10-K
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2022
OR
☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 001-34375
PLUS THERAPEUTICS, INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (737) 255-7194
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share PSTV Nasdaq Capital Market
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐No☒
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ☐No☒
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See 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. ☐
Indicacheck mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐
If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements.☐
Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b).☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒
The aggregate market value of the common stock of the registrant held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 30, 2022, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $12.1 million based on the closing sales price of the registrant’s common stock on June 30, 2022 as reported on the Nasdaq Capital Market, of $0.54 per share.
As of February 17, 2023, there were 35,109,885 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:
Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for its 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of December 31, 2022, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PART I
Item 1. Business 6
Item 1A. Risk Factors 24
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 46
Item 2. Properties 46
Item 3. Legal Proceedings 46
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 47
PART II
Item 6. [Reserved] 49
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 60
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 61
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 83
Item 9B. Other Information 83
Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspection 84
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 84
Item 11. Executive Compensation 84
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 84
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules 85
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report contains certain statements that may be deemed “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, that address activities, events or developments that we intend, expect, project, believe or anticipate and similar expressions or future conditional verbs such as will, should, would, could or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. Such statements are based upon certain assumptions and assessments made by our management in light of their experience and their perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors they believe to be appropriate.
These statements include, without limitation, statements about our anticipated expenditures, including research and development, and general and administrative expenses; our strategic collaborations and license agreements, intellectual property, FDA and EMA approvals and interactions and government regulation; the potential size of the market for our product candidates; our research and development efforts; results from our pre-clinical and clinical studies and the implications of such results regarding the efficacy or safety of our product candidates; the safety profile, pathways, and efficacy of our product candidates and formulations; anticipated advantages of our product candidates over other products available in the market and being developed; the populations that will most benefit from our product candidates and indications that will be pursued with each product candidate; anticipated progress in our current and future clinical trials; plans and strategies to create novel technologies; our IP strategy; competition; future development and/or expansion of our product candidates and therapies in our markets; sources of competition for any of our product candidates; our pipeline; our ability to generate product or development revenue and the sources of such revenue; our ability to effectively manage our gross profit margins; our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals; expectations as to our future performance; portions of the “Liquidity and Capital Resources” section of this report, including our potential need for additional financing and the availability thereof; our ability to continue as a going concern; our ability to remain listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market; our ability to repay or refinance some or all of our outstanding indebtedness and our ability to raise capital in the future; our ability to transfer the drug product manufacture to a contract drug manufacturing organization; and the potential enhancement of our cash position through development, marketing, and licensing arrangements. The forward-looking statements included in this report are also subject to a number of additional material risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to the risks described under the “Risk Factor Summary” below.
We encourage you to read the risks described under “Risk Factor Summary” and elsewhere in this report carefully. We caution you not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this report. These statements, like all statements in this report, speak only as of the date of this report (unless an earlier date is indicated) and we undertake no obligation to update or revise the statements except as required by law. Such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance.
3
Risk Factor Summary
Below is a summary of the principal factors that may affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Form 10-K and our other filings with the SEC.
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Requirements
•
We have incurred losses since inception and expect to incur significant net losses in the foreseeable future and therefore may never become profitable and our operating results have been and will likely continue to be volatile.
•
We could be delisted from Nasdaq, which would seriously harm the liquidity of our stock and our ability to raise capital.
•
We will need substantial additional funding to develop our product candidates and conduct our future operations and to repay our outstanding debt obligations. If we are unable to obtain the funds necessary to do so, we may be required to delay, scale back or eliminate our product development activities or may be unable to continue our business operations. Furthermore, the volatility in the global capital markets may negatively impact our ability to obtain additional debt financings and modify our existing debt facilities and may increase the risk of non-compliance with covenants under our existing loan agreement.
•
Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.
Risks Related to Our Business and Industry
•
Our future success is in large part dependent upon our ability to successfully develop our nanomedicine platform and commercialize rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and 188RNL-BAM and any failure to do so could significantly harm our business and prospects.
•
If we are unable to successfully partner with other companies to commercialize our product candidates, our business could materially suffer.
•
Our success depends in substantial part on our ability to obtain regulatory approvals for our rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and 188RNL-BAM product candidates. However, we cannot be certain that we will receive regulatory approval for these product candidates or our other product candidates.
•
Reliance on government funding for our programs may impose requirements that limit our ability to take certain actions, and subject it to potential financial penalties, which could materially and adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations.
•
If our competitors market or develop products that are marketed more effectively, approved more quickly than our product candidates, or demonstrated to be safer or more effective than our product candidates, our commercial opportunities could be reduced or eliminated.
•
Product development involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our product candidates.
•
Pre-clinical studies and preliminary and interim data from clinical trials of our product candidates are not necessarily predictive of the results or success of ongoing or future clinical trials of our product candidates.
•
Clinical trial results may fail to support approval of our product candidates.
•
If third parties we engage are not able to successfully perform, we may not be able to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.
•
We may have difficulty enrolling, or fail to enroll patients in our clinical trials, which could delay or prevent clinical trials of our drug candidates.
•
If a particular product candidate causes significant adverse events, then we may be unable to receive regulatory approval or market acceptance for such product candidate.
•
If our product candidates and technologies receive regulatory approval but do not achieve broad market acceptance, especially by physicians, the revenue that we generate will be limited.
•
All potential applications of our product candidates are investigational, which subjects us to development and marketing risks.
•
We and our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation, and the requirements to obtain regulatory approvals in the United States and other jurisdictions can be costly, time-consuming, and unpredictable. If we or our partners are unable to obtain timely regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business may be substantially harmed.
•
We will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant expense, and if we or our collaborators fail to comply with such requirements, regulatory agencies may take action against us or them, which could significantly harm our business.
4
•
Changing, new and/or emerging government regulations, including healthcare legislative reform measures, may adversely affect us.
•
Adequate coverage and reimbursement from third party payors may not be available for our products and we may be unable to successfully contract for coverage from pharmacy benefit managers and other organizations; conversely, to secure coverage from these organizations, we may be required to pay rebates or other discounts or other restrictions to reimbursement, either of which could diminish our sales or adversely affect our ability to sell our products profitably.
•
Some intellectual property that we have in-licensed have been discovered through government funded programs and thus may be subject to federal regulations such as "march-in" rights, certain reporting requirements and a preference for U.S.-based companies. Compliance with such regulations may limit our exclusive rights, and limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. manufacturers.
•
Orphan drug designation may not ensure that we will enjoy market exclusivity in a particular market, and if we fail to obtain or maintain orphan drug designation or other regulatory exclusivity for some of our product candidates, our competitive position could be harmed.
•
If we experience an interruption in supply from a material sole source supplier, our business may be harmed.
•
We may engage in strategic transactions that could impact our liquidity, increase our expenses, and present significant distractions to our management.
Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property
•
Our success depends in part on our ability to protect our intellectual property. We may not be able to protect our trade secrets.
•
We may be subject to claims that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.
•
We may incur substantial costs as a result of litigation or other proceedings relating to patent and other intellectual property rights, and we may be unable to protect our rights to our product candidates and technology.
•
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.
Risks Relating to the Securities Markets and an Investment in Our Common Stock
•
Our stockholders may experience substantial dilution in the value of their investment if we issue additional shares of our capital stock, including in connection withthe sale or issuance of our common stock to Lincoln Park and the sale of the shares of common stock acquired by Lincoln Park and the sale of our common stock by Canaccord.
•
The market price of our common stock may be volatile and fluctuate significantly, which could result in substantial losses for stockholders, and future sales of our common stock may depress our share price.
•
We may issue debt and equity securities or securities convertible into equity securities, any of which may be senior to our common stock as to distributions and in liquidation, which could negatively affect the value of our common stock.
5
PART I
Item 1. Business
References to “Plus,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Plus Therapeutics, Inc. References to “Notes” refer to the Notes to Financial Statements included herein (refer to Item 8).
General
Plus Therapeutics, Inc. is a U.S. pharmaceutical company developing targeted radiotherapeutics with advanced platform technologies for central nervous system ("CNS") cancers. Our novel radioactive drug formulations and therapeutic candidates are designed to deliver safe and effective doses of radiation to tumors. To achieve this, we have developed innovative approaches to drug formulation, including encapsulating radionuclides such as Rhenium isotopes with nanoliposomes and microspheres. Our formulations are intended to achieve elevated patient absorbed radiation doses and extend retention times such that the clearance of the isotope occurs after significant and essentially complete radiation decay, which will contribute and provide less normal tissue/organ exposure and improved safety margins.
Traditional approaches to radiation therapy for cancer, such as external beam radiation, have many disadvantages including continuous treatment for four to six weeks (which is onerous for patients), that the radiation damages healthy cells and tissue, and that the amount of radiation delivered is very limited and, therefore, is frequently inadequate to fully destroy the cancer.
Our targeted radiotherapeutic platform and unique investigational drugs have the potential to overcome these disadvantages by directing higher, more powerful radiation doses at the tumor—and only the tumor—potentially in a single treatment. By minimizing radiation exposure to healthy tissues while simultaneously maximizing locoregional delivery and, thereby, efficacy, we hope to reduce the radiation toxicity for patients, improving their quality of life and life expectancy. Our radiotherapeutic platform, combined with advances in surgery, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, and radiation oncology, affords us the opportunity to target a broad variety of cancer types.
Our lead radiotherapeutic candidate, rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda (formerly, “186RNL”), is designed specifically to CNS cancers including recurrent glioblastoma ("GBM"), leptomeningeal metastases ("LM"), and pediatric brain cancers ("PBC") by direct localized delivery utilizing approved standard-of-care tissue access such as with convection-enhanced delivery (“CED”) and intraventricular brain(Ommaya reservoir) catheters. Our recently acquired radiotherapeutic candidate, Rhenium-188 NanoLiposome Biodegradable Alginate Microsphere (“188RNL-BAM”) is designed to treat many solid organ cancers including primary and secondary liver cancers by intra-arterial injection.
Our headquarters and manufacturing facilities are in Texas and are in proximity to world-class cancer institutions and researchers. Our dedicated team of engineers, physicians, scientists, and other professionals are committed to advancing our targeted radiotherapeutic technology for the benefit of cancer patients and healthcare providers worldwide and our current pipeline is focused on treating rare and difficult-to-treat cancers with significant unmet medical needs.
In addition to its headquarters in Austin, we have an established, GMP-validated research and development and manufacturing facility in San Antonio, Texas, tailored to produce cGMP rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda. We have built a robust supply chain through strategic partnerships that enable the development, manufacturing and future potential commercialization of our products. Our current supply chain and key partners are positioned to supply cGMP rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for ongoing and planned Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials in patients with GBM, LM and PBC..
Pipeline
Our most advanced investigational drug, rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda, is a patented radiotherapy potentially useful for patients with CNS and other cancers. Preclinical study data describing the use ofrhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for several cancer targets have been published in peer-reviewed journals and reported at a variety of medical society peer-reviewed meetings. Besides GBM, LM and PBC, rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda has been reported to have potential applications for head and neck cancer, ovarian cancer, breast cancer and peritoneal metastases.
The Rhenium (186Re) Obisbemeda technology was part of a licensed radiotherapeutic portfolio that we acquired from NanoTx, Corp. (“NanoTx”) on May 7, 2020. The licensed radiotherapeutic has been evaluated in preclinical studies for several cancer targets and we have an active $3.0 million award from U.S. National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute which is expected to provide financial support for the continued clinical development of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for recurrent GBM through the completion of a Phase 2 clinical trial, including enrollment of up to 55 patients. As of February 23, 2023, 26 patients have been treated in the Phase 1 clinical trial and the Phase 2 clinical trial has been initiated with the first patient treated. In addition, we anticipate obtaining FDA IND approval for the ReSPECT-PBC clinical trial for PBC in early 2023.
6
On August 29, 2022, we announced feedback from a Type C meeting with the FDA regarding Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (“CMC”) practices. The meeting focused on our Current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”) clinical and commercial manufacturing process for our lead investigational targeted radiotherapeutic, BMEDA-chelated Rhenium (186Re) Obisbemeda, for recurrent GBM.
The FDA indicated agreement with our proposed application of cGMP guidance for radiotherapeutics, small molecule drug products and liposome drug products for our novel rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda in support of ongoing and future GBM clinical trials, manufacturing scale up, and commercialization. Alignment with the FDA includes support of our proposed controls and release strategy for new drug substance and new drug product. Because this product is identical for recurrent GBM and LM adult development and pediatric brain tumors, we believe this FDA alignment and feedback will apply to rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda used in other clinical development programs, including LM and PBC.
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda versus External Beam Radiation Therapy for Recurrent GBM
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda is a novel injectable radiotherapy designed to deliver targeted, high dose radiation directly into GBM tumors in a safe, effective, and convenient manner that may ultimately prolong patient survival. rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda is composed of the radionuclide Rhenium-186 and a nanoliposomal carrier, and is infused in a highly targeted, controlled fashion, directly into the tumor via precision brain mapping and CED catheters. Potential benefits of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda compared to standard external beam radiotherapy or EBRT include:
•
The rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda radiation dose delivered to patients may be up to 20 times greater than what is possible with commonly used external beam radiation therapy (“EBRT”), which, unlike EBRT and proton beam devices, spares normal tissue and the brain from radiation exposure.
•
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda can be visualized in real-time during administration, possibly giving clinicians better control of radiation dosing, distribution and retention.
•
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda potentially more effectively treats a bulk tumor and microscopic disease that has already invaded healthy tissue.
•
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda is infused directly into the targeted tumor by CED catheter insertion using MRI guided software to avoid critical patient neurological structures and neural pathways and also bypasses the blood brain barrier, which delivers the therapeutic product where it is needed. Importantly, it reduces radiation exposure to healthy cells, in contrast to EBRT which passes through normal tissue to reach the tumor, continuing its path through the tumor, hence being less targeted and selective.
•
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda is given during a single, short, in-patient hospital visit, and is available in all hospitals with nuclear medicine and neurosurgery, while EBRT requires out-patient visits five days a week for approximately four to six weeks.
ReSPECT-GBM Trial for Recurrent GBM
Recurrent GBM is the most common, complex, and aggressive primary brain cancer in adults. In the U.S., there are more than 13,000 GBM cases diagnosed and approximately 10,000 patients succumb to the disease each year. The average length of overall survival ("OS") for GBM patients is eight months, with a one-year survival rate of 40.8% and a five-year survival rate of only 6.8% and these estimates varies and are lower in some publications. GBM routinely presents with headaches, seizures, vision changes and other significant neurological complications, with a significant compromise in quality of life. Despite the best available medical treatments, the disease remains incurable. Even after efforts to manage the presenting signs and symptoms and completely resect the initial brain tumor, some microscopic disease almost always remains and tumor regrowth occurs within months. Approximately 90% or more of patients with primary GBM experience tumor recurrence. Complete surgical removal of GBM is usually not possible and GBM is often resistant or quickly develops resistance to most available current and investigational therapies. Even today, the treatment of GBM remains a significant challenge and it has been nearly a decade since the FDA approved a new therapy for this disease, and these more recent approvals have not improved GBM patients OS over past decades, and a significant unmet medical need persists.
For recurrent GBM, there are few currently approved treatments, which in the aggregate, provide only marginal survival benefit. Furthermore, these therapies are associated with significant side effects, which limit dosing and prolonged use.
While EBRT has been shown to be safe and has temporary efficacy in many malignancies including GBM, typically at absorbed, fractionated radiation dose of ~30 Gray in GBM, this maximum possible administered dose is always limited by toxicity to the normal tissues surrounding the malignancy and because EBRT requires fractionation to manage toxicity and maximum EBRT limits are typically reached before long-term efficacy reached. Because of this limitation EBRT cannot provide a cure or long term control of GBM and GBM always recurs within months after EBRT. In contrast, locally delivered and targeted radiopharmaceuticals that precisely deliver radiation in the form of beta particles such as Iodine-131 for thyroid cancer, are known to be safe and effective and minimize exposure to normal cells and tissues especially with optimal targeting and avoidance of normal tissue. The locally delivered rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda is designed for and provides patient tolerability and safety. Though no head-to-head trial with chemo, immune,
7
EBRT or systemic radiopharmaceutical products have been conducted, patient tolerability and safety considerations have been reported as expected.
Interim results from our ongoing Phase 1/2a ReSPECT-GBM trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01906385) show that the beta particle energy from our lead investigational drug rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda has provided preliminary positive data and utility in treating GBM and potential other malignancies. More specifically, the preliminary data from our Phase 1/2a ReSPECT-GBM trial suggests that radiation, in the form of high energy beta particles or electrons, can be effective against GBM. Thus far, we have been able to deliver up to 740 Gy of absorbed radiation to tumor tissue in humans, without significant or dose limiting toxicities and with what we believe has the capability to go higher if required. In comparison, current EBRT protocols for recurrent GBM typically recommend a total maximum radiation dose of about ~30-35 Gray.
In September 2020, the FDA granted both Orphan Drug designation and Fast Track designations to rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for the treatment of patients with GBM. In November 2021, the FDA granted Fast Track designation for rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for the treatment of LM.
Rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda is under clinical investigation in a multicenter, sequential cohort, open-label, volume and dose escalation study of the safety, tolerability, and distribution of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda given by CED catheters to patients with recurrent or progressive malignant glioma after standard surgical, radiation, and/or chemotherapy treatment (NCT01906385). The study uses a standard, modified 3x3 Fibonacci dose escalation, followed by a planned Phase 2 expansion trial at the maximum tolerated dose (“MTD”) / maximum feasible dose (“MFD”) or non-dose limiting toxicity (“DLT”) if MTD is not reached, to determine efficacy. The trial is funded through Phase 2 in large part by a NIH/NCI grant. These investigations have not reached DLT or MTD/MFD and the study is in its eighth dosing administration cohort. Due to the observation of a preliminary efficacy signal, we have initiated in parallel a Phase 2, non-DLT dose trial pursuant to the currently funded NIH/NCI Grant. This trial will begin at the current non-DLT rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda dose and will expand exploring higher radiation doses in larger volumes to treat larger tumors. Additionally, two or more rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda administrations, if indicated, will be evaluated, and reviewed with the FDA, as well as expanded safety, imaging and efficacy data to support a planned future registrational trial. This in turn will provide a path to a registration trial.
On September 6, 2022, we announced a summary of our Type C clinical meeting with the FDA that focused on the ReSPECT-GBM trial. The FDA agreed with us that the ReSPECT-GBM clinical trial should proceed to the planned Phase 2. The key focus areas of clinical investigation of the Phase 2 trial will be 1) further dose exploration, including both increased dosing and multiple doses, and 2) collecting additional safety and efficacy data to inform the design of a future registrational trial. Because no DLT administered doses were observed, the FDA and we also agreed to continue to dose cohort eight. There was further agreement with the FDA that in a planned future registrational trial, overall survival should be used as the primary endpoint. We agreed with the FDA to hold future meeting(s) to consider the use of external data to augment the use of a control arm in the registrational trial.
At the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, held September 9 to 13, 2022, we presented updated data from the ReSPECT-GBM trial, which evaluated 23 adult patients with recurrent GBM across eight cohorts of increasing dose and treated over a seven-year period. Key findings include:
•
No DLTs have been observed and the procedure was very well tolerated with a strong safety profile. Minimal systemic radiation has been observed and the majority of adverse events have been mild or moderate and considered causally unrelated to rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda.
•
Improved median overall survival (“OS”) rates correlated with the absorbed radiation tumor dose. When patients were stratified based on receipt of either a therapeutic or a subtherapeutic absorbed dose of radiation to the tumor, a statistically significant improvement in survival was observed. Specifically, patients receiving a therapeutic absorbed radiation dose (>100 Gray) had a median OS of 22.9 months (95% CI of 8.8-42.3) compared to those receiving a subtherapeutic absorbed radiation dose (<100 Gray) whose median OS was 5.6 months (95% CI of 1.6-9.4). Currently, three patients remain alive, all in the therapeutic group.
•
Feasibility to deliver up to at least 20 times more radiation to the tumor than the standard of care, EBRT. A maximum of 32.2 mCi in 12.3 mL of volume has been delivered in and near the tumors, and a maximum average absorbed dose of radiation of 740 Gray was successfully administered in a single procedure.
•
Average absorbed radiation dose to the tumor increased in latter dosing cohorts with greater administered doses of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda β-particle radiation, larger drug CED infusate volumes, more catheters used (up to four versus one), and higher convection flow rates. In cohorts five and later, 82% of patients received a therapeutic radiation dose of >100Gray.
•
Single-photon emission computerized tomography and (SPECT)/CT scanning were used during treatment to compute tumor coverage and dosimetry. Post treatment imaging analyses, including MRI, relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) analysis
8
and treatment response assessment maps (TRAMs) correlated with a positive tumor response and confirmed the presence of pseudoprogression in patients with positive tumor responses.
At the Society for Neuro-Oncology Annual Meeting in November 2022, we presented patient data, which at that time included the results for 24 patients treated in the ReSPECT-GBM trial. As of the date of this report, rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda given by CED in recurrent GBM patients was observed in the trial to be feasible and well tolerated. Across all subjects in the first eight cohorts (n=24), the median absorbed dose to the tumor volume increased as cohorts evaluated progressed, with patients receiving >100Gy absorbed dose showing significant survival benefit versus patients receiving <100Gy absorbed dose. Importantly, in a subset of patients where tumor coverage was greater than or equal to 75%, the median absorbed dose was 405 Gy (range 146-593). By contrast, given the protocol dose escalation design where early cohorts often had much lower doses, the absorbed doses were adequate for small tumors even with low doses. Small, absorbed doses to specific organs and whole body, are typically well-tolerated. Based on observed and reported patient protocol activity and all available adverse event (AE) data, rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda has been well-tolerated with AEs related to CED insertion that were limited and fully recovered. No AEs with an outcome of death, study discontinuation or study drug-related serious AEs have been reported. All AEs have been mild or moderate (Grade 1 or 2) in intensity, except for one case of Grade 3 vasogenic edema, which was considered by the investigator to be unrelated to the study drug. AEs considered by the investigator to be at least possibly related to rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda have included Grade 1 to 2 skin and soft tissue infection, intermittent cephalgia, neck and jaw pain, nausea with or without vomiting, constipation, increased lethargy, difficulty walking (gait disturbance), worsening double vision, and dysuria. Scalp discomfort and tenderness related to the surgical procedure has also been reported.
In the 24 subjects with recurrent GBM receiving a single administration of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda, the median OS for all 24 patients as of November 2022 was 8.8 months, with four patients alive. In a subset of 13 patients receiving a presumed therapeutic absorbed radiation dose to the tumor (>100 Gy), the mean OS was 22.9 months, respectively, with seven of 13 patients alive. In contrast, in nine patients receiving a presumed sub-therapeutic absorbed radiation dose to the tumor (<100 Gy), the mean and median OS was 23.9 and 22.3 weeks, respectively. A Kaplan-Meier curve comparing patients with presumed therapeutic (>100 Gy) versus sub-therapeutic (<100 Gy) radiation dose to the tumor showed a statistically significant difference between the groups (p=.0003). It is hypothesized that targeted infusion of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda into the tumor by CED, which exposure and potential toxicity and concentrates radiation to the tumor and surrounding region of interest. On January 18, 2023, we announced that the first patient has been dosed in the ReSPECT-GBM Phase 2b dose expansion clinical trial evaluating rhenium obisbemeda for the treatment of recurrent GBM. The Phase 2b trial is expected to enroll up to 31 total patients with small- to medium-sized tumors in approximately 24 months.
ReSPECT-LM Clinical Trial for Leptomeningeal Metastases (LM)
LM is a rare complication of cancer in which the disease spreads to the membranes (meninges) surrounding the brain and spinal cord. The incidence of LM is growing and occurs in approximately 5%, or more, of people with late-stage cancer, or 110,000 people in the U.S. each year. It is highly lethal with an average one-year survival of just 7%. All solid cancers have the potential to spread to the central nervous system and leptomeninges resulting in LM.
The ReSPECT-LM Phase 1 clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05034497) is predicated in part upon preclinical studies in which tolerance to doses of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda as high as 1,075 Gy was shown in animal models with LM without significant observed toxicity. Furthermore, treatment led to a marked reduction in tumor burden in both C6 and MDA-231 LM models.
Upon receiving acceptance of our Investigational New Drug application and Fast Track designation by the FDA for rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for the treatment of LM, we initiated the trial and began screening patients for the ReSPECT-LM Phase 1 clinical trial in Q4 2021.
The ReSPECT-LM is a multi-center, sequential cohort, open-label, dose escalation study evaluating the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of a single-dose application of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda administered through intrathecal infusion to the ventricle of patients with LM after standard surgical, radiation, and/or chemotherapy treatment. The primary endpoint of the study is the incidence and severity of adverse events and dose limiting toxicities.
On March 31, 2022, we entered into a Sales Order (the “Sales Order”) with Medidata Solutions, Inc. (“Medidata”), pursuant to which Medidata built a Synthetic Control Arm® (SCA) platform that facilitates the use of historical clinical data to incorporate into our Phase 2 clinical trial of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda in GBM. The Sales Order had a term of six (6) months. Work under this Sales Order has been completed.
On September 19, 2022, we entered into a Cancer Research Grant Contract (the “CPRIT Contract”), effective as of August 31, 2022, with CPRIT, pursuant to which CPRIT will provide us a grant of up to $17.6 million (the “CPRIT Grant”) over a three-year period to fund the continued development of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for the treatment of patients with LM through Phase 2 of the ReSPECT LM clinical trial. The CPRIT Grant is subject to customary CPRIT funding conditions, including, but not limited to, a matching fund requirement (one dollar from us for every two dollars awarded by CPRIT), revenue sharing obligations upon
9
commercialization of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda based on specific dollar thresholds until CPRIT receives the aggregate amount of 400% of the proceeds awarded under the CPRIT Grant, and certain reporting requirements.
Interim results showed that treatment with rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda decreased CSF tumor cell count/ml and was well tolerated by all four LM patients.rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda was administered through a standard intraventricular catheter (Ommaya Reservoir), redistributed throughout the CSF, and was retained in the leptomeninges at least through day seven. All four patients have shown prompt and durable rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda distribution throughout the subarachnoid space. A single dose of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda at 6.6 millicurie ("mCi") in 5.0 mL, in Cohort 1, achieved absorbed doses of 18.7 to 29.0 Gy to the ventricles and cranial subarachnoid spaces, respectively. Cohort 2 is in progress with a 13.2 mCi administered dose in 5ml and was also well tolerated. All four patients experienced a decreased CSF cell count ranging from 46% to 92%. Three patients remain alive, as the first patient in Cohort 1 has died, due to primary tumor progression. A single dose of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda was well-tolerated with limited AEs and no patients had definite treatment related AEs. Additionally, there were no AEs greater than Grade 1 that were even possibly related to treatment. Cohort 2 was completed on January 26, 2023 and Cohort 3 is expected to enroll in late February/early March 2023 after a protocol defined follow-up 28-day period. Besides continued dose escalation, repeated dosing will be explored.
ReSPECT-PBC Clinical Trial for Pediatric Brain Cancer
In August 2021, we announced plans for treating pediatric brain cancer at the 2021 American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) Annual Scientific Meeting. In July 2021, we reported that we had received FDA feedback pertaining to a pre-IND meeting briefing package in which the FDA stated that we are not required to perform any additional preclinical or toxicology studies.
It is estimated that in 2022 there were approximately 25,050 new brain and other central nervous system cases diagnosed (1.3% of all cancers) and 18,280 deaths (3.0% of all cancer related deaths). The average annual age adjusted mortality rate (“AAAMR”) for children aged 0-14 for malignant brain (and other CNS) tumors is 0.71/100,000, making it the most common cause of death and cancer death in this age group. The 2021 World Health Organization Classification of CNS Tumors (“WHO CNS5”) classifies gliomas, glioneuronal tumors, and neuronal tumors into six different families: (1) adult-type diffuse gliomas; (2) pediatric-type diffuse low-grade gliomas; (3) pediatric-type diffuse high-grade gliomas (“HGG”); (4) circumscribed astrocytic gliomas; (5) glioneuronal and neuronal tumors; and (6) ependymomas.
Since the initial FDA feedback and receiving important adult GBM data and experience with rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and follow-up communications with the FDA, we plan to submit a pediatric brain tumor IND to investigate the use of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda in two pediatric brain cancers in early 2023.
Pediatric high-grade gliomas can be found almost anywhere within the CNS; however, they are most commonly found within the supratentorium. The highest incidence of supratentorial, high-grade gliomas in pediatrics appears to occur in children aged 15 to 19 years, with a median age of approximately nine years. Overall, pediatric high grade glioma confers a three-year progression free survival (“PFS”) of 11 ± 3% and three-year overall survival (“OS”) of 22% ±5%. One-year PFS is as low as 40% in recent trials. Ependymomas are slow-growing central nervous system tumors that involve the ventricular system. Diagnosis is based on MRI and biopsy and survival rate depends on tumor grade and how much of the tumor can be removed. Grade II pathology was associated with significantly improved OS compared to Grade III (anaplastic) pathology (five-year OS = 71 ± 5% vs. 57 ± 10%; p = 0.026). Gross total resection compared to subtotal resection was associated with significantly improved OS (five-year OS = 75 ± 5% vs. 54 ± 8%; p = 0.002).
Overall, pediatric HGG and ependymoma are extremely difficult-to-treat pediatric brain tumors, frequently aggressive, and in recurrent settings, carry an extremely poor prognosis.
Rhenium-188 NanoLiposome Biodegradable Alginate Microsphere Technology
In January 2022, we announced that we licensed Biodegradable Alginate Microsphere (“BAM”) patents and technology from The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio (“UT Health Science Center at San Antonio”) to expand our tumor targeting capabilities and precision radiotherapeutics pipeline. We intend to combine our Rhenium NanoLiposome technology with the BAM technology to create a novel radioembolization technology. Initially, we intend to utilize the Rhenium-188 isotope, 188RNL-BAM for the intra-arterial embolization and local delivery of a high dose of targeted radiation for a variety of solid organ cancers such as hepatocellular cancer, hepatic metastases, pancreatic cancer and many others.
Preclinical data from an ex vivo embolization experiment in which Technetium99m-BAM was intra-arterially delivered to a bovine kidney perfusion model was presented at the recent 2021 Society of Interventional Radiology (“SIR”) Annual Scientific Meeting. The study concluded that the technology required for radiolabeling BAM could successfully deliver, embolize and retain radiation in the target organ. 188RNL-BAM is a preclinical investigational drug we intend to further develop and move into clinical trials. Specifically, in 2022 we transferred the 188RNL-BAM technology from UT Health Science Center at San Antonio, and began planning to develop the drug product and complete early preclinical studies to support a future FDA IND submission. Our intended initial clinical target is liver
10
cancer which is the sixth most common and third deadliest cancer worldwide. It is a rare disease with increasing U.S. annual incidence (42,000) and deaths (30,000).
Licensing
On June 22, 2022, we announced a multi-year laboratory services agreement with Biocept, Inc. (“Biocept”) to employ their cerebrospinal fluid (“CSF”) assay, CNSide, in Plus Therapeutics’ ReSPECT-LM Phase 1/2a dose-escalation trial of Rhenium-186 NanoLiposome for the treatment of patients with (“LM”).
On December 31, 2021, we entered into a Patent and Technology License Agreement (the “UTHSA License Agreement”) with UT Health Science Center at San Antonio, pursuant to which UT Heath Science Center at San Antonio granted us an irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive, fully paid-up license, with the right to sublicense and to make, develop, commercialize and otherwise exploit certain patents, know-how and technology related to the development of BAM containing nanoliposomes loaded with imaging and/or therapeutic payloads. Therapeutic payloads may include radiotherapeutics, chemotherapeutics, or thermotherapeutics.
The BAM technology is delivered directly into the intra-arterial vascular system via commonly utilized and standard interventional vascular catheters and techniques that allow precise placement into the arterial blood vessels feeding tumors. Once injected, BAM technology provides a dual therapeutic delivery—blocking blood flow to the tumors by alginate microsphere tumor capillary embolization with simultaneous delivery of very high doses of cytotoxic compounds including radiation, such as nanoliposome encapsulated bi-functionally chelated Re-188, for an extended time. Weeks later, the delivered BAM are physiologically metabolized allowing excretion from the body. Rhenium-188 is an attraction and ideal therapeutic isotope for this application because of it’s 16.9 hour half-life, 2.12MEV β-decay and ~3.8mm tissue path-length, and simultaneous 155Kev γ-decay that allow simultaneous SPECT/CT imaging with commonly available imaging equipment to easily and non-invasively monitor product administration, delivery and dosimetry absorbed dose evaluation.
We currently anticipate that we will initially focus on developing 188RNL-BAM as a next-generation radioembolization therapy for liver cancer, in which BAM blocks the hepatic artery segments that supply blood to the malignant tumor while also providing 188RNL radiotherapy directly to the tumor and surrounding tissue. According to the American Cancer Society, liver cancer is a rare disease with an increasing annual incidence and five-year overall survival of only 20%. We estimate that the global opportunity for localized embolization, chemoembolization, and radioembolization therapies for primary (hepatocellular carcinoma) and secondary (typically metastatic colorectal cancer, for example) liver cancer is $1.3 billion.
The financial terms of the exclusive license agreement are primarily success-based with milestone and royalty payments contingent on achieving key clinical, regulatory and sales milestones.
The initial inventions and work behind the licensed patents and technologies were developed and led by William Phillips MD, Professor of Nuclear Medicine, and team at UT Health Science Center at San Antonio. The 188RNL-BAM technology incorporates Rhenium-188, or 188Re, a unique isotope for radiotherapeutic embolization owing to its emission of a high energy [2.12Mev] electron (beta particle, 16.9 hour half-life with a 3.8mm decay path length. 188Re also emits 155kev gamma energy that permits high quality, real-time imaging of the BAM construct delivery localization and confirmation. BAMs are not permanent and are anticipated to degrade over time, allowing restoration of blood flow, decreasing radiation resistance, and allowing for safer physiological clearance of 188Re through the kidneys, which may minimize bone marrow toxicity.
The transaction terms include an upfront payment in cash. We are also required to pay development and sales milestone payments, if achieved, and a tiered single-digit royalty on U.S. and European sales. In addition, we may be obligated to pay an annual maintenance fee beginning in 2024.
On March 29, 2020, we entered into a Patent and Know-How License Agreement (the “NanoTx License Agreement”) with NanoTx, pursuant to which NanoTx granted us an irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive, fully paid-up license, with the right to sublicense andto make, develop, commercialize and otherwise exploit certain patents, know-how and technology related to the development of radiolabeled nanoliposomes.
The transaction terms included an upfront payment of $0.4 million in cash and $0.3 million in our voting stock. The transaction terms also included success-based milestone and royalty payments contingent on key clinical, regulatory and sales milestones, as well as the requirement to pay 15% of any non-dilutive monetary awards or grants received from external agencies to support product development of the nanoliposome encapsulated BMEDA-chelated radioisotope, which includes grants from the CPRIT.
The licensed NanoTx portfolio benefits from proprietary nanoliposome-encapsulated technology to encapsulate radionuclides allowing direct local delivery for several cancer targets.
11
The licensed radiolabeled nanoliposome platform was developed by a multi-institutional consortium based in Texas at the Mays Cancer Center / UT Health Science Center at San Antonio MD Anderson Cancer Center led by Dr. Andrew Brenner, MD, PhD, who is the Kolitz Chair in Neuro-Oncology Research and Co-Leader of the Experimental and Developmental Therapeutics Program. The technology was previously owned by NanoTx and funded by both the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute ("NIH"/"NCI") and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas ("CPRIT"). There is an active $3 million award from NIH/NCI which is expected to financially support the continued clinical development of rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda for recurrent glioblastoma.
Manufacturing
We have a dedicated nanoparticle research & development facility located in San Antonio, Texas. The facility and processes are designed to comply with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) per FDA and EMA regulations for the manufacture of drug candidates for clinical trials, research, and development. As described below, upon completion of the research and development phase of a drug candidate, certain parts of the manufacturing processes for such candidate may be transferred to contract manufactures to support clinical trials and commercial release. Upon approval of our drug candidates, we expect our manufacturing capabilities to include validated manufacturing processes for the drug product as well as a quality assurance product release process with the ability to ultimately scale-up the process to meet increasing market demands. We believe our strategic investments in our analytical, development and manufacturing capabilities, including personnel with expertise from drug discovery through drug development, will allow us to advance our product candidates more quickly. Expertise gained in manufacturing our drug products may be applied to other formulations in the future, further leveraging our capabilities. Our San Antonio facility is designed to enable us to develop drug substances, and drug products, in a cost-effective manner while retaining control over the intellectual property, process and timing of development activities. The use of a qualified Contract Drug Manufacturing Organization (“CDMO”) is entitled to be utilized to perform various manufacturing processes as we deem appropriate to meet our operational objectives. In addition, we have entered into master services agreements (“MSAs”) with third parties, including Piramal Pharma Solutions, Inc. (“Piramal”), ABX Advanced Biochemical Compounds GmbH, IsoTherapeutics Group, LLC, and Radiomedix, Inc. in connection with the development, manufacture, and supply of our rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda drug product.
Competition
We will compete primarily on the basis of the safety and efficacy of our therapies across a broad range of clinical indications to address significant unmet medical and market needs, supported by our brand name, pricing, products, published clinical data, regulatory approvals, and reimbursement. We believe that our continued success depends on our ability to:
•
develop and innovate our product and technology platforms;
•
initiate new and advance existing clinical development programs;
•
secure and maintain regulatory agency approvals;
•
build and expand our commercial footprint;
•
produce high quality products per our specifications and in line with customer expectations;
•
achieve improved economies of scale;
•
generate and protect intellectual property;
•
hire and retain key talent; and
•
successfully execute acquisition, licensing, and partnership activities.
Competition for rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda may come from a single or combination therapy in the future.
Recurrent Glioblastoma
EnGeneIC, Berg, Istari, AstraZeneca, Novartis, PharmAbcine, Kairos, Midatech, Oncovir, Infuseon, Astellas, NanoPharmaceuticals, Erasca, OX2, Crimson BioPharm, TMUNITY, Pfizer, Arcus, Photolitec, Samus, DNAtrix, ImmVira, BerGenBio, Boston Scientific, BeiGene, GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Sumitomo, QED, Chimerix, Accenda, Oblato, VBI, INIGHTEC, Sonalasense, VBL, Medicenna, Mimiva, Carthera, Gilead, CNS Pharmaceuticals, VAXIMM, Incyte, Celularity, Medicinova, Karyopharm, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Merck, Telix, Neonc, Nuvation Bio, Aadi, ERC, Kazia, Xoft, Basilea, Vigo, Biohaven, Bayer, Kintara, and others have reported drug development programs at various clinical stages for recurrent GBM.
Leptomeningeal Metastases
Angiochem, Y-mAbs, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Kazia, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Memorial Sloan Kettering, University of Virginia, Wake Forest University, University of Alabama Birmingham, and others have reported drug development programs at various clinical stages for LM.
12
Pediatric Brain Cancer
AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chimerix, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Nektar Therapeutics, Istari Oncology, Novartis, NovoCure, Takeda, Y-mAbs, Cellectar, and others have reported drug development programs at various clinical stages for PBC.
Competition for 188RNL-BAM may come from a single or combination therapy in the future.
Liver Cancer
Boston Scientific, SIR-TEX, Terumo, ABK Biomedical, and others have reported radioembolization therapy product development programs for liver cancer.
Intellectual Property
Our success depends in large part on our ability to protect our proprietary technology, and to operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of third parties. We rely on a combination of patent, trade secret, copyright and trademark laws, as well as confidentiality agreements, licensing agreements and other agreements, to establish and protect our proprietary rights. Our success also depends, in part, on our ability to avoid infringing patents issued to others.
We license the proprietary formulation and proprietary methods of manufacture of the nanoliposome-encapsulated radionucleotides. rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and 188RNL are covered by U.S. Patent No. 7,718,160, (the “‘160 Patent”) which will expire in December 2026. Patent term extension, codified in 35 U.S.C. §156, provides a means of recapturing time lost during the regulatory approval process. Based upon this regulation, we will apply for patent term extension for the ‘160 Patent for the time equal to the regulatory review period for rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda. This has the potential to extend patent coverage for this product for up to another five years. The ‘160 Patent covers rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and 188RNL and their method of manufacture. The patent family also contains granted patents in Canada (Patent No. 2,490,959), Europe (Patent No. EP1536843), and Australia (Patent No. 2003241598), which are expected to expire in May 2023.
188RNL is also covered by U.S. Patent Appl. No. 17/611,929 titled Radiotherapeutic Microspheres, to which we have a license. This application is directed to a method of producing liposome containing alginate microspheres. This application was filed on November 17, 2021, and any patent granted from or claiming priority to it is expected to expire in May 2040, not including any patent term adjustment or patent term extension. The patent family also contains applications in Canada, Israel, India, Japan, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, South Africa, Vietnam, Philippines, China, European Patent Office, Brazil, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia, and New Zealand.
188RNL is also covered by PCT/US2022/018992 titled Loading Alginate Microspheres, to which we have a license. This application is directed to a method for post-manufacture loading of a liposome-containing hydrogel microsphere. This application was filed March 4, 2022, and any patent granted from or claiming priority to it is expected to expire in March 2042.
We co-own and license PCT Application No. PCT/US2021/059969 and U.S. Patent Appl. No. 17/746,853, titled Radiolabeled Liposomes and Methods of Use Thereof, which are directed to methods of treating cancer comprising administering 186Re and 188Re nanoliposomes via CED. These applications were filed on November 18, 2021 and May 17, 2022, respectively, and any patents issued from or claiming priority to them are expected to expire in November 2041, not including any patent term adjustment or patent term extension.
We co-own and license PCT Application No. PCT/US2023/11564, titled Radiolabeled Liposomes and Methods of Use for Treating Leptomeningeal Metastases, which is directed to methods of treating Leptomeningeal Metastases comprising administering 186Re and/or 188Re nanoliposomes via an intraventricular reservoir. This application was filed on January 25, 2023, and any patent issued claiming priority to it is expected to expire in January 2043, not including any patent term adjustment or patent term extension.
Government Regulation and Product Approval
Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries and jurisdictions, including the European Union, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries and jurisdictions, along with compliance with applicable statutes and regulations and other regulatory authorities, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.Our nanoparticle oncology drug candidates must receive regulatory approvals from the EMA and the FDA and from other government authorities prior to sale of the product candidates in their respective jurisdictions.
13
FDA Approval Process
In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. Manufactures of pharmaceutical products may also be subject to state and local regulation. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FDC Act, and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as the imposition by the FDA or an institutional review board, or IRB, of a clinical hold, FDA refusal to approve pending new drug applications, or NDAs, or supplements, withdrawal of approval, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties, and criminal investigation, penalties, or prosecution.
Product development for a new product or certain changes to an approved product in the United States typically involves:
•
Completion of preclinical laboratory studies, formulation studies, and animal studies, some in compliance with the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practices, or GLP, regulations, and the Animal Welfare Act administered and enforced by the United States Department of Agriculture;
•
Submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, to support human clinical testing, which must become effective before clinical testing may commence;
•
Approval by an IRB before each trial may be initiated at each clinical site;
•
Performance of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials under protocols submitted to the FDA and reviewed and approved by each IRB, conducted in accordance with federal regulations and current Good Clinical Practices, or GCP, to establish the safety and effectiveness of the drug for each indication for which FDA approval is sought;
•
Submission of an NDA to the FDA;
•
Satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable;
•
Satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facilities at which the product candidate is produced to assess compliance with current good manufacturing practices, or cGMP, and to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate; and
•
FDA review and approval of the NDA.
Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the product or disease.
Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation, and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The conduct of some preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including as applicable, GLP and the Animal Welfare Act. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Additional preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. A 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND is required prior to the commencement of clinical testing in humans. If the FDA has neither commented on nor questioned the IND within this 30-day period, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin.
Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational drug product to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCP, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators, and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Foreign studies conducted under an IND generally must meet the same requirements that apply to studies being conducted in the United States. The informed written consent of each study patient must be obtained before the patient may begin participation in the clinical trial. The study protocol, study plan, and informed consent forms for each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each clinical site, and the study must be conducted under the auspices of an IRB for each trial site. Investigators and IRBs must also comply with FDA regulations and guidelines, including those regarding oversight of study patient informed consent, complying with the study protocol and investigational plan, adequately monitoring the clinical trial, and timely reporting of adverse events.
14
Clinical trials to support drug products for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. Phase 1 involves the initial introduction of the drug product into healthy human subjects or patients. In Phase 1 trials, the product is tested to assess safety, metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence on effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the drug for a particular indication, dosage tolerance, and optimal dosage, and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks. If a compound demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain the additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the product. In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug product. A single Phase 3 trial with other confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in certain instances.
The decision to suspend or terminate development of a product candidate may be made by either a health authority body, such as the FDA, by an IRB, or by a company for various reasons and during any phase of clinical trials. The FDA may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time or impose other sanctions if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. In most cases, in addition to sponsor oversight clinical trials are also overseen by an independent data safety monitoring board, or DSMB, which is a separate, independent group of qualified experts organized by the trial sponsor to evaluate at designated points in time whether or not a trial may move forward and/or should be modified. These decisions are based on unblinded access to data from the ongoing trial and generally involve determinations regarding the benefit-risk ratio for study patients and the scientific integrity and validity of the clinical trial.
In addition, the manufacturer of an investigational drug in a Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trial for a serious or life-threatening disease is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on evaluating and responding to requests for expanded access to such investigational drug.
After completion of the required clinical testing, a drug product application is prepared and submitted to the FDA to request marketing approval for the product candidate in specific indications. FDA approval of the drug product is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The drug product must include all relevant results of preclinical, clinical, and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product candidate’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture, and controls, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate to the satisfaction of the FDA. The cost of preparing and submitting a drug product application is substantial. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the submission of most drug product applications is subject to a substantial application user fee, and the applicant under an approved drug product is also subject to an annual program fee for each prescription product, subject to certain limited deferrals, waivers and reductions that may be available. These fees are typically increased annually. The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. The FDA may refuse to accept for filing any NDA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission, in which case the NDA will have to be updated and resubmitted. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs. The FDA’s PDUFA review goal is to review 90% of priority applications within six months of filing and 90% of standard applications within 10 months of filing. Priority review may be granted to an application for a product candidate that the FDA determines has the potential to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would be a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness compared to available therapies. The review process for both standard and priority review may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission.
The FDA may also refer applications for drug candidates that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee—typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts—for review, evaluation, and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it consider such recommendations carefully when making decisions. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless compliance with cGMP is satisfactory and the NDA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the drug candidate is safe and effective in the intended indication.
After the FDA evaluates the NDA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing, or information, in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. If and when those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA may issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval and deny approval of a resubmitted NDA.
15
An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug candidate with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the drug candidate outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use, or ETASU. ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring, and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. Moreover, product approval may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the product’s safety or efficacy.
Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing. For example, quality control and manufacturing procedures must conform, on an ongoing basis, to cGMP requirements, and the FDA periodically inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to spend time, money and effort to maintain cGMP compliance. Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing an NDA.
Expedited Programs
In the United States, a product may be granted Fast Track designation if it is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such condition. With Fast Track designation, the sponsor may be eligible for more frequent opportunities to obtain the FDA’s feedback, and the FDA may initiate review of sections of an NDA before the application is complete. This rolling review is available if the applicant provides and the FDA approves a schedule for the remaining information. Even if a product receives Fast Track designation, the designation can be rescinded and provides no assurance that a product will be reviewed or approved more expeditiously than would otherwise have been the case, or that the product will be approved at all.
The FDA may designate a product candidate as a breakthrough therapy if it finds that the product candidate is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other product candidates or approved products, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. For product candidates designated as breakthrough therapies, more frequent interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development. Product candidates designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA may also be eligible for six month priority review. The receipt of a breakthrough therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to product candidates considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and, in any event, does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that the product candidates no longer meet the conditions for designation.
Accelerated approval under FDA regulations allows a product designed to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition that provides a meaningful therapeutic advantage over available therapies to be approved on the basis of either an intermediate clinical endpoint or a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Approvals of this kind typically include requirements for confirmatory clinical trials to be conducted with due diligence to validate the surrogate endpoint or otherwise confirm clinical benefit and for all promotional materials to be submitted to the FDA for review prior to dissemination.
The FDA may grant priority review to a product candidate, which sets the target date for FDA action on the application at six months from FDA filing, or eight months from the sponsor’s submission. Priority Review may be granted where a product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and, if approved, has the potential to provide a safe and effective therapy where no satisfactory alternative therapy exists or a significant improvement in safety or efficacy compared to available therapy. If criteria are not met for Priority Review, the standard FDA review period is ten months from FDA filing or 12 months from sponsorsubmission. Priority Review designation does not change the scientific/medical standard for approval or the quality of evidence necessary to support approval.
Orphan Drug Designation
Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drug candidate products intended to treat a rare disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if it affects more than 200,000 individuals in the United States, there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a product available in the United States for such disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product in the United States.
After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug product and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. However, orphan drug designation does entitle a party to financial incentives, such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax credits for certain research and user fee waivers under certain circumstances. In addition, if a product
16
receives the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to seven years of market exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application for a biologic for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity. The FDA can revoke a product’s orphan drug exclusivity under certain circumstances, including when the product sponsor is unable to assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the product to meet patient needs. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same biologic for a different disease or condition.
Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher Program
Under the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher program, the FDA may grant Rare Pediatric Disease designation for serious and life-threatening diseases that primarily affect children aged 18 years or younger and fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. The FDA may award a priority review voucher to the sponsor of an approved marketing application for a product that treats or prevents a Rare Pediatric Disease. The voucher entitles the sponsor to priority review of one subsequent marketing application.
A voucher may be awarded only for an application that:
•
is a human drug application for the prevention or treatment of a Rare Pediatric Disease and does not contain an active ingredient (including any ester or salt of the active ingredient) that has been previously approved in any other application;
•
FDA deems eligible for priority review;
•
is an original NDA or BLA;
•
relies on clinical data derived from studies examining a pediatric population and dosages of the drug intended for that population;
•
does not seek approval for an adult indication in the original rare pediatric disease product application; and
•
is approved after September 30, 2016.
Before NDA or IND approval, the FDA may designate a product in development as a product for a rare pediatric disease, but such designation is not required to receive a voucher.
To receive a rare pediatric disease priority review voucher, a sponsor must notify the FDA, upon submission of the NDA or IND, of its intent to request a voucher. If the FDA determines that the NDA or IND is a rare pediatric disease product application, and if the NDA or IND is approved, the FDA will award the sponsor of the NDA or IND a voucher upon approval of the NDA or IND. The FDA may revoke a rare pediatric disease priority review voucher if the product for which it was awarded is not marketed in the U.S. within 1 year of the product’s approval.
The voucher, which is transferable to another sponsor, may be submitted with a subsequent application and entitles the holder to priority review of the application. The sponsor submitting the priority review voucher must notify the FDA of its intent to submit the voucher with the application at least 90 days prior to submission of the application and must pay a priority review user fee in addition to any other required user fee. The FDA must take action on an application under priority review within six months of receipt of the application.
The Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher program was renewed as part of the 2021 Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, allowing a product that is designated as a product for a rare pediatric disease prior to September 30, 2024 to be eligible to receive a rare pediatric disease priority review voucher upon approval of a qualifying NDA after September 30, 2024. After September 30, 2026, the FDA may not award any rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers.
Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information
Sponsors of clinical trials of the FDA-regulated products are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to discuss the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.
17
Pediatric Information
Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, certain NDAs must include an assessment, generally based on clinical trial data, of the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate in relevant pediatric populations. The FDA may waive or defer the requirement for a pediatric assessment, either at a company’s request or by its own initiative, including waivers for certain products not likely to be used in a substantial number of pediatric patients. Products with orphan drug designation are exempt from these requirements for orphan-designated indications with no formal waiver process required. Any original NDA submitted on or after August 18, 2020 for a new active ingredient must contain reports on molecularly targeted pediatric cancer investigations, unless the requirement is waived or deferred, if the drug that is the subject of the application is intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and is directed at a molecular target that the FDA has determined is substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer. This requirement applies even if the adult cancer indication does not occur in the pediatric population, and even if the drug is for an adult indication for which orphan designation has been granted.
Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, certain NDAs must include an assessment, generally based on clinical trial data, of the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate in relevant pediatric populations. The FDA may waive or defer the requirement for a pediatric assessment, either at a company’s request or by its own initiative, including waivers for certain products not likely to be used in a substantial number of pediatric patients. Products with orphan drug designation are exempt from these requirements for orphan-designated indications with no formal waiver process required. Any original NDA submitted on or after August 18, 2020 for a new active ingredient must contain reports on molecularly targeted pediatric cancer investigations, unless the requirement is waived or deferred, if the drug that is the subject of the application is intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and is directed at a molecular target that the FDA has determined is substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer. This requirement applies even if the adult cancer indication does not occur in the pediatric population, and even if the drug is for an adult indication for which orphan designation has been granted.
Patent Term Restoration
After approval, owners of relevant drug patents may apply for up to a five-year patent extension as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as one half of the drug’s testing phase—the time between the effective date of an IND and NDA submission—and all of the review phase—the time between NDA submission and approval, up to a maximum of five years. The time can be shortened if the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence. The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years. Only one patent applicable to an approved product is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration.
For patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the USPTO must determine that approval of the drug covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for a drug for which an NDA has not been submitted.
Market Exclusivity
In the United States and elsewhere, certain regulatory exclusivities and patent rights can provide an approved drug product with protection from certain competitors’ products for a period of time and within a certain scope. In the United States, those protections include regulatory exclusivity under the Hatch-Waxman Act, which provides periods of exclusivity for a branded drug product that would serve as an RLD for a generic drug applicant filing an ANDA under section 505(j) of the FD&C Act or as a listed drug for an applicant filing an NDA under section 505(b)(2) of the FD&C Act. If such a product is a “new chemical entity” (“NCE”) generally meaning that the active moiety has never before been approved in any drug, there is a period of five years from the product’s approval during which the FDA may not accept for filing any ANDA or 505(b)(2) application for a drug with the same active moiety. An ANDA or 505(b)(2) application may be submitted after four years, however, if the sponsor of the application makes a Paragraph IV certification (as described above). Such a product that is not an NCE may qualify for a three-year period of exclusivity if its NDA contains new clinical data (other than bioavailability studies), derived from studies conducted by or for the sponsor, that were necessary for approval. In this instance, the three-year exclusivity period does not preclude filing or review of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application; rather, the FDA is precluded from granting final approval to the ANDA or 505(b)(2) application until three years after approval of the RLD. This three-year exclusivity applies only to the conditions of approval that required submission of the clinical data.
Post-Approval Regulation
Once approved, drug products are subject to continuing extensive regulation by the FDA. If ongoing regulatory requirements are not met, or if safety problems occur after a product reaches market, the FDA may take actions to change the conditions under which
18
the product is marketed, such as requiring labeling modifications, restricting distribution, or even withdrawing approval. In addition to FDA regulation, our business is also subject to extensive federal, state, local and foreign regulation.
Good Manufacturing Practices. Companies engaged in manufacturing drug products or their components must comply with applicable cGMP requirements, which include requirements regarding organization and training of personnel, building and facilities, equipment, control of components and drug product containers, closures, production and process controls, packaging and labeling controls, holding and distribution, laboratory controls and records and reports. The FDA inspects equipment, facilities and manufacturing processes before approval and conducts periodic re-inspections after approval. If, after receiving approval, a company makes a material change in manufacturing equipment, location, or process (all of which are, to some degree, incorporated in the NDA), additional regulatory review and approval may be required. Failure to comply with applicable cGMP requirements or the conditions of the product’s approval may lead the FDA to take enforcement actions, such as issuing a warning letter, or to seek sanctions, including fines, civil penalties, injunctions, suspension of manufacturing operations, imposition of operating restrictions, withdrawal of FDA approval, seizure or recall of products, and criminal prosecution. Although we periodically monitor FDA compliance of the third parties on which we rely for manufacturing our product candidates, we cannot be certain that our present or future third-party manufacturers will consistently comply with cGMP or other applicable FDA regulatory requirements.
Sales and Marketing. Once a product is approved, the advertising, promotion and marketing of the product will be subject to close regulation, including with regard to promotion to healthcare practitioners, direct-to-consumer advertising, communications regarding unapproved uses, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, state and federal fraud and abuse laws have been applied to restrict certain marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry. Failure to comply with applicable requirements in this area may subject a company to adverse publicity, investigations and enforcement action by the FDA, the Department of Justice, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services, and/or state authorities. This could subject a company to a range of penalties that could have a significant commercial impact, including civil and criminal fines and agreements that materially restrict the manner in which a company promotes or distributes drug products.
Other Requirements. Companies that manufacture or distribute drug products pursuant to approved NDAs must meet numerous other regulatory requirements, including adverse event reporting, submission of periodic reports, and record-keeping obligations.
Other U.S. Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements
In the United States, our activities are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including but not limited to, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the U.S. Department of Justice, or DOJ, and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments. For example, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs must comply with the anti-fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, the false claims laws, the privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, and similar state laws, each as amended.
The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor.
Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA codified case law 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 federal False Claims Act (discussed below).
19
The civil monetary penalties statute imposes penalties against any person or entity who, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal health program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.
The federal False Claims Act prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal government or knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. As a result of a modification made by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, a claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. Recently, several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus generally non-reimbursable, uses.
HIPAA created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services.
Also, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. We may be subject to data privacy and security regulations by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, and its implementing regulations, imposes requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. In addition, state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.
Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act within the ACA, and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biological and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. The reported data are posted in searchable form on a public website on an annual basis. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties. Effective January 1, 2022, we are required to report on transfers of value to physician assistants, nurse practitioners or clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and certified nurse-midwives.
In order to distribute products commercially, we must comply with state laws that require the registration of manufacturers and wholesale distributors of drug and biological products in a state, including, in certain states, manufacturers and distributors who ship products into the state even if such manufacturers or distributors have no place of business within the state. Some states also impose requirements on manufacturers and distributors to establish the pedigree of product in the chain of distribution, including some states that require manufacturers and others to adopt new technology capable of tracking and tracing product as it moves through the distribution chain. Several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to establish marketing compliance programs, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities, and/or register their sales representatives, as well as to prohibit pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All of our activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.
If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including without limitation, civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, injunctions, private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government, or refusal to allow us to enter into government contracts, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.
Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement
Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and markets in other countries, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval
20
for commercial sale will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors provide coverage, and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such products. In the United States, third-party payors include federal and state healthcare programs, private managed care providers, health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a third-party payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price of a product or for establishing the reimbursement rate that such a payor will pay for the product. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products, therapies and services, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy. We may need to conduct expensive pharmaco-economic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our product candidates, in addition to the costs required to obtain the FDA approvals. Our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.
Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. In the EU, governments influence the price of pharmaceutical products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country.
The marketability of any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payors fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, emphasis on managed care in the United States has increased and we expect will continue to increase the pressure on healthcare pricing. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.
Healthcare Reform
The ACA has substantially changed some aspects of healthcare financing and delivery by both governmental and private insurers. The ACA has affected existing government healthcare programs and resulted in the development of new programs.
Among the ACA provisions of importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, in addition to those otherwise described above, are the following:
•
an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents apportioned among these entities according to their market share in some government healthcare programs, that began in 2011;
•
an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, retroactive to January 1, 2010, to 23.1% and 13% of the average manufacturer price for most branded and generic drugs, respectively and capped the total rebate amount for innovator drugs at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price, or AMP (which cap is now set to be removed effective January 1, 2024, which could increase our rebate liability particularly as we could be subject to an additional rebate in the amount that our AMP has exceeded the pace of inflation, if any);
•
a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% 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;
•
extension of manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations;
•
expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals beginning in 2014 and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability;
•
expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the 340B drug discount program; and
21
•
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 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law in December 2017, which eliminated certain requirements of the ACA, including the individual mandate. We cannot predict whether these challenges will continue or whether other proposals will be made or adopted, or what impact these efforts may have on us. It is possible that the ACA, as currently enacted or may be amended in the future, 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, and new payment methodologies and in additional downward pressure on coverage and payment and the price that we receive for any approved product. 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 products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted in the United States or outside of the United States, or whether regulatory changes, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be.
Other legislative changes relating to reimbursement have been adopted in the U.S. since the ACA was enacted. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals for spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction, which triggered the legislation’s automatic reductions. In concert with subsequent legislation, this has resulted in aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of, on average, 2% per fiscal year through 2030 (with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic). The law provides for 1% Medicare sequestration in the second quarter of 2022 and allows the full 2% sequestration thereafter until 2030. To offset the temporary suspension during the COVID-19 pandemic, in 2030, the sequestration will be 2.25% for the first half of the year, and 3% in the second half of the year. As long as these cuts remain in effect, they could adversely impact payment for any products we may commercialize in the future. We expect that additional federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, and in turn could significantly reduce the projected value of certain development projects and reduce our profitability.
Additional legislative changes, regulatory changes, or guidance could be adopted, which may impact the marketing approvals and reimbursement for our product candidates. For example, there has been increasing legislative, regulatory, and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to drug pricing practices. There have been several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation and regulatory initiatives designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, evaluate the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government healthcare program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. If healthcare policies or reforms intended to curb healthcare costs are adopted or if we experience negative publicity with respect to pricing of our products or the pricing of pharmaceutical drugs generally, the prices that we charge for any approved products may be limited, our commercial opportunity may be limited and/or our revenues from sales of our products may be negatively impacted. CMS issued a final regulation, which became effective on April 1, 2016, to implement the changes to the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program under the ACA. On December 31, 2020, CMS issued a final regulation that modified prior Medicaid Drug Rebate program regulations to permit reporting multiple best price figures with regard to value‐based purchasing arrangements (beginning in 2022); provide definitions for “line extension,” “new formulation,” and related terms, with the practical effect of expanding the scope of drugs considered to be line extensions that are subject to an alternative rebate formula (beginning in 2022); and revise best price and average manufacturer price exclusions of manufacturer-sponsored patient benefit programs, specifically regarding applicability of such exclusions in the context of pharmacy benefit manager “accumulator” programs (beginning in 2023).
Federal law also requires that a company that participates in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program report average sales price information each quarter to CMS for certain categories of drugs that are paid under the Medicare Part B program. For calendar quarters beginning January 1, 2022, manufacturers are required to report the average sales price for certain drugs under the Medicare program regardless of whether they participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Manufacturers calculate average sales price based on a statutorily defined formula as well as regulations and interpretations of the statute by CMS. CMS uses these submissions to determine payment rates for drugs under Medicare Part B. Starting in 2023, manufacturers must pay refunds to Medicare for single source drugs or biologicals, or biosimilar biological products, reimbursed under Medicare Part B and packaged in single-dose containers or single-use packages, for units of discarded drug reimbursed by Medicare Part B in excess of 10 percent of total allowed charges under Medicare Part B for that drug. Manufacturers that fail to pay refunds could be subject to civil monetary penalties of 125 percent of the refund amount.
Statutory or regulatory changes or CMS guidance could affect the pricing calculations for our approved products, and could negatively impact our results of operations. For example, Congress could enact a Medicare Part B inflation rebate, under which manufacturers would owe additional rebates if the average sales price of a drug were to increase faster than the pace of inflation. In addition, Congress could enact a drug price negotiation program under which the prices for certain high Medicare spend single source
22
drugs would be capped by reference to the non-federal average manufacturer price. This or any other legislative change could impact the market conditions for our products. We further expect continued scrutiny on government price reporting and pricing more generally from Congress, agencies, and other bodies.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, or authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with accounting provisions requiring the company to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.
Additional Regulation
In addition to the foregoing, state and federal laws regarding environmental protection and hazardous substances, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Resource Conservancy and Recovery Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, affect our business. These and other laws govern our use, handling and disposal of various biological, chemical and radioactive substances used in, and wastes generated by, our operations. If our operations result in contamination of the environment or expose individuals to hazardous substances, we could be liable for damages and governmental fines. We believe that we are in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and that continued compliance therewith will not have a material adverse effect on our business. We cannot predict, however, how changes in these laws may affect our future operations.
Europe / Rest of World Government Regulation
In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials and any commercial sales and distribution of our product candidates. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval of a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. Certain countries outside of the United States have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical trial application much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical trials. In the EU, for example, a clinical trial application must be submitted to each country’s national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and IRB, respectively. Once the clinical trial application is approved in accordance with a country’s requirements, clinical trial development may proceed.
The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, the clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.
To obtain regulatory approval of an investigational drug product under EU regulatory systems, we must submit a marketing authorization application. The application used to file the drug product in the United States is similar to that required in the EU, with the exception of, among other things, country-specific document requirements.
For other countries outside of the EU, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, again, the clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.
If we or our potential collaborators fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.
Employees and Human Capital
As of December 31, 2022, we had 17 full-time employees. Of these full-time employees, ten were engaged in research and development, and seven were engaged in management, finance and administration. From time to time, we also employ independent contractors to support our operations. Our employees are not represented by any collective bargaining agreements and we have never experienced an organized work stoppage.
23
We believe that we must offer and maintain market competitive compensation and benefit programs for our employees in order to attract and retain qualified personnel. In addition to cash compensation, we provide equity compensation, a company-matched 401(k) Plan, healthcare and insurance benefits, health savings and flexible spending accounts, paid time off, family leave, and employee assistance programs.
Corporate Information
We were initially formed as a California general partnership in July 1996 and incorporated in the State of Delaware in May 1997. We were formerly known as Cytori Therapeutics, Inc., before that as MacroPore Biosurgery, Inc. and before that as MacroPore, Inc. On July 20, 2019, we changed our name from Cytori Therapeutics, Inc. to Plus Therapeutics, Inc. Our corporate offices are located at 4200 Marathon Blvd., Suite 200, Austin, TX. Our telephone number is (737) 255-7194. We maintain a website at www.plustherapeutics.com.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
The risk factors described below, as well as statements described elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our audited Financial Statements and the related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations”, or in other SEC filings, describe risks that could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations, which could also cause the trading price of our equity securities to decline. These risks are not the only risks that we face. Our business, financial condition and results of operations could also be affected by additional factors that are not presently known to us or that we currently consider to be immaterial to our operations.
Risks Related to our Financial Position and Capital Requirements
We have incurred losses since inception, we expect to incur significant net losses in the foreseeable future and we may never become profitable and our operating results have been and will likely continue to be volatile.
We generated negative cash flows from operations and have incurred net operating losses each year since we started business. For the year ended December 31, 2022, we incurred net losses of $20.3 million and our net cash used in operating activities was $13.0 million. As of December 31, 2022, our accumulated deficit was $467.2 million. We expect to continue to incur net losses and negative cash flow from operating activities for at least the next twelve months. As our focus on development of nanomedicine and the development of therapeutic applications has increased, losses have resulted primarily from expenses associated with research and development and clinical trial-related activities, as well as general and administrative expenses. While we have implemented and continue to implement cost reduction measures where possible, we nonetheless expect to continue operating in a loss position and expect that recurring operating expenses will be at higher levels for the year ended December 31, 2022 as we perform clinical trial and other development activities for our nanomedicine product candidates.
Our ability to generate sufficient revenue from any of our products, product candidates or technologies to achieve profitability will depend on a number of factors including, but not limited to:
•
our ability to manufacture, test and validate our product candidates in compliance with applicable laws and as required for submission to applicable regulatory bodies, including manufacturing, testing and validation of our RNL candidates;
•
our or our partners’ ability to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates;
•
our ability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals for our product candidates;
•
our or our partners’ ability to negotiate and receive favorable reimbursement for our product candidates, including for our product candidates that have been granted or may be granted orphan drug status or otherwise command currently anticipated pricing levels;
•
our ability to negotiate favorable arrangements with third parties to help finance the development of, and market and distribute, our products and product candidates; and
•
the degree to which our approved products are accepted in the marketplace.
Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with our commercialization and product development efforts, we are unable to predict the extent of our future losses or when or if we will become profitable and it is possible we will never become profitable. If we do not generate significant sales from any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval, there would be a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects, which in turn could result in our inability to continue operations.
Our prospects must be evaluated in light of the risks and difficulties frequently encountered by emerging companies and particularly by such companies in rapidly evolving and technologically advanced biotech, pharmaceutical and medical device fields. In
24
addition, our budgeted expense levels are based in part on our expectations concerning future research and development activities. We may be unable to reduce our expenditures in a timely manner to compensate for any unexpected events. Accordingly, unexpected events could have an immediate and material impact on our business and financial condition. From time to time, we have tried to update our investors’ expectations as to our operating results. If we revise any timelines we may give with respect to our clinical trials, it could materially harm our reputation and the market’s perception of us and could cause our stock price to decline.
We could be delisted from Nasdaq, which would seriously harm the liquidity of our stock and our ability to raise capital.
Nasdaq requires listing issuers to comply with certain standards in order to remain listed on its exchange. If, for any reason, Nasdaq should delist our securities from trading on its exchange and we are unable to obtain listing on another reputable national securities exchange, a reduction in some or all of the following may occur, each of which could materially adversely affect our stockholders.
On May 24, 2022, we received written notice (the “Notification Letter”) from the Listings Qualifications Department of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) that because the closing bid price for our common stock has fallen below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive business days, we no longer complied with the minimum bid price requirement pursuant to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Minimum Bid Requirement”). Nasdaq’s notice had no immediate effect on the listing or trading of our common stock. The Notification Letter stated that we had 180 days, or until November 21, 2022, to demonstrate our compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement. On November 22, 2022, we received a second letter from Nasdaq advising that we had been granted an additional 180 calendar days, or to May 22, 2023, to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement, in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A).
We intend to continue to actively monitor the closing bid price of our common stock and will evaluate available options to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement. Specifically, we have confirmed to Nasdaq that, if necessary, we will implement a reverse stock split of our outstanding common stock (if approved by our stockholders) to attempt to regain compliance. If we do not regain compliance within the additional compliance period, Nasdaq will provide notice that our common stock will be subject to delisting. We would then be entitled to appeal that determination to a Nasdaq hearings panel. There can be no assurance that we will regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement during the 180-day additional compliance period or maintain compliance with the other Nasdaq listing requirements.
If, for any reason, Nasdaq were to delist our securities from trading on its exchange and we are unable to obtain listing on another reputable national securities exchange, a reduction in some or all of the following may occur, each of which could materially adversely affect our stockholders:
• the liquidity and marketability of our common stock;
• the market price of our common stock;
• our ability to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations;
• the number of market makers in our common stock;
In addition, if we cease to be eligible to trade on Nasdaq, we may have to pursue trading on a less recognized or accepted market, such as the over the counter markets, our stock may be traded as a “penny stock” which would make transactions in our stock more difficult and cumbersome, and we may be unable to access capital on favorable terms or at all, as companies trading on alternative markets may be viewed as less attractive investments with higher associated risks, such that existing or prospective institutional investors may be less interested in, or prohibited from, investing in our common stock. This may also cause the market price of our common stock to further decline.
25
We will need substantial additional funding to develop our product candidates and conduct our future operations and to repay our outstanding debt obligations. If we are unable to obtain the funds necessary to do so, we may be required to delay, scale back or eliminate our product development activities or may be unable to continue our business operations.
We have had, and we will continue to have, an ongoing need to raise additional cash from outside sources to continue funding our operations, including our continuing substantial research and development expenses and potential commercialization activities. We do not currently believe that our cash balance will be sufficient to fund the development and marketing efforts required to reach profitability without raising additional capital from accessible sources of financing in the near future. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:
•
our ability to raise capital to fund our operations on terms acceptable to us, or at all;
•
our perceived capital needs with respect to our development programs, and any delays in, adverse events and excessive costs of such programs beyond what we currently anticipate;
•
our ability to establish and maintain collaborative and other arrangements with third parties to assist in bringing our product candidates to market and the cost of such arrangements at the time;
•
costs associated with operating at our San Antonio, Texas facility;
•
the cost of manufacturing our product candidates, including compliance with good manufacturing practices applicable to our product candidates;
•
expenses related to the establishment of sales and marketing capabilities for product candidates awaiting approval or products that have been approved;
•
competing technological and market developments; and
•
our ability to introduce and sell new products.
The amount and timing of our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including the pace and results of its clinical development efforts.
We have secured capital historically from grant revenue, collaboration proceeds, and debt and equity offerings. To obtain additional capital, we may pursue debt and/or equity offering programs, strategic corporate partnerships, state and federal development programs, licensing arrangements, and sales of assets or debt or equity securities. We cannot be certain that additional capital will be available on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to raise any such additional capital, we may be required to take actions that could materially and adversely harm our business, including a possible significant reduction in our research, development and administrative operations (including reduction of our employee base), the surrender of our rights to some technologies or product opportunities, delay of our clinical trials or regulatory and reimbursement efforts, or curtailment or cessation of operations.
Depending on the type and the terms of any financing we pursue, stockholders’ rights and the value of their investment in our common stock could be reduced. A financing could involve one or more types of securities including common stock, convertible debt or warrants to acquire common stock. These securities could be issued at or below the then prevailing market price for our common stock. In addition, if we issue secured debt securities, the holders of the debt would have a claim to our assets that would be prior to the rights of stockholders until the debt is paid. Interest on these debt securities would increase costs and negatively impact operating results. If the issuance of new securities results in diminished rights to holders of our common stock, the market price of our common stock could be negatively impacted.
On September 9, 2022, we entered into an Equity Distribution Agreement (the “September 2022 Distribution Agreement”) with Canaccord Genuity LLC ("Canaccord”), pursuant to which we may issue and sell, from time to time, shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $5,000,000, depending on market demand, with Canaccord acting as an agent for sales. Sales of our common stock may be made by any method permitted by law deemed to be an “at the market offering” as defined in Rule 415(a)(4) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), including, without limitation, sales made directly on or through the NASDAQ Capital Market.
On August 2, 2022, we entered into a purchase agreement (the “2022 Purchase Agreement”) and registration rights agreement pursuant to which Lincoln Park Capital Fund ("Lincoln Park") committed to purchase up to $50.0 million shares of our common stock. Under the terms and subject to the conditions of the 2022 Purchase Agreement, we have the right, but not the obligation, to sell to Lincoln Park, and Lincoln Park is obligated to purchase up to $50.0 million shares of our common stock, provided that we cannot sell more than 57.5 million shares pursuant to the 2022 Purchase Agreement. Sales of common stock by us are subject to certain limitations, and can occur from time to time, at our sole discretion, over the 36-month period commencing on August 17, 2022, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. As consideration for Lincoln Park’s irrevocable commitment to purchase shares of our common stock upon the terms of and subject to satisfaction of the conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement, we paid $0.1 million in cash as an Initial Commitment Fee and issued 492,698 Commitment Shares to Lincoln Park in consideration for its commitment to purchase shares of our common stock at our direction under the Purchase Agreement.
On August 17, 2022, a registration statement was declared effective covering the resale of up to 9,500,000 shares of our common stock comprised of (i) the 492,698 Commitment Shares, and (ii) up to 9,007,302 shares that we have reserved for issuance and
26
sale to Lincoln Park under the Purchase Agreement. We cannot sell more shares under the 2022 Purchase Agreement without registering additional shares.
Even with the arrangements described above, we will need to complete additional financing transactions in order to continue operations. These arrangements may also not be sufficient in the near-term. Given, among other things, the current status of the capital markets and our recent stock price performance, the September 2022 Distribution Agreement and the 2022 Purchase Agreement and other financing strategies we may pursue may not be sufficient to fund our operations in the near term. There can be no assurances that we will be able to secure additional financing, or if available, that it will be sufficient to meet our needs or be on favorable terms. Additionally, our cost of capital will depend upon numerous factors including, but not limited to, the strength of the financial markets, global market conditions, including inflationary pressures, interest rate fluctuations, our recovery and financial performance, the recovery and performance of our industry in general and the size, scope and timing of our financial needs. If we are unable to access current financings or secure future financings, including for any of the foregoing reasons, it will have a negative impact on our cash flows and our ability to meet our financial obligations. Failure to raise capital as and when needed, on favorable terms or at all, would have a significant negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our product candidates.
The volatility in the global capital markets may negatively impact our ability to obtain additional debt financings and modify our existing debt facilities and may increase the risk of non-compliance with covenants under our existing loan agreement.
Under the Loan and Security Agreement, dated May 29, 2015 (the “Loan and Security Agreement”), as amended, with Oxford Finance, LLC (“Oxford”), Oxford made a term loan to us in an aggregate principal amount of $17.7 million (the “Term Loan”) subject to the terms and conditions set forth therein. As of December 31, 2022, the outstanding principal balance of the Term Loan was $2.4 million. In addition, we are obligated to pay a final payment fee of $3.2 million at the earlier of the maturity date, acceleration, or payment of the Term Loan.
The Term Loan accrues interest at a floating rate equal to the three-month LIBOR rate (with a floor of 1.00%) plus 7.95% per annum. Beginning November 1, 2021, we began to make payments of principal and accrued interest in equal monthly installments as required, to amortize the Term Loan through June 1, 2024.
As security for our obligations under the Loan and Security Agreement, we granted a security interest in substantially all of our existing and after-acquired assets, excluding our intellectual property assets, subject to certain exceptions set forth in the Loan and Security Agreement. If we are unable to discharge these obligations, Oxford could foreclose on these assets, which would, at a minimum, have a severe material adverse effect on our ability to operate our business.
Our indebtedness to Oxford could adversely affect our operations and liquidity, by, among other things:
•
causing us to use a larger portion of our cash flow to fund interest and principal payments, reducing the availability of cash to fund working capital and capital expenditures and other business activities;
•
making it more difficult for us to take advantage of significant business opportunities, such as acquisition opportunities, and to react to changes in market or industry conditions; and
•
limiting our ability to borrow additional monies in the future to fund working capital and capital expenditures and for other general corporate purposes.
The Loan and Security Agreement, as amended, includes certain reporting and other covenants, that, among other things, restrict our ability to (i) dispose of assets, (ii) change the business we conduct, (iii) make acquisitions, (iv) engage in mergers or consolidations, (v) incur additional indebtedness, (vi) create liens on assets, (vii) maintain any collateral account, (viii) pay dividends, (ix) make investments, loans or advances, (x) engage in certain transactions with affiliates, and (xi) prepay certain other indebtedness or amend other financing arrangements. If we fail to comply with any of these covenants or restrictions, such failure may result in an event of default, which if not cured or waived, could result in Oxford causing the outstanding loan amount to become immediately due and payable. If the maturity of our indebtedness is accelerated, we may not have, or be able to timely procure, sufficient cash resources to satisfy our debt obligations, and such acceleration would adversely affect our business and financial condition.
The global markets have experienced significant volatility and a continued downturn may affect our business, liquidity position, and financial results. This in turn may negatively impact our ability to remain in compliance with the financial and operating covenants under the Loan and Security Agreement and may restrict our ability to obtain covenant waivers, restructure or amend the terms of our existing debt, or obtain additional debt financing. If the maturity of our indebtedness is accelerated or if we are unable to amend the terms or obtain any necessary waivers under our debt facilities or obtain additional debt or other financing, it would materially and adversely affect our liquidity position and ability to fund our operations. This in turn would materially harm our business and financial conditions.
Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.
We do not expect to make profits in the near future. Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in its equity ownership over
27
a three year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change taxable income and taxes may be limited. We have undergone “ownership changes” as a result of shifts in stock ownership in the past, which significantly limited our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes. Any additional ownership change within the definition of Section 382 would further limit our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes. This change may require us to pay federal income taxes in future years despite generating a loss for federal income tax purposes in prior years.
Risks Related to Our Business and Industry
Our future success is in large part dependent upon our ability to successfully develop our nanomedicine platform and commercialize rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and 188RNL-BAM and any failure to do so could significantly harm our business and prospects.
Our ability to successfully develop and commercialize rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda and 188RNL-BAM is subject to a number of risks, including the following:
•
we do not have substantive drug development, manufacturing, and commercialization experience, and thus we may be required to hire and rely on significant numbers of scientific, quality, regulatory and other technical personnel with the experience and expertise necessary to develop, manufacture, and commercialize our nanomedicine product candidates. We may be unable to identify, hire and retain personnel with the requisite experience to conduct the operations necessary to obtain regulatory approval and commercialize our RNL product candidates, in which case our business would be materially harmed;
•
we intend to find a commercialization partner to share or assume responsibility for marketing, sales, and distribution activities and related costs and expenses for our RNL product candidates. There can be no assurance that we would obtain sufficient capital to fund the development, manufacturing, and commercialization of our nanomedicine program ourselves, or if we do obtain such capital, that our development, manufacturing, and commercialization efforts would be successful; and
•
to the extent that we incur unanticipated expenses in our business, are unable to timely obtain sufficient additional capital on terms acceptable to us (or at all) to fund this business, our ability to develop our RNL product candidates could be materially and adversely impacted.
If we are unable to successfully partner with other companies to commercialize our product candidates, our business could materially suffer.
A key part of our business strategy is to leverage strategic partnerships and collaborations to commercialize our product candidates. We do not have the financial, human or other resources necessary to develop, commercialize, launch or sell our therapeutic offerings in all of the geographies that we are targeting, and thus it is important that we identify and partner with third parties who possess the necessary resources to bring our product candidates to market. We expect that any such partners will provide regulatory and reimbursement/pricing expertise, sales and marketing resources, and other expertise and resources vital to the success of our product offerings in their territories. We further expect, but cannot guarantee, that any such partnering arrangements will include upfront cash payments to us in return for the rights to develop, manufacture, and/or sell our product candidates in specified territories, as well as downstream revenue in the form of milestone payments and royalties. If we are unable to successfully partner with other companies to commercialize our product candidates, our business could materially suffer.
Our success depends in substantial part on our ability to obtain regulatory approvals for our RNL product candidates. However, we cannot be certain that we will receive regulatory approval for these product candidates or our other product candidates.
We have a limited number of product candidates in development, and our business depends substantially on their successful development and commercialization. Our product candidates will require development, regulatory review and approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenue from sales of our product candidates. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries, whose regulations differ from country to country.
We are not permitted to market our product candidates in the United States until we receive approval from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from the regulatory authorities of such countries (including centralized marketing authorization from EMA), and we may never receive such regulatory approvals. Obtaining regulatory approval for a product candidate is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and may not be obtained. Any failure to obtain regulatory approval of any of our product candidates would limit our ability to generate future revenue (and any failure to obtain such approval for all of the indications
28
and labeling claims we deem desirable could reduce our potential revenue), would potentially harm the development prospects of our product candidates and would have a material and adverse impact on our business.
Even if we successfully obtain regulatory approvals to market our product candidates, our revenue will be dependent, in part, on our ability to commercialize such products as well as the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval. If the markets for our product candidates are not as significant as we estimate, our business and prospects will be harmed.
If a product candidate is not approved in a timely fashion on commercially viable terms, or if development of any product candidate is terminated due to difficulties or delays encountered in the regulatory approval process, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, and we may become more dependent on the development of other proprietary products and/or our ability to successfully acquire other products and technologies. There can be no assurance that any product candidate will receive regulatory approval in a timely manner, or at all.
If we or any party to a key collaboration, licensing, development, acquisition or similar arrangement fails to perform material obligations, or commit a breach, under such arrangement, or any arrangement is terminated for any reason, there could be an adverse effect on our business.
We are currently party to certain licensing, collaboration and acquisition agreements under which we may make or receive future payments in the form of milestone payments, maintenance fees, royalties and/or minimum product purchases. Our collaborators may not devote the attention and resources to such efforts to be successful. The termination of a key collaboration agreement by one of our collaborators could materially impact our ability to enter into additional collaboration agreements with new collaborators on favorable terms.
On March 29, 2020, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with NanoTx for the global rights to develop and commercialize NanoTx’s glioblastoma treatment, rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda. Under the license agreement with NanoTx, we are required to use commercial reasonable efforts to develop the rhenium (186Re) obisbemeda product candidate acquired under the license agreement. Further, we are subject to future milestone, earn-out and other payments to NanoTx all of which are tied to our commercialization and sale activities for product candidates. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to develop these assets, or if NanoTx and we were to enter into a dispute over the terms of our agreement, then our business could be seriously harmed.
On December 31, 2021, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with UT Health Science Center at San Antonio for the global rights to develop and commercialize Rhenium-188 NanoLiposome biodegradable alginate microspheres (188RNL-BAM). Under the license agreement with UT Health Science at San Antonio, we are required to use commercial reasonable efforts to develop the 188RNL-BAM product candidate acquired under the license agreement. Further, we are subject to future milestone, earn-out and other payments to UT Heath Science Center San Antonio all of which are tied to our commercialization and sale activities for product candidates. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to develop these assets, or if UT Heath Science Center San Antonio and we were to enter into a dispute over the terms of our agreement, then our business could be seriously harmed.
If we breach any of the agreements under which we license the use, development and commercialization rights to our product candidates or technology from third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business. Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:
•