UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
☒ | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
For the quarterly period ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172023
OR
☐ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
For the transition period fromto
Commission File Number: 001-35703
PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware | 77-0683487 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
|
Identification Number)
10880 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2150, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
(424) 248-6500
(Registrant’sRegistrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
Title of each class | Trading Symbol(s) | Name of each exchange on which registered |
Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share | PBYI | The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (NASDAQ Global Select Market) |
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. days. Yes ☒ No ☐.☐.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, 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)files). Yes ☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer |
| ☐ | Accelerated filer |
| |||
Non-accelerated filer | ☐ | Smaller reporting company |
| ||||
Emerging growth company | ☐ | ||||||
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒.☒.
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’sissuer's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date. 37,529,53647,509,765 shares of Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share, were outstanding as of November 6, 2017.
July 31, 2023
- INDEX -
Page | |||
Item 1. | |||
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of | |||
| |||
Notes to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements |
| ||
Item 2. |
|
| |
Item 3. |
| ||
Item 4. |
| ||
Item 1. |
| ||
Item 1A. |
| ||
Item 2. |
| ||
Item 3. |
| ||
Item 4. |
| ||
Item 5. |
| ||
Item 6. |
| ||
| |||
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, (this “Quarterly Report”), contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act.(the “Exchange Act”). Any statements about our expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance are not historical facts and may be forward looking. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the timelines specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer (the
Company’s principal executive officer) and Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration and Treasurer (the Company’s principal financial and accounting officer),Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.disclosures. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can only provide reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives and in reaching a reasonable level of assurance, management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration and Treasurer,Chief Financial Officer, we have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined under Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)), as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2023. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration and TreasurerChief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017.2023.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There waswere no changechanges in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fiscal quarterthree months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2023 that hashave materially affected, or isare reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting other than controls that were added as a result of the Company's commercialization subsequent to FDA approval and the related product launch of NERLYNX.
reporting.
Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et.et al.
On June 3, 2015, Hsingching Hsu or the “plaintiff,” individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a class action lawsuit against us or “the defendants��� and certain of our executive officers in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 8:15-cv-00865-AG-JCG). On October 16, 2015, lead plaintiff Norfolk Pension Fund filed a consolidated complaint on behalf of all persons who purchased our securities between July 22, 2014 and May 29, 2015. The consolidated complaint alleges that we and certain of our executive officers made false or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts about our business, operations, prospects and performance in violation of Sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The plaintiff seeks damages, interest, costs, attorneys' fees, and other unspecified equitable relief. On September 30, 2016, the court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint. On June 6, 2017, the lead plaintiff filed a first amended complaint that included new claims about additional statements that plaintiff alleges are false or misleading. On June 19, 2017, defendants moved to dismiss the new claims in the amended complaint. On July 25, 2017, the court denied the motion to dismiss. A trial date is currently set for November 6, 2018. We intend to vigorously defend against this matter.
Eshelman vs. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et. al.
OnIn February 2, 2016, Fredric N. Eshelman filed a lawsuit against ourthe Company’s Chief Executive Officer and President, Alan H. Auerbach, and usthe Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (Case No.7:16-cv-00018-D)16-cv-00018-D). The complaint generally allegesalleged that Mr. Auerbach and wethe Company made defamatory statements regarding Dr. Eshelman in connection with a proxy contest. Dr. Eshelman seeks compensatory and punitive damages and expenses and costs, including attorneys’ fees. On April 4,In May 2016 we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On May 2, 2016,, Dr. Eshelman filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the claims against Mr. Auerbach. A trial on the remaining defamation claims against the Company took place from March 11 to March 15, 2019. At trial, the jury found the Company liable and awarded Dr. Eshelman $15.9 million in compensatory damages and $6.5 million in punitive damages. The Company strongly disagreed with the verdict and, on April 22, 2019, filed a motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, a reduced damages award. The Court denied that motion on March 2, 2020. The Company has appealed that ruling, and the verdict. Additionally, after trial, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking approximately $3.0 million in attorneys’ fees, as well as prejudgment interest. In the Court’s March 2020 ruling, it denied the motion for attorneys’ fees but granted the request for prejudgment interest, bringing the total judgment to $26.3 million. On February 6, 2017,March 30, 2020, the plaintiff filed a notice of cross-appeal and conditional cross-appeal, appealing the Court’s order denying the plaintiff’s request for attorneys’ fees and conditionally cross-appealing a Court ruling that certain communications between Mr. Auerbach and his attorneys were protected by attorney-client privilege and a related evidentiary ruling. On June 23, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the liability verdict but found the $22.4 million damages award, payable by the Company, to be excessive in light of the evidence at trial. The court denied our motionvacated this award and remanded for a new trial on damages. The Court’s judgment eliminated the damages award, pending further proceedings on remand. On remand, the District Court set a trial date for the new trial on damages for November 7, 2022. As the Company announced on November 10, 2022, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. Pursuant to dismiss. Discovery endedthe settlement agreement, Dr. Eshelman filed a Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice on November 7, 2022, and the Company agreed to pay Dr. Eshelman $16.0 million related to the settlement of Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology (the “Eshelman Litigation”), at which time the Company accrued $16.0 million (less imputed interest) related to the settlement, to be paid in September 2017. We intend to vigorously defend against Dr. Eshelman’s claims.two separate installments. The first payment of $8.0 million was paid in January 2023, and the second payment of $8.0 million will be paid on or before November 1, 2024.
Derivative ActionsLegal Malpractice Suit
On April 12September 17, 2020, the Company filed a lawsuit against Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe & Garofalo, L.L.P. and April 14, 2016, alleged shareholders filed two derivative lawsuits purportedly on behalf of us against certain of our officers and directorsDavid L. Levy, the attorneys who previously represented the Company in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al. in the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Company is alleging legal malpractice based on the Statedefendants’ negligent handling of California, Los Angeles, captioned Xing Xiethe defense of the Company in Eshelman v. Alan H. Auerbach, No. BC616617, and Kevin McKenney v. Auerbach, No. BC617059. The complaints assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, mismanagement and waste of corporate assets arising from substantially similar allegationsPuma Biotechnology, Inc., et al. as those contained in the securities class action describeddetailed above. The complaints seek an unspecified sum of damages and equitable relief. We intend to vigorously defend against this matter.
Stockholder Demand
On September 13, 2017, a purported stockholder filed a complaint in the Court of ChanceryCompany is seeking recovery of the Stateentire amount awarded in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al. and all legal fees and expenses incurred in appealing from the judgment and retrying the damages phase of Delaware seeking an equitable apportionment of attorneys’ fees in an unspecified amount. The purported stockholder alleges that his actions caused our board of directors to implement certain governance reforms and enhancements to our director compensation program, and that, as a result of his actions, the purported stockholder is entitled to attorneys’ fees in an amount commensurate to those purported benefits. Wetrial. On November 23, 2020, the defendant filed an answer to the complaint denying the allegations of negligence. On August 19, 2022, the Company filed a voluntary dismissal of the legal malpractice action, without prejudice, to allow the Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc. to conclude before proceedings. On June 2, 2023 the Company re-filed the lawsuit against Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe & Garofalo, L.L.P. and David L. Levy, the attorneys who previously represented the Company in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al. in the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
Mfolozi Dlamini, individually and on October 20, 2017. We intendbehalf of all others similarly situated v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc.
On May 26, 2023, Mfolozi Dlamini filed a Class Action Complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, alleging injuries as a result of unauthorized disclosure of certain individuals’ personally identifiable information in connection with a data security incident discovered by the Company in June 2022. The plaintiff seeks monetary and injunctive relief on behalf of himself and the putative class. At this time, the amount of potential damages as a result of the lawsuit, if any, is uncertain, though the Company believes any such amount would be immaterial.
Patent-Related Proceedings
AstraZeneca Litigation
On September 22, 2021, the Company filed suit against AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP, AstraZeneca AB, and AstraZeneca PLC for infringement of United States Patent Nos. 10,603,314 (“the ’314 patent”) and 10,596,162 (“the ’162 patent”) (Puma Biotechnology, Inc. et al. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP et al., 1:21CV01338 (D. Del. Sep. 22, 2021)). The Company’s complaint alleges that AstraZeneca’s commercial manufacture, use, offer for sale, sale, distribution, and/or importation of Tagrisso® (osimertinib) products for the treatment of gefitinib and/or erlotinib-resistant non-small cell lung cancer infringes the ’314 and ’162 patents. The Company is an exclusive licensee of the ’314 and ’162 patents under the Pfizer Agreement. Wyeth is a co-plaintiff. Plaintiffs seek a judgment that AstraZeneca’s product infringes the asserted patents and an award of monetary damages in an amount to vigorously defendbe proven at trial. AstraZeneca AB and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP filed an answer and counterclaims on November 5, 2021, including claims challenging the asserted patents as not infringed and/or invalid, and accusing plaintiffs of patent misuse. The parties stipulated to dismiss AstraZeneca PLC as a defendant and Pfizer as a Counterclaim Defendant on December 10, 2021, which the Court so ordered on December 13, 2021. The Company filed its answer to AstraZeneca’s counterclaims on December 17, 2021, denying those claims. The case was reassigned to visiting Judge Matthew Kennelly of the Northern District of Illinois. The parties attended a status conference with the Court on February 6, 2023. Fact discovery closed on May 19, 2023, and the parties are working to complete discovery of certain issues. A Markman Hearing was conducted on March 17, 2023, and the Court issued its claim construction decision on March 29, 2023. On April 10, 2023, AstraZeneca gave notice of its intention to rely on advice of counsel as a defense to Plaintiffs’ claims of willful infringement, and discovery related to that defense is ongoing. Initial expert discovery will be due July 28, 2023, and expert discovery will close on November 17, 2023. A jury trial is scheduled to begin on May 13, 2024.
Sandoz Litigation
On November 10, 2021, the Company filed suit against this matter.Sandoz, Inc. (“Sandoz”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,399,865 B2 (“the '865 patent”) (Puma Biotechnology, Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc., 1:21CV19918 (D.N.J. Nov. 10, 2021) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The Complaint was filed within 45 days of Sandoz providing notice of its abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”) seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® (neratinib) Tablets, 40 mg prior to the expiration of the '865 patent. The Company and Wyeth seek judgment that Sandoz’s purported ANDA product would, if allowed on the market, infringe the ‘865 patent, and ask that the Court order that, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271(e)(4)(A), the FDA’s approval of the Sandoz ANDA can be no earlier than the date the ‘865 patent expires. Sandoz has stated that, due to Paragraph III certifications filed for other patents listed in the Orange Book in conjunction with NERLYNX, Sandoz cannot launch its ANDA product until November 21, 2030, at the earliest. The Company’s complaint alleges that Sandoz has infringed the '865 patent by seeking approval to commercially manufacture, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import a generic version of NERLYNX in the United States prior to the expiration of the '865 patent. The Company is the exclusive licensee of the '865 patent under the Pfizer Agreement. Wyeth is a co-plaintiff. Sandoz submitted its answer to the complaint on January 14, 2022 and asserted counterclaims challenging the ‘865 patent as invalid. The Company and Wyeth filed an answer to those counterclaims on February 4, 2022. The filing of the Company’s Complaint against Sandoz triggered a 30-month stay of marketing approval for Sandoz’s ANDA.
Effective December 13, 2022, the Company and Wyeth entered into a settlement and license agreement (the “Settlement and License Agreement”) with Sandoz to fully settle and release all claims and terminate without prejudice the patent infringement litigation. Pursuant to the Settlement and License Agreement, the Company granted Sandoz a non-exclusive, royalty-free sub-license to certain licensed patents, including U.S. Patent No. 7,399,865 B2, which would permit Sandoz to begin selling a generic version of neratinib on or around December 8, 2030, unless such date is otherwise adjusted in accordance with the Settlement and License Agreement. In addition, the Company and Wyeth granted Sandoz a waiver of any and all regulatory exclusivities.
The Company entered into the Settlement and License Agreement solely to eliminate the burden, expense, distraction and uncertainties of further litigation.
Acebright China Litigation
On January 18, 2022, Shanghai Acebright Pharmaceuticals Group Co., Ltd. (“Acebright”) filed an ANDA with the National Medical Products Administration in China (“NMPA”) seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® (neratinib) tablet, 40mg in China. Acebright seeks approval prior to the expiration of three patents listed on the China Patent Information Registration Platform for Marketed Drugs (“Chinese Orange Book”), namely, Chinese Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, and ZL200880118789.3 (“NERLYNX® Patents”), alleging in a Type 4.2 patent declaration that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of NERLYNX® Patents listed in the Chinese Orange Book. The patent declaration of Acebright were published in the Chinese Orange Book on January 19, 2022. On March 2, 2022, the Company filed petitions with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (“CNIPA”) and requested administrative determination that Acebright’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of NERLYNX® Patents listed in the Chinese Orange Book. The Company’s request for administrative determination was accepted by CNIPA on March 18, 2022. The Company has notified NMPA of the acceptance of the request for administrative determination for NMPA to institute a stay of Acebright’s ANDA for nine months. On July 11, 2022, CNIPA decided that claims 5 and 6 of patent No. ZL200880118789.3 are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these two pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall in the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On September 9, 2022, CNIPA decided that the generic drug in Acebright’s ANDA does not fall within the protection scope of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 of patent No. ZL201410082103.7 and claims 1-4, 7 and 9-13 of patent No. ZL201080060546.6. The three CNIPA administrative decisions on NERLYNX® Patents have lifted the stay of Acebright’s ANDA by NMPA. The Company has appealed each CNIPA administrative decision in January 2023 at the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (“BJIPC”). The three appeals were accepted by BJIPC on February 20, 2023. The Company also filed three civil complaints based on the three NERLYNX® Patents against Acebright with the BJIPC in July 2022 and requested court determination that Acebright’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of NERLYNX® Patents. On May 6, 2023, the Company withdrew two civil lawsuits and two appeals in relation to Chinese Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6 at the BJIPC. On May 24, 2023, the BJIPC accepted the Company’s withdrawal request. The Company has one pending proceedings describedcivil lawsuit and one pending appeal in this section involve complex questionsrelation to Chinese Patent No. ZL200880118789.3 at the BJIPC.
Aosaikang China Litigation
On November 17, 2022, Jiangsu Aosaikang Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. (“Aosaikang”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of factthe Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2202006. Aosaikang made Type 4.2 declarations against the four Orange Book patents ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, ZL200880118789.3 and lawZL201710057547.9, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of the Orange Book patents. Aosaikang also alleged that patents ZL200880118789.3 and will requireZL201710057547.9 are not eligible for Chinese Orange Book listing.
On December 28, 2022, the expenditureCompany submitted four Article 76 petitions against the Aosaikang ANDA with the CNIPA and requested administrative determination that Aosaikang’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of significant fundsthe claims of the four Orange Book patents. On January 6, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to patent nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6. Also on January 6, 2023, the diversionCNIPA declined to accept the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to patent nos. ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that the listed claims are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall in the scope of other resources“patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On January 28, 2023, the Company requested the NMPA to defend.institute a nine-month stay against Aosaikang ANDA starting from the CNIPA’s acceptance of the Company’s request for administrative determination. On June 2, 2023, CNIPA decided that the generic drug in Aosaikang’s ANDA does not fall within the protection scope of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 of patent No. ZL201410082103.7 and claims 1-4, 7 and 9-13 of patent No. ZL201080060546.6. The resultstwo CNIPA administrative decisions on NERLYNX® Patents have lifted the stay of legal proceedingsAosaikang’s ANDA by NMPA. The Company has the right to appeal each CNIPA administrative decision within six months of receiving the decision. The Company also has the right to enforce the four Orange Book patents in civil litigation before the Chinese court.
Convalife China Litigation
Convalife Pharmaceuticals (Shanghai) Co., Ltd (“Convalife”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2202095. On December 23, 2022, Convalife made Type 4.2 declarations against the four Orange Book patents ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of the Orange Book patents. Convalife also alleged that patents ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9 are inherently uncertain,not eligible for Chinese Orange Book listing.
On February 1, 2023, the Company submitted four Article 76 petitions against the Convalife ANDA with the CNIPA and material adverse outcomesrequested administrative determination that Convalife’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of the four Orange Book patents. On February 3, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to patent nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6. Also on February 3, 2023, the CNIPA declined to accept the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to patent nos. ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that the listed claims are possible.not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall in the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On February 24, 2023, the Company requested the NMPA to institute a nine-month stay against Convalife ANDA starting from the CNIPA’s acceptance of the Company’s request for administrative determination. On June 2, 2023, CNIPA decided that the generic drug in Convalife’s ANDA does not fall within the protection scope of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 of patent No. ZL201410082103.7 and claims 1-4, 7 and 9-13 of patent No. ZL201080060546.6. The two CNIPA administrative decisions on NERLYNX® Patents have lifted the stay of Convalife’s ANDA by NMPA. The Company has the right to appeal each CNIPA administrative decision within six months of receiving the decision. The Company also has the right to enforce the four Orange Book patents in civil litigation before the Chinese court.
Kelun China Litigation
Hunan Kelun Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Kelun”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2300221. On January 28, 2023, Kelun made Type 4.2 declarations against the four Orange Book patents ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of the Orange Book patents. Kelun also alleged that patents ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9 are not eligible for Chinese Orange Book listing.
On March 13, 2023, the Company submitted four Article 76 petitions against the Kelun ANDA with the CNIPA and requested administrative determination that Kelun’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of the four Orange Book patents. On March 21, 2023, the CNIPA declined to accept the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to patent nos. ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that the listed claims are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall in the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On March 24, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to patent nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6. On April 17, 2023, the Company requested the NMPA to institute a nine-month stay against Kelun’s ANDA starting from the CNIPA’s acceptance of the Company’s request for administrative determination. The Company has the right to appeal each CNIPA administrative decision within six months of receiving the decision. The Company also has the right to enforce the four Orange Book patents in civil litigation before the Chinese court.
In addition
Under Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, we identified important factors that could affect our financial performance and could cause our actual results for future periods to thediffer materially from our anticipated results or other information containedexpectations, including those expressed in any forward-looking statements made in this Quarterly Report, the followingReport. Except as described below, there has been no material change in our risk factors should be considered carefullysubsequent to the filing of our prior reports referenced above. However, the risks described in evaluating our company. Our business, financial condition, liquidity or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. The risks and uncertainties described belowreports are not the only onesrisks we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently believe are not material, may also become important factors that affect us.
We have a limited operating history and are not profitable and may never become profitable.
We have a limited operating history and until recently our efforts and resources have been focused primarily on acquiring and developing our pharmaceutical technologies, raising capital and recruiting personnel. On July 17, 2017, the FDA approved our first product, NERLYNX, for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer in the United States and NERLYNX only recently became commercially available in the United States. We have a history of operating losses with net losses of $227.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and $276.0 million and $239.3 million for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. As of September 30, 2017, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $1,024.4 million.
Although we received FDA approval of NERLYNX, we expect to incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future and may never become profitable. Moreover, even if we succeed in developing and commercializing one or more of other drug candidates, we may never become profitable. The successful development and commercialization of any drug candidates will require us to perform a variety of functions, including:
undertaking pre-clinical development and clinical trials;
hiring additional personnel;
participating in regulatory approval processes;
formulating and manufacturing products;
initiating and conducting sales and marketing activities; and
implementing additional internal systems and infrastructure.
We will likely need to raise additional capital in order to fund our business and generate significant revenue in order to achieve and maintain profitability. We may not be able to generate this revenue, raise additional capital or achieve profitability in the future. As a result, we expect our losses to continue for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will achieve profitability in the future or that, if we do become profitable, we will sustain profitability. Our failure to achieve or maintain profitability could negatively impact the value of our common stock.
Our success depends on our ability to successfully commercialize NERLYNX. We are currently a single product company with limited commercial sales experience, which makes it difficult to evaluate our current business, predict our future prospects and forecast our financial performance and growth.
We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the development and commercialization of our lead product, NERLYNX, which was approved by the FDA for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer in the United States on July 17, 2017, and we expect NERLYNX to constitute the vast majority of our product revenue for the foreseeable future. Our success depends on our ability to effectively commercialize NERLYNX. Successful commercialization of NERLYNX is subject to many risks. We have never, as an organization, launched or commercialized a product, and there is no guarantee that we will be able to do so successfully with NERLYNX for this indication. There are numerous examples of unsuccessful product launches and failures to meet high expectations of market potential, including by pharmaceutical companies with more experience and resources than we have. We are continuing to build our commercial team and hire our U.S. sales force, and therefore, we will need to further develop and train the team and any new hires in orderdeem to be prepared to successfully commercialize of NERLYNX. Even if we are successful in building out our commercial team, there are many factors that could cause the commercialization of NERLYNX to be unsuccessful, including a number of factors that are outside our control. The commercial success of NERLYNX depends on the extent to which patients and physicians accept and adopt NERLYNX. For example, if the expected patient population is smaller than we estimateimmaterial or if physicians are unwilling to prescribe or patients are unwilling to take NERLYNX due to the related side effects, including diarrhea, the commercial potential of NERLYNX will be limited. In addition, we also do not know how physicians, patients and payors will respond to the pricing of NERLYNX. Thus, significant uncertainty remains regarding the commercial potential of NERLYNX. Moreover, our ability to effectively generate product revenue from NERLYNX will depend on our ability to, among other things:
achieve and maintain compliance with regulatory requirements;
create market demand for and achieve market acceptance of NERLYNX through our marketing and sales activities and other arrangements established for the promotion of NERLYNX;
compete with other breast cancer drugs (either in the present or in the future);
train, deploy and support a qualified sales force;
the ability of our third-party manufacturers to manufacture NERLYNX in sufficient quantities in compliance with requirements of the FDA and similar foreign regulatory agencies, if NERLYNX is approved by such foreign regulatory agencies, and at acceptable quality and pricing levels in order to meet commercial demand;
the ability of our third-party manufacturers to develop, validate and maintain commercially viable manufacturing processes that are compliant with current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, regulations;
implement and maintain agreements with wholesalers, distributors and group purchasing organizations on commercially reasonable terms;
ensure that our entire supply chain efficiently and consistently delivers NERLYNX to our customers;
receive adequate levels of coverage and reimbursement for NERLYNX from commercial health plans and governmental health programs;
our provision of co-pay assistance to help qualified patients with out-of-pocket costs associated with their NERLYNX prescription and/or other programs to ensure patient access to our products;
our success in educating physicians and patients about the benefits, administration and use of NERLYNX;
acceptance of NERLYNX as safe and effective by patients and the medical community;
the nature of publicity related to our product relative to the publicity related to our competitors’ products;
obtain regulatory approvals for additional indications for the use of NERLYNX; and
maintain and defend our patent protection and regulatory exclusivity for NERLYNX and to comply with our obligations under, and otherwise maintain, our intellectual property license with Pfizer.
Any disruption in our ability to generate product revenue from the sale of NERLYNX will have a material and adverse impact on our results of operations.
We currently have no experience as a company in marketing or distributing pharmaceutical products. If we are unable to expand our marketing capabilities and effectively commercialize NERLYNX, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be materially adversely affected.
Our strategy is to build our sales, marketing and distribution capabilities to successfully commercialize NERLYNX in the United States. While we are continuing to establish our commercial team and hire our U.S. sales force, we do not have any experience commercializing pharmaceutical products as an organization. In order to successfully market NERLYNX, we must continue to build our sales, marketing, managerial, compliance, and related capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. If we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to appropriately commercialize NERLYNX and may not become profitable.
Included in our strategy in the United States is the establishment of a direct sales force to commercialize NERLYNX, and we will need to conduct further activities to develop our sales force. These efforts will continue to be expensive and time-consuming, and we cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully develop this capability. NERLYNX is a newly-marketed drug and, therefore, none of the members of our sales force has ever promoted NERLYNX prior to its commercial launch. In addition, we must train our sales force to ensure that a consistent and appropriate message about NERLYNX is being delivered to our potential customers. If we are unable to effectively train our sales force and equip them with effective materials, including medical and sales literature to help them inform and educate potential customers about the benefits of NERLYNX and its proper administration, our efforts to successfully commercialize NERLYNX could be harmed, which would negatively impact our ability to generate product revenue.
Additionally, even though we have commenced the commercialization of NERLYNX, we will need to maintain and further develop our sales force to achieve commercial success, and we will be competing with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. In the event we are unable to continue to develop and effectively maintain our commercial team, including our U.S. sales force, our ability to successfully commercialize NERLYNX would be limited, and we would not be able to generate product revenue successfully. There are risks involved both with establishing our own sales and marketing capabilities and with entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, any efforts to develop a direct sales and marketing organization would be subject to numerous risks, including:
recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch;
our inability to recruit, retain or motivate adequate numbers of effective and qualified sales and marketing personnel;
the inability to provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel;
the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or convince adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe any future products;
unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization; and
the premature or unnecessary incurrence of significant commercialization expenses if the commercial launch of a product is delayed or does not occur for any reason.
Similarly, if we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services, our product revenue or the profitability associated with any product revenue may be lower than if we were to market and sell any products that we develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our proposed products or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We may have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. Moreover, we may be negatively impacted by other factors outside of our control relating to such third parties, including, but not limited to, their inability to comply with regulatory requirements. If we do not establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our proposed products.
We may not be able to secure additional financing on favorable terms, or at all, to meet our future capital needs and our failure to obtain additional financing when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or commercialization efforts or other operations.
Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect our costs and expenses to increase in the future as we commercialize NERLYNX, including the cost of a direct sales force and the cost of manufacturing. We will also continue to expend substantial amounts on research and development of our other product candidates, including conducting clinical trials. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:
the costs and expenses of our U.S. sales and marketing infrastructure;
the degree of success we experience in commercializing NERLYNX;
the revenue generated by the sale of NERLYNX and any other products that may be approved in the United States;
the costs, timing and outcomes of clinical trials and regulatory reviews associated with our other product candidates;
the emergence of competing products;
the extent to which NERLYNX is adopted by the physician community and patients;
the number and types of future products we develop and commercialize;
the costs of preparing, filing and prosecuting patent applications and maintaining, enforcing and defending intellectual property-related claims;
costs of operating as a public company and compliance with existing and future regulations; and
the extent and scope of our general and administrative expenses.
While our consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, we expect to continue incurring significant losses for the foreseeable future and will continue to remain dependent on our ability to obtain sufficient funding to sustain operation and successfully commercialize NERLYNX. The Company entered into a loan agreement with Silicon Valley Bank and Oxford Finance for a term loan of up to $100.0 million, subject to funding in two tranches. The Company received gross proceeds of $50.0 million from the first tranche of the credit facility upon closing on October 31, 2017 and intends to use the funds for general corporate purposes and to further support NERLYNX commercial initiatives. The second tranche of $50.0 million may be drawn at the Company’s option and subject to the achievement of certain revenue milestones. The loan will mature on October 31, 2022. While we have been successful in raising financing in the past, there can be no assurance that we will be able to do so in the future. Additional financing may not be available on a timely basis on terms acceptableknown to us, or at all. We may raise funds in equity or debt financings to access funds for our capital needs. If we raise additional funds through further issuances of equity or convertible debt securities, our existing stockholders could suffer significant dilution in their percentage ownership of our company, and any new equity securities we issue could have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. Any debt financing obtained by us in the future would cause us to incur debt service expenses and could include restrictive covenants relating to our capital raising activities andas well as other financial and operational matters, which may make it more difficult for us to obtain additional capital and pursue business opportunities. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to us when we require it, we may terminate or delay the development of one or more of our product candidates, delay clinical trials necessary to market our products, or delay establishment of sales and marketing capabilities or other activities necessary to commercialize our products. If this were to occur, our ability to continue to grow and support our business and to respond to business challenges could be significantly limited. Furthermore, our ability to obtain funding may be adversely impacted by uncertain market conditions, unfavorable decisions of regulatory authorities or adverse clinical trial results. The outcome of these matters cannot be predicted at this time. If the going concern assumption was not appropriate for the preparation of our consolidated financial statements, adjustment might be necessary to the consolidated financial statements.
Our former independent registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
Our historical consolidated financial statements have been prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. Our former independent registered public accounting firm has issued a report on our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2016 that included an explanatory paragraph referring to our significant operating losses and expressing substantial doubt in our ability to continue as a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon our ability to obtain additional equity financing or other capital, attain further operating efficiencies, reduce expenditures, and, ultimately, to generate revenue. Our consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. However, if adequate funds are not available to us when we need it, we will be required to curtail our operations which would, in turn, further raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. The doubt regarding our potential ability to continue as a going concern may adversely affect our ability to obtain new financing on reasonable terms or at all. Additionally, if we are unable to continue as a going concern, our stockholders may lose some or all of their investment in the Company.
The terms of our credit facility place restrictions on our ability to operate our business and on our financial flexibility, and we may be unable to achieve the revenue necessary for us to incur additional borrowings under the credit facility or to satisfy the minimum revenue covenants.
The terms of our credit facility place restrictions on our ability to operate our business and our financial flexibility. On October 31, 2017, we entered into a loan and security agreement, which we refer to as the credit facility, with Silicon Valley Bank, or SVB, as administrative and collateral agent, and the lenders party theretorisks reported from time to time including SVB and Oxford Finance LLC, or Oxford, pursuant to which the lenders agreed to make term loans available to us in an aggregate amount of $100 million, consisting of (i) a Term Loan A in an aggregate amount of $50 million available on the effective date and (ii) a Term Loan B in an aggregate amount of $50 million available to be drawn at our option between March 31, 2018 and June 30, 2018 provided we have achieved a specified minimum revenue milestone and no event of default is occurring. As of October 31, 2017, we had $50.0 million in principal outstanding under the credit facility. We cannot assure you that we will achieve the revenue milestone that will trigger our ability to draw the Term Loan B, and accordingly, we may never be able to borrow the additional $50.0 million provided for in the credit facility. The credit facility is secured by substantially all of our personal property, other than our intellectual property.
The credit facility includes affirmative and negative covenants applicable to us, our current subsidiary and any subsidiaries we create in the future. The affirmative covenants include, among others, covenants requiring us to maintain our legal existence and governmental approvals, deliver certain financial reports, maintain insurance coverage and satisfy certain requirements regarding deposit accounts. We must also achieve product revenue, measured as of the last day of each fiscal quarter on a trailing 3-month basis, that is (i) greater than or equal to 70% of the revenue target set forth in our board-approved projections for the 2017 fiscal year, (ii) greater than or equal to 50% of the revenue target set forth in our board-approved projections for the 2018 fiscal year, and (iii) greater than or equal to 50% of the revenue target set forth in our board-approved projections for the 2019 fiscal year. New minimum revenue levels will be established for each subsequent fiscal year by mutual agreement of us, SVB, as administrative agent, and the
lenders. The negative covenants include, among others, restrictions on us transferring collateral, incurring additional indebtedness, engaging in mergers or acquisitions, paying dividends or making other distributions, making investments, creating liens, selling assets and suffering a change in control, in each case subject to certain exceptions. These covenants may make it difficult for us to operate our business. In addition, we are in the early stages of commercializing NERLYNX and we cannot assure you that we will be able to achieve the minimum revenue requirements provided for in the credit facility. Our failure to satisfy the revenue, or any other, covenant could result in an event of default under the loan.
The credit facility also includes events of default, the occurrence and continuation of which could cause interest to be charged at the rate that is otherwise applicable plus 5.0% and would provide SVB, as collateral agent, with the right to exercise remedies against us and the collateral securing the credit facility, including foreclosure against the property securing the credit facilities, including our cash. These events of default include, among other things, our failure to pay principal or interest due under the credit facility, a breach of certain covenants under the credit facility, our insolvency, a material adverse change, the occurrence of any default under certain other indebtedness in an amount greater than $500,000 and one or more judgments against us in an amount greater than $500,000 individually or in the aggregate.
Even though the FDA has granted approval of NERLYNX for the treatment for the extended adjuvant treatment of early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer, the terms of the approval may limit its commercial potential.
Even though the FDA has granted approval of NERLYNX, the scope and terms of the approval may limit our ability to commercialize NERLYNX and, therefore, our ability to generate substantial sales revenue. The FDA has approved NERLYNX only for the extended adjuvant treatment of early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer. In connection with the FDA approval, we have committed to conduct the following post-marketing studies: (i) a physiologically-based pharmacokinetic, or PBPK, modeling/simulation study to evaluate the effect of repeat doses of a moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor on the single dose pharmacokinetics of neratinib and its active metabolites to assess the magnitude of increased drug exposure and to address the potential for excessive drug toxicity, or if the PBPK modeling/simulation is not feasible, a clinical pharmacokinetic trial, (ii) a PBPK modeling/simulation study or a clinical pharmacokinetic trial with repeat doses of a moderate CYP3A4 inducer on the single dose pharmacokinetics of neratinib and its active metabolites to assess the magnitude of decreased drug exposure and to determine appropriate dosing recommendations, (iii) a clinical pharmacokinetic trial to evaluate whether separating the dosing of H2-receptor antagonists and neratinib can minimize the drug-drug interaction potential, (iv) the submission of the final results of our 2-year carcinogenicity study in the rat, and (v) submission of certain trial data from our ongoing clinical trials. If we fail to comply with our post-marketing commitments, or if the results of the post-marketing studies, or any other ongoing clinical studies of NERLYNX, are negative, the FDA could decide to withdraw approval, add warnings or narrow the approved indication in the product label.
We are heavily dependent on the success of NERLYNX, which is still under clinical development for various additional indications. While the FDA has approved NERLYNX for the extended adjuvant treatment of patients with early stage HER2-positive breast cancer, we cannot be certain that NERLYNX will receive regulatory approval for any other indication for which we may seek approval.
The FDA has approved NERLYNX only for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer. We expect that a substantial portion of our efforts and expenditures over the next few years will be devoted to the development of NERLYNX in various additional indications. Accordingly, our business currently depends heavily on the successful development and regulatory approval of NERLYNX for additional indications. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of drug products are and will remain subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries that each have differing regulations. We are not permitted to market NERLYNX for other indications or any of our other drug candidates in the United States until they receive approval of a New Drug Application, or NDA, from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until they receive the requisite approval from such countries. In June 2016, we submitted a MAA with the European Medicines Agency, or EMA. The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the EMA, or CHMP, recently issued its Day-180 List of Outstanding issues in the process of their ongoing regulatory review of the MAA. The CHMP has requested additional data analyses related to the safety and efficacy of neratinib and has instituted a clock stop in order to allow the Company time to respond to this List of Outstanding Issues. The CHMP has set a deadline of December 22, 2017 for the Company to respond to the list. The Company expects the CHMP to issue an opinion regarding the MAA for neratinib in the first quarter of 2018. Approval of NERLYNX by the FDA for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer does not ensure that the foreign jurisdictions will also approve NERLYNX for that indication, nor does it ensure that NERLYNX will be approved by the FDA for any other indications. Obtaining approval of an NDA or foreign marketing application is an extensive, lengthy, expensive and inherently uncertain process, and the FDA or foreign regulator may delay, limit or deny approval of a drug candidate for many reasons, including:
we may not be able to demonstrate that NERLYNX or any other drug candidate is safe and effective as a treatment for our targeted indications to the satisfaction of the FDA or other regulator;
|
|
the FDA or other regulator may disagree with the number, design, size, conduct or implementation of our clinical trials;
the clinical research organization, or CRO, that we retain to conduct clinical trials or any other third parties involved in the conduct of trials may take actions outside of our control that materially adversely impact our clinical trials;
the FDA or other regulator may not find the data from pre-clinical studies and clinical trials sufficient to demonstrate that the clinical and other benefits of NERLYNX or any other drug candidate outweigh the safety risks;
the FDA or other regulator may disagree with our interpretation of data from our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials or may require that we conduct additional studies or trials;
the FDA or other regulator may not accept data generated at our clinical trial sites;
if our NDA is reviewed by an advisory committee, the FDA may have difficulties scheduling an advisory committee meeting in a timely manner or the advisory committee may recommend against approval of our application or may recommend that the FDA require, as a condition of approval, additional pre-clinical studies or clinical trials, limitations on approved labeling or distribution and use restrictions;
the advisory committee may recommend that the FDA require, as a condition of approval, additional pre-clinical studies or clinical trials, limitations on approved labeling or distribution and use restrictions;
the FDA may require development of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy as a condition of approval;
the FDA or other regulator may identify deficiencies in the manufacturing processes or facilities of our third-party manufacturers; or
the FDA or other regulator may change its approval policies or adopt new regulations.
If we do not obtain regulatory approval of NERLYNX for other indications in the United States, or for any indications in foreign jurisdictions, we will not be able to market NERLYNX for other indications or in other jurisdictions, which will limit our commercial revenue.
We will rely exclusively on third parties to formulate and manufacture NERLYNX and our drug candidates. The commercialization of NERLYNX and any of our other drug candidates, if approved, could be stopped, delayed or made less profitable if those third parties fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of product or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.
We have no experience in drug formulation or manufacturing and do not intend to establish our own manufacturing facilities. We lack the resources and expertise to formulate or manufacture our own drug candidates. While NERLYNX and our drug candidates were being developed by Pfizer, both the drug substance and drug product were manufactured by third-party contractors. We are using the same third-party contractors to manufacture, supply, store and distribute drug supplies for our clinical trials and the commercialization of NERYLNX. If we are unable to continue our relationships with one or more of these third-party contractors, we could experience delays in our development or commercialization efforts as we locate and qualify new manufacturers. We intend to rely on one or more third-party contractors to manufacture the commercial supply of our drugs. Our anticipated future reliance on a limited number of third-party manufacturers exposes us to the following risks:
We may be unable to identify manufacturers on acceptable terms or at all because the number of potential manufacturers is limited and the FDA must approve any replacement manufacturer. This approval would require new testing and compliance inspections. In addition, a new manufacturer would have to be educated in, or develop substantially equivalent processes for, production of our products after receipt of FDA approval.
Our third-party manufacturers might be unable to formulate and manufacture our drugs in the volume and of the quality required to meet our clinical needs and commercial needs, as applicable.
Our future contract manufacturers may not perform as agreed or may not remain in the contract manufacturing business for the time required to supply our clinical trials or to successfully produce, store and distribute our products for commercialization, as applicable.
|
|
|
If any third-party manufacturer makes improvements in the manufacturing process for our products, we may not own, or may have to share, the intellectual property rights to the innovation.
Each of these risks could delay our clinical trials, the approval, if any, of our drug candidates by the FDA or the commercialization of NERLYNX or our other drug candidates or result in higher costs or deprive us of potential product revenue.
If our third-party manufacturers fail to manufacture NERLYNX in sufficient quantities and at acceptable quality and pricing levels, or fail to fully comply with cGMP regulations, we may face delays in commercialization or be unable to meet market demand, and may lose potential revenues.
The manufacture of NERLYNX requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques, process controls and the use of specialized processing equipment. Our third-party maunfacturers must comply with federal, state and foreign regulations, including the FDA’s regulations governing cGMP, enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program and by similar regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions where we do business. These requirements include, among other things, quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation. The FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities at any time may implement new standards, or change their interpretation and enforcement of existing standards for manufacture, packaging or testing of our products. Any failure by us or our third-party maunfacturers to comply with applicable regulations may result in fines and civil penalties, suspension of production, product seizure or recall, operating restrictions, imposition of a consent decree, modification or withdrawal of product approval or criminal prosecution and would limit the availability of our product. Any manufacturing defect or error discovered after products have been produced and distributed also could result in significant consequences, including costly recall procedures, re-stocking costs, damage to our reputation and potential for product liability claims.
If our third-party manufacturers are unable to produce the required commercial quantities of NERLYNX to meet market demand for NERLYNX on a timely basis or at all, or if they fail to comply with applicable laws for the manufacturing of NERLYNX, we will suffer damage to our reputation and commercial prospects and we will lose potential revenue.
Clinical trials are very expensive, time-consuming and difficult to design and implement.
Although the FDA approved NERLYNX for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer in the United States on July 17, 2017, NERLYNX is still under development for various indications and our other drug candidates are in development as well, all of which will require extensive clinical testing before we can submit any NDA for regulatory approval. We cannot predict with any certainty that any NDA submitted by us will be approved by the FDA. Human clinical trials are very expensive and difficult to design and implement, in part because they are subject to rigorous regulatory requirements. The clinical trial process is also time consuming. We estimate that clinical trials of our other drug candidates will take at least several years to complete. Furthermore, failure can occur at any stage of the trials, and we could encounter problems that cause us to abandon or repeat clinical trials. The results of pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials of our drug candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Drug candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through pre-clinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Our future clinical trial results may not be successful.
The commencement and completion of clinical trials may be delayed by several factors, including:
imposition of a clinical hold or failure to obtain regulatory authorization or approval to commence a trial;
unforeseen safety issues;
determination of dosing issues;
lack of effectiveness during clinical trials;
inability to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites;
slower-than-expected rates of patient recruitment;
inability to monitor patients adequately during or after treatment; and
inability or unwillingness of medical investigators to follow our clinical protocols.
Further, we, the FDA, foreign regulatory authorities, or an Institutional Review Board, or IRB, may suspend our clinical trials at any time if it appears that we or our collaborators are failing to conduct a trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, that we are exposing participants to unacceptable health risks, or if the FDA or such other regulator finds deficiencies in our IND or comparable submissions or the conduct of these trials. Therefore, we cannot predict with any certainty the schedule for commencement and completion of future clinical trials. If we experience delays in the commencement or completion of our clinical trials, or if we terminate a clinical trial prior to completion, the commercial prospects of our drug candidates could be harmed, and our ability to generate revenue from the drug candidates may be delayed. In addition, any delays in our clinical trials could increase our costs, slow down the approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. 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 drug candidates.
Enrollment and retention of patients in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside our control.
We may encounter delays in enrolling, or be unable to enroll, a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our clinical trials, and even once enrolled we may be unable to retain a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our trials. Patient enrollment and retention in clinical trials depends on many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the trial protocol, the existing body of safety and efficacy data with respect to the study drug, the number and nature of competing treatments and ongoing clinical trials of competing drugs for the same indication, the proximity of patients to clinical sites and the eligibility criteria for the study. Furthermore, any negative results we may report in clinical trials of any of our drug candidates may make it difficult or impossible to recruit and retain patients in other clinical studies of that same drug candidate. Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment and/or retention may result in increased costs, program delays or both, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop our drug candidates, or could render further development impossible. In addition, we expect to rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure proper and timely conduct of our future clinical trials and, while we intend to enter into agreements governing their services, we will be limited in our ability to compel their actual performance.
The results of our clinical trials may not support our drug candidate claims.
Even if our clinical trials are completed as planned, we cannot be certain that their results will support the safety and effectiveness of our drug candidates for our targeted indications. Success in pre-clinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and we cannot be sure that the results of later clinical trials will replicate the results of prior clinical trials and pre-clinical testing. A failure of a clinical trial to meet its predetermined endpoints would likely cause us to abandon a drug candidate and may delay development of other drug candidates. Any delay in, or termination of, our clinical trials will delay the filing of our NDAs with the FDA and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize our drug candidates and generate product revenue.
While we have negotiated a Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA, agreement with the FDA relating to our Phase III clinical study of PB272, this agreement does not guarantee approval of PB272 or any other particular outcome from regulatory review of the clinical trial or the drug candidate.
In February 2013, we announced that we reached agreement with the FDA under a Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA, for our Phase III clinical trial of PB272 in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer who have failed two or more prior treatments. We commenced the Phase III clinical trial in June 2013. The FDA’s SPA process is designed to facilitate the FDA’s review and approval of drugs by allowing the FDA to evaluate the proposed design and size of Phase III clinical trials that are intended to form the primary basis for determining a drug product’s efficacy. Upon specific request by a clinical trial sponsor, the FDA will evaluate the protocol and respond to a sponsor’s questions regarding, among other things, primary efficacy endpoints, trial conduct and data analysis, within 45 days of receipt of the request. The FDA ultimately assesses whether the protocol design and planned analysis of the trial are acceptable to support regulatory approval of the product candidate with respect to the effectiveness of the identified indication. All agreements between the FDA and the sponsor regarding an SPA must be clearly documented in writing, either in the form of an SPA letter or minutes of a meeting between the sponsor and the FDA at which the SPA agreement was reached. However, an SPA agreement does not guarantee approval of a product candidate, and even if the FDA agrees to the design, execution, and analysis proposed in protocols reviewed under the SPA process, the FDA may revoke or alter its agreement in certain circumstances. In particular, an SPA agreement is not binding on the FDA if public health concerns emerge that were unrecognized at the time of the SPA agreement, other new scientific concerns regarding product safety or efficacy arise, the sponsor company fails to comply with the agreed upon trial protocols, or the relevant data, assumptions or information provided by the sponsor in a request for
the SPA change or are found to be false or omit relevant facts. In addition, even after an SPA agreement is finalized, the SPA agreement may be modified, and such modification will be deemed binding on the FDA review division, except under the circumstances described above, if the FDA and the sponsor agree in writing to modify the protocol and such modification is intended to improve the study. The FDA retains significant latitude and discretion in interpreting the terms of the SPA agreement and the data and results from any study that is the subject of the SPA agreement.
We cannot assure you that our Phase III clinical trial will succeed, or that the SPA will ultimately be binding on the FDA or will result in any FDA approval for PB272. The trial is expected to enroll approximately 600 patients. We expect that the FDA will review our compliance with the SPA, evaluate the results of the clinical trials and conduct inspections of some of the approximately 250 sites in North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific where the clinical trials will be conducted. We cannot assure you that each of the clinical trial sites will pass such FDA inspections, and negative inspection results could significantly delay or prevent any potential approval for PB272. If the FDA revokes or alters its agreement under the SPA, or interprets the data collected from the clinical trial differently than we do, the FDA may deem the data insufficient to support regulatory approval, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
NERLYNX or our other drug 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, as applicable.
Undesirable side effects caused by NERLYNX or our other drug 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. To date, subjects treated with NERLYNX have experienced drug-related side effects including diarrhea. 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 side effects 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 we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any approved product, 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.
Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of NERLYNX or the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
Regulatory approval for any approved product is limited by the FDA to those specific indications and conditions for which clinical safety and efficacy have been demonstrated as set forth on the product label. If we market NERLYNX for uses beyond such approved indications, we could be subject to enforcement action, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. These regulations include standards and restrictions for direct-to-consumer advertising, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, promotional activities involving the internet and off-label promotion. Any regulatory approval that the FDA grants is limited to those specific diseases and indications for which a product is deemed to be safe and effective by the FDA. For example, the FDA-approved label for NERLYNX is limited to the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer. In addition to the FDA approval required for new formulations, any new indication for an approved product also requires FDA approval. If we are not able to obtain FDA approval for any desired future indications for our drugs and drug candidates, our ability to effectively market and sell our products may be reduced and our business may be adversely affected.
While physicians in the United States may choose, and are generally permitted, to prescribe drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those tested in clinical trials and approved by the regulatory authorities, our ability to promote the products is narrowly limited to those indications that are specifically approved by the FDA. These “off-label” uses are common across medical specialties and may constitute an appropriate treatment for some patients in varied circumstances.
Regulatory authorities in the United States generally do not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. Regulatory authorities do, however, restrict communications by pharmaceutical companies on the subject of off-label use. Although recent court decisions suggest that certain off-label promotional activities may be protected under the First Amendment, the scope of any such protection is unclear. If our promotional activities fail to comply with the FDA’s regulations or guidelines, we may be subject to warnings from, or enforcement action by, these authorities. In addition, our failure to follow FDA rules and guidelines relating to promotion and advertising may cause the FDA to issue warning letters or untitled letters, bring an enforcement action against us, suspend or withdraw an approved product from the market, require a recall or institute fines or civil fines, or could result in disgorgement of money, operating restrictions, injunctions or criminal prosecution, any of which could harm our reputation and our business.
Even though the FDA has approved NERLYNX for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer, we will be subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review with regard to NERLYNX and any other drug candidates that receive FDA approval, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, NERLYNX and our drug 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.
The FDA’s approval of the NDA for NERLYNX may, and any regulatory approvals that we receive for our other drug 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, including Phase IV clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the drug candidate. In addition, the manufacturing processes, 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 cGMPs and GCPs 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;
fines, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;
refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;
product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and
injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
The FDA’s policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our drug candidates. For example, in December 2016, the 21st Century Cures Act, or Cures Act, was signed into law. The Cures Act, among other things, is intended to modernize the regulation of drugs and spur innovation. 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, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.
We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. For example, certain policies of the Trump administration may impact our business and industry. Namely, the Trump administration has taken several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, FDA’s ability to engage in routine regulatory and oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. Notably, on January 30, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order, applicable to all executive agencies, including the FDA, that requires that for each notice of proposed rulemaking or final regulation to be issued in fiscal year 2017, the agency shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed, unless prohibited by law. These requirements are referred to as the “two-for-one” provisions. This Executive Order includes a budget neutrality provision that requires the total incremental cost of all new regulations in the 2017 fiscal year, including repealed regulations, to be no greater than zero, except in limited circumstances. For fiscal years 2018 and beyond, the Executive Order requires agencies to identify regulations to offset any incremental cost of a new regulation. In interim guidance issued by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within OMB on February 2, 2017, the administration indicates that the “two-for-one” provisions may apply not only to agency regulations, but also to significant agency guidance documents. It is difficult to predict how these requirement will be implemented, and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If these executive actions impose constraints on FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted.
We rely on third parties to conduct our pre-clinical studies 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 our drug candidates.
We depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as CROs, universities and medical institutions, to conduct our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials under agreements with us. These collaborators are not our employees and we cannot control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements, including good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements, and the applicable protocol. If we, or any of our CROs or third party contractors, fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection 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 cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, third party contractors and investigators may not assign as great a priority to our programs or pursue them as diligently as we would if we were undertaking such programs ourselves. If outside collaborators fail to devote sufficient time and resources to our drug-development programs, or if their performance is substandard or otherwise fails to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, the approval of our FDA applications, if any, and our introduction of new drugs, if any, will be delayed. These collaborators may also have relationships with other commercial entities, some of whom may compete with us. If our collaborators assist our competitors to our detriment, our competitive position would be harmed. If any of our relationships with these third-party collaborators terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Switching or adding additional third parties to our clinical trial programs can involve substantial costs and require extensive management time and focus.
We rely significantly on information technology and any failure, inadequacy, interruption or security lapse of that technology, including any cybersecurity incidents, could harm our ability to operate our business effectively.
Our internal computer systems and those of third parties with which we contract may be vulnerable to damage from cyber-attacks, computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures despite the implementation of security measures. System failures, accidents or security breaches could cause interruptions in our operations, and could result in a material disruption of our clinical activities and business operations, in addition to possibly requiring substantial expenditures of resources to remedy. The loss of clinical trial data 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 our research and development programs and the development of our drug candidates could be delayed.
Health care reform measures may hinder or prevent our products’ and product candidates’ commercial success.
The United States and some foreign jurisdictions have enacted or are considering enacting a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to profitably sell our product and product candidates, if and when they are approved. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives.
In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA, became law in the United States. The ACA substantially changed and will continue to change the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers and significantly affects the pharmaceutical industry. Among the provisions of the ACA, of greatest importance to the pharmaceutical industry are the following:
an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain branded prescription drugs and biologic agents, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs;
an increase in the rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13% of the average manufacturer price for branded and generic drugs, respectively;
a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected;
a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D;
|
|
expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals, which began in April 2010, and by adding new eligibility categories for certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the Federal Poverty Level beginning in 2014, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability;
increase in the number of entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service pharmaceutical pricing program;
a new requirement to annually report drug samples that manufacturers and distributors provide to physicians;
a licensure framework for follow-on biologic products; and
a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research.
The ACA also requires adults not covered by employer or government-sponsored insurance plans to maintain health insurance coverage or pay a penalty, a provision commonly referred to as the individual mandate.
Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. As a result, there have been delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the ACA. We expect that the Trump administration and U.S. Congress will continue to seek to modify, repeal, or otherwise invalidate all, or certain provisions of, the ACA. We cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or effect of any healthcare reform legislation or the impact of potential legislation on us.
In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will remain in effect through 2030 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, or ATRA, which, among other things, also reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Recently, there has also been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, the 21st Century Cures Act changes the reimbursement methodology for infusion drugs and biologics furnished through durable medical equipment in an attempt to remedy over- and underpayment of certain drugs. We cannot predict all of the ways in which future federal or state legislative or administrative changes relating to healthcare reform will affect our business.
Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs.
We anticipate that the ACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product, and could seriously harm our business. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product and product candidates, if approved.
Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for our products or product candidates, if approved, could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.
Successful commercial sales of any approved products will depend on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payors. Each third-party payor
separately decides which products it will cover and establishes the reimbursement level, and there is no guarantee that any of our approved products or product candidates that may be approved for marketing by regulatory authorities will receive adequate coverage or reimbursement levels. Obtaining and maintaining coverage approval for a product is time-consuming, costly and may be difficult. We may be required to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies to justify coverage and reimbursement or the level of coverage and reimbursement relative to other therapies. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available or limited, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product or product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. Government authorities and third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for drugs and biologics. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product, the resulting reimbursement rates may be inadequate and may affect the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval.
We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of NERLYNX (oral), NERLYNX (intravenous), PB357 and any other products that we may develop, due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative proposals. There may be additional pressure by payors and healthcare providers to use generic drugs that contain the active ingredients found in neratinib (oral), neratinib (intravenous), PB357 or any other drug candidates that we may develop. If we fail to successfully secure and maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for our products or are significantly delayed in doing so, we will have difficulty achieving market acceptance of our products and expected revenue and profitability which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We are subject, directly and indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, physician payment transparency laws and health information privacy and security laws. Failure to comply with these laws may subject us to substantial penalties.
We do not and will not control referrals of healthcare services or bill directly to Medicare, Medicaid or other third-party payors. However, federal and state healthcare laws and regulations pertaining to fraud and abuse, physician payment transparency, privacy and security laws and regulations may apply to us depending on programs we operate and have been asserted by the government and others to apply to companies like us, and our arrangements with healthcare providers, customers and other entities, including our marketing practices, educational programs and pricing policies. These laws include:
the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The Affordable Care Act amended the federal Anti-Kickback Statute to provide that a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act;
federal false claims laws, including, without limitation, the False Claims Act, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid or other federal third-party payors that are false or fraudulent, such as engaging in improper promotion of products or submitting inaccurate price reports to the Medicaid Drug Rebate program;
the federal Civil Monetary Penalties law, which prohibits, among other things, offering or transferring remuneration to a federal healthcare beneficiary that a person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s decision to order or receive items or services reimbursable by the government from a particular provider or supplier;
federal criminal laws that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any federal healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation;
the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, which governs the conduct of certain electronic healthcare transactions and protects the security and privacy of protected health information held by certain covered entities and their business associates, and imposes obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;
|
|
|
analogous state and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information; 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.
Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available under such laws, it is possible that some of our business activities, including our relationships with physicians and other healthcare providers, some of whom recommend, purchase and/or prescribe our products, and the manner in which we promote our products, could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws.
We areSEC, also exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors, distributors and agents may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. While we have policies and procedures in place prohibiting such activity, misconduct by these parties could include, among other infractions or violations, intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or unauthorized activity that violates FDA requirements, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, manufacturing standards, federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data or other commercial or regulatory laws or requirements. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by our employees and other third parties, 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 our operations are found to violate any of the laws described above or any other laws and regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and imprisonment of officers involved, any of which could adversely affect our ability to market our current and any future products, once approved, and materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business.
If we fail to comply with our reporting and payment obligations under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program or other governmental pricing programs in the United States, we could be subject to additional reimbursement requirements, penalties, sanctions and fines, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by the CMS, and other federal and state government pricing programs in the United States, and we may participate in additional government pricing programs in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors in connection with drugs, including NERLYNX, that are dispensed to beneficiaries of these programs. In some cases, such as with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing and rebate calculations that we report on a monthly and quarterly basis to the government agencies that administer the programs. Pricing and rebate calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. The terms, scope and complexity of these government pricing programs change frequently. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs and the complexity of compliance will be time consuming.
In addition, there is increased focus by the Office of Inspector General on the methodologies used by manufacturers to calculate average manufacturer price (“AMP”), and best price (“BP”), to assess manufacturer compliance with reporting requirements under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. We are liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data and for any overcharging of government payors. For example, failure to submit monthly/quarterly AMP and BP data on a timely basis could result in a civil monetary penalty per day for each day the submission is late beyond the due date. Failure to make necessary disclosures and/or to identify overpayments could result in allegations against us under the Federal False Claims Act and other laws and regulations.
Any required refunds to the U.S. government or responding to a government investigation or enforcement action would be expensive and time consuming and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In the event that the CMS were to terminate our rebate agreement, no federal payments would be available under Medicaid or Medicare for our covered outpatient drugs.
If we cannot compete successfully for market share against other drug companies, we may not achieve sufficient product revenue and our business will suffer.
The market for our drugs and drug candidates is characterized by intense competition and rapid technological advances. NERLYNX and any of our other drug candidates that receives FDA approval will compete with a number of existing and future drugs and therapies developed, manufactured and marketed by others. Existing or future competing products may provide greater therapeutic convenience or clinical or other benefits for a specific indication than our products, or may offer comparable performance at a lower cost. In addition, a large number of companies are pursuing the development of pharmaceuticals that target the same diseases and conditions that we are targeting. If our products fail to capture and maintain market share, we may not achieve sufficient product revenue and our business will suffer.
We will compete against fully integrated pharmaceutical companies and smaller companies that are collaborating with larger pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations. Many of these competitors have oncology compounds that have already been approved or are in development. In addition, many of these competitors, either alone or together with their collaborative partners, operate larger research and development programs or have substantially greater financial resources than we do, as well as significantly greater experience in the following:
developing drugs;
undertaking pre-clinical testing and clinical trials;
obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of drugs;
formulating and manufacturing drugs; and
launching, marketing and selling drugs.
We may be exposed to liability claims associated with the use of hazardous materials and chemicals.
Our research and development activities may involve the controlled use of hazardous materials and chemicals. Although we believe that our safety procedures for using, storing, handling and disposing of these materials comply with federal, state and local laws and regulations, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of accidental injury or contamination from these materials. In the event of such an accident, we could be held liable for any resulting damages and any liability could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of hazardous or radioactive materials and waste products may require us to incur substantial compliance costs that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The loss of one or more key members of our management team could adversely affect our business.
Our success and future growth depends to a significant degree on the skills and continued services of our management team, in particular Alan H. Auerbach, our Chief Executive Officer and President. If Mr. Auerbach resigns or becomes unable to continue in his present role and is not adequately replaced, our business operations could be materially adversely affected. We do not maintain “key man” life insurance for Mr. Auerbach.
If we are unable to hire additional qualified personnel, our ability to grow our business may be harmed.
As of September 30, 2017, we had 308 employees, including our Chief Executive Officer and President. Our future success depends on our ability to identify, attract, hire, train, retain and motivate other highly skilled scientific, technical, marketing, managerial and financial personnel. Although we will seek to hire and retain qualified personnel with experience and abilities commensurate with our needs, there is no assurance that we will succeed despite their collective efforts. Competition for personnel is intense, and any failure to attract and retain the necessary technical, marketing, managerial and financial personnel would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
We may not successfully manage our growth.
Our success will depend upon the expansion of our operations and our ability to successfully manage our growth. Our future growth, if any, may place a significant strain on our management and on our administrative, operational and financial resources. Our ability to manage our growth effectively will require us to implement and improve our operational, financial and management systems and to expand, train, manage and motivate our employees. These demands may require the hiring of additional management personnel and the development of additional expertise by management. Any increase in resources devoted to research and product development without a corresponding increase in our operational, financial and management systems could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We may be adversely affected by the current economic environment.
Our ability to attract and retain collaborators or customers, invest in and grow our business and meet our financial obligations depends on our operating and financial performance, which, in turn, is subject to numerous factors, including the prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors beyond our control, such as the rate of unemployment, the number of uninsured persons in the United States and inflationary pressures. We cannot anticipate all the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.
We are exposed to risks associated with reduced profitability and the potential financial instability of our collaborators or customers, many of which may be adversely affected by volatile conditions in the financial markets. For example, unemployment and underemployment, and the resultant loss of insurance, may decrease the demand for healthcare services and pharmaceuticals. If fewer patients are seeking medical care because they do not have insurance coverage, our collaboration partners or customers may experience reductions in revenues, profitability and/or cash flow that could lead them to modify, delay or cancel orders for our products once commercialized. If collaboration partners or customers are not successful in generating sufficient revenue or are precluded from securing financing, they may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable that are owed to us. This, in turn, could adversely affect our financial condition and liquidity. In addition, if economic challenges in the United States result in widespread and prolonged unemployment, either regionally or on a national basis, prior to the effectiveness of certain provisions of the ACA, a substantial number of people may become uninsured or underinsured. To the extent economic challenges result in fewer individuals pursuing or being able to afford our products once commercialized, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely affected.
We may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our products in response to product liability lawsuits.
The testing and marketing of medical products entail an inherent risk of product liability. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our products. If we are unable to obtain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims, the commercialization of pharmaceutical products we develop, alone or with collaborators, could be prevented or inhibited.
Our cash and cash equivalents could be adversely affected if the financial institutions in which we hold our cash and cash equivalents fail.
We regularly maintain cash balances at third-party financial institutions in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or FDIC, insurance limit. While we monitor daily the cash balances in the operating accounts and adjust the balances as appropriate, these balances could be impacted, and there could be a material adverse effect on our business, if one or more of the financial institutions with which we deposit fails or is subject to other adverse conditions in the financial or credit markets. To date, we have experienced no loss or lack of access to our invested cash or cash equivalents; however, we can provide no assurance that access to our invested cash and cash equivalents will not be impacted by adverse conditions in the financial and credit markets.
Our investments in marketable securities are subject to market, interest and credit risk that may reduce their value.
The value of our investments in marketable securities may be adversely affected by changes in interest rates, downgrades in the creditworthiness of bonds we hold, turmoil in the credit markets and financial services industry and by other factors which may result in other than temporary declines in the value of our investments. Decreases in the market value of our marketable securities could have an adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements, results of operations and cash flow.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
We depend significantly on intellectual property licensed from Pfizer and the termination of this license would significantly harm our business and future prospects.
We depend significantly on our license agreement with Pfizer. Our license agreement with Pfizer may be terminated by Pfizer if we materially breach the agreement and fail to cure our breach during an applicable cure period. Our failure to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products in certain specified major market countries would constitute a material breach of the license agreement. Pfizer may also terminate the license agreement if we become involved in bankruptcy, receivership, insolvency or similar proceedings. In the event our license agreement with Pfizer is terminated, we will lose all of our rights to develop and commercialize the drug candidates covered by such license, which would significantly harm our business and future prospects.
Our proprietary rights may not adequately protect our intellectual property and potential products, and if we cannot obtain adequate protection of our intellectual property and potential products, we may not be able to successfully market our potential products.
Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining intellectual property protection for our products, formulations, processes, methods and other technologies. We will only be able to protect these technologies and products from unauthorized use by third parties to the extent that valid and enforceable intellectual property rights, including patents, cover them, or other market exclusionary rights apply. The patent positions of pharmaceutical companies, like ours, can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in such companies’ patents has emerged to date in the United States. The general environment for pharmaceutical patents outside the United States also involves significant uncertainty. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced, or that the scope of these patent rights could provide a sufficient degree of future protection that could permit us to gain or keep our competitive advantage with respect to these products and technology. For example, we cannot predict:
the degree and range of protection any patents will afford us against competitors, including whether third parties will find ways to make, use, sell, offer to sell or import competitive products without infringing our patents;
if and when patents will issue;
whether or not others will obtain patents claiming inventions similar to those covered by our patents and patent applications; or
whether we will need to initiate litigation or administrative proceedings in connection with patent rights, which may be costly whether we win or lose.
The patents we have licensed may be subject to challenge and possibly invalidated or rendered unenforceable by third parties. Changes in either the patent laws or in the interpretations of patent laws in the United States or other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property.
In addition, others may independently develop similar or alternative products and technologies that may be outside the scope of our intellectual property. Furthermore, others may have invented technology claimed by our patents before we or our licensors did so, and they may have filed patents claiming such technology before we did so, weakening our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for such technology. Should third parties obtain patent rights to similar products or technology, this may have an adverse effect on our business.
We may also rely on trade secrets to protect our technology, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. Trade secrets, however, are difficult to protect. While we believe that we will use reasonable efforts to protect our trade secrets, our own or our strategic partners’ employees, consultants, contractors or advisors may unintentionally or willfully disclose our information to competitors. We seek to protect this information, in part, through the use of non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with employees, consultants, advisors and others. These agreements may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for a breach. In addition, we cannot ensure that those agreements will provide adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information or prevent their unauthorized use or disclosure.
To the extent that consultants or key employees apply technological information independently developed by them or by others to our potential products, disputes may arise as to the proprietary rights in such information, which may not be resolved in our favor. Consultants and key employees who work with our confidential and proprietary technologies are required to assign all intellectual property rights in their discoveries to us. However, these consultants or key employees may terminate their relationship with us, and we cannot preclude them indefinitely from dealing with our competitors. If our trade secrets become known to competitors with greater experience and financial resources, the competitors may copy or use our trade secrets and other proprietary information in the
advancement of their products, methods or technologies. If we were to prosecute a claim that a third party had illegally obtained and was using our trade secrets, it could be expensive and time consuming and the outcome could be unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets than courts in the United States. Moreover, if our competitors independently develop equivalent knowledge, we would lack any legal or contractual claim to prevent them from using such information, and our business could be harmed.
Our ability to commercialize our potential products will depend on our ability to sell such products without infringing the patent or proprietary rights of third parties. If we are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, it will be costly and time consuming, and an unfavorable outcome in that litigation would have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our ability to commercialize our potential products will depend on our ability to sell such products without infringing the patents or other proprietary rights of third parties. Third-party intellectual property rights in our field are complicated and continuously evolving. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and this interpretation is not always consistent.
Other companies may have or may acquire intellectual property rights that could be enforced against us. If they do so, we may be required to alter our products, formulations, processes, methods or other technologies, obtain a license, assuming one can be obtained, or cease our product-related activities. If our products or technologies infringe the intellectual property rights of others, they could bring legal action against us or our licensors or collaborators claiming damages and seeking to enjoin any activities that they believe infringe their intellectual property rights. If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our products or methods of use either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid or unenforceable, and we may not be able to do this. Proving the invalidity of a patent is particularly difficult in the United States, since it requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. If we are found to infringe a third-party patent, we may need to cease the commercial sale of our products.
Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications unknown to us or reissue applications that may later result in issued patents upon which our products or technologies may infringe. There could also be existing patents of which we are unaware that our products or technologies may infringe. In addition, if third parties file patent applications or obtain patents claiming products or technologies also claimed by us in pending applications or issued patents, we may have to participate in interference proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, to determine priority of invention. If third parties file oppositions in foreign countries, we may also have to participate in opposition proceedings in foreign tribunals to defend the patentability of our filed foreign patent applications. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. Additionally, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation may have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations.
If a third party claims that we infringe its intellectual property rights, it could cause our businessactual results to suffer in a number of ways, including:
we may become involved in time-consuming and expensive litigation, even if the claim is without merit, the third party’s patent is ultimately invalid or unenforceable, or we are ultimately found to have not infringed;
we may become liable for substantial damages for past infringement if a court decides thatdiffer materially from our technologies infringe upon a third party’s patent;
we may be ordered by a court to stop making, selling or licensing our products or technologies without a license from a patent holder, and such license may not be available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all, or may require us to pay substantial royalties or grant cross-licenses to our patents; and
we may have to redesign our products so that they do not infringe upon others’ patent rights, which may not be possible or could require substantial investment and/or time.
If any of these events occur, our business could suffer and the market price of our common stock may decline.
As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, we employ individuals who were previously employed at other companies in these industries, including our competitors or potential competitors. We may become subject to claims that these employees or we have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secretsanticipated results or other proprietary information of their former employers, although no such claims are pending. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we successfully defend any such claims, we may incur substantial costs in such defense, and our management may be distracted by these claims. expectations.
Risks Related to Owning our Common Stock
Our stock price may fluctuate significantly and you may have difficulty selling your shares based on current trading volumes of our stock. In addition, numerous other factors could result in substantial volatility in the trading price of our stock.
We cannot predict the extent to which investor interest in our company will be sufficient to maintain an active trading market on the NASDAQ Global Select Market or any other exchange in the future. We have several stockholders, including affiliated stockholders, who hold substantial blocks of our stock. As of September 30, 2017 we estimate that our officers, directors and their affiliated entities, and our 5% or greater stockholders, collectively beneficially owned approximately 89.9% of our outstanding shares of common stock. Sales of large numbers of shares by any of our large stockholders could adversely affect our trading price. If stockholders holding shares of our common stock sell, indicate an intention to sell, or if it is perceived that they will sell, substantial amounts of their common stock in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline. Moreover, if there is a less active trading market, holders of our common stock may have difficulty selling their shares.
The price of our common stock could be subject to volatility related or unrelated to our operations.
The trading price of our common stock may be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. These factors include:
our ability to successfully commercialize NERLYNX in the United States for the extended adjuvant treatment of early stage, HER2-positive breast cancer;
the status and cost of our marketing commitments for NERLYNX;
the status and cost of development and commercialization of neratinib for indications other than in the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer and in jurisdictions other than in the United States, if approved;
actual or anticipated quarterly variation in our results of operations or the results of our competitors;
announcements regarding results of any clinical trials relating to our drug candidates;
announcements of medical innovations or new products by our competitors;
issuance of new or changed securities analysts’ reports or recommendations for our stock;
developments or disputes concerning our intellectual property or other proprietary rights;
commencement of, or involvement in, litigation;
market conditions in the biopharmaceutical industry;
timing and announcement of regulatory approvals;
any future sales of our common stock or other securities in connection with raising additional capital or otherwise;
any major change to the composition of our board of directors or management; and
general economic conditions and slow or negative growth of our markets.
The stock market in general, and market prices for the securities of biotechnology companies like ours in particular, have from time to time experienced volatility that often has been unrelated to the operating performance of the underlying companies. These broad market and industry fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance.
Volatility in the price of our common stock may subject us to securities litigation, which could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management's attention, financial resources and other company assets.
In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following periods of volatility in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us because pharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. In addition, we and certain of our executive officers have been named as defendants in a securities class action and derivative lawsuits captioned HSC v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al., Xing Xie v. Alan H. Auerbach, and Kevin McKenney v. Auerbach. These lawsuits and any future lawsuits to which we may become a party are subject to inherent uncertainties and will likely be expensive and time-consuming to investigate, defend and resolve, and will divert our management's attention and financial and other resources. The outcome of litigation is necessarily uncertain, and we could be forced to expend significant resources in the defense of these and other suits, and we may not prevail. Any litigation to which we are a party may result in an onerous or unfavorable judgment that may not be reversed upon appeal or in payments of substantial monetary damages or fines, or we may decide to settle this or other lawsuits on similarly unfavorable terms, which could adversely affect our business, financial
condition, results of operations or stock price. See Item 3. “Legal Proceedings” below for additional information regarding the securities class action and derivative lawsuits.
Issuance of stock to fund our operations may dilute your investment and reduce your equity interest.
We may need to raise capital in the future to fund the development of our drug candidates or for other purposes. Any equity financing may have a significant dilutive effect to stockholders and a material decrease in our existing stockholders’ equity interest in us. Equity financing, if obtained, could result in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders. At its sole discretion, our board of directors may issue additional securities without seeking stockholder approval, and we do not know when we will need additional capital or, if we do, whether it will be available to us.
Upon the exercise of our outstanding warrant, holders of our common stock may experience immediate dilution and the market price of our common stock may be adversely affected.
Following an October 2011 private placement, Alan H. Auerbach, our founder, Chief Executive Officer and President, held approximately 21% of our outstanding shares of common stock. Pursuant to the terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement for the private placement, we issued an anti-dilutive warrant to Mr. Auerbach. The warrant has a 10-year term expiring in October 2021 for 2,116,250 shares with an exercise price of $16.00 per share.
If any portion of the outstanding warrant is exercised for shares of our common stock, our stockholders may experience immediate dilution and the market price of our common stock may be adversely affected.
We will incur increased costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies, which could harm our operating results.
As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with public company reporting requirements. We also incur costs associated with current corporate governance requirements, including requirements under Section 404 and other provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules implemented by the SEC, or NASDAQ or any stock exchange or inter-dealer quotations system on which our common stock may be listed in the future. The expenses incurred by public companies for reporting and corporate governance purposes have increased dramatically in recent years. We expect these rules and regulations to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly. We are unable to currently estimate these costs with any degree of certainty. We also expect that these rules and regulations may make it difficult and expensive for us to maintain the appropriate level of director and officer insurance for a company with our market capitalization. If we are unable to maintain an appropriate level of such insurance, we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or larger deductible limits. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our board of directors or as our executive officers.
If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired, which could harm our operating results, our ability to operate our business and investors’ views of us.
We are subject to the rules and regulations of the SEC, including those rules and regulations mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires public companies to include in their annual report a statement of management’s responsibilities for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, together with an assessment of the effectiveness of those internal controls. Section 404 also requires the independent auditors of certain public companies to attest to, and report on, this management assessment. Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that will need to be evaluated frequently. Our failure to maintain the effectiveness of our internal controls in accordance with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could have a material adverse effect on our business. We could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock. In addition, if our efforts to comply with new or changed laws, regulations, and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related to practice, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause the market price of our common stock to drop significantly, even if our business is doing well, which result would in turn negatively affect our ability to raise additional equity capital.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our common stock. A substantial majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock are freely tradable without restriction or further registration under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended. We have also registered all shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plan, which can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to volume limitations applicable to affiliates. We are unable to predict the effect that sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock. However, an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise additional equity capital.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish, or cease publishing, research or reports about us, our business or our market, or if they change their recommendations regarding our stock adversely, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock is and will be influenced by whether industry or securities analysts publish research and reports about us, our business, our market or our competitors and, if any analysts do publish such reports, what they publish in those reports. We may not obtain analyst coverage in the future. Any analysts who do cover us may make adverse recommendations regarding our stock, adversely change their recommendations from time to time, and/or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors. If any analyst who may cover us in the future were to cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, or if analysts fail to cover us or publish reports about us at all, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.
We do not foresee paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
We currently intend to retain any future earnings for funding growth. We do not anticipate paying any dividends in the foreseeable future. As a result, you should not rely on an investment in our securities if you require dividend income. Capital appreciation, if any, of our shares may be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Moreover, you may not be able to re-sell your shares in us at or above the price you paid for them.
Our ability to use our net operating losses and research and development credit carryforwards to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.
In general, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three year period, is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change net operating losses, or NOLs, and its research and development credit carryforwards to offset future taxable income. Our existing NOLs and research and development credit carryforwards may be subject to limitations arising from previous ownership changes, and if we undergo an ownership change, our ability to utilize NOLs and research and development credit carryforwards could be further limited by Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. Future changes in our stock ownership, some of which might be beyond our control, could result in an ownership change under Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. Furthermore, our ability to utilize NOLs and research and development credit carryforwards of any companies we may acquire in the future may be subject to limitations, in accordance with Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. For these reasons, in the event we experience a change of control, we may not be able to utilize a material portion of the NOLs and research and development credit carryforwards, even if we attain profitability.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
We did not sell any of our equity securities without registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, during the quarter ended September 30, 2017.
None.
Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
Neither we nor any “affiliated purchasers” within the definition of Rule 10b-18(a)(3) promulgated under the Exchange Act made any purchases of our equity securities during the quarter ended September 30, 2017.
None.
Not applicable.
On September 29, 2017,During the compensation committee of our board of directors approved the ratification,three months ended June 30, 2023, no director or the Ratification, of certain grants of Restricted Stock Units, or the RSU Awards, under the Puma Biotechnology, Inc. 2011 Incentive Award Plan, as amended, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 204officer of the General Corporation LawCompany adopted or terminated a “Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” or “non-Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement,” as each term is defined in Item 408(a) of the State of Delaware, or the General Corporation Law. The RSU Awards were made on May 1, 2017, May 8, 2017, May 22, 2017, May 30, 2017, June 12, 2017, June 19, 2017, June 26, 2017, July 17, 2017, July 24, 2017, July 31, 2017, August 7, 2017 and August 14, 2017 and involved the grant of 7,500, 11,250, 35,625, 3,750, 30,000, 30,000, 18,750, 24,375, 18,750, 15,000, 11,250 and 11,250 Restricted Stock Units, respectively. The compensation committee approved the Ratification of such RSU Awards after it determined that the RSU Awards may not have been duly authorized in accordance with Section 152 of the General Corporation Law. As none of the RSU Awards have vested, no shares of putative stock have been issued in respect of the RSU Awards. Any claim that the RSU Awards are void or voidable due to the foregoing failure of authorization, or that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware should declare in its discretion that the Ratification not be effective or be effective only on certain conditions, must be brought within 120 days from the later of the validation effective time and the giving of this notice (which is deemed given on the date that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission).
Regulation S-K.
(a) |
|
Exhibit Number |
|
| Description | ||
3.1 | |||
3.2 | |||
| 10.1+ | Limited Waiver and Fifth Amendment to Note Purchase Agreement, dated July 7, 2023, by and between the Company and Athyrium Opportunities IV CO-Invest 1 LP, as Administrative Agent | ||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
101.INS+ | Inline XBRL Instance Document – the instance document does not appear in the Interactive Data File because its XBRL tags are embedded within the Inline XBRL document. | ||
|
| ||
101.SCH+ | |||
| Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document | ||
| Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document | ||
| Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document | ||
| Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document | ||
| Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Linkbase Document | ||
104+ | Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted as Inline XBRL and contained in Exhibit 101) | ||
+ |
| |
++ | Furnished herewith |
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.
PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. | |||||
Date: | August 3, 2023 | By: | /s/ Alan H. Auerbach | ||
Alan H. Auerbach | |||||
President and Chief Executive Officer | |||||
(Principal Executive Officer) | |||||
Date: | August 3, 2023 | By: | /s/ | ||
| |||||
| |||||
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
| ||||
57