Skip to content
KStart free
AI InfrastructureDefenseQuantumAll studies →

RLMD US Equity

Relmada Therapeutics, Inc.Health Care · Pharmaceutical Preparations · CIK 1553643 · FY ends Dec 31
$4.83
-0.02 (-0.41%)
USD · as of 2026-08-19 · marketstack

RLMD · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

← all RLMD documents
filed 2023-03-23 · EDGAR original ↗

Our rendering of the filing — original pagination and typography are not reproduced, and tables are reduced to their short label cells (the figures live on FA). Nothing is summarized: every line below is the filing's own text.

blocks 1600 of 2,904271k characters rendered

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

☒ ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

☐ TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

Commission file number: 000-55347

Relmada Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

2222 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Floor 3

Coral Gables, FL33134

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

(786)629 1376

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area

code)

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 ($.001 par value) RLMD The NASDAQ Global Select 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 Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by checkmark 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 and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§

232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post

such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is

a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See

the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and

“emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☐

Non-accelerated filer ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒

Emerging Growth Company ☐

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check

mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting

standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant 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 ☒

As of June 30, 2022 (the last business day of

the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter), the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock

held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $562,983,180, based on the closing price on that date as reported on the NASDAQ.

As of March 20, 2023, there were 30,099,203 shares of common stock,

$0.001 par value per share, outstanding.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement

for its 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Proxy Statement”), to be filed within 120 days of the registrant’s fiscal

year ended December 31, 2022, are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Except with respect to information

specifically incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Proxy Statement is not deemed to be filed as part of this

Annual Report on Form 10-K.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item Number and Caption Page

Forward-Looking Statements ii

PART I

1. Business 1

1A. Risk Factors 13

1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 32

2. Properties 32

3. Legal Proceedings 32

4. Mine Safety Disclosures 32

PART II

6. [Reserved] 33

7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 38

8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 38

9A. Controls and Procedures 38

9B. Other Information 39

9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections 39

PART III

10. Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance 40

11. Executive Compensation 40

13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 40

14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 40

PART IV

15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, Signatures 41

i

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this Report) contains

forward looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, principally in the sections entitled “Description of Business,”

“Risk Factors,” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this Report, including statements regarding future events,

our future financial performance, business strategy and plans and objectives of management for future operations, are forward-looking

statements. We have attempted to identify forward-looking statements by terminology including “anticipates,” “believes,”

“can,” “continue,” “could,” “estimates,” “expects,” “intends,”

“may,” “plans,” “potential,” “predicts,” “should,” or “will”

or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Although we do not make forward-looking statements unless we believe

we have a reasonable basis for doing so, we cannot guarantee their accuracy. These statements are only predictions and involve known

and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, including the risks outlined under “Risk Factors” or elsewhere in this

Report, which may cause our or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to differ materially

from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing

environment. New risks emerge from time to time and it is not possible for us to predict all risk factors, nor can we address the impact

of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause our actual results to differ materially

from those contained in any forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements included in this document are based on information

available to us on the date hereof, and we assume no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements.

You should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking

statement, each of which applies only as of the date of this Report on Form-10-K. Before you invest in our securities, you should be

aware that the occurrence of the events described in the section entitled “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Report could

negatively affect our business, operating results, financial condition and stock price. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation

to update or revise publicly any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this Report on Form-10-K to conform our statements

to actual results or changed expectations.

ii

PART I

All brand names or trademarks appearing in this

report are the property of their respective holders. Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this report to “Relmada,”

the “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Relmada Therapeutics, Inc., a Nevada corporation.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Business Overview

Relmada Therapeutics, Inc. (Relmada, the Company,

we or us) (a Nevada corporation), is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development of esmethadone (d-methadone, dextromethadone,

REL-1017), an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist. Esmethadone, an isomer of methadone, is a new chemical entity (NCE) that

potentially addresses areas of high unmet medical need in the treatment of central nervous system (CNS) diseases and other disorders.

Our lead product candidate, esmethadone, is being

developed as a rapidly acting, oral agent for the treatment of depression and other potential indications. On October 15, 2019, we reported

top-line data from study REL-1017-202. This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating the safety, tolerability

and efficacy of two oral doses of REL-1017, 25 mg once a day and 50 mg once a day, as an adjunctive treatment in patients with major

depressive disorder (MDD), who experienced an inadequate response to 1 to 3 adequate antidepressant treatments with an antidepressant

medication.

Phase 2 Clinical Trial

In the REL-1017-202 study, 62 subjects, with an average

age 49.2 years, with an average Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score of 25.3 and an average Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale

(MADRS) score of 34.0 (severe depression), were randomized. Other demographic characteristics were balanced across all arms. After an

initial screening period, subjects were randomized to one of three arms: placebo, REL-1017 25 mg or REL-1017 50 mg, in addition to stable

background antidepressant therapy. Subjects in the REL-1017 treatment arms received one loading dose of either 75 mg (25 mg arm) or 100

mg (50 mg arm) of REL-1017. Subjects were treated inpatient for 7 days and discharged home at Day 9. They returned for follow-up visits

at Day 14 and Day 21. Efficacy was measured on Days 2, 4 and 7 in the dosing period and on Day 14, one week after treatment discontinuation.

61 subjects received all treatment doses and were included in the per-protocol population (PPP) treatment analysis; 57 subjects completed

all visits. All 62 randomized subjects were part of the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. No differences were observed between the ITT

and PPP analyses and results.

We observed that subjects in both the REL-1017 25

mg and 50 mg treatment groups experienced statistically significant improvement on all efficacy measures tested as compared to subjects

in the placebo group, including: MADRS; the Clinical Global Impression – Severity (CGI-S) scale; the Clinical Global Impression

– Improvement (CGI-I) scale; and the Symptoms of Depression Questionnaire (SDQ).

Improvements on the MADRS endpoint appeared on Day

4 in both REL-1017 dose groups and continued through Day 7 and Day 14, seven days after treatment discontinuation, with P values<

0.03 and large effect sizes (a measure of quantifying the difference between two groups), ranging from 0.7 to 1.0. Similar findings emerged

from the CGI-S and CGI-I scales.

MADRS: Analysis of Change from Baseline to Day

7 and to Day 14 ITT Population

LS = Least Squares; d = Cohen’s effect size

The study also confirmed the tolerability profile

of REL-1017, which was observed in the Phase 1 studies. Subjects experienced only mild and moderate adverse events (AEs), and no serious

adverse events, without significant differences between placebo and treatment groups. The AEs observed in the Phase 2a clinical study

were of the same nature as those observed in the Phase 1 clinical studies in d-Methadone, and there was no evidence of either treatment

induced psychotomimetic and dissociative AEs or withdrawal signs and symptoms upon treatment discontinuation.

1

Phase 3 Program

On December 20, 2020, Relmada announced that the

first patient had been enrolled in the first Phase 3 clinical trial (RELIANCE I) for the Company’s lead product candidate, REL-1017,

as an adjunctive treatment for MDD.

On April 1, 2021, Relmada announced the initiation

of RELIANCE II, the second of two sister pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials (RELIANCE I and RELIANCE II) for the Company’s lead product

candidate, REL-1017, as an adjunctive treatment for MDD.

On October 4, 2021, Relmada announced the initiation

of RELIANCE III study, a monotherapy trial for the Company’s lead product candidate, REL-1017.

On August 9, 2022, Relmada

announced that the FDA granted Fast Track designation to REL-1017 as a monotherapy for the treatment of MDD.

On October 13, 2022, Relmada

announced that its RELIANCE III study, evaluating REL-1017 in the monotherapy setting for MDD, did not achieve its primary endpoint,

which was a statistically significant improvement in depression symptoms compared to placebo as measured by MADRS on Day 28. In the study,

the REL-1017 treatment arm showed a MADRS reduction of 14.8 points at Day 28 versus 13.9 points for the placebo arm, a higher than expected

placebo response.

On December 7, 2022,

Relmada announced that its RELIANCE I study, evaluating REL-1017 as an adjunctive treatment for MDD, did not achieve its primary endpoint,

which was a statistically significant improvement in depression symptoms compared to placebo as measured by MADRS on Day 28. In the study,

the REL-1017 treatment arm (n= 113) showed a MADRS reduction of 15.1 points at Day 28 versus 12.9 points for the placebo arm (n=114),

which is a clinically meaningful difference of 2.2 points on the MADRS. The study also showed a nominally statistically significant difference

in the response rate, with a response rate of 39.8% in the REL-1017 arm vs 27.2% in the placebo arm (p<0.05).

Patients who complete the

RELIANCE trials are eligible to rollover into the long-term, open-label study, which also is expected to include subjects who had not

previously participated in a REL-1017 clinical trial.

In addition, in order to support potential regulatory

submissions seeking approval for REL-1017 as monotherapy and adjunctive treatment, the FDA confirmed that, based on what is known at

this time, Relmada will not be required to conduct a two-year carcinogenicity study of REL-1017, as sufficient clinical data have been

generated to date. The FDA also confirmed that Relmada does not need to conduct a Thorough QT analysis (TQT) cardiac study in humans

to support cardiac safety in potential regulatory submissions for REL-1017, as the data provided so far and the data generated by the

Phase 3 program will be adequate to evaluate the cardiac safety profile of REL-1017.

Human Abuse Potential (HAP) Studies

Top-line Results - Oxycodone:

On July 27, 2021, Relmada announced top-line results

that showed that all three doses of REL-1017 (25 mg, 75 mg and 150 mg, the therapeutic, supratherapeutic and maximum tolerated doses (MTD),

respectively, tested in recreational opioid users, demonstrated a highly statistically significant difference vs. the active control drug,

oxycodone 40 mg. The study’s primary endpoint was a measure of “likability” with the subjects rating the maximum effect

(or Emax) for Drug Liking “at the moment”, using a 1-100 bipolar rating scale (known as a visual analog scale or VAS), with

100 as the highest likability, 50 as neutral (placebo-like), and 0 the highest dislike. In summary, all tested doses of REL-1017, including

the 150 mg MTD, showed a highly statistically significant difference in abuse potential versus oxycodone with p-values less than 0.05.

Consistent results were seen for the secondary endpoints. Additionally, all REL-1017 doses including 150 mg (6 times the therapeutic dose

and MTD) were statistically equivalent to placebo (p<0.05). These results support the lack of opioid effects of REL-1017.

2

Top-line Results - Ketamine:

On February 23, 2022, Relmada announced top-line

results that showed that all three doses of REL-1017 (25 mg, 75 mg, and 150 mg, the therapeutic, supratherapeutic and MTD, respectively)

tested in recreational drug users, demonstrated a substantial (30+ points) and statistically significant difference vs. the active control

drug, intravenous ketamine 0.5 mg/kg over 40 minutes, and, importantly, were statistically equivalent to placebo. The study’s primary

endpoint was a measure of “likability” with the subjects rating the maximum effect (or Emax) for Drug Liking “at this

moment”, using a 1-100 bipolar rating scale (known as a visual analog scale or VAS), with 100 as the highest likability, 50 as neutral

(placebo-like), and 0 the highest dislike. Consistent results are seen for the secondary endpoints.

Key Upcoming Anticipated Milestones

We expect multiple key milestones over the next 12-18

months. These include:

● Results of RELIANCE – OLS (Long-term, Open-label) study in MDD in mid-2023.

Our Development Program

Esmethadone (d-Methadone, dextromethadone, REL-1017) as a treatment

for MDD

Background

In 2014, the National Institute of Mental Health

(NIMH) estimated that 15.7 million adults aged 18 or older in the United States had at least one major depressive episode in the past

year. According to data from nationally representative surveys supported by NIMH, only about half of Americans diagnosed with major depression

in a given year receive treatment. Of those receiving treatment with as many as four different standard antidepressants, 33% of drug-treated

depression patients do not achieve adequate therapeutic benefits according to the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression

(STAR*D) trial published in the American Journal of Psychiatry.

In

addition to the high failure rate, only two of the marketed products for depression, esketamine (marketed by Johnson and Johnson as Spravato®),

an in-clinic nasal spray treatment, and dextromethorphan-bupropion (marketed by Axsome as Auvelityä),

can demonstrate rapid antidepressant effects, while the other currently approved

products can take two to eight weeks to show activity. The urgent need for improved, faster acting antidepressant treatments is underscored

by the fact that severe depression can be life-threatening, due to heightened risk of suicide.

Esmethadone Overview and Mechanism of Action

Esmethadone’s mechanism of action, as a low

affinity, non-competitive NMDA channel blocker or antagonist, is fundamentally differentiated from most currently FDA-approved antidepressants,

as well as all atypical antipsychotics used adjunctively with standard, FDA-approved antidepressants. Working through the same brain

mechanisms as ketamine and esketamine but potentially lacking their adverse side effects, esmethadone is being developed as a rapidly

acting, oral agent for the treatment of depression and potentially other CNS conditions.

In chemistry an enantiomer, also known as an optical

isomer, is one of two stereoisomers that are mirror images of each other that are non-superimposable (not identical), much as one’s

left and right hands are the same except for being reversed along one axis. A racemic compound, or racemate, is one that has equal amounts

of left- and right-handed enantiomers of a chiral molecule. For racemic drugs, often only one of a drug’s enantiomers is responsible

for the desired physiologic effects, while the other enantiomer is less active or inactive.

As a single isomer of racemic methadone, esmethadone

has been shown to possess NMDA antagonist properties with virtually no traditional opioid or ketamine-like adverse events at the expected

therapeutic doses. In contrast, racemic methadone is associated with common opioid side effects that include anxiety, nervousness, restlessness,

sleep problems (insomnia), nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, drowsiness, and others. It has been shown that the left (levo) isomer,

l-methadone, is largely responsible for methadone’s opioid activity, while the right (dextro) isomer, esmethadone, at the currently

therapeutic doses used in development is virtually inactive as an opioid while maintaining affinity for the NMDA receptor.

NMDA receptors are present in many parts of the CNS

and play important roles in regulating neuronal activity and promoting synaptic plasticity in brain areas important for cognitive functions

such as executive function, learning and memory. Based on these premises, esmethadone could show benefits in several different CNS indications.

Esmethadone (d-methadone, dextromethadone, REL-1017) in other indications

While our current strategy is currently to focus on the further development

of esmethadone as an adjunctive treatment for MDD, we may in the future re-commence testing of esmethadone as a monotherapy for MDD. In

addition, we are evaluating other indications that Relmada may explore in the future, including restless leg syndrome and other glutamatergic

system activation related diseases.

3

Our Corporate History and Background

We are a clinical-stage, publicly traded biotechnology

company developing New Chemical Entities (NCEs) and novel versions of drug products that potentially address areas of high unmet medical

need in the treatment of depression and other CNS diseases.

Currently, none of our product candidates have been

approved for sale in the United States or elsewhere. We have no commercial products nor do we have a sales or marketing infrastructure.

In order to market and sell our products we must conduct clinical trials on patients and obtain regulatory approvals from appropriate

regulatory agencies, like the FDA in the United States, and similar organizations elsewhere in the world.

We have not generated revenues and do not anticipate

generating revenues for the foreseeable future. We had net loss of approximately $157,043,800 and $125,751,800 for the years ended December

31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. At December 31, 2022, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $462,110,900.

Business Strategy

Our strategy is to leverage our considerable industry

experience, understanding of CNS markets and development expertise to identify, develop and commercialize product candidates with significant

market potential that can fulfill unmet medical needs in the treatment of CNS diseases. We have assembled a management team along with

both scientific advisors, including recognized experts in the fields of depression, and business advisors with significant industry

and regulatory experience to lead and execute the development and commercialization of esmethadone.

We plan to further develop esmethadone as our priority

program. As the drug esmethadone is an NCE, the regulatory pathway required to support a new drug application (NDA) submission involves

a full clinical development program. We plan to continue to generate intellectual property (IP) that will further protect our products

from competition. We will also continue to prioritize our product development activities after taking into account the resources we have

available, market dynamics and potential for adding value.

Market Opportunity

We believe that the market for addressing areas of

high unmet medical need in the treatment of CNS diseases will continue to be large for the foreseeable future and that it will represent

a sizable revenue opportunity for us. For example, the World Health Organization (WHO) has estimated that CNS diseases affect nearly

2 billion people globally, making up approximately 40% of total disease burden (based on disability adjusted life years), compared with

13% for cancer and 12% for cardiovascular disease.

The depression treatment market is segmented on the

basis of antidepressants drugs, devices, and therapies. Antidepressants are the largest and most popular market segment. The antidepressants

segment consists of large pharmaceutical and generic companies, such as Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Allergan, Sage Therapeutics

and Johnson & Johnson. Some of the notable drugs produced by these companies are Cymbalta® (Eli Lilly), Effexor®

(Pfizer), Pristiq® (Pfizer), Zulresso® (Sage), Spravato® (Johnson & Johnson) and

Auvelity® (Axsome).

Intellectual Property Portfolio and Market Exclusivity

We have over 50 issued patents and pending patent applications related

to REL-1017 for multiple uses, including psychological and neurological conditions, potentially provide coverage beyond 2033. We have

also secured an Orphan Drug Designation from the FDA for d-methadone for “the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia,” (postherpetic

neuralgia is lasting pain in areas of skin affected by previous outbreaks of shingles, caused by the varicella-zoster, or herpes zoster,

virus). which, upon NDA approval, carries 7-year FDA Orphan Drug marketing exclusivity. In the European Union, some of our actual and

prospective products may be eligible up to 10 years of market exclusivity, which includes 8 years data exclusivity and 2 years market

exclusivity. In addition to any granted patents, REL-1017 will be eligible for market exclusivity to run concurrently with the term of

the patent for 5 years in the U.S. (Hatch Waxman Act) plus additional 6 month of pediatric exclusivity and up to 10 years of exclusivity

in the European Union. We believe an extensive intellectual property estate of US and foreign patents and applications, once approved,

will protect our technology and products.

Esmethadone License Agreement

As a result of a prior acquisition, the Company assumed

an obligation to pay third parties (Dr. Charles E. Inturrisi and Dr. Paolo Manfredi – see below): (A) royalty payments up to 2%

on net sales of licensed products that are not sold by sublicensee and (B) on each and every sublicense earned royalty payment received

by licensee from its sublicensee on sales of license product by sublicensee, the higher of (i) 20% of the royalties received by licensee;

or (ii) up to 2% of net sales of sublicensee. The Company will also make milestone payments of up to $4 or $2 million, for the first

commercial sale of product in the field that has a single active pharmaceutical ingredient, and for the first commercial sale of product

in the field of product that has more than one active pharmaceutical ingredient, respectively. As of December 31, 2022, the Company has

not generated any revenue related to this license agreement.

4

Inturrisi / Manfredi

In January 2018, we entered into an Intellectual

Property Assignment Agreement (the Assignment Agreement) and License Agreement (the License Agreement and together with the Assignment

Agreement, the Agreements) with Dr. Charles E. Inturrisi and Dr. Paolo Manfredi (collectively, the Licensor). Pursuant to the Agreements,

Relmada assigned its existing rights, including patents and patent applications, to esmethadone in the context of psychiatric use (the

Existing Invention) to Licensor. Licensor then granted Relmada under the License Agreement a perpetual, worldwide, and exclusive license

to commercialize the Existing Invention and certain further inventions regarding esmethadone. In consideration of the rights granted

to Relmada under the License Agreement, Relmada paid the Licensor an upfront, non-refundable license fee of $180,000. Additionally, Relmada

will pay Licensor $45,000 every three months until the earliest to occur of the following events: (i) the first commercial sale of a

licensed product anywhere in the world, (ii) the expiration or invalidation of the last to expire or be invalidated of the patent rights

anywhere in the world, or (iii) the termination of the License Agreement. Relmada will also pay Licensor tiered royalties with a maximum

rate of 2%, decreasing to 1.75%, and 1.5% in certain circumstances, on net sales of licensed products covered under the License Agreement.

Relmada will also pay Licensor tiered payments up to a maximum of 20%, and decreasing to 17.5%, and 15% in certain circumstances, of

all consideration received by Relmada for sublicenses granted under the License Agreement. As of December 31, 2022, no events have occurred,

and the Company continues to pay Licensor $45,000 every three months.

The License Agreement includes standard termination

rights for Licensor in the event of our insolvency, challenge of the licensed patents and uncured material breach of our obligations under

the License Agreement. In addition, the License Agreement contains certain “Key Man” provisions such that Licensor may terminate

the License Agreement if we terminate the employment of our Chief Executive Officer, Dr Sergio Traversa, for any reason other than for

specified causes determined by a majority of our Board of Directors (including fraud, gross negligence, unauthorized use of our confidential

information, conduct including harassment or discrimination, breach of fiduciary duty or uncured material breach), or if we (a) substantially

modify Dr. Traversa’s job responsibilities or decision-making rights in connection with the development and commercialization of

esmethadone, (b) remove him from the role of Chief Executive Officer other than in connection with a permitted change-of-control transaction,

(c) materially reduce his compensation, or (d) assign or transfer our rights under the License Agreement or the esmethadone intellectual

property without Dr. Traversa’s consent, in each case (termination or the events in (a) through (d)) during the period commencing

on the effective date and ending on the later of five years from the original effective date of the License Agreement or December 31,

2022. The December 2019 amendment to the License Agreement made certain clarifications to the nature of a termination for Cause, including

to clarify that termination due to Dr. Traversa’s death or disability does not give Licensor the right to terminate the License

Agreement. On December 27, 2022, the Licensor and the Company entered into a new amendment extending the “Key Man” provision

period until December 31, 2027. The License Agreement was not otherwise modified.

Wonpung License Agreement

In 2007, the Company entered into a License Development

and Commercialization Agreement with Wonpung Mulsan Co, a shareholder of the Company. Wonpung has exclusive territorial rights in countries

it selects in Asia to market up to two drugs the Company is currently developing and a right of first refusal (“ROFR”) for

up to an additional five drugs that the Company may develop in the future as defined in more detail in the license agreement. If the

parties cannot agree to terms of a license agreement then the Company shall be able to engage in discussions with other potential licensors.

As of March 23, 2023, no discussions are active between the Company and Wonpung.

The Company received an upfront license fee of $1,500,000

and will earn royalties of up to 12% of net sales for up to two licensed products it is currently developing. The licensing terms for

the ROFR products are subject to future negotiations and binding arbitration. The terms of each licensing agreement will expire on the

earlier of any time from 15 years to 20 years after licensing or on the date of commercial availability of a generic product to such

licensed product in the licensed territory.

Psilocybin License Agreement

In July 2021, we executed a License Agreement with Arbormentis, LLC

which gives us the development and commercial rights to a novel psilocybin and derivate program. Under the terms of the agreement, we

paid Arbormentis, LLC an up-front fee of $12.7 million consisting of a mix of cash and warrants to purchase the Company’s common

stock, in addition to potential milestone payments totaling up to approximately $160 million related to pre-specified development and

commercialization milestones. Arbormentis, LLC is also eligible to receive a low single digit percentage royalty on net sales of any commercialized

therapy resulting from this agreement. The license agreement is terminable by us but is perpetual and not terminable by the licensor absent

material breach of its terms by us. We will collaborate with Arbormentis, LLC on the development of new therapies targeting neurological

and psychiatric disorders, leveraging its understanding of neuroplasticity, and focusing on this emerging new class of drugs targeting

the neuroplastogen mechanism of action. Importantly, neuroplasticity also plays a key role in the activity of REL-1017, Relmada’s lead

program. Dr. Paolo Manfredi, our Acting Chief Scientific Officer and co-inventor of REL-1017, and Dr. Marco Pappagallo, our Acting Chief

Clinical Officer, are among the scientists affiliated with Arbormentis, LLC.

5

Key Strengths

We believe that the key elements for our market success include:

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry is

characterized by intense competition, rapid product development and technological change. Competition is intense among manufacturers

of prescription pharmaceuticals and other product areas where we may develop and market products in the future. Most of our competitors

are large, well-established pharmaceutical or healthcare companies with considerably more financial, marketing, sales and technical resources

than are available to us. Additionally, many of our competitors have research and development capabilities that may allow such competitors

to develop new or improved products that may compete with our products. Our products could be rendered obsolete or made uneconomical

by the development of new products.

Regarding our competitive position in the industry,

we currently have no products approved for sale.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States, at the

federal, state and local level, and in other countries and jurisdictions 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 subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations

and other regulatory authorities, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

FDA Approval Process

In the United States, pharmaceutical products are

subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C 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 FDA refusal to approve pending NDAs, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of

production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties and criminal prosecution.

Pharmaceutical product development for a new product

or certain changes to an approved product in the U.S. typically involves preclinical laboratory and animal tests, the submission to FDA

of an investigational new drug application (IND) which must become effective before clinical testing may commence, and adequate and well-controlled

clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the drug for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. 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.

6

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. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including good laboratory

practices. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information

about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long-term 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 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

new drug 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 good clinical practice, or 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 FDA as part of the

IND.

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. The study protocol and informed consent information

for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an institutional review board (IRB) for approval. An IRB may also require the

clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements,

or may impose other conditions.

Clinical trials to support NDAs for marketing approval

are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the drug into

healthy human subjects or patients, the drug is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects

associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence of 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 optimum dosage, and to identify

common adverse effects and safety risks. If a drug 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 FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship

of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the drug. In most cases, FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled

Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug. A single Phase 3 trial with other confirmatory evidence may be sufficient

in rare instances, such as where the study is a large multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive

finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious

outcome and confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible.

After completion of the required clinical testing,

an NDA is prepared and submitted to FDA. FDA approval of the NDA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the U.S. The

NDA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s

pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture and controls. The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA is substantial. The submission of most

NDAs is additionally subject to a substantial application user fee, and the applicant under an approved NDA is also subject to an annual

program fee for each prescription product. These fees are typically increased annually. Sponsors of applications for drugs granted Orphan

Drug Designation are exempt from these user fees.

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. Once the submission is accepted for filing, FDA begins an in-depth review. FDA has agreed to certain performance

goals in the review of NDAs to encourage timeliness. Applications for most standard review drug products are reviewed within twelve months

from submission of NDAs for new molecular entities (NMEs) and ten months from submission of NDAs for non-NMEs. Priority review can be

applied to drugs that FDA determines offer major advances in treatment or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. The review

process for both standard and priority review may be extended by FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information

or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission.

FDA may also refer applications for novel drug products,

or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an outside 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.

FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.

Before approving an NDA, FDA will typically inspect

one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the

drug is manufactured. FDA will not approve the product unless compliance with current good manufacturing practices (cGMPs) is satisfactory

and the NDA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the drug is safe and effective in the indication studied.

After 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 FDA to reconsider the application. If,

or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, FDA will issue an approval

letter. FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included. An approval

letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of

NDA approval, FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh

the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe

use (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 drug. Moreover, product approval may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance

to monitor the drug’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.

7

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 FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements

as it does in reviewing NDAs.

Fast Track Designation

FDA is required to facilitate the development, and expedite the review,

of drugs that are intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition for which there is no effective treatment

and which demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Under the Fast Track program, the sponsor of a new

drug candidate may request that FDA designate the drug candidate for a specific indication as a Fast Track drug concurrent with, or after,

the submission of the IND for the drug candidate. FDA must determine if the drug candidate qualifies for Fast Track Designation within

60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request.

If a submission is granted Fast Track Designation,

the sponsor may engage in more frequent interactions with FDA, and FDA may review sections of the NDA before the application is complete.

This rolling review is available if the applicant provides, and FDA approves, a schedule for the submission of the remaining information

and the applicant pays applicable user fees. However, FDA’s time period goal for reviewing an application does not begin until

the last section of the NDA is submitted. Additionally, Fast Track Designation may be withdrawn by FDA if FDA believes that the designation

is no longer supported by data emerging in the clinical trial process.

Orphan Drugs

Under the Orphan Drug Act, FDA may grant Orphan Drug

Designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition – generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000

individuals in the U.S. Orphan Drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After FDA grants Orphan Drug Designation,

the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by FDA. Orphan Drug Designation does not convey

any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. The first NDA applicant to receive FDA approval

for a particular active ingredient to treat a particular disease with FDA Orphan Drug Designation is entitled to a seven-year exclusive

marketing period in the U.S. for that product, for that indication. During the seven-year exclusivity period, FDA may not approve any

other applications to market the same drug for the same disease, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority

to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent FDA from approving a different drug for the same

disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of Orphan Drug Designation are

tax credits for certain research and an exemption from the NDA application user fee.

Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information

Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA regulated products,

including drugs, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the product, patient

population, phase of investigation, study 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.

Pediatric Information

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA), NDAs

or supplements to NDAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant

pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective.

FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. With certain exceptions, PREA does not apply to any drug

for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.

The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA)

provides NDA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity – patent or nonpatent – for a drug if certain conditions are

met. Conditions for exclusivity include FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric

population may produce health benefits in that population, FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing

to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications under the BPCA are treated as priority

applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers.

Post-Approval Requirements

Once an NDA is approved, a product will be subject

to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs, including

standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities

and promotional activities involving the internet. Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the

provisions of the approved labeling.

8

Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic

reports are required following FDA approval of an NDA. FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, REMS and

surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution

or use of the product. In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging and labeling procedures must continue to conform to

cGMPs after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with FDA and

certain state agencies. Registration with FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by FDA, during which the Agency inspects

manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in

the areas of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with cGMPs. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals

or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing,

or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered.

Generic Competition

In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants

are required to list with the FDA each patent whose claims cover the applicant’s product. Upon approval of a drug, each of the

patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence

Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors

in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA). An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same

active ingredients in the same strengths and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown through bioequivalence testing to be therapeutically

equivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or

submit results of, preclinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Drugs approved in this way

are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions

written for the original listed drug.

The ANDA applicant is required to certify to the

FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in the FDA’s Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify that

(i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has

not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid

or will not be infringed by the new product (a Paragraph IV certification). The ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a section viii

statement certifying that its proposed ANDA label does not contain (or carve out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather

than certify to a listed method-of-use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents or certifies that the listed patents

will not be infringed by the new product, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced

product have expired. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification, the NDA and patent holders may then initiate a

patent infringement lawsuit in response. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a such certification

automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit,

or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant.

Exclusivity

Upon NDA approval of a new chemical entity (NCE)

such as esmethadone, which is a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by FDA in any other NDA, that drug receives

five years of marketing exclusivity during which FDA cannot receive any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug. An ANDA

may be submitted one year before NCE exclusivity expires if a Paragraph IV certification is filed. If there is no listed patent in the

Orange Book, there may not be a Paragraph IV certification, and, thus, no ANDA may be filed before the expiration of the exclusivity

period. Certain changes to a drug, such as the addition of a new indication to the package insert, can be the subject of a three-year

period of exclusivity if the application contains reports of new clinical investigations (other than bioavailability studies) conducted

or sponsored by the sponsor that were essential to approval of the application. FDA cannot approve an ANDA for a generic drug that includes

the change during the period of exclusivity.

In the case of a non-racemic drug containing as an active ingredient

a single enantiomer that is contained in a racemic drug approved in another NDA, the NDA for the non-racemic drug may elect to have the

single enantiomer not be considered the same active ingredient as that contained in the approved racemic drug and therefore eligible for

NCE exclusivity, if certain conditions are met. These conditions include: (1) the single enantiomer has not been previously approved except

in the approved racemic drug, (2) the NDA for the non-racemic drug includes full reports of new clinical investigations necessary for

the approval of the product conducted or sponsored by the applicant and not submitted for approval of the racemic drug, and (3) the NDA

for the non-racemic drug is not submitted for approval of a condition of use in a therapeutic category in which the approved racemic drug

has been approved or for which any other enantiomer of the racemic drug has been approved. In addition, FDA will not approve the non-racemic

drug for any condition of use in the therapeutic category in which the racemic drug has been approved for a period of 10 years after approval

of the non-racemic drug, and the labeling of the non-racemic drug will include a statement in the indication that the non-racemic drug

is not approved, and has not been shown to be safe and effective, for any condition of use of the racemic drug. The applicant for the

non-racemic drug may make this election only in an application submitted before October 1, 2027.

Patent Term Extension

After NDA approval, owners of relevant drug patents

may apply for up to a five-year patent extension. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as half of the drug’s testing

phase (the time between IND application 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 FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence.

The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years, and only one patent can be extended. 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 United States Patent and Trademark Office 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.

9

Controlled Substances

The active ingredients in esmethadone are regulated

Source: SEC EDGAR (public domain) · 10-K for the period ended 2022-12-31, filed 2023-03-23 · accession 0001213900-23-022463

Filing HTML rendered to line-structured narrative text by the shipped reducer (datafeeds.edgar_fulltext.visible_text, keep_table_headers=True): scripts and inline-XBRL headers are dropped, and table content is reduced to its short label cells — numeric table data is not rendered and is therefore not counted. The same rendering is used for every year, so a year-over-year comparison is like for like.

The text is our rendering of the filing, not a facsimile: original pagination, typography and tables are not reproduced, and the numbers live in the financial statements (FA).

The outline locates item HEADINGS in this document. Only Items 1A and 7 have certified boundaries elsewhere in the terminal (the redline and the narrative-overlap number); every span here runs from one heading found to the next heading found.

How the outline was chosen. It is the longest chain of item headings that runs forward through both the document and the standard item order: 20 headings are on that chain and 0 further heading-shaped lines are not — the table-of-contents echo of every item, cross-references and exhibit-list mentions. Each entry's length is measured from its heading to the next heading on the chain.