respectively, of our total liabilities were denominated in currencies other than the functional currency.
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and the Principal Financial and Accounting Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objective. With the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer, management performed an evaluation as of March 31, 2016 of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer concluded that, as of March 31, 2016, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended March 31, 2016 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
27
On November 19, 2015, Steve Kimbro, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a purported class action complaint (the “Kimbro Complaint”) against Clovis and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The Kimbro Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased Clovis stock between October 31, 2013 and November 15, 2015. The Kimbro Complaint generally alleges that Clovis and certain of its officers violated federal securities laws by making allegedly false and misleading statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the potential for market success of rociletinib. The Kimbro Complaint seeks unspecified damages.
Also on November 19, 2015, a second purported shareholder class action complaint was filed by Sonny P. Medina, another purported Clovis shareholder, containing similar allegations to those set forth in the Kimbro Complaint, also in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (the “Medina Complaint”). The Medina Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased Clovis stock between May 20, 2014 and November 13, 2015. On November 20, 2015, a third complaint was filed by John Moran in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Moran Complaint”). The Moran Complaint contains similar allegations to those asserted in the Kimbro and Medina Complaints and purports to be asserted on behalf of a plaintiff class who purchased Clovis stock between October 31, 2013 and November 13, 2015.
On December 14, 2015, Ralph P. Rocco, a fourth purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (the “Rocco Complaint”). The Rocco Complaint contains similar allegations to those set forth in the previous complaints and purports to be asserted on behalf of a plaintiff class who purchased Clovis stock between October 31, 2013 and November 15, 2015.
On January 19, 2016, a number of motions were filed in both the District of Colorado and the Northern District of California seeking to consolidate the shareholder class actions into one matter and for appointment of a lead plaintiff. All lead plaintiff movants other than M. Arkin (1999) LTD and Arkin Communications LTD (the “Arkin Plaintiffs”) subsequently filed notices of non-opposition to the Arkin Plaintiffs’ application.
On February 2, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiffs filed a motion to transfer the Moran Complaint to the District of Colorado (the “Motion to Transfer”). Also on February 2, 2016, the defendants filed a statement in the Northern District of California supporting the consolidation of all actions in a single court, the District of Colorado. On February 3, 2016, the Northern District of California court denied without prejudice the lead plaintiff motions filed in that court pending a decision on the Motion to Transfer.
On February 16, 2016, the defendants filed a memorandum in support of the Motion to Transfer, and plaintiff Moran filed a notice of non-opposition to the Motion to Transfer. On February 17, 2016, the Northern District of California court granted the Motion to Transfer.
On February 18, 2016, the Medina court issued an opinion and order addressing the various motions for consolidation and appointment of lead plaintiff and lead counsel in the District of Colorado actions. By this ruling, the court consolidated the Medina, Kimbro and Rocco actions into a single proceeding. The court also appointed the Arkin Plaintiffs as the lead plaintiffs and Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman as lead counsel for the putative class.
On April 1, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiffs and the defendants filed a stipulated motion to set the schedule for the filing of a consolidated complaint in the Medina, Kimbro and Rocco actions (the “Consolidated Complaint”) and the responses thereto, including the defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint (the “Motion to Dismiss”), and to stay discovery and related proceedings until the District of Colorado issues a decision on the Motion to Dismiss. The stipulated motion was entered by the District of Colorado on April 4, 2016. Subject to a further agreed-upon extension by the parties, the Consolidated Complaint was filed on May 6, 2016, while the Motion to Dismiss is due on July 11, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiff’s opposition on August 19, 2016 and the defendants’ reply on September 7, 2016. On April 15, 2016, the Arkin Plaintiffs and the defendants filed a stipulated motion to consolidate the Moran action, now pending in the District of Colorado, with the Medina, Kimbro and Rocco actions.
The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the Kimbro, Medina, Moran and Rocco Complaints, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful.
28
On December 30, 2015, Jamie McCall, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a shareholder derivative complaint (the “McCall Complaint”) against certain officers and directors of Clovis in the Colorado District Court, County of Boulder. The McCall Complaint generally alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed to Clovis by participating in misrepresentation of the Company’s business operations and prospects. The McCall Complaint also alleges claims for abuse of control, gross mismanagement and unjust enrichment. The McCall Complaint seeks, among other things, an award of money damages, declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the alleged fiduciary breaches and other forms of equitable relief. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the McCall Complaint, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful.
On January 22, 2016, the Electrical Workers Local #357 Pension and Health & Welfare Trusts, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a purported class action complaint (the “Electrical Workers Complaint”) against Clovis and certain of its officers, directors, investors and underwriters in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo. The Electrical Workers Complaint purports to be asserted on behalf of a class of persons who purchased stock in Clovis’ July 8, 2015 follow-on offering. The Electrical Workers Complaint generally alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Act because the offering documents for the July 8, 2015 follow-on offering contained allegedly false and misleading statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the potential for market success of rociletinib. The Electrical Workers Complaint seeks unspecified damages.
On February 25, 2016, the defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and thereafter moved to transfer the case to the District of Colorado (“Motion to Transfer”). On March 2, 2016, the plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case to San Mateo County Superior Court (“Motion to Remand”). Following briefing on the Motion to Transfer and the Motion to Remand, the Northern District of California held a hearing on April 18, 2016 concerning the Motion to Remand, at the conclusion of which the court granted to the Motion to Remand. We expect that the court will deny the Motion to Transfer as moot. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations contained in the Electrical Workers Complaint, but there can be no assurance that the defense will be successful.
On February 19, 2016, Maris Sanchez, a purported shareholder of Clovis, filed a shareholder derivative complaint (the “Sanchez Complaint”) against certain officers and directors of Clovis in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The Sanchez Complaint generally alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed to Clovis by participating in misrepresentation of the Company’s business operations and prospects. The Sanchez Complaint also alleged claims for abuse of control and gross mismanagement. The Sanchez Complaint sought, among other things, an award of money damages. On March 11, 2016, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the Sanchez Complaint without prejudice. On March 14, 2016, the Sanchez action was terminated by the District of Colorado.
The Company has received requests for information from governmental agencies relating to the Company’s regulatory update announcement in November 2015 that the FDA requested additional clinical data on the efficacy and safety of rociletinib. The Company is cooperating with the inquiries.
Our business faces significant risks and uncertainties. Certain factors may have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations, and you should carefully consider them. Accordingly, in evaluating our business, we encourage you to consider the following discussion of risk factors, in its entirety, in addition to other information contained in or incorporated by reference into this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and our other public filings with the SEC. Other events that we do not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
29
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Requirements
We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future. We are a clinical-stage company with no approved products, and no historical revenues, which makes it difficult to assess our future viability.
We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We have focused primarily on in-licensing and developing our product candidates. We are not profitable and have incurred losses in each year since our inception in April 2009. We have only a limited operating history upon which you can evaluate our business and prospects. In addition, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome many of the risks and uncertainties frequently encountered by companies in new and rapidly evolving fields, particularly in the biopharmaceutical area. Two of our product candidates, CO-101 and CO-1686 (rociletinib), encountered development and regulatory setbacks after initial promising data, leading us to discontinue their development. We have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, we had net losses of $352.9 million, $160.0 million and $84.5 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2016, we had an accumulated deficit of $865.3 million. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, as we continue our development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates, and begin to commercialize any approved products. As such, we are subject to all of the risks incident to the development of new biopharmaceutical products and related companion diagnostics, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, regulatory scrutiny, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. If any of our product candidates fail in clinical trials or do not gain regulatory approval, or if any of our product candidates, if approved, fail to achieve market acceptance, we may never become profitable. Even if we achieve profitability in the future, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.
We will require substantial additional funding which may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we fail to obtain additional financing, we may be unable to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates or continue our development programs.
Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to advance the clinical development of our product candidates and launch and commercialize any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval, including building our own commercial organizations to address certain markets.
Based on current estimates, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities will allow us to fund our operating plan through at least the next 12 months. As of March 31, 2016, we had cash, cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities totaling $445.5 million. We do not have any material committed external source of funds or other support for our development efforts other than that portion of the costs associated with global development activities for lucitanib for which Servier is responsible pursuant to our collaboration and license agreement. Based on current cost estimates, we expect that commitment will be fulfilled in late 2016 or early 2017, and thereafter, we will share equally in future development costs with Servier pursuant to a mutually agreed upon global development plan.
Until we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue to finance our cash requirements, which we may never do, we expect to finance future cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, collaborations, strategic alliances and other similar licensing arrangements. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Furthermore, it may be difficult for us to raise additional funds while we are subject to uncertainty related to litigation described under “Part II, Item 1-Legal Proceedings” in this report. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of one or more of our product candidates. We may also seek collaborators for one or more of our current or future product candidates on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available. Any of these events could significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects.
Servicing our long-term debt requires a significant amount of cash, and we may not have sufficient cash flow from our business to pay our substantial debt.
In September 2014, we completed a private placement of $287.5 million aggregate principal amount of 2.5% convertible senior notes due 2021 (the “Notes”), resulting in net proceeds to the Company of $278.3 million after deducting offering expenses. The Notes are governed by the terms of the indenture between the Company, as issuer, and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as trustee. Interest is payable on the Notes semi-annually, and the Notes mature on September 15, 2021, unless redeemed, repurchased or converted prior to that date. In addition, if, as defined by the terms of the indenture, a fundamental change occurs, holders of the Notes may require us to repurchase for cash all or any portion of their Notes at a purchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes to be repurchased plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but excluding, the fundamental change repurchase date. As of March 31, 2016, all $287.5 million principal amount of the Notes remained outstanding.
30
Our ability to make scheduled payments of interest and principal on the Notes, or to pay the repurchase price for the Notes on a fundamental change, depends on our future performance, which is subject to economic, financial, competitive and other factors beyond our control. We may not have sufficient cash in the future to service our debt. If we are unable to generate such cash flow or secure additional sources of funding, we may be required to adopt one or more alternatives, such as restructuring debt or obtaining additional equity capital on terms that may be onerous or highly dilutive. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness will depend on the capital markets and our financial condition at such time. We may not be able to engage in any of these activities or engage in these activities on desirable terms, which could result in a default on our debt obligations.
We and certain of our officers and directors have been named as defendants in several lawsuits that could result in substantial costs and divert management’s attention.
We and certain of our officers were named as defendants in four separate purported class action lawsuits initiated in 2015, three of which have since been consolidated, that generally allege that we and certain of our officers violated federal securities laws by making allegedly false and misleading statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the potential for market success of rociletinib. An amended complaint in the consolidated action is due to be filed on May 6, 2016. Moreover, in January 2016, we and certain of our officers, directors, investors and underwriters were named as defendants in a purported class action lawsuit that alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Act because the offering documents for our July 2015 follow-on offering contained allegedly false and misleading statements regarding the progress toward FDA approval and the potential for market success of rociletinib.
We intend to engage in a vigorous defense of these lawsuits; however, we are unable to predict the outcome of these matters at this time. If we are not successful in our defense of the class action litigation, we could be forced to make significant payments to, or enter into other settlements with, our shareholders and their lawyers (and in certain circumstances reimburse costs and expenses incurred by the underwriters), and such payments or settlement arrangements could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. For example, we could incur substantial costs not covered by our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, suffer a significant adverse impact on our reputation and divert management’s attention and resources from other priorities, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, any of these matters could require payments that are not covered by, or exceed the limits of, our available directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results or financial condition.
Additional lawsuits with similar claims may be filed by other parties against us and our officers and directors. Even if such claims are not successful, these lawsuits or other future similar actions, or other regulatory inquiries or investigations, may result in substantial costs and have a significant adverse impact on our reputation and divert management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition.
Risks Related to Our Business and Industry
We are heavily dependent on the success of our product candidates, and we cannot give any assurance that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.
To date, we have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the acquisition and development of our product candidates. Our business depends entirely on the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. Rucaparib and lucitanib are currently in clinical trials. We currently generate no revenues from sales of any drugs, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable drug.
Each of our product candidates requires clinical development, management of clinical, non-clinical and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, obtaining manufacturing supply, building of a commercial organization and significant marketing efforts in order to generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. In addition, our product development programs contemplate the development of companion diagnostics by third-party collaborators. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation as medical devices and must themselves be approved for marketing by the FDA or certain other foreign regulatory agencies before our product candidates may be commercialized.
We cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval even if they are successful in clinical trials. Two of our product candidates, CO-101 and CO-1686 (rociletinib), encountered development and regulatory setbacks after initial promising data, leading us to discontinue their development. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations. Even if we successfully obtain regulatory approvals to market one or more of our product candidates, our revenues will be dependent, in part, upon our diagnostic collaborators’ ability to obtain regulatory approval of the companion diagnostics to be used with our product candidates, as well as the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval and have commercial rights. If the markets for patient subsets that we are targeting are not as significant as we estimate, we may not generate significant revenues from sales of such products, if approved.
31
We plan to seek regulatory approval to commercialize our product candidates in the United States, the European Union and in additional foreign countries. While the scope of regulatory approval is similar in other countries, obtaining separate regulatory approval in many other countries requires compliance with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions.
Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.
Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of non-clinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through non-clinical studies and initial clinical trials. It is not uncommon for companies in the biopharmaceutical industry to suffer significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Indeed, based on the negative results of a pivotal study, we ceased further development of our previous product candidate CO-101, and we decided to discontinue ongoing development of rociletinib in anticipation of the issuance of a Complete Response Letter by FDA. Additionally, our future clinical trial results may not be successful.
Although we have clinical trials ongoing, we may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials, and we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays related to:
|
● |
obtaining regulatory approval to commence a trial; |
|
● |
reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations (“CROs”) and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites; |
|
● |
obtaining institutional review board (“IRB”) approval at each site; |
|
● |
recruiting suitable patients to participate in a trial; |
|
● |
developing and validating companion diagnostics on a timely basis; |
|
● |
having patients complete a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up; |
|
● |
clinical sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial; |
|
● |
adding new clinical trial sites; or |
|
● |
manufacturing sufficient quantities of product candidate for use in clinical trials. |
Patient enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating. Furthermore, we rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials, and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance.
We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.
32
The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.
The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable, but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval. Although our product candidates rociletinib and rucaparib have been granted Breakthrough Therapy designation by the FDA, which allows for greater interaction with, and expedited review by, the FDA, the designation does not guarantee a faster development or review time as compared to other drugs, nor does it ensure that the drugs will obtain ultimate marketing approval by the FDA. Indeed, in anticipation of the issuance of a Complete Response Letter by FDA with respect to the rociletinib NDA, we decided to discontinue further development of rociletinib. In addition, the FDA may withdraw this designation at any time.
Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval or approval may be delayed for many reasons, including the following:
|
● |
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials; |
|
● |
we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe and effective for its proposed indication; |
|
● |
the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval; |
|
● |
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from non-clinical studies or clinical trials; |
|
● |
the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to support the submission of an NDA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere; |
|
● |
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; |
|
● |
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the companion diagnostics we contemplate developing with partners; and |
|
● |
the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval. |
This lengthy approval process, as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results, may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Even if we receive regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.
Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing and clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. In addition, if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority approves any of our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, pricing, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with current good manufacturing practices and good clinical practices for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:
|
· |
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls; |
33
|
· |
refusal by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals; |
|
· |
injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. |
We may seek approval from U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities for one or more product candidates on a conditional basis with full approval conditioned upon fulfilling the requirements of regulators. For example, we are seeking accelerated approval from the FDA for rucaparib and plan to seek conditional marketing authorization from the E.U. for rucaparib. Each of these approval pathways has certain conditions to approval, some of which may be post-approval, such as the conduct of a post-approval, or confirmatory, trial using due diligence. If we are unable to fulfill the requirements of regulators that are conditions of a product’s accelerated or conditional approval, if the confirmatory trial shows unfavorable results or increased or additional undesirable side effects, or if regulators re-evaluate the data or risk-benefit profile of our product candidate, the availability of accelerated or conditional approval may be withdrawn or our conditional approval may not result in full approval or may be revoked or not renewed. Alternatively, we may be required to change a product candidate’s labeled indications or even withdraw the product, if approved, from the market.
The FDA’s and comparable foreign authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.
Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.
Adverse events (“AEs”) attributable to our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other comparable foreign authorities. Clinical studies conducted to date have generated AEs related to our product candidates, some of which have been serious. Patients treated with rucaparib have commonly experienced anemia/decreased hemoglobin and fatigue/asthenia. In studies of lucitanib, hypertension, proteinuria and subclinical hypothyroidism requiring supplementation are the most common AEs observed. The most notable AEs experienced by patients treated with rociletinib include hyperglycemia and QTc prolongation. As is the case with all oncology drugs, it is possible that there may be other potentially harmful characteristics associated with their use in future trials, including larger and lengthier Phase III clinical trials. As we evaluate the use of our product candidates in combination with other active agents, we may encounter safety issues as a result of the combined safety profiles of each agent, which could pose a substantial challenge to that development strategy.
Results of our trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of these or other side effects. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug-related AEs could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.
Additionally, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:
|
● |
regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product; |
|
● |
regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label; |
|
● |
we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients; |
|
● |
we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients; and |
|
● |
our reputation may suffer. |
34
Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Failure to successfully validate, develop and obtain regulatory approval for companion diagnostics could harm our drug development strategy.
As one of the key elements of our clinical development strategy, we seek to identify patient subsets within a disease category who may derive selective and meaningful benefit from the product candidates we are developing. In collaboration with partners, we plan to develop companion diagnostics to help us to more accurately identify patients within a particular subset, both during our clinical trials and in connection with the commercialization of our product candidates. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities as medical devices and require separate regulatory approval prior to commercialization. We do not develop companion diagnostics internally and thus we are dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of our third-party collaborators in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. We and our collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing and obtaining approval for the companion diagnostics, including issues relating to selectivity/specificity, analytical validation, reproducibility, or clinical validation. Any delay or failure by our collaborators to develop or obtain regulatory approval of the companion diagnostics could delay or prevent approval of our product candidates. In addition, our collaborators may encounter production difficulties that could constrain the supply of the companion diagnostics, and both they and we may have difficulties gaining acceptance of the use of the companion diagnostics in the clinical community. If such companion diagnostics fail to gain market acceptance, it would have an adverse effect on our ability to derive revenues from sales of our products. In addition, the diagnostic company with whom we contract may decide to discontinue selling or manufacturing the companion diagnostic that we anticipate using in connection with development and commercialization of our product candidates or our relationship with such diagnostic company may otherwise terminate. We may not be able to enter into arrangements with another diagnostic company to obtain supplies of an alternative diagnostic test for use in connection with the development and commercialization of our product candidates or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could adversely affect and/or delay the development or commercialization of our product candidates.
The failure to maintain our collaboration with Servier, or the failure of Servier to perform its obligations under the collaboration, could negatively affect our business.
Pursuant to the terms of our collaboration and license agreement with Servier, Servier was granted exclusive rights to develop and commercialize lucitanib in markets outside of the United States and Japan (excluding China). Consequently, our ability to realize any revenues from lucitanib in the Servier territory depends on our success in maintaining our collaboration with Servier and Servier’s ability to obtain regulatory approvals for, and to successfully commercialize, lucitanib in its licensed territory. Although we collaborate with Servier to carry out a global development plan for lucitanib, we have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that Servier will dedicate to these efforts.
Based on current cost estimates, we expect Servier’s funding commitment will be fulfilled in late 2016 or early 2017, and thereafter, we will share equally with Servier in future development costs pursuant to a mutually agreed upon global development plan.
We are subject to a number of other risks associated with our collaboration and license agreement with Servier, including:
|
● |
Servier may not comply with applicable regulatory requirements with respect to developing or commercializing lucitanib, which could adversely affect future development or sales of lucitanib in Servier’s licensed territory and elsewhere; |
|
● |
Servier is responsible for the first €80.0 million of development costs in support of the lucitanib program; however we have limited control over the costs Servier may incur with respect to its development activities for the compound, and therefore our obligation to share additional costs could be triggered sooner than planned; |
|
● |
If Servier does not agree to include within the global development plan new studies that we propose to conduct for lucitanib, we may be responsible for all costs associated with carrying out such activities; |
|
● |
We and Servier could disagree as to current or future development plans for lucitanib, and Servier may delay clinical trials or stop a clinical trial for which it is the sponsor; |
|
● |
There may be disputes between us and Servier, including disagreements regarding the collaboration and license agreement, that may result in (1) the delay of or failure to achieve regulatory and commercial objectives that would result in milestone or royalty payments, (2) the delay or termination of any future development or commercialization of lucitanib, and/or (3) costly litigation or arbitration that diverts our management’s attention and resources; |
|
● |
Business combinations or significant changes in Servier’s business strategy may adversely affect Servier’s ability or willingness to perform its obligations under our collaboration and license agreement; and |
35
The collaboration and license agreement is subject to early termination, including through Servier’s right to terminate the agreement without cause upon advance notice to us. If the agreement is terminated early, we may not be able to find another collaborator for the further development and commercialization of lucitanib outside of the United States and Japan on acceptable terms, or at all, and we could incur significant additional costs by pursuing continued development and commercialization of lucitanib in those territories on our own.
We rely on third parties to conduct our non-clinical and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.
We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party CROs to monitor and manage data for our ongoing non-clinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our non-clinical and clinical trials, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCP, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the EEA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under current GMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.
Our CROs have the right to terminate their agreements with us in the event of an uncured material breach. In addition, some of our CROs have an ability to terminate their respective agreements with us if it can be reasonably demonstrated that the safety of the subjects participating in our clinical trials warrants such termination, if we make a general assignment for the benefit of our creditors or if we are liquidated.
If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our on-going clinical and non-clinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.
Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially influence our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and prospects.
36
We rely completely on third parties to manufacture our clinical drug supplies and we intend to rely on third parties to produce commercial supplies of any approved product candidate, and our commercialization of any of our product candidates could be stopped, delayed or made less profitable if those third parties fail to obtain approval of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of drug product or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.
We do not currently have nor do we plan to acquire the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture our clinical drug supplies for use in the conduct of our clinical trials, and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the GMP regulatory requirements for manufacture of both active drug substances and finished drug products. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly affect our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved.
We rely on our manufacturers to purchase from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials. There are a limited number of suppliers of raw materials that we use to manufacture our drugs and there may be a need to assess alternate suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials, and if approved, ultimately for commercial sale. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these raw materials by our manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of these raw materials. Any significant delay in the supply of a product candidate, or the raw material components thereof, for an ongoing clinical trial due to the need to replace a third-party manufacturer could considerably delay completion of our clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates. If our manufacturers or we are unable to purchase these raw materials after regulatory approval has been obtained for our product candidates, the commercial launch of our product candidates would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply, which would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our product candidates.
We are dependent on our third party manufacturers to conduct process development and scale-up work necessary to support greater clinical development and commercialization requirements for our product candidates. Carrying out these activities in a timely manner, and on commercially reasonable terms, is critical to the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates. We expect that our third-party manufacturers are capable of providing sufficient quantities of our product candidates to meet anticipated clinical and full-scale commercial demands, however if third parties with whom we currently work are unable to meet our supply requirements, we will need to secure alternate suppliers. While we believe that there are other contract manufacturers having the technical capabilities to manufacture our product candidates, we cannot be certain that identifying and establishing relationships with such sources would not result in significant delay or material additional costs.
We expect to continue to depend on third-party contract manufacturers for the foreseeable future. We have not entered into long-term agreements with all of our current contract manufacturers or with any alternate fill/finish suppliers, and though we intend to do so prior to commercial launch in order to ensure that we maintain adequate supplies of finished drug product, we may be unable to enter into such an agreement or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business. We currently obtain our supplies of finished drug product through individual purchase orders.
Although we have begun to build our marketing and sales organization, if we are unable to establish and maintain sufficient internal marketing, sales and distribution capabilities, or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products.
We have no history as a company in the sales and distribution of pharmaceutical products. In order to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates, if approved, we must establish and maintain our marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities, or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. Our commercial and medical affairs organizations in the U.S. are in place; however, we may not be able to retain the marketing and sales organization in place until the time of the potential launch of rucaparib, if and when approved for sale by the FDA. Establishing our sales and marketing organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize our product candidates will continue to be expensive and time consuming.
37
With respect to our product candidates, we may elect to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems in certain territories. To the extent that we enter into licensing or co-promotion arrangements for any of our product candidates, our product revenue may be lower than if we directly marketed or sold our approved products. In addition, any revenue we receive as a result of such arrangements would depend in whole or in part upon the efforts of such third parties, which may not be successful and are generally not within our control. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates that receive regulatory approval. If we are not successful in commercializing our product candidates, either on our own or through collaborations with one or more third parties, our future product revenue will suffer and we may incur significant additional losses.
Our commercial success depends upon attaining significant market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, among physicians, patients, healthcare payors and major operators of cancer clinics.
Even if we obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, the product may not gain market acceptance among physicians, health care payors, patients and the medical community, which are critical to commercial success. Market acceptance of any product candidate for which we receive approval depends on a number of factors, including:
|
● |
the efficacy and safety as demonstrated in clinical trials; |
|
● |
the timing of market introduction of such product candidate as well as competitive products; |
|
● |
the clinical indications for which the drug is approved and the product label approved by regulatory authorities, including any warnings that may be required on the label; |
|
● |
the approval, availability, market acceptance and reimbursement for the companion diagnostic; |
|
● |
acceptance by physicians, major operators of cancer clinics and patients of the drug as a safe and effective treatment; |
|
● |
the potential and perceived advantages of such product candidate over alternative treatments, especially with respect to patient subsets that we are targeting with such product candidate; |
|
● |
the safety of such product candidate seen in a broader patient group, including its use outside the approved indications; |
|
● |
the cost, safety and efficacy of the product in relation to alternative treatments; |
|
● |
the availability of adequate reimbursement and pricing by third-party payors and government authorities; |
|
● |
relative convenience and ease of administration; |
|
● |
the prevalence and severity of adverse side effects; and |
|
● |
the effectiveness of our sales and marketing efforts. |
If our product candidates are approved but fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, healthcare payors and patients, we will not be able to generate significant revenues, and we may not become or remain profitable.
We face significant competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.
The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. In addition, the competition in the oncology market is intense. We have competitors both in the United States and internationally, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and universities and other research institutions.
In late 2014, Lynparza™ (olaparib) was approved in the U.S. as monotherapy in patients with germline BRCA mutated advanced ovarian cancer who have been treated with three or more prior lines of chemotherapy and in the EU for the maintenance treatment of BRCA mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer. There are a number of other PARP inhibitors in clinical development including AbbVie’s ABT-888 (veliparib), currently in Phase III clinical trials, Tesaro, Inc.’s niraparib, currently in Phase III trials, Eisai’s E-7016, currently in Phase II trials and Medivation’s talazoparib (BMN-673), currently in Phase III trials.
There are currently no approved drugs that specifically inhibit each of VEGFR, PDGFR and FGFR, as does lucitanib; however, there are currently a number of oral antiangiogenic drugs that target one or a subset of those markers and are approved or in development for various solid tumors, including: nintedanib (Boehringer Ingelheim), lenvatinib (Eisai), sunitinib (Pfizer), sorafenib (Bayer), pazopanib (Novartis), axitinib (Pfizer) and cabozantinib (Exelixis).
38
In November 2015, the FDA approved Tagrisso™ (osimertinib) for patients with metastatic EGFR T790M mutation-positive NSCLC who have progressed on or after EGFR TKI therapy. This represents the first approved therapy for the treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC patients who test positive for the T790M mutation. In February 2016, the European Commission granted conditional marketing approval to Tagrisso™ for the treatment of advanced NSCLC patients who test positive for the T790M mutation. In addition, we are aware of a number of other products in development targeting cancer-causing mutant forms of EGFR for the treatment of NSCLC patients. These products include Pfizer’s PF-06747775, currently in Phase I/II trials, Astellas Pharma’s ASP8273, currently in Phase I/II trials, Novartis’ EGF816, currently in Phase I/II trials, Hanmi Pharmaceutical’s and Boehringer Ingelheim’s BI-1482694 (HM61713), HM781-36B (Poziotinib), currently in Phase I/II trials and Acea Bio (Hangzhou)’s avitinib and AC0010MA, currently in Phase I/II trials. Bristol Myers Squibb’s Opdivo® and Merck’s Keytruda®, both approved for second-line NSCLC, may also represent competition to rociletinib.
Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Additional mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. As a result, these companies may obtain regulatory approval more rapidly than we are able and may be more effective in selling and marketing their products as well. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis drug products that are more effective or less costly than any drug candidate that we are currently developing or that we may develop. If approved, our product candidates will face competition from commercially available drugs, as well as drugs that are in the development pipelines of our competitors and later enter the market.
Established pharmaceutical companies may invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make our product candidates less competitive. In addition, any new product that competes with an approved product must demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety in order to overcome price competition and to be commercially successful. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection, receiving FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval or discovering, developing and commercializing medicines before we do, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
Reimbursement may be limited or unavailable in certain market segments for our product candidates, which could make it difficult for us to sell our products profitably.
There is significant uncertainty related to the third-party coverage and reimbursement of newly approved drugs. We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in the United States, Europe and other selected foreign jurisdictions. Market acceptance and sales of our product candidates in both domestic and international markets will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors for any of our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures. Government and other third-party payors are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for new drugs and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. These payors may conclude that our product candidates are less safe, less effective or less cost-effective than existing or later introduced products, and third-party payors may not approve our product candidates for coverage and reimbursement or may cease providing coverage and reimbursement for these product candidates.
Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for 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. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement. We cannot be sure that coverage or adequate reimbursement will be available for any of our product candidates. Even if we obtain coverage for our product candidates, third-party payors may not establish adequate reimbursement amounts, which may reduce the demand for, or the price of, our products. If reimbursement of our future products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability.
In both the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been and we expect there will continue to be a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the health care system that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. The U.S. government and other governments have shown significant interest in pursuing healthcare reform. In particular, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 revised the payment methodology for many products under the Medicare program in the United States. This has resulted in lower rates of reimbursement. In 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”), was enacted. The Affordable Care Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Such government-adopted reform measures may adversely affect the pricing of healthcare products and services in the United States or internationally and the amount of reimbursement available from governmental agencies or other third-party payors.
39
There have been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals at the federal and state levels directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect the demand for any drug products for which we may obtain regulatory approval, as well as our ability to set satisfactory prices for our products, to generate revenues, and to achieve and maintain profitability.
In some foreign countries, particularly in the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product candidate. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our product candidates is unavailable or limited in scope or amount in a particular country, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability of our products in such country.
If we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy. Further, we will need to grow our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.
Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceuticals industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our management, scientific and medical personnel, especially Patrick J. Mahaffy, our President and Chief Executive Officer, Lindsey Rolfe, our Executive Vice President of Clinical and Preclinical Development and Pharmacovigilance and Chief Medical Officer, Dale Hooks, our Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer and Gillian C. Ivers-Read, our Executive Vice President, Technical Operations and Chief Regulatory Officer, whose services are critical to the successful implementation of our product candidate acquisition, development and regulatory strategies.
Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific, development and commercial teams may terminate their employment with us on short notice. Pursuant to their employment arrangements, each of our executive officers may voluntarily terminate their employment at any time by providing as little as thirty days advance notice. Our employment arrangements with all of our employees provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees (other than our executive officers) could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. For example, Andrew R. Allen, our former Executive Vice President of Clinical and Pre-Clinical Development and Chief Medical Officer, resigned in July 2015, Steven L. Hoerter, our former Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, resigned in January 2016 and Erle T. Mast, our former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, resigned in March 2016. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers or other key employees and our inability to find suitable replacements could potentially harm our business, financial condition and prospects. Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled junior, mid-level and senior managers as well as junior, mid-level and senior scientific and medical personnel.
As of April 29, 2016, we employed 304 full-time employees. As our development plans and strategies develop, we expect to expand our employee base for managerial, operational, financial and other resources. Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain, motivate and integrate additional employees. Also, our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects. If our management is unable to effectively manage our expected growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate revenues could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy.
We may not be able to attract or retain qualified management and scientific personnel in the future due to the intense competition for a limited number of qualified personnel among biopharmaceutical, biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses. Many of the other pharmaceutical companies that we compete against for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. They also may provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high quality candidates than what we have to offer. In order to induce valuable employees to continue their employment with us, we have provided stock options that vest over time. The value to employees of stock options that vest over time is significantly affected by movements in our stock price that are beyond our control, and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can develop and commercialize product candidates will be limited.
40
Our employees may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct. Misconduct by employees could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations, provide accurate information to the FDA, comply with manufacturing standards we have established, comply with federal and state health-care fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a Code of Business Ethics, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant effect on our business and results of operations, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.
We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws and health information privacy and security laws. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.
If we obtain FDA approval for any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our operations may be directly, or indirectly through our customers, subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the federal False Claims Act. These laws may affect, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:
|
● |
the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce, or in return for, the purchase or recommendation of an item or service reimbursable under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs; |
|
● |
federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payers that are false or fraudulent; |
|
● |
HIPAA which created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program and making false statements relating to healthcare matters; |
|
● |
HIPAA, as amended by HITECH and its implementing regulations, which imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information; and |
|
● |
state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payer, including commercial insurers, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. |
If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.
41
If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.
We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates, if approved. Even successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:
|
● |
decreased demand for our product candidates or products that we may develop; |
|
● |
injury to our reputation; |
|
● |
withdrawal of clinical trial participants; |
|
● |
initiation of investigations by regulators; |
|
● |
costs to defend the related litigation; |
|
● |
a diversion of management’s time and our resources; |
|
● |
substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients; |
|
● |
increase in insurance premiums; |
|
● |
product recalls, withdrawals or labeling, marketing or promotional restrictions; |
|
● |
loss of revenues from product sales; |
|
● |
the inability to commercialize our product candidates; and |
|
● |
a decline in our stock price. |
Our inability to obtain and retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of products we develop. We have a program of product liability insurance covering our ongoing clinical trials; however, the amount of insurance we maintain may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts.
Our internal computer systems, or those used by our CROs or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches.
We and our business partners maintain sensitive company data on our computer networks, including our intellectual property and proprietary business information, as well as certain clinical trial information. Cybersecurity attacks are becoming more commonplace and include, but are not limited to, malicious software, attempts to gain unauthorized access to data and other electronic security breaches that could lead to disruptions in systems, misappropriation of information and corruption of data. Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our CROs and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. While we have not experienced any such material system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our development programs and business operations. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of our product candidates could be delayed.
42
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
If our efforts to protect the proprietary nature of the intellectual property related to our technologies are not adequate, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.
We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies. Any disclosure to or misappropriation by third parties of our confidential proprietary information could enable competitors to quickly duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market.
The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or license may fail to result in issued patents in the United States or in other foreign countries. Even if the patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patent applications we hold or pursue with respect to our product candidates is threatened, it could threaten our ability to commercialize our product candidates. Further, if we encounter delays in our clinical trials, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to our product candidates. Furthermore, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third-party or instituted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“U.S. PTO”) to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications.
In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we seek to rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our drug development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. Although we require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, we will not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our drug discovery and development efforts.
Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including interference, inter parties review and reexamination proceedings before the U.S. PTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. Numerous United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others.
Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There are or may be third-party patents with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications, which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or they are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Similarly, if any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture or methods of use, including combination therapy or patient selection methods, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidate unless we obtain a license, limit our uses, or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
43
Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, limit our uses, pay royalties or redesign our infringing product candidates, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly.
The patent protection and patent prosecution for some of our product candidates is dependent on third parties.
While we normally seek and gain the right to fully prosecute the patents relating to our product candidates, there may be times when platform technology patents that relate to our product candidates are controlled by our licensors. This is the case with our license to rociletinib, under which Celgene holds the right to prosecute and maintain the patents and patent applications covering its core discovery technology, including molecular backbones, building blocks and classes of compounds generated by that technology, aspects of which relate to rociletinib. While we have the right to jointly prosecute and maintain the patent rights for the composition of matter for rociletinib, if Celgene or any of our future licensing partners fail to appropriately prosecute and maintain patent protection for patents covering any of our product candidates, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products.
We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.
Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or our licensors is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing.
Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by the U.S. PTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees.
We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our trade secrets or confidential information, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our product candidates throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued patents and our patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from so competing.
Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial cost and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business.
44
If we breach any of the agreements under which we license commercialization rights to our product candidates from third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.
We license the use, development and commercialization rights for all of our product candidates, and may enter into similar licenses in the future. Under each of our existing license agreements we are subject to commercialization and development, diligence obligations, milestone payment obligations, royalty payments and other obligations. If we fail to comply with any of these obligations or otherwise breach our license agreements, including by failing to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop or commercialize the product candidate, our licensing partners may have the right to terminate the license in whole or in part. Generally, the loss of any one of our licenses or other licenses in the future could materially harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.
The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business, or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. The following examples are illustrative:
|
● |
Others may be able to make compounds that are similar to our product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or have exclusively licensed. |
|
● |
We or our licensors or strategic partners might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patent or pending patent application that we own or have exclusively licensed. |
|
● |
We or our licensors or strategic partners might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions. |
|
● |
Others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights. |
|
● |
It is possible that our pending patent applications will not lead to issued patents. |
|
● |
Issued patents that we own or have exclusively licensed may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or may be held invalid or unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our competitors. |
|
● |
Our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets. |
|
● |
We may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable. |
|
● |
The patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business. |
Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock and Convertible Senior Notes
There may not be a viable public market for our common stock and as a result it may be difficult for you to sell your shares of our common stock.
Our common stock had not been publicly traded prior to our initial public offering in November 2011. The trading market for our common stock on The NASDAQ Global Select Market has been limited and an active trading market for our shares may not be sustained. As a result of these and other factors, you may be unable to resell your shares at a price that is attractive to you or at all. Further, an inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock and may impair our ability to enter into strategic partnerships or acquire companies or products by using our shares of common stock as consideration.
The price of our stock has been, and may continue to be, volatile, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
The trading price of our common stock has been, and may continue to be, volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. During the 12-month period ended April 29, 2016, the price of our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market ranged from $12.25 per share to $116.75 per share. In addition to the factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report, these factors include:
|
● |
adverse results of regulatory actions or decisions; |
|
● |
our failure to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved; |
45
|
● |
unanticipated serious safety concerns related to the use of any of our product candidates; |
|
● |
changes in laws or regulations applicable to our product candidates, including but not limited to clinical trial requirements for approvals; |
|
● |
disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our product candidates; |
|
● |
our decision to initiate a clinical trial, not to initiate a clinical trial or to terminate an existing clinical trial; |
|
● |
inability to obtain adequate product supply for any approved drug product or inability to do so at acceptable prices; |
|
● |
our dependence on third parties, including CMOS and CROs, as well as our partners that provide us with companion diagnostic products; |
|
● |
additions or departures of key scientific or management personnel; |
|
● |
failure to meet or exceed any financial guidance or expectations regarding development milestones that we may provide to the public; |
|
● |
actual or anticipated variations in quarterly operating results; |
|
● |
failure to meet or exceed the estimates and projections of the investment community; |
|
● |
overall performance of the equity markets and other factors that may be unrelated to our operating performance or the operating performance of our competitors, including changes in market valuations of similar companies; |
|
● |
conditions or trends in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries; |
|
● |
introduction of new products offered by us or our competitors; |
|
● |
announcements of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by us or our competitors; |
|
● |
issuances of debt or equity securities; |
|
● |
significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation; |
|
● |
sales of our common stock by us or our stockholders in the future; |
|
● |
trading volume of our common stock; |
|
● |
publication of research reports about us or our industry or positive or negative recommendations or withdrawal of research coverage by securities analysts; |
|
● |
ineffectiveness of our internal controls; |
|
● |
general political and economic conditions; |
|
● |
effects of natural or man-made catastrophic events; and |
|
● |
other events or factors, many of which are beyond our control. |
In addition, the stock market in general, and the NASDAQ Global Select Market and biotechnology companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. The realization of any of the above risks or any of a broad range of other risks, including those described in these “Risk Factors,” could have a dramatic and material adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.
Because our outstanding Notes are convertible into shares of our common stock, volatility or depressed prices of our common stock could have a similar effect on the trading price of our Notes. In addition, the existence of the Notes may encourage short selling in our common stock by market participants because the conversion of the Notes could depress the price of our common stock.
46
The conversion of some or all of the Notes may dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders. Holders of the outstanding Notes will be able to convert them at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding September 15, 2021. Upon conversion, holders of the Notes will receive shares of common stock. Any sales in the public market of shares of common stock issued upon conversion of such Notes could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock. We cannot predict the size of future issuances or the effect, if any, that they may have on the market price of our common stock. The issuance and sale of substantial amounts of common stock, or the perception that such issuances and sales may occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity or convertible debt securities.
Following periods of volatility in a company’s stock price, litigation has often been initiated against companies. Following the decline in our stock price related to the rociletinib regulatory update in November 2015, a number of lawsuits have been filed against us (see “Part II, Item 1-Legal Proceedings”). These proceedings and other similar litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition.
Certain of members of management and their affiliates own a significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exert significant influence over matters subject to stockholder approval.
Our executive officers, directors and their respective affiliates known to us beneficially owned approximately 17.4% of our voting stock as of April 11, 2016. These stockholders may have the ability to significantly influence the outcome of all matters submitted to our stockholders for approval. The interests of our executive officers, directors and their affiliates might not coincide with the interests of the other holders of our capital stock which may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you may feel are in your best interest as one of our stockholders.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.
Persons who were our stockholders prior to our initial public offering continue to hold a substantial number of shares of our common stock. If such persons sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline.
In addition, shares of common stock that are either subject to outstanding options or reserved for future issuance under our equity incentive plans will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting schedules and Rule 144 and Rule 701 under the Securities Act, and, in any event, we have filed a registration statement permitting shares of common stock issued on exercise of options to be freely sold in the public market. If these additional shares of common stock are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline.
Future sales and issuances of our common stock or rights to purchase common stock, including pursuant to our equity incentive plans, could result in additional dilution of the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our stock price to fall.
We expect that significant additional capital will be needed in the future to continue our planned operations. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. If we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in more than one transaction, investors may be materially diluted by subsequent sales. Such sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock.
Pursuant to our equity incentive plan(s), our compensation committee (or its designee) is authorized to grant equity-based incentive awards to our employees, directors and consultants. As of March 31, 2016, the number of shares of our common stock available for future grant under our 2011 Stock Incentive Plan (“2011 Plan”) is 752,618. The number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under our 2011 Plan will be increased (i) from time to time by the number of shares of our common stock forfeited upon the expiration, cancellation, forfeiture, cash settlement or other termination of awards under our 2009 Equity Incentive Plan, and (ii) at the discretion of our board of directors, on the date of each annual meeting of our stockholders, by up to the lesser of (x) a number of additional shares of our common stock representing 4% of our then-outstanding shares of common stock on such date and (y) 2,758,621 shares of our common stock. Future option grants and issuances of common stock under our 2011 Plan may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. In addition, a substantial number of shares of our common stock are reserved for issuance upon conversion of the Notes.
47
Some provisions of our charter documents and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.
Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire us or increase the cost of acquiring us, even if doing so would benefit our stockholders or remove our current management. These provisions include:
|
● |
authorizing the issuance of “blank check” preferred stock, the terms of which may be established and shares of which may be issued without stockholder approval; |
|
● |
limiting the removal of directors by the stockholders; |
|
● |
creating a staggered board of directors; |
|
● |
prohibiting stockholder action by written consent, thereby requiring all stockholder actions to be taken at a meeting of our stockholders; |
|
● |
eliminating the ability of stockholders to call a special meeting of stockholders; |
|
● |
permitting our board of directors to accelerate the vesting of outstanding option grants upon certain transactions that result in a change of control; and |
|
● |
establishing advance notice requirements for nominations for election to the board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon at stockholder meetings. |
These provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management. Because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which may discourage, delay or prevent someone from acquiring us or merging with us whether or not it is desired by or beneficial to our stockholders. Under Delaware law, a corporation may not, in general, engage in a business combination with any holder of 15% or more of its capital stock unless the holder has held the stock for three years or, among other things, the board of directors has approved the transaction. Any provision of our certificate of incorporation or bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock. Additionally, certain provisions of our outstanding Notes could make it more difficult or more expensive for a third party to acquire us. The repurchase price of the Notes must be paid in cash, and this obligation may have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing an acquisition of the Company that would otherwise be beneficial to our security holders.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrades our stock or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which might cause our stock price and trading volume to decline.
We may not be able to raise the funds necessary to repurchase the Notes upon a fundamental change, and our future debt may contain limitations on our ability to repurchase the Notes.
If we undergo a fundamental change, as defined in the indenture, prior to the maturity date of the Notes, holders may require us to repurchase for cash all or any portion of the Notes at a fundamental change repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the fundamental change repurchase date. We may not have or be able to borrow the funds required to repurchase the Notes on the fundamental change repurchase date. In addition, our ability to repurchase the Notes may otherwise be limited by law, regulatory authority or agreements governing our future indebtedness. Our failure to repurchase the Notes at a time when the repurchase is required by the indenture would constitute a default under the indenture. A default under the indenture or the fundamental change itself could also lead to a default under agreements governing our future indebtedness. If the repayment of the related indebtedness were to be accelerated after any applicable notice or grace periods, we may not have sufficient funds to repay the indebtedness and repurchase the Notes when required.
48
We may incur substantially more debt or take other actions which would intensify the risks discussed above; and we may not generate cash flow from operations in the future sufficient to satisfy our obligations under the Notes and any future indebtedness we may incur.
We may incur substantial additional debt in the future, subject to the restrictions contained in any debt instruments that we enter into in the future, some of which may be secured debt. We are not restricted under the terms of the indenture governing the Notes from incurring additional debt, securing existing or future debt, recapitalizing our debt or taking a number of other actions that are not limited by the terms of the indenture governing the Notes that could have the effect of diminishing our ability to make payments on the Notes when due. Our ability to refinance the Notes or future indebtedness will depend on the capital markets and our financial condition at such time. In addition, agreements that govern any future indebtedness that we may incur may contain financial and other restrictive covenants that will limit our ability to engage in activities that may be in our long-term best interests. Our failure to comply with those covenants could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration of some or all of our debt.
None.
None.
Not Applicable.
None.
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Exhibit Number |
|
Exhibit Description |
|
|
|
3.1(5) |
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Clovis Oncology, Inc. |
|
|
|
3.2(5) |
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of Clovis Oncology, Inc. |
|
|
|
4.1(3) |
|
Form of Common Stock Certificate of Clovis Oncology, Inc. |
|
|
|
4.2(8) |
|
Indenture dated as of September 9, 2014, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. |
|
|
|
10.1*(4) |
|
Amended and Restated Strategic License Agreement, dated as of June 16, 2011, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Avila Therapeutics, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.2*(4) |
|
License Agreement, dated as of June 2, 2011, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Pfizer Inc. |
|
|
|
10.3+(1) |
|
Clovis Oncology, Inc. 2009 Equity Incentive Plan. |
|
|
|
10.4+(4) |
|
Clovis Oncology, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan. |
|
|
|
10.5+(1) |
|
Form of Clovis Oncology, Inc. 2009 Equity Incentive Plan Stock Option Agreement. |
|
|
|
10.6+(4) |
|
Form of Clovis Oncology, Inc. 2011 Stock Incentive Plan Stock Option Agreement. |
|
|
|
10.7+(3) |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of August 24, 2011, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Patrick J. Mahaffy. |
|
|
|
10.8+(3) |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of August 24, 2011, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Erle T. Mast. |
|
|
|
49
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of August 24, 2011, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Gillian C. Ivers-Read. |
|
|
|
|
10.10+(3) |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of August 24, 2011, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Andrew R. Allen. |
|
|
|
10.11+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Paul Klingenstein. |
|
|
|
10.12+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and James C. Blair. |
|
|
|
10.13+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Edward J. McKinley. |
|
|
|
10.14+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Thorlef Spickschen. |
|
|
|
10.15+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and M. James Barrett. |
|
|
|
10.16+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Brian G. Atwood. |
|
|
|
10.17+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 12, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Patrick J. Mahaffy. |
|
|
|
10.18+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 12, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Erle T. Mast. |
|
|
|
10.19+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 12, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Gillian C. Ivers-Read. |
|
|
|
10.20+(1) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of May 13, 2009, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Andrew R. Allen. |
|
|
|
10.21+(4) |
|
Clovis Oncology, Inc. 2011 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. |
|
|
|
10.22+(4) |
|
Clovis Oncology, Inc. 2011 Cash Bonus Plan. |
|
|
|
10.23+(6) |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of March 22, 2012, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Steven L. Hoerter. |
|
|
|
10.24+(6) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of March 22, 2012, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Steven L. Hoerter. |
|
|
|
10.25+(2) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of June 13, 2013, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Ginger L. Graham. |
|
|
|
10.26+(2) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of June 13, 2013, between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Keith Flaherty. |
|
|
|
10.27(7) |
|
Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of November 19, 2013, by and among the Company, EOS, the Sellers listed on Exhibit A thereto and Sofinnova Capital V FCPR, acting in its capacity as the Sellers’ Representative. |
|
|
|
10.28*(7) |
|
Development and Commercialization Agreement, dated as of October 24, 2008, by and between Advenchen Laboratories LLC and Ethical Oncology Science S.p.A., as amended by the First Amendment, dated as of April 13, 2010 and the Second Amendment, dated as of July 30, 2012. |
|
|
|
10.29*(7) |
|
Collaboration and License Agreement, dated as of September 28, 2012, by and between Ethical Oncology Science S.p.A. and Les Laboratoires Servier and Institut de Recherches Internationales Servier. |
|
|
|
10.30(9) |
|
Consulting Agreement, dated August 6, 2015, by and between Andrew Allen and Clovis Oncology, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.31+(10) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of January 29, 2016, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Lindsey Rolfe. |
|
|
|
10.32+(10) |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of February 25, 2016, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Lindsey Rolfe. |
|
|
|
10.33+(10) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of January 26, 2016, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Dale Hooks. |
|
|
|
10.34+(10) |
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of January 26, 2016, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Dale Hooks. |
|
|
|
10.35+(11) |
|
Indemnification Agreement, dated as of February 17, 2016, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Daniel W. Muehl. |
|
|
|
10.36+ |
|
Offer Letter, dated as of May 27, 2015, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Daniel W. Muehl. |
|
|
|
10.37+ |
|
Salary Waiver Letter, dated as of May 9, 2016, by and between Clovis Oncology, Inc. and Patrick J. Mahaffy. |
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
Certification of principal financial officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
50
|
Certification of principal financial officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
The following materials from Clovis Oncology, Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2016, formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) the Consolidated Statements of Operations, (ii) the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss, (iii) the Consolidated Balance Sheets, (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and (v) Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements. |
(1) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-175080) on June 23, 2011. |
(2) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-35347) on June 14, 2013. |
(3) |
Filed as an exhibit with Amendment No. 2 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-175080) on August 31, 2011. |
(4) |
Filed as an exhibit with Amendment No. 3 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-175080) on October 31, 2011. |
(5) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K on March 15, 2012. |
(6) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-180293) on March 23, 2012. |
(7) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-35347) on November 19, 2013. |
(8) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-35347) on September 9, 2014. |
(9) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-35347) on August 12, 2015. |
(10) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K on February 29, 2016. |
(11) |
Filed as an exhibit with the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (File No. 001-35347) on April 1, 2016. |
+ |
Indicates management contract or compensatory plan. |
* |
Confidential treatment has been granted with respect to portions of this exhibit, which portions have been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. |
51
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: May 9, 2016 |
CLOVIS ONCOLOGY, INC. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ PATRICK J. MAHAFFY |
|
|
|
Patrick J. Mahaffy |
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer; Director |
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ DANIEL W. MUEHL |
|
|
|
Daniel W. Muehl |
|
|
|
Vice President of Finance and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer |
52