acrx20201231_10k.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

☑ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December31, 2020

☐ 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: 001-35068

ACELRX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

351 Galveston Drive

Redwood City, CA94063

(650) 216-3500

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

Securities registered pursuant to Section12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class Trading Symbol(s) Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered

Common Stock, $0.001 par value ACRX The Nasdaq Global Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section12(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 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 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. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2) Yes ☐ No ☑

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 30, 2020 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter), based upon the last sale price reported on the Nasdaq Global Market on that date, was approximately $95,491,775. The calculation excludes 1,971,363 shares of the registrant’s common stock held by current executive officers and directors that the registrant has concluded are affiliates of the registrant. Exclusion of such shares should not be construed to indicate that any such person possesses the power, direct or indirect, to direct or cause the direction of the management or policies of the registrant or that such person is controlled by or under common control with the registrant.

As of March 9, 2021, the number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s common stock was 118,947,830.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

ACELRX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

2020 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PART I

Item 1. Business 4

Item 1A. Risk Factors 23

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 56

Item 2. Properties 56

Item 3. Legal Proceedings 56

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 56

PART II

Item 6. Selected Financial Data 57

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 71

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 71

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 71

Item 9B. Other Information 71

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 72

Item 11. Executive Compensation 72

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 72

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules 72

Signatures 76

Unless the context indicates otherwise, the terms “AcelRx,” “AcelRx Pharmaceuticals,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and its consolidated subsidiaries. “DZUVEO” is a trademark, and “ACELRX”, “DSUVIA” and “Zalviso” are registered trademarks, all owned by AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. This report also contains trademarks and trade names that are the property of their respective owners.

Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or Form 10-K, contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, which are subject to the “safe harbor” created by that section. The forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K are contained principally under “Item 1. Business,” “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the following words: “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “project,” “potential,” “continue,” “ongoing” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. These statements involve risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Form 10-K, we caution you that these statements are based on a combination of facts and factors currently known by us and our projections of the future, about which we cannot be certain. Many important factors affect our ability to achieve our objectives, including:

• the integration and performance of any assets or businesses we acquire;

• continued demonstration of an acceptable safety profile of DSUVIA;

• the outcome of any potential FDA Advisory Committee meeting held for Zalviso;

• our ability to obtain adequate government or third-party payer reimbursement;

• regulatory developments in the United States and foreign countries;

• the success of competing therapies that are or become available;

• our liquidity and capital resources; and

In addition, you should refer to “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K for a discussion of these and other important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. Also, forward-looking statements represent our estimates and assumptions only as of the date of this Form 10-K. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

PART I

Item1. Business

Overview

We are a specialty pharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of innovative therapies for use in medically supervised settings.

Our Portfolio

The following table summarizes our portfolio.

Product Description Target Use Status

We have created a proprietary sublingual (under the tongue) formulation of sufentanil intended for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain. We believe our non-invasive, proprietary sublingual sufentanil tablet potentially overcomes many of the limitations of current treatment options available for moderate-to-severe acute pain. The sufentanil pharmacokinetic profile when delivered sublingually avoids the high peak plasma levels and short duration of action observed with IV administration. The sublingual formulation retains the therapeutic value of sufentanil, and novel delivery devices provide a non-invasive route of administration. Sufentanil is highly lipophilic which provides for rapid absorption in the mucosal tissue, or fatty cells, found under the tongue, and for rapid transit across the blood-brain barrier to reach the mu-opioid receptors in the brain. The sublingual route of delivery used by DSUVIA and Zalviso provides a predictable onset of analgesia. The sublingual delivery system also eliminates the risk of intravenous, or IV, complications, such as catheter-related infections. In addition, because patients do not require direct connection to an IV infusion pump, or IV line, DSUVIA and Zalviso may allow for ease of patient mobility.

We have chosen sufentanil as the therapeutic ingredient for DSUVIA and Zalviso. Opioids have been utilized for pain relief for centuries and are the standard-of-care for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain. Sufentanil, a high-therapeutic index opioid, which has no active metabolites, is available as an injectable in several markets around the world and is used by anesthesiologists for induction of sedation or as an epidural; however, the injectable formulation is not suitable for the treatment of acute pain. Sufentanil has many pharmacological advantages over other opioids. Published studies demonstrate that sufentanil produces significantly less respiratory depressive effects relative to its analgesic effects compared to other opioids, including morphine and fentanyl. These third-party clinical results correlate well with preclinical trials demonstrating sufentanil’s high therapeutic index, or the ratio of the toxic dose to the therapeutic dose of a drug, used as a measure of the relative safety of the drug for a particular treatment. Accordingly, we believe that sufentanil can provide an effective and well-tolerated treatment for acute pain. The following table illustrates the difference between the therapeutic index of different opioids.

Opioid Therapeutic Index

Meperidine 5

Methadone 12

Morphine 71

Hydromorphone 250

In addition, the pharmaceutical attributes of sufentanil, including lipid solubility and ionization, result in rapid cell membrane penetration and onset of action, which we believe make sufentanil an optimal opioid for the treatment of acute pain.

Although the analgesic efficacy and safety of sufentanil have been well established, the product’s use has been historically limited due to its short duration of action when delivered intravenously. Sublingual delivery of sufentanil avoids the high peak plasma levels and short duration of action of intravenous, or IV, administration.

DSUVIA®

DSUVIA, known as DZUVEO in Europe, approved by the FDA in November 2018 (and by the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, in June 2018), is indicated for use in adults in certified medically supervised healthcare settings, such as hospitals, surgical centers, and emergency departments, for the management of acute pain severe enough to require an opioid analgesic and for which alternative treatments are inadequate. DSUVIA was designed to provide rapid analgesia via a non-invasive route and to eliminate dosing errors associated with IV administration. DSUVIA is a single-strength solid dosage form administered sublingually via a single-dose applicator, or SDA, by healthcare professionals. Sufentanil is an opioid analgesic currently marketed for IV and epidural anesthesia and analgesia. The sufentanil pharmacokinetic profile when delivered sublingually avoids the high peak plasma levels and short duration of action observed with IV administration.

Examples of potential patient populations and settings in which DSUVIA could be used include: emergency room patients; perioperative use for patients who are undergoing inpatient, short-stay or ambulatory surgery; inpatient use for up to 72 hours in patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain; procedural suite use for painful procedures such as oral surgery or cosmetic procedures; patients being treated and transported by paramedics; and for battlefield casualties. In the emergency room and in procedural suite environments, patients often do not have immediate IV access available, or may not require IV access. Moreover, IV dosing results in high peak plasma levels, thereby limiting the opioid dose and requiring frequent redosing intervals to titrate to satisfactory analgesia. Oral pills and liquids generally have slow and erratic onset of analgesia. Based on internal market research conducted to date, we believe that an additional treatment option that provides timely analgesia without requiring an IV for moderate-to-severe acute pain is needed, in both civilian and military settings, as an alternative to currently available opioids.

DSUVIA was approved with a REMS which restricts distribution to certified medically supervised healthcare settings in order to prevent respiratory depression resulting from accidental exposure. DSUVIA is only distributed to facilities certified in the DSUVIA REMS program following attestation by an authorized representative to comply with appropriate dispensing and use restrictions of DSUVIA. To become certified, a healthcare setting is required to train their healthcare professionals on the proper use of DSUVIA and have the ability to manage respiratory depression. DSUVIA is not available in retail pharmacies or for outpatient use. As part of the REMS program, we monitor distribution and audit wholesalers’ data, evaluate proper usage within the healthcare settings and monitor for any diversion and abuse. We de-certify healthcare settings that are non-compliant with the REMS program.

Zalviso®

While still under development in the United States, Zalviso is approved and marketed in the European Union, or EU. Zalviso is intended for the management of moderate-to-severe acute pain in hospitalized adult patients. Zalviso consists of a pre-filled cartridge of 40 sufentanil sublingual tablets, 15 mcg, delivered by the Zalviso System, a needle-free, handheld, patient-administered, pain management system. Zalviso is a pre-programmed non-invasive system that allows hospital patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain to self-dose with sufentanil sublingual tablets, 15 mcg, to manage their pain. Zalviso is designed to help address certain problems associated with post-operative IV patient-controlled analgesia, or PCA. Zalviso allows patients to self-administer sufentanil sublingual tablets via a pre-programmed, secure system designed in part to eliminate the risk of healthcare provider programming errors.

The Zalviso System consists of the following components: a disposable dispenser tip, a disposable dispenser cap, an adhesive thumb tag, a cartridge of 40 sufentanil sublingual 15 mcg tablets (approximately a two-day supply) in a disposable radio frequency identification and bar-coded cartridge, a reusable, rechargeable handheld controller, a tether, and an authorized access card.

The potential benefits of Zalviso are the result of combining the following three elements:

• sufentanil, a high therapeutic index opioid;

Drugs are classified or scheduled by the Drug Enforcement Agency, or DEA, according to their potential for abuse and addiction. Sufentanil is classified as a Schedule II controlled substance. Scheduled drugs, when they are under patient control in a hospital setting, must be secured and have adequate dose access control and tracking mechanisms. Our novel handheld PCA device has the following safety features:

• pre-programmed 20-minute lock-out to avoid overdosing;

• a security tether that is designed to prevent theft and misuse; and

• fully automated inventory record of sufentanil sublingual tablet usage.

We submitted an NDA for Zalviso in September 2013, or the Zalviso NDA, and on July 25, 2014, the Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia, and Addiction Products of the FDA issued a Complete Response Letter, or CRL, for the Zalviso NDA. The CRL contained requests for additional information on the Zalviso System to ensure proper use of the device. The requests include submission of data demonstrating a reduction in the incidence of device errors, changes to address inadvertent dosing, among other items, and submission of additional data to support the shelf life of the product. In March 2015, we received correspondence from the FDA stating that, in addition to the work we had performed to address the items in the CRL, a clinical study would be required to test the modifications to the Zalviso device and mitigations put in place to reduce the risk of inadvertent dosing/misplaced tablets.

Our IAP312 study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of changes made to the functionality and usability of the Zalviso device and to take into account comments from the FDA on the study protocol. In the IAP312 study, 320 hospitalized, post-operative patients used Zalviso to self-administer 15 mcg sublingual sufentanil tablets as often as once every 20 minutes for 24-to-72 hours to manage their moderate-to-severe acute pain. Throughout the study, for which top-line results were announced in August 2017, 2.2% of patients experienced a Zalviso device error, which was statistically less than the 5% limit specified in the study objectives. None of these device errors resulted in an over-dosing event. This 2.2% rate was lower (p < 0.001) than the 7.9% rate of device errors during patient use previously reported for the earlier version of the Zalviso device in the Phase 3 IAP311 study. In addition, results of this study supported earlier clinical findings, with favorable tolerability and a significant majority of “good” or “excellent” ratings provided by both patients and healthcare providers when assessing the method of pain control. These results will supplement those of our earlier Phase 3 studies (IAP309, IAP310 and IAP311), all of which met safety and efficacy endpoints, in the Zalviso NDA resubmission. The timing of the resubmission of the Zalviso NDA is dependent upon the finalization of the FDA’s new opioid approval guidelines and process.

Zalviso was approved for commercial sale in the European Union, or EU, in September 2015 and Grünenthal GmbH, or Grünenthal, began its commercial launch of Zalviso in the EU in April 2016. On May 18, 2020, we received a notice from Grünenthal that it was exercising its right to terminate the Collaboration and License Agreement, or, as amended, the License Agreement, which granted Grünenthal the European rights to commercialize Zalviso in the 28 EU member states at the time of the agreement, plus Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Iceland, Norway and Australia, or the Territory, for human use in pain treatment in medically supervised settings, and the related Manufacture and Supply Agreement, or, as amended, the MSA, under which AcelRx exclusively manufactured and supplied Zalviso to Grünenthal for commercial sales in the Territory. The MSA, together with the License Agreement, are referred to as the Grünenthal Agreements. The terms of the Grünenthal Agreements were extended to May 2021 to enable Grünenthal to sell down its Zalviso inventory, a right it had under the Grünenthal Agreements. The rights to market and sell Zalviso in the Territory revert back to us in May 2021.

On September 18, 2015, we sold a majority of the expected royalty stream and commercial milestones from the sales of Zalviso in Europe by Grünenthal to PDL BioPharma, Inc., or PDL, in a transaction referred to as the Royalty Monetization. On August 31, 2020, PDL announced it sold its royalty interest for Zalviso to SWK Funding, LLC, or SWK. Under the Royalty Monetization, we have a continuing obligation to use commercially reasonable efforts to negotiate a replacement license agreement for Zalviso, or New Arrangement; however, we have not yet entered into such an arrangement. For additional information regarding the Grünenthal Agreements, see Note 5 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” in the accompanying notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. For additional information on the Royalty Monetization, see Note 8 “Liability Related to Sale of Future Royalties” in the accompanying notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Clinical Trials

Zalviso®

Zalviso has completed three Phase 3 clinical trials: two placebo-controlled efficacy and safety trials and one open-label active comparator trial, in which Zalviso was compared to IV PCA morphine. Each of the three Phase 3 trials successfully achieved its primary endpoint. Based on FDA feedback, we completed a fourth study, IAP312, in a diverse post-surgical population to further evaluate the overall performance of the Zalviso System.

Active comparator trial (IAP309)

In November 2012, we reported top-line data showing that Zalviso had met its primary endpoint of non-inferiority in the Phase 3 open-label active comparator trial designed to compare the efficacy and safety of Zalviso (15 mcg/dose) to IV PCA with morphine (1mg/dose) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute post-operative pain. Utilizing a randomized, open-label, parallel group design, this trial enrolled 359 adult patients at 26 U.S. sites for the treatment of pain immediately following open-abdominal or major orthopedic surgery (hip and knee replacement). Patients were randomized 1:1 to treatment with Zalviso or IV PCA morphine and were treated for a minimum of 48 hours and up to 72 hours.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, abdominal surgery trial (IAP310)

In March 2013, we reported top-line data results demonstrating that Zalviso met its primary endpoint in a pivotal Phase 3 trial designed to compare the efficacy and safety of Zalviso to placebo in the management of acute post-operative pain after major open abdominal surgery. Adverse events reported in the trial were generally mild or moderate in nature and similar in both placebo and treatment groups. Utilizing a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, this Phase 3 trial enrolled 178 adult patients at 13 U.S. sites. Patients were treated for post-operative pain for a minimum of 48 hours, and up to 72 hours. Patients were randomized 2:1, with 119 patients randomized to sufentanil sublingual tablet treatment and 59 to placebo treatment. Both treatments were delivered by the patient, as needed, using Zalviso with a 20-minute lock-out period. Patients in both groups could receive up to 2 mg morphine intravenously per hour as a rescue medication, the primary purpose of this rescue medication being to provide placebo-treated patients access to pain medication to enable them to stay in the trial as long as possible. Pre-rescue pain scores were imputed to minimize the impact of this rescue opioid on efficacy evaluations.

The primary endpoint evaluated pain intensity over the 48-hour study period compared to baseline, or Summed Pain Intensity Difference, or SPID-48, in patients following major open abdominal surgery. Patients receiving sufentanil sublingual tablets demonstrated a significantly greater SPID-48 compared to placebo-treated patients during the study period (105.6 and 55.6, respectively; p=0.001).

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, orthopedic surgery trial (IAP311)

In May 2013, we reported top-line data results demonstrating that Zalviso met its primary endpoint in a pivotal Phase 3 trial designed to compare the efficacy and safety of Zalviso to placebo in the management of acute post-operative pain after major orthopedic surgery. Adverse events reported in the study were generally mild or moderate in nature and were similar in both placebo and treatment groups for the majority of adverse events. Utilizing a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, this pivotal Phase 3 study enrolled 426 adult patients at 34 U.S. sites for treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain immediately following major orthopedic surgery. Seven patients did not receive study drug, resulting in 419 patients being included in the ITT population. Patients were treated for a minimum of 48 hours, and up to 72 hours. Patients were randomized 3:1, with 321 patients randomized to sufentanil sublingual tablet treatment and 105 to placebo treatment. Both treatments were delivered by the patient, as needed, using the Zalviso System with a 20-minute lock-out period. Patients in both groups could receive up to 2 mg morphine intravenously per hour as a rescue medication, the primary purpose of this rescue medication being to enable placebo-treated patients to stay in the study. Pain scores recorded just prior to the delivery of rescue medication were gathered and imputed forward to minimize the impact of this rescue opioid on efficacy evaluations.

The primary endpoint evaluated SPID-48 in patients following major orthopedic surgery. Patients receiving Zalviso demonstrated a significantly greater SPID-48 compared to placebo-treated patients during the study period (+76.2 and -11.4, respectively; p < 0.001). Two hundred fifteen (68.3%) sufentanil sublingual tablet-treated patients completed the 48-hour study period, compared to 43 (41.3%) placebo-treated patients. Primary reasons for drop-out in the sufentanil sublingual tablet- and placebo-treated groups were adverse events (7.0% and 6.7%, respectively) and lack of efficacy (14.3% and 48.1%, respectively).

Four patients (three in the sufentanil sublingual tablet group and one in the placebo group) experienced a serious adverse event, or SAE, considered possibly or probably related to the study drug by the investigator. The SAEs observed in the patients in the sufentanil sublingual tablet group included severe oxygen saturation decrease, sinus tachycardia, and confusional state.

Combined related adverse events for the two placebo-controlled pivotal studies (IAP310 and IAP311) compared to placebo are shown below. Only pruritus (itching) was statistically different for Zalviso compared to placebo (p = 0.002).

Adverse Events Occurring in > 2% in Either Group

Possibly or Probably Related Adverse Events Zalviso n=429 Placebo n=162

At least 2% in either group Two Placebo- Controlled Phase 3 Studies

Oxygen Saturation Decreased 6.1 % 2.5 %

Pruritus 4.7 % 0 %

Dizziness 4.4 % 1.2 %

Constipation 3.7 % 0.6 %

Hypotension 3.0 % 1.2 %

Confusional state 2.1 % 0.6 %

3 patients (0.7%) in the Zalviso group had treatment-emergent respiratory events that required naloxone reversal.

Multi-center, single-arm, open-label study (IAP312)

IAP312 was a Phase 3 study designed to evaluate the overall performance of the Zalviso System, in response to the CRL received from the FDA for Zalviso. Throughout the study in 320 enrolled patients, 2.2% of patients experienced a Zalviso device error, which was statistically less than the 5% limit specified in the study objectives. Importantly, none of these device errors resulted in an over-dosing event. This 2.2% rate was lower (p < 0.001) than the 7.9% rate of device errors during patient use previously reported for the earlier version of the Zalviso device in the Phase 3 IAP311 study.

In addition, as requested by FDA, the IAP312 study prospectively evaluated the number of inadvertently misplaced tablets which occurred during patient dosing. A small number of inadvertently misplaced tablets (less than 0.1% of total dispensed tablets) was observed in the original Phase 3 studies. However, the presence of inadvertently misplaced tablets had not been routinely assessed as part of the previous protocols. Throughout the IAP312 study, patients self-administered a total of 7,293 sufentanil tablets. Per the updated Zalviso training instructions electronically displayed on the hand-held device, 6 patients called the nurse when they failed to properly self-administer a single tablet to allow for proper retrieval and disposal of the tablet. Also, during inspection by the nurse, which occurred every two hours per protocol, a total of 7 misplaced tablets (<0.1% of total dispensed tablets) were discovered with 6 additional patients. No patient had a repeat incidence of an inadvertently misplaced tablet following re-training on the device. This combination of patient training and nurse inspection, along with the tracking features of the Zalviso device, could potentially address the FDA's concerns regarding drug accountability.

Finally, in this study, 86%, 89% and 100% of patients at the 24, 48 and 72-hour time points, respectively, recorded "good" or "excellent" ratings on the patient global assessment, or PGA, of the method of pain control, which measures a patient's satisfaction with their quality of analgesia. Healthcare professional global assessment, or HPGA, of the method of pain control was similarly strong, with 91%, 95% and 100% of nurses rating Zalviso as "good" or "excellent" over each respective 24-hour period. Zalviso was shown to be well tolerated by study participants, with nausea, hypotension and vomiting representing the most commonly reported adverse events. A total of 5 patients experienced serious adverse events, but all were considered unrelated to study drug by investigators.

The Market Opportunity for DSUVIA and Zalviso

Unmet Medical Need

Examples of potential patient populations and settings in which patients might require the short-term management of moderate-to-severe acute pain include emergency room patients; perioperative use for patients who are undergoing inpatient, short-stay or ambulatory surgery; inpatient use for up to 72 hours in patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain; procedural suite use for painful procedures such as oral surgery or cosmetic procedures; patients being treated and transported by paramedics; and for battlefield casualties.

While IV opioids are currently employed to control moderate-to-severe acute pain in many of these settings, the use of IV opioids suffers from the following:

• potential high peaks and troughs of plasma concentrations;

• infection risk associated with the invasive nature of IV delivery;

We believe healthcare providers and hospital administrators caring for patients in moderate-to-severe acute pain in the aforementioned medically supervised settings could significantly benefit from the following items:

• pain relief that does not sacrifice cognitive function; and/or

• infection risks due to invasive routes of delivery, such as IV.

In our Phase 1 through Phase 3 clinical studies, sublingual sufentanil has demonstrated the following attributes:

• ease of administration;

• maintenance of cognitive function;

We believe that sublingual sufentanil provides a safety, efficacy and tolerability profile enabling our products to potentially replace IV opioid use in patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain in the proposed medically supervised settings. This may be especially true for DSUVIA in the post-operative settings where, because of the unique pharmacokinetic profile, the healthcare practitioner may be able to manage patient-flow more efficiently in the recovery room after surgery, and in emergency medical settings. The number of emergency departments is decreasing in the United States, resulting in an increased focus on resource management to treat a growing number of patients in an efficient manner.

United States Market

Based on commissioned research conducted in 2016, we estimate that there are over 90 million patients who are treated in various medically supervised settings for their moderate-to-severe acute pain which is significant enough to warrant the use of an opioid. We believe these patients may be eligible for treatment with DSUVIA, and in some cases Zalviso, if approved in the United States. The target patient population for DSUVIA are those patients in a certified medically supervised healthcare setting, such as hospitals, surgical centers, and emergency departments, for less than 24 hours. The target patient population for Zalviso are patients in a hospital setting for greater than 24 hours. Our current estimate of patients in moderate-to-severe acute pain in medically supervised settings, by setting, is as follows:

Outpatient surgery 11 million

Hospital/surgery center/office-based procedures 20 million

Inpatient surgery/inpatient conditions 10 million

The market for Zalviso, given the target patients in a hospital setting for greater than 24 hours, is the approximately 10 million inpatient surgeries and inpatient conditions above. There can be no assurance that our estimates regarding the number of patients treated in the various settings will be accurate.

European Market

Based on commissioned research conducted in 2016, there are an estimated 142 million patients in the EU5 (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) represented across DZUVEO target care settings annually. Each year, there are an estimated 110 million emergency attendances and 32 million surgical procedures performed each year. It is anticipated that there are 51 million patients in emergency medicine with moderate-to-severe acute pain and 16 million with moderate-to-severe acute pain following surgery each year.

ARX-02(higher strength sufentanil sublingual tablet)

A Phase 2 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of ARX-02 for the treatment of cancer breakthrough pain in opioid-tolerant patients has been completed. The IND application for ARX-02 was inactivated as there is no ongoing clinical development.

ARX-03(combination sufentanil/triazolam sublingual tablet)

A Phase 2 trial which evaluated the efficacy and safety of this product for procedural anxiety and acute pain has been completed. The IND application for ARX-03 was inactivated as there is no ongoing clinical development.

ARX-02 and ARX-03 are investigational product candidates and are not approved by the FDA or any other regulatory agency. We do not intend to invest resources in these development stage product candidates; accordingly, any future development of these development stage product candidates is contingent on funding from a corporate partnership or other external funding source.

Our Strategy

Our strategy remains focused upon the commercial launch of DSUVIA into the medically supervised healthcare settings market, such as hospitals, surgical centers and emergency departments. The process of selling into these settings and obtaining approval for a product to be used within these types of institutions is complex and takes time.

Our four-pillar strategy for DSUVIA revenue growth is focused on delivering the most effective and efficient commercialization of DSUVIA through different channels, plus business development to expand the number of products in our portfolio.

The first pillar is concentrated on supporting broader use within the DoD after DSUVIA achieved U.S. Army Milestone C approval and was added to the Joint Deployment Formulary in 2020. We believe the opportunity for DSUVIA revenue growth includes deployed or deploying military troops, domestic-based military, military treatment facilities and Veterans Administration facilities. We are using a small internal commercial team of three that are focused on achieving our objectives within this first pillar.

The second pillar is focused on what we call specialty markets, which are typically large market opportunities, but more geographically dispersed with a lower concentration of patient visits than a hospital or surgery center. Examples of these specialty markets include oral/dental surgery, emergency medical services and plastic surgery. We intend to leverage the use of commercial partnerships with more established companies already serving customers in these specific markets. An example of an initiative in this pillar is our exclusive partnership with Zimmer Biomet Dental in oral/dental surgery. Our objective is to focus on finding additional partners for these other specialties that align with our values and goals.

The third pillar is centered around the hospital and ambulatory surgery centers. We intend to continue the launch of DSUVIA in the United States focused on promotion to hospitals, emergency departments and surgery centers with our internal commercial team, plus the support of La Jolla’s promotion efforts.

The fourth pillar involves identifying and licensing, or acquiring, complementary products to DSUVIA. We believe having a single product to market and sell into this setting is inherently inefficient and building a portfolio of products is important to mitigate such inefficiency. Accordingly, we will focus on business development activities to increase the number of products in our portfolio.

Supporting the DSUVIA commercial strategy is the production strategy, focused on the completion of our transition to automated packaging equipment with our contract manufacturing organization, to leverage improved technology to lower production cost.

Our specific strategy with respect to Zalviso is to (a) continue to use commercially reasonable efforts to negotiate a New Arrangement as required under the Royalty Monetization; and (b) upon the FDA providing further guidance about new opioid approval guidelines, evaluate resubmission of the Zalviso NDA to seek regulatory approval in the United States and, if successful, promote Zalviso as a follow-on product to DSUVIA, or potentially seek a commercial partner.

Business Development

In addition to partnering DSUVIA in large market, non-core specialty areas outside the hospital and ambulatory surgery centers (e.g., oral/dental surgery, plastic surgery, EMS, etc.), and identifying and licensing, or acquiring, complementary products to DSUVIA, as well as out-licensing DSUVIA/DZUVEO in other geographies with potential partners, we are actively pursuing ways to leverage our commercial infrastructure by identifying, evaluating and executing transactions to bring in additional products for healthcare institutions.

Sales and Marketing

Our four-pillar commercial strategy is focused on leveraging our internal commercial organization, plus collaboration partners, to commercialize DSUVIA. We have established and will continue developing our distribution capability and commercial organization in the United States to market and sell DSUVIA in the United States. In geographies where we decide not to commercialize ourselves, we will seek to out-license commercialization rights. In specialty areas that are not core to the hospital, ambulatory surgery centers, or ASCs, or emergency room settings, (e.g., plastic surgeries), we will seek commercialization partners that will support accessing these markets.

We are building commercial capability in the United States progressively to support the launch of DSUVIA in the United States market. We foresee two stages of commercial execution to support successful introduction of DSUVIA in the United States:

To date, we have:

Next steps in our commercialization plan include:

If we are unable to establish successful sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may be unable to generate any product revenue. For a more comprehensive discussion of the risks related to our commercialization, please see “Risk Factors— Risks Related to Commercialization of DSUVIA and Zalviso” appearing elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Promotion Agreement

On March 15, 2020, we entered into a Co-Promotion Agreement, or the Co-Promotion Agreement, with Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Tetraphase, to co-promote DSUVIA and Tetraphases’s XERAVATM (eravacycline). On July 28, 2020, Tetraphase was acquired by La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company, or La Jolla. On October 1, 2020, we entered into a Promotion Agreement, or the Promotion Agreement, with La Jolla and Tetraphase, effective as of September 30, 2020, pursuant to which AcelRx, La Jolla and Tetraphase restructured their co-promotion arrangement, with La Jolla agreeing to detail and promote DSUVIA and AcelRx and Tetraphase agreeing to terminate the Co-Promotion Agreement between them. Refer to Note 1 “Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” for additional information.

Distribution Agreement

On July 17, 2020, we entered into a distribution agreement, or the Distribution Agreement, with Zimmer Biomet Dental, or ZB Dental, pursuant to which ZB Dental obtained the exclusive right to promote, market, sell, and arrange to distribute DSUVIA in the United States to clinicians, dentists, surgeons and other licensed health care practitioners that perform dental (including specialty dental), oral-maxillofacial, cranio-maxillofacial or oral surgery procedures, or Professionals, and their respective institutions and facilities that are permitted to use DSUVIA.

ZB Dental’s distribution rights are non-exclusive for crossover ambulatory surgery centers and certain government customers, and do not extend to ambulatory care centers outside the class of trade or into hospitals. ZB Dental will conduct any distribution activities in a manner consistent with DSUVIA’s FDA-approved indication and REMS program, and within the parameters established in the Distribution Agreement. ZB Dental has the right to sublicense its distribution rights to its qualified marketing partners but may not otherwise sublicense its distribution rights to any third party without our prior written consent.

Intellectual Property

We seek patent protection in the United States and internationally for DSUVIA, DZUVEO and Zalviso. Our policy is to pursue, maintain and defend patent rights developed internally and to protect the technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business. We cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our technology. We also rely on trade secrets to protect DSUVIA, DZUVEO and Zalviso. Our commercial success also depends in part on our non-infringement of the patents or proprietary rights of third parties. For a more comprehensive discussion of the risks related to our intellectual property, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” appearing elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Our success will depend significantly on our ability to:

• defend our patents;

• preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; and

We have established and continue to build proprietary positions for DSUVIA, DZUVEO and Zalviso and related technology in the United States and abroad.

As of December 31, 2020, we are the owner of record of 26 issued U.S. patents, which together provide coverage for sufentanil sublingual tablets, and the device components of Zalviso and DSUVIA. These patents provide coverage to at least 2027. We also hold nine issued European patents, each valid in at least eight countries in Europe. In addition, we own seven patents in Japan, eight in China and seven in Korea, and a number of other international patents which provide coverage to at least 2027. We are also pursuing a number of U.S. and foreign patent applications. The patent applications that we have filed and have not yet been granted may fail to result in issued patents in the United States or in foreign countries. Even if the patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge the patents.

We continue to seek and expand our patent protection for both compositions of matter and delivery devices, as well as methods of treatment related to DSUVIA, DZUVEO and Zalviso. In particular, we are pursuing additional patent protection for our DSUVIA, DZUVEO and Zalviso formulations, our Zalviso device, the combination of drugs and our Zalviso device, our DSUVIA and DZUVEO SDA, as well as to methods of treatment using such drug and device compositions.

We have filed for additional patent coverage in the United States, Europe as well as many other foreign jurisdictions including, Japan, China, India, Canada and Korea. If issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, we expect that these patents will expire between 2027 and 2031, excluding any additional term for patent term adjustments or patent term extensions in the United States. We note that the patent laws of foreign countries differ from those in United States, and the degree of protection afforded by foreign patents may be different from the protection offered by U.S. patents.

Further, we seek trademark protection in the United States and internationally where available and when appropriate. We have registered our ACELRX, DSUVIA and Zalviso marks in Class 5, “Pharmaceutical preparations for treating pain; pharmaceutical preparations for treating anxiety,” and Class 10, “Drug delivery systems; medical device, namely, a mechanical and electronic device used to administer medications, perform timed medication delivery, and to provide secure access to and delivery of medications,” in the United States.

Our ACELRX, DSUVIA and Zalviso marks are also registered in the European Union, as well as other countries. Our DZUVEO mark is registered in the European Union.

Competition

Our industry is highly competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. Our potential competitors include large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical and generic drug companies, and medical technology companies. We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our products are the safety, efficacy and tolerability profile, the patient and healthcare professional satisfaction with using our products in relation to available alternatives and the reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement of our products. Over the past year, we have monitored changes in the pharmaceutical industry in response to opioid use in the United States. Pharmaceutical companies engaged in the distribution and sale of opioids, in particular for the treatment of chronic pain, are refocusing their efforts in order to support responsible opioid use. While our products are designed for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain for use in medically supervised settings, rather than for the treatment of chronic pain or for outpatient use, these industry changes could impact the commercial success of DSUVIA, or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States.

DSUVIA competes, and Zalviso, if approved in the U.S., will compete, with a number of existing and future pharmaceuticals and drug delivery devices developed, manufactured and marketed by others. In particular, DSUVIA may compete with a wide variety of products and product candidates including (i) injectable opioid products, such as morphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone and meperidine; (ii) oral opioids such as oxycodone and hydrocodone; (iii) generic injectable local anesthetics, such as bupivacaine or branded formulations thereof; (iv) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDS, including ketorolac in intranasal or generic IV form, and IV meloxicam; and (v) transmucosal fentanyl products. Zalviso, if approved in the U.S., may compete with a number of opioid-based treatment options, including IV PCA pumps, oral PCA devices, and transdermal opioid PCAs.

Many of our competitors and potential competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of drug candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approval of products, and the commercialization of those products. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than we are in obtaining FDA approval for drugs and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ drugs or drug delivery systems may be more effective, have fewer adverse effects, be less expensive to develop and manufacture, or be more effectively marketed and sold than any product we may seek to commercialize. This may render our products obsolete or non-competitive. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new drugs enter the market, additional technologies become available, and competitors establish collaborative or licensing relationships, which may adversely affect our competitive position.

Pharmaceutical Manufacturing and Supply

We currently rely on contract manufacturers to produce sufentanil sublingual tablets for commercial production of DSUVIA and Zalviso under current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, with oversight by our internal managers. Equipment specific to the pharmaceutical manufacturing process was purchased and customized for us and is currently owned by us. We plan to continue to rely on contract manufacturers and, potentially, collaboration partners to manufacture commercial quantities of our products, if and when approved for marketing by the FDA. We currently rely on a single manufacturer for the commercial supplies of the active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, for DSUVIA and Zalviso, and intend to qualify a second source. We have identified other manufacturers that could satisfy our commercial supply and packaging requirements and we continue to evaluate those manufacturers.

Device Manufacturing and Supply

All contract manufacturers and component suppliers have been selected for their specific competencies in the manufacturing processes and materials that make up DSUVIA and Zalviso. We currently rely on single manufacturers for the commercial supplies of our drug components and packaging for DSUVIA and Zalviso, and do not currently have agreements in place for redundant supply or a second source for either DSUVIA or Zalviso. DSUVIA utilizes an SDA in the delivery of the tablets. FDA regulations require that materials be produced under cGMPs or Quality System Regulation, or QSR, as required for the respective unit operation within the manufacturing process. We outsource injection molding of all the plastic parts for the SDA, and product sub-assemblies; and filling, packaging and labeling of SDAs.

The device components of Zalviso are manufactured by contract manufacturers, component fabricators and secondary service providers. We outsource injection molding of all the plastic parts for the cartridge and device and product sub-assemblies; tablet cartridge filling and packaging; and assembly, packaging and labeling of the dispenser and controller.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing, export and import of products such as DSUVIA and Zalviso. Product candidates, such as Zalviso, must be approved by the FDA through the NDA process before they may legally be marketed in the United States.

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and its implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and complying with applicable laws and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply at any time during the product development and approval process, or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties. For example, on February 11, 2021, we received a warning letter from the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion, or OPDP, of the FDA relating to a banner advertisement we submitted to the OPDP on December 6, 2019 and a tabletop display we submitted on February 28, 2020, and resubmitted to the OPDP at its request on September 23, 2020. We submitted the materials to the OPDP pursuant to the FDA requirement that sponsors submit all promotional materials to the FDA at the time of their initial dissemination or publication. The FDA’s concerns identified in the letter include its view that the promotional material makes misleading claims and representations about the risks and efficacy of DSUVIA because the material does not reveal facts that are material in light of the representations made. As a result, we conducted a review of our marketing materials to identify any potential revisions in light of the letter. We responded to the FDA within the timeframe requested in the letter and sought guidance and clarification from the FDA on the concerns raised in the letter. We cannot give any assurances, however, that the FDA will be satisfied with our response to the letter or that such response will resolve the issues identified in the letter.

The process required by the FDA before a drug product may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

• submission to the FDA of an NDA for a new drug product;

• payment of application, annual program fees; and

• FDA review and approval of the NDA.

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources and we cannot be certain that approval for our product candidate, Zalviso, will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an Institutional Review Board, or IRB, can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug or biological product has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal trials and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP and QSR for medical device requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

The results of product development, preclinical trials and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on our drug products, proposed labeling and other relevant information, will be submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA for a new drug product, requesting approval to market the product in the United States. The submission of an NDA is subject to the payment of a substantial user fee; a waiver of such fee may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. During its review of an NDA, the FDA may inspect our manufacturers for GMP and QSR compliance, and our pivotal clinical trial sites for GCP compliance.

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, an NDA or supplement to an NDA must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may grant deferrals for submission of data or full or partial waivers.

The approval process is lengthy and difficult, and the FDA may refuse to approve an NDA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical data or other data and information. Even if such data and information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data. The FDA issues a Complete Response Letter at the conclusion of its review if the NDA is not yet deemed ready for approval. A Complete Response Letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing or information for the FDA to reconsider the application. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included.

If a product candidate does receive regulatory approval, the approval may be limited to specific conditions and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. DSUVIA was approved with a REMS to mitigate the risk of respiratory depression resulting from accidental exposure by ensuring that DSUVIA is dispensed only to patients in certified medically supervised healthcare settings. Zalviso, if approved, will also require a REMS, which can include a medication guide, patient package insert, a communication plan, elements to assure safe use and implementation system, and must include a timetable for assessment of the REMS. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized. In addition, the FDA may require post-approval testing which involves clinical trials designed to further assess a drug product’s safety and effectiveness after the NDA.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any drug products for which we receive FDA approval are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated clinical safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements. Phase 4 clinical trials are conducted after approval to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication or when otherwise requested by the FDA in the form of post marketing requirements or commitments. Failure to promptly conduct any required Phase 4 clinical trials could result in withdrawal of NDA approval. The FDA strictly regulates labeling, advertising, promotion and other types of information on products that are placed on the market. Drug products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. Further, manufacturers of drug products must continue to comply with cGMP requirements, which are extensive and require considerable time, resources and ongoing investment to ensure compliance. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented and other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

Drug product manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacturing and distribution of approved drug products are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. The cGMP requirements apply to all stages of the manufacturing process, including the production, processing, packaging, labeling, storage and shipment of the drug product. Manufacturers must establish validated systems to ensure that products meet specifications and regulatory standards, and test each product batch or lot prior to its release. In the case of Zalviso, the device component must comply with FDA’s Quality Systems Regulation.

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of our products. Future FDA and state inspections may identify compliance issues at the facilities of our contract manufacturers that may disrupt production or distribution or may require substantial resources to correct.

The FDA may withdraw a product approval if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market. Further, the failure to maintain compliance with regulatory requirements may result in administrative or judicial actions, such as fines, warning letters, holds on clinical trials, product recalls or seizures, product detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products, refusal to approve pending applications or supplements, restrictions on marketing or manufacturing, injunctions or civil or criminal penalties.

Foreign Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of our products to the extent we choose to sell any products outside of the United States.

In June 2018, the European Commission, or EC, granted marketing approval of DZUVEO for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe acute pain in medically monitored settings. We currently intend to commercialize and promote DZUVEO in Europe with a strategic partner, although we have not yet entered into such an arrangement.

We are responsible for maintaining Zalviso device regulatory approval in the EU in order to support the manufacturing and supply of Zalviso for commercial sales. We completed the Conformité Européenne approval process for the Zalviso device, more commonly known as a CE Mark approval. We received CE Mark approval in December 2014, which permits the commercial sale of the Zalviso device in the European Union. In connection with the CE Mark approval, we were also granted International Standards Organization, or ISO, 13485:2003 certification of our quality management system. This is an internationally recognized quality standard for medical devices. The CE Mark was originally issued by the British Standards Institution, or BSI, a Notified Body, or NB, located in the United Kingdom, or U.K., or BSI-U.K. We transferred the CE Mark file and certification to the Netherlands NB of BSI, or BSI-NL, to mitigate the uncertainty with regards to Brexit. The ISO certification issued through BSI-U.K. was upgraded in 2019 to the latest version of the standard, ISO 13485:2016 through BSI-U.K. in 2019 and remains in effect, regardless of Brexit. BSI ISO 13485:2016 certification recognizes that consistent quality policies and procedures are in place for the development, design and manufacturing of medical devices. The certification indicates that we have successfully implemented a quality system that conforms to ISO 13485 standards for medical devices. Certification to this standard is one of the key regulatory requirements for a CE Mark in the EU and EEA, as well as to meet equivalent requirements in other international markets.

Controlled Substances Regulations

Sufentanil, a Schedule II controlled substance, is the API in DSUVIA and Zalviso. Controlled substances are governed by the DEA. Similarly, sufentanil is regulated as a controlled substance in Europe and other territories outside of the U.S. The handling of controlled substances and/or drug product by us, our contract manufacturers, analytical laboratories, packagers and distributors, are regulated by the Controlled Substances Act and regulations thereunder.

The Drug Supply Chain Security Act of 2013, or DSCSA, imposes obligations on manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, among others, related to product tracking and tracing. Among the requirements are that manufacturers must provide certain information regarding the drug product to individuals and entities to which product ownership is transferred, label drug product with a product identifier, and keep certain records regarding the drug product. Further, manufacturers have drug product investigation, quarantine, disposition, and notification responsibilities related to counterfeit, diverted, stolen, and intentionally adulterated products, as well as products that are the subject of fraudulent transactions or which are otherwise unfit for distribution such that they would be reasonably likely to result in serious health consequences or death.

Unforeseen delays to the drug substance and drug product manufacture and supply chain may occur due to delays, errors or other unforeseen problems with the permitting and quota process. Also, any one of our suppliers, contract manufacturers, laboratories, packagers and/or distributors could be the subject of DEA violations and enforcement could lead to delays or even loss of DEA license by the contractors.

Federal and State Fraud and Abuse and Data Privacy and Security and Transparency Laws and Regulations

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, federal and state healthcare laws restrict certain business practices in the pharmaceutical industry. These laws include, but are not limited to, anti-kickback, false claims, data privacy and security, and transparency statutes and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving 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 purchasing, leasing or ordering of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare program. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value, including for example, gifts, discounts, the furnishing of supplies or equipment, credit arrangements, payments of cash, waivers of payment, ownership interests and providing anything at less than its fair market value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers and/or formulary managers on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices involving remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce purchasing, leasing or ordering may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. The failure to satisfy all of the requirements of an applicable exception or safe harbor do 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 an exception or safe harbor.

Additionally, the intent standard under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively, the Affordable Care Act to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Rather, if “one purpose” of the remuneration is to induce referrals, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute is violated. In addition, the Affordable Care Act codified case law that a claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute also constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act (discussed below).

The federal civil False Claims Act and related laws prohibit, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval to 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. Pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for, among other things, allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses. Further, the Civil Monetary Penalties Law imposes penalties against any person or entity who, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to, among others, a federal healthcare program that the person knows or should know is for a medical or other item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

In addition, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their implementing regulations, imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates that are independent contractors or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. International laws, such as the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, (EU 2016/679) and Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection, regulate the processing of personal data within the European Union and between countries in the European Union and countries outside of the European Union, including the United States. Failure to provide adequate privacy protections and maintain compliance with safe harbor mechanisms could jeopardize business transactions across borders and result in significant penalties.

Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act within the Affordable Care Act and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals and medical supplies, for which federal healthcare program payment is available, report information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians, (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) 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. Beginning in 2022, applicable manufacturers also will be required to report such information regarding its payments and other transfers of value to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwives during the previous year.

Also, many states have similar healthcare statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer. FDA and some states require the posting of information relating to clinical studies. In addition, certain states such as California require pharmaceutical companies to implement a comprehensive compliance program that includes a limit on expenditures for, or payments to, individual medical or health professionals. Moreover, several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to, among other things, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales and marketing activities, report information related to drug pricing, require the registration of sales representatives, and prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the health regulatory laws described above or any other laws that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including potentially significant criminal, civil and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion of products from reimbursement under government programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws 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. To the extent that any of our products will be sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws and implementation of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or transfers of value to healthcare professionals.

Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

In both domestic and foreign markets, our sales of any approved products will depend in part on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payers. Third-party payers include government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Sales of our products will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our products will be paid by third-party payers. These third-party payers are increasingly focused on containing healthcare costs by challenging the price and examining the cost-effectiveness of medical products and services. In addition, significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. Such payers may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Third-party payers and hospitals may refuse to include a particular branded drug in their formularies or otherwise restrict patient access to a branded drug when a less costly generic equivalent or other alternative is available. Because each third-party payer individually approves coverage and reimbursement levels, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement is a time-consuming, costly and sometimes unpredictable process. We may be required to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of any product to each third-party payer and hospital separately with no assurance that approval would be obtained, and we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of our products. This process could delay the market acceptance of any product and could have a negative effect on our future revenues and operating results. We cannot be certain that DSUVIA and Zalviso, once approved for commercial sale, will be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. Because coverage and reimbursement determinations are made on a payer-by-payer basis, obtaining acceptable coverage and reimbursement from one payer does not guarantee that we will obtain similar acceptable coverage or reimbursement from another payer. If we are unable to obtain coverage of, and adequate reimbursement and payment levels for, our approved products from third-party payers, physicians may limit how much or under what circumstances they will prescribe or administer them. This in turn could affect our ability to successfully commercialize our products and impact our profitability, results of operations, financial condition and future success. Third-party payers, government healthcare programs, wholesalers, group purchasing organizations, and hospitals frequently require that pharmaceutical companies negotiate agreements that provide discounts or rebates from list prices. We expect increasing pressure to offer larger discounts or discounts to a greater number of these organizations to maintain acceptable reimbursement levels for and access to our products. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by these mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs, private payers, wholesalers, group purchasing organizations, hospitals, and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies. In addition, if our competitors reduce the prices of their products, or otherwise demonstrate that they are better or more cost effective than our products, this may result in a greater level of reimbursement for their products relative to our products, which would reduce sales of our products and harm our results of operations.

There have been, and there will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to commercialize our products profitably. We anticipate that the federal and state legislatures and the private sector will continue to consider and may adopt and implement healthcare policies, such as the Affordable Care Act, intended to curb rising healthcare costs. These cost containment measures may include: controls on government-funded reimbursement for drugs; new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates to government health care programs; controls on healthcare providers; challenges to or limits on the pricing of drugs, including pricing controls, or limits or prohibitions on reimbursement for specific products through other means; requirements to try less expensive products or generics before a more expensive branded product; and public funding for cost effectiveness research, which may be used by government and private third-party payers to make coverage and payment decisions.

In addition, in many foreign countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to government control. In some non-U.S. jurisdictions, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the EU provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. We may face competition for our products from lower-priced products in foreign countries that have placed price controls on pharmaceutical products. In addition, there may be importation of foreign products that compete with our own products, which could negatively impact our profitability.

Healthcare Reform

In the United States and foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations as we begin to commercialize our products. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state level that seek to reduce healthcare costs. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for our products for which we receive marketing approval. However, any negotiated prices for our future products will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain from non-governmental payers. Moreover, private payers often follow federal healthcare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates.

Furthermore, political, economic and regulatory influences are subjecting the healthcare industry in the United States to fundamental change. Initiatives to reduce the federal deficit and to reform healthcare delivery are increasing cost-containment efforts. We anticipate that Congress, state legislatures and the private sector will continue to review and assess alternative benefits, controls on healthcare spending through limitations on the growth of private health insurance premiums and Medicare and Medicaid spending, the creation of large insurance purchasing groups, price controls on pharmaceuticals and other fundamental changes to the healthcare delivery system. Any proposed or actual changes could limit or eliminate our spending on development projects and affect our ultimate profitability.

In the United States, the Affordable Care Act was enacted in an effort to, among other things, broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Aspects of PPACA that may impact our business include:

There remain judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. Currently, Congress has considered legislation that would repeal, or repeal and replace all or part of the Affordable Care Act. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, several bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the Affordable Care Act have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Affordable Care Act on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate”. Additionally, the 2020 federal spending package permanently eliminated, effective January 1, 2020, the Affordable Care Act’s mandated “Cadillac” tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax and, effective January 1, 2021, also eliminated the health insurer tax. In December 2018, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain Affordable Care Act qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the Affordable Care Act risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of federal district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. Further, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or the BBA, among other things, amends the Affordable Care Act, effective January 1, 2019, to increase from 50% to 70% the point-of-sale discount that is owed by pharmaceutical manufacturers who participate in Medicare Part D and to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Additionally, on December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the District Court ruling that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the Affordable Care Act are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing this case, but it is unknown when a decision will be reached. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through May 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act. It is unclear how the Supreme Court ruling, other such litigation, and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the Affordable Care Act. We expect that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as it may be amended or repealed in the future, and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our ability to successfully commercialize DSUVIA, and if approved in the United States, Zalviso.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. Aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year went into effect on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2030 unless Congressional action is taken. However, COVID-19 relief legislation suspended the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021. The American Taxpayer Relief Act further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals.

Moreover, the DSCSA imposes additional obligations on manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, among others, related to product tracking and tracing. Among the requirements of this new legislation, manufacturers will be required to provide certain information regarding the drug product to individuals and entities to which product ownership is transferred, label drug product with a product identifier, and keep certain records regarding the drug product. AcelRx is engaging Contract Manufacturing Organizations, or CMOs, and solution providers in serialization to implement the requirements of the DSCSA on our products. The acceptability of the approach that AcelRx is implementing will be ultimately subject to review by the FDA.

Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and further restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We are not sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our products, if any, may be.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our products may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

There has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. For example, at the federal level, the Trump administration’s budget proposal for the fiscal year 2021 included a $135 billion allowance to support legislative proposals seeking to reduce drug prices, increase competition, lower out-of-pocket drug costs for patients, and increase patient access to lower-cost generic and biosimilar drugs. On July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the Trump administration announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that attempt to implement several of the administration’s proposals. On November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The implementation of this rule has been delayed by the Biden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, the implementation of which has also been delayed pending review by the Biden administration until March 22, 2021. Further, on November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. On December 28, 2020, the U.S. District Court in Northern California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against implementation of the interim final rule. However, it is unclear whether the Biden administration will work to reverse these measures or pursue similar policy initiatives. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

Further, there may continue to be additional proposals relating to the reform of the U.S. healthcare system, some of which could further limit the prices we are able to charge for our products, or the amounts of reimbursement available for our products. If future legislation were to impose direct governmental price controls and access restrictions, it could have a significant adverse impact on our business. Managed care organizations, as well as Medicaid and other government agencies, continue to seek price discounts. Some states have implemented, and other states are considering, price controls or patient access constraints under the Medicaid program, and some states are considering price-control regimes that would apply to broader segments of their populations that are not Medicaid-eligible. Due to the volatility in the current economic and market dynamics, we are unable to predict the impact of any unforeseen or unknown legislative, regulatory, payer or policy actions, which may include cost containment and other healthcare reform measures. Such policy actions could have a material adverse impact on our profitability.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2020, we employed 54 full-time employees, approximately half of whom work out of our corporate offices in Redwood City, CA. The rest of our employees work remotely in various locations throughout the United States and are members of our commercial team. We have completed a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or DEI, training to reflect our commitment to DEI as an organization and build awareness. AcelRx is committed to pay equity, regardless of gender or race/ethnicity, and conducts pay equity analyses on an annual basis.

We invest in our workforce by offering competitive salaries, wages, and benefits. We endeavor to foster a strong sense of ownership by offering all employees stock options and restricted stock units under our broad-based stock incentive program. We also offer comprehensive and locally relevant benefits for all eligible employees. We recognize and support the growth and development of our employees.

We have implemented COVID-19 policies at our Redwood City office designed to ensure the safety and well-being of all employees and the people associated with them. In addition, we have implemented COVID-19 policies for our sales force to ensure safe access to hospitals and other medically supervised settings, as appropriate. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, to reduce risk, our corporate employees have been asked to work remotely, and all employees have been asked to avoid all non-essential travel, adhere to good hygiene practices, and engage in physical distancing.

None of our employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Corporate Information

We were originally incorporated as SuRx, Inc. in Delaware on July 13, 2005. We subsequently changed our name to AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on August 13, 2006. We file electronically with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. We make available on our website at www.acelrx.com, free of charge, copies of these reports as soon as reasonably practicable after filing these reports with, or furnishing them to, the SEC.

Item1A. Risk Factors

Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and uncertainties. You should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all of the other information in this report, including our financial statements and notes thereto. If any of the following risks actually materialize, our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and future prospects could be materially harmed, the price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment.

Summary Risk Factors

Our business is subject to numerous risks, as more fully described in this section below this summary. You should read these risks before you invest in our common stock. We may be unable, for many reasons, including those that are beyond our control, to implement our business strategy. In particular, our risks include:

● Our business is being adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

● The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile.

Risks Related to COVID-19 Pandemic

Our business is being adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our business has been adversely affected by the recent COVID-19 outbreak. Federal, state, local and foreign government orders on account of the COVID-19 pandemic are preventing us from conducting certain activities and obtaining supplies required to manufacture and deliver certain components for Zalviso. Furthermore, following local and state government orders in California and the counties in which our corporate office is located and many of our employees live, we implemented work from home policies, which are limiting certain of our operations. If the COVID-19 outbreak continues, we may need to limit operations further and implement additional limitations, such as extending our work from home policies. Moreover, some hospitals and other healthcare facilities have implemented policies that limit access of our representatives to such facilities, which is causing a delay to, and thwarting, our educational and promotional efforts with respect to such facilities. Some governments, hospitals and doctors, as a measure to combat the further spread of COVID-19, have reduced the number of procedures in which DSUVIA is administered as part of the pain treatment program, and temporarily halted performing elective surgeries, which will adversely impact the levels of our sales relating to such procedures. The ultimate impact of the COVID-19 outbreak is highly uncertain and subject to change. We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these effects could have a material impact on our operations, and we will continue to monitor the COVID-19 situation closely.

Risks Related to Commercialization of DSUVIA® and Zalviso®

Our success is highly dependent on our ability to successfully commercialize DSUVIA. To the extent DSUVIA is not commercially successful, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially harmed.

We invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources to develop and gain regulatory approval for DSUVIA and expect to continue making significant investments to commercialize DSUVIA. We believe our success is highly dependent on, and a significant portion of the value of our company relates to, our ability to successfully commercialize DSUVIA in the United States. The commercial success of DSUVIA depends heavily on numerous factors, including:

• our ability to market, sell, and distribute DSUVIA;

• acceptance of DSUVIA by physicians, patients and the healthcare community;

• acceptance of pricing and placement of DSUVIA on payers’ formularies;

• continued demonstration of an acceptable safety profile of DSUVIA; and

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, some hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers and other healthcare facilities have barred visitors that are not caregivers or mission-critical and we have no visibility as to when these restrictions on access will be lifted for all of our customers. As a result, our commercial and medical affairs teams’ educational and promotional efforts have been substantially reduced, and in some cases, stopped. As a result, we expect our near-term sales volumes to be adversely impacted for as long as access to healthcare facilities by our commercial and medical affairs personnel continues to be limited.

If we are unable to successfully commercialize DSUVIA, our business, financial condition, and results of operations will be materially harmed.

The commercial success of DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, as well as DZUVEO and Zalviso in Europe, will depend upon the acceptance of these products by the medical community, including physicians, nurses, patients, and pharmacy and therapeutics committees.

The degree of market acceptance of DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, or DZUVEO and Zalviso in Europe, will depend on a number of factors, including:

• demonstration of clinical safety and efficacy compared to other products;

• restrictions or limitations placed on DSUVIA due to the REMS program;

• availability of alternative treatments;

• existing capital investment by hospitals in IV PCA technology;

• pricing and cost-effectiveness;

• our ability to obtain formulary approval; and,

If our approved products do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, nurses, patients and pharmacy and therapeutics committees, we may not generate sufficient revenue and become or remain profitable.

If we are unable to maintain or grow our sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may be unable to generate sufficient product revenue.

In order to commercialize DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, we must maintain or grow internal sales, marketing, distribution, managerial and other capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. We have entered into agreements with third parties for the distribution of DSUVIA and plan to enter into such agreements for Zalviso, if approved, in the United States; however, if these third parties do not perform as expected or there are delays in establishing such relationships for Zalviso, if approved, our ability to effectively distribute products would suffer.

We entered into a collaboration with Grünenthal for the commercialization of Zalviso in Europe and Australia and, during the three months ended June 30, 2020, Grünenthal terminated the collaboration, effective November 13, 2020. The terms of the Grünenthal Agreements were extended to May 2021 to enable Grünenthal to sell down its Zalviso inventory, a right it had under the Grünenthal Agreements. The rights to market and sell Zalviso in the Territory revert back to us in May 2021. We intend to enter into additional strategic partnerships with third parties to commercialize our products outside of the United States, including a replacement license agreement for Zalviso in Europe. Per the terms of royalty monetization arrangement with PDL BioPharma, Inc., or PDL, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to negotiate a replacement license agreement. Accordingly, even if we are able to enter into a replacement license agreement, and that licensee is successful in commercializing Zalviso in Europe, we will receive only a portion of any royalties until the capped amount owing to PDL is reached. On August 31, 2020, PDL announced it sold its royalty interest for Zalviso to SWK Funding, LLC, or SWK. The EC granted marketing approval of DZUVEO in June 2018. We have not yet entered into a collaboration agreement with a strategic partner for the commercialization of DZUVEO in Europe, and there can be no assurance that we will successfully enter into such an agreement. We may also consider the option to enter into strategic partnerships for DSUVIA, or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States. We face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners, and these strategic partnerships can be intricate and time consuming to negotiate and document.

We may not be able to negotiate future strategic partnerships on acceptable terms, or at all. We are unable to predict when, if ever, we will enter into any strategic partnerships because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with establishing strategic partnerships. Our current or future collaboration partners, if any, may not dedicate sufficient resources to the commercialization of Zalviso or DSUVIA/DZUVEO, or may otherwise fail in their commercialization due to factors beyond our control. If we are unable to establish effective collaborations to enable the sale of our products to healthcare professionals and in geographical regions that will not be covered by our own marketing and sales force, or if our potential future collaboration partners do not successfully commercialize our products, our ability to generate revenues from product sales will be adversely affected.

If we are unable to maintain or grow adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to generate sufficient product revenue and become profitable. We compete with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

In March 2020, we reduced the size of our commercial team and, given our reduced workforce, we may experience difficulties in retaining our existing employees and managing our operations, including our continued commercialization of DSUVIA.

In March 2020, we reduced the size of our commercial team to eliminate the overlap with the Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc. commercial team under our co-promotion arrangement and reduce operating expenses. The restructuring resulted in the elimination of 30 positions, or approximately 33% of our workforce. As of December 31, 2020, we had approximately 25 sales representatives, including those under the Promotion Agreement with La Jolla.

We will need to retain and maintain our existing sales, managerial, operational, finance and other personnel and resources in order to continue the commercialization of DSUVIA and manage our operations. Our current infrastructure may be inadequate to support our strategy and our workforce reduction may be disruptive to our operations, may negatively affect our productivity, and constrain our commercialization activities. For example, our workforce reduction could yield unanticipated consequences, such as attrition beyond planned staff reductions, negative impact on employee morale and our corporate culture, or increase difficulties in our day-to-day operations and prevent us from successfully commercializing DSUVIA as rapidly as planned. If we encounter such unanticipated consequences, we may have difficulty retaining and attracting personnel. In addition, the implementation of any additional workforce or expense reduction programs may divert the efforts of our management team and other key employees, which could adversely affect our business. Furthermore, we may not realize, in full or in part, the anticipated benefits, savings and improvements in our cost structure from our cost reduction plan, due to unforeseen difficulties, delays or unexpected costs. If we are unable to realize the expected operational efficiencies and cost savings from the cost reduction plan, our operating results and financial condition would be adversely affected.

Guidelines and recommendations published by government agencies, as well as non-governmental organizations, and existing laws and regulations can reduce the use of DSUVIA, and Zalviso, if approved in the United States.

Government agencies and non-governmental organizations promulgate regulations and guidelines applicable to certain drug classes that may include DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved in the United States. Recommendations of government agencies or non-governmental organizations may relate to such matters as maximum quantities dispensed to patients, dosage, route of administration, and use of concomitant therapies. Government agencies and non-governmental organizations have offered commentary and guidelines on the use of opioid-containing products. We are uncertain how these activities and guidelines may impact DSUVIA and our ability to gain marketing approval of Zalviso in the United States. Regulations or guidelines suggesting the reduced use of certain drug classes that may include DSUVIA or Zalviso, or the use of competitive or alternative products as the standard-of-care to be followed by patients and healthcare providers, could result in decreased use of DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, or negatively impact our ability to gain market acceptance and market share. The U.S. government and state legislatures have prioritized combatting the growing misuse and addiction to opioids and opioid overdose deaths and have enacted legislation and regulations as well as other measures intended to fight the opioid epidemic. Addressing opioid drug abuse is a priority for the current U.S. administration and the FDA and is part of a broader initiative led by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS. Overall, there is greater scrutiny of entities involved in the manufacture, sale and distribution of opioids. These initiatives, existing laws and regulations, and any negative publicity related to opioids may have a material impact on our business and our ability to manufacture opioid products.

Governmental investigations, inquiries, and regulatory actions and lawsuits brought against us by government agencies and private parties with respect to our commercialization of opioids could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

As a result of greater public awareness of the public health issue of opioid abuse, there has been increased scrutiny of, and investigation into, the commercial practices of opioid manufacturers by state and federal agencies. As a result of our manufacturing and commercial sale of DSUVIA in the United States and Zalviso in Europe, we could become the subject of federal, state and foreign government investigations and enforcement actions, focused on the misuse and abuse of opioid medications.

In addition, a significant number of lawsuits have been filed against opioid manufacturers, distributors, and others in the supply chain by cities, counties, state Attorney's General and private persons seeking to hold them accountable for opioid misuse and abuse. The lawsuits assert a variety of claims, including, but not limited to, public nuisance, negligence, civil conspiracy, fraud, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, or similar state laws, violations of state Controlled Substance Acts or state False Claims Acts, product liability, consumer fraud, unfair or deceptive trade practices, false advertising, insurance fraud, unjust enrichment and other common law and statutory claims arising from defendants’ manufacturing, distribution, marketing and promotion of opioids and seek restitution, damages, injunctive and other relief and attorneys’ fees and costs. The claims generally are based on alleged misrepresentations and/or omissions in connection with the sale and marketing of prescription opioid medications and/or an alleged failure to take adequate steps to prevent abuse and diversion. While DSUVIA is designed for use solely in certified medically supervised healthcare settings and administered only by a healthcare professional in these settings, and is not distributed or available at retail pharmacies to patients by prescription, we can provide no assurance that parties will not file lawsuits of this type against us in the future. In addition, current public perceptions of the public health issue of opioid abuse may present challenges to favorable resolution of any potential claims. Accordingly, we cannot predict whether we may become subject to these kinds of investigations and lawsuits in the future, and if we were to be named as a defendant in such actions, we cannot predict the ultimate outcome. Any allegations against us may negatively affect our business in various ways, including through harm to our reputation.

If we were required to defend ourselves in these matters, we would likely incur significant legal costs and could in the future be required to pay significant amounts as a result of fines, penalties, settlements or judgments. It is unlikely that our current product liability insurance would fully cover these potential liabilities, if at all. Moreover, we may be unable to maintain insurance in the future on acceptable terms or with adequate coverage against potential liabilities or other losses. For more information about our product liability insurance and exclusions therefrom, please see the risk factor entitled “We face potential product liability claims, and, if such claims are successful, we may incur substantial liability” elsewhere in this section. The resolution of one or more of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Furthermore, in the current climate, stories regarding prescription drug abuse and the diversion of opioids and other controlled substances are frequently in the media or advocated by public interest groups. Unfavorable publicity regarding the use or misuse of opioid drugs, the limitations of abuse-deterrent formulations, the ability of drug abusers to discover previously unknown ways to abuse opioid products, public inquiries and investigations into prescription drug abuse, litigation, or regulatory activity regarding sales, marketing, distribution or storage of opioids could have a material adverse effect on our reputation and impact on the results of litigation.

Finally, various government entities, including Congress, state legislatures or other policy-making bodies, or public interest groups have in the past and may in the future hold hearings, conduct investigations and/or issue reports calling attention to the opioid crisis, and may mention or criticize the perceived role of manufacturers, including us, in the opioid crisis. Similarly, press organizations have and likely will continue to report on these issues, and such reporting may result in adverse publicity for us, resulting in reputational harm.

A key part of our business strategy is to establish collaborative relationships to commercialize and fund development and approval of our products, particularly outside of the United States. We may not succeed in establishing and maintaining collaborative relationships, which may significantly limit our ability to develop and commercialize our products successfully, if at all.

We will need to establish and maintain successful collaborative relationships to obtain international sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for our products. The process of establishing and maintaining collaborative relationships is difficult, time-consuming and involves significant uncertainty. For example:

If any collaborator fails to fulfill its responsibilities in a timely manner, or at all, any research, clinical development, manufacturing or commercialization efforts pursuant to that collaboration could be delayed or terminated, or it may be necessary for us to assume responsibility for expenses or activities that would otherwise have been the responsibility of our collaborator. For example, Grünenthal has terminated the collaboration agreement for the commercialization of Zalviso in Europe. The rights to market and sell Zalviso in the Territory revert back to us in May 2021. We have a continuing obligation, through the term of the Royalty Monetization with PDL, to use commercially reasonable efforts to negotiate a replacement license agreement, or New Arrangement. On August 31, 2020, PDL announced it sold its royalty interest for Zalviso to SWK. If we are unable to establish and maintain collaborative relationships on acceptable terms or to successfully and timely transition terminated collaborative agreements, including entering into a New Arrangement for Zalviso in Europe, we may have to undertake development and commercialization activities at our own expense or find alternative sources of capital.

Approval of Zalviso and DZUVEO in Europe has resulted in a variety of risks associated with international operations that could materially adversely affect our business.

Our collaboration with Grünenthal for Zalviso required us to supply product to support the European commercialization of Zalviso and it is possible that any New Arrangement would also include such a requirement. In addition, with the June 2018 approval of DZUVEO in Europe, we intend to enter into agreements with third parties to market DZUVEO in Europe, which may also require us to supply product to those third parties. We may be subject to additional risks related to entering into international business relationships, including:

• reduced protection for intellectual property rights;

• unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers and regulatory requirements;

Any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business.

If we, or current and potential partners, are unable to compete effectively, our products may not reach their commercial potential.

The U.S. biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by intense competition and cost pressure. DSUVIA competes, and Zalviso, if approved in the U.S., will compete, with a number of existing and future pharmaceuticals and drug delivery devices developed, manufactured and marketed by others. In particular, DSUVIA may compete with a wide variety of products and product candidates including (i) injectable opioid products, such as morphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone and meperidine; (ii) oral opioids such as oxycodone and hydrocodone; (iii) generic injectable local anesthetics, such as bupivacaine or branded formulations thereof; (iv) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDS, including ketorolac in intranasal or generic IV form, and IV meloxicam; and (v) transmucosal fentanyl products. Zalviso, if approved in the U.S., may compete with a number of opioid-based treatment options, including IV PCA pumps, oral PCA devices, and transdermal opioid PCAs.

Key competitive factors affecting the commercial success of our approved products are likely to be efficacy, safety profile, reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement. Many of our competitors and potential competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of drug candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approval of products, and the commercialization of those products. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than we are in obtaining FDA approval for drugs and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ drugs or drug delivery systems may be more effective, have fewer adverse effects, be less expensive to develop and manufacture, or be more effectively marketed and sold than any product we may seek to commercialize. This may render our products obsolete or non-competitive. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new drugs enter the market, additional technologies become available, and competitors establish collaborative or licensing relationships, which may adversely affect our competitive position. These and other competitive risks may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or sustain profitable operations.

Hospital or other health care facility formulary approvals for DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States may not be achieved, or could be subject to certain restrictions, which could make it difficult for us to sell our products.

Obtaining hospital or other health care facility formulary approvals can be an expensive and time-consuming process. We cannot be certain if and when we will obtain formulary approvals to allow us to sell our products into our target markets. In particular, the restrictions on our commercial and medical affairs teams’ access to hospitals and other health care facilities has adversely impacted the number of formulary approvals we anticipated achieving in 2020, and for as long as these restrictions remain in place, or new restrictions are implemented, we may have limited visibility or difficulties in obtaining these formulary approvals. Failure to obtain timely formulary approval will limit our commercial success. If we are successful in obtaining formulary approvals, we may need to complete evaluation programs whereby DSUVIA, or Zalviso, if approved, is used on a limited basis for certain patient types. The evaluation period may last several months and there can be no assurance that use during the evaluation period will lead to formulary approvals of DSUVIA, or Zalviso, if approved. Further, even successful formulary approvals may be subject to certain restrictions based on patient type or hospital protocol. Failure to obtain timely formulary approvals for DSUVIA, or Zalviso, if approved, would materially adversely affect our ability to attain or sustain profitable operations.

Coverage and adequate reimbursement may not be available for DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, or DZUVEO or Zalviso in Europe, which could make it difficult for us, or our partners, to sell our products profitably.

Our ability to commercialize DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, and any future collaboration partner’s ability to commercialize DZUVEO or Zalviso in Europe successfully will depend, in part, on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement will be available from government payer programs at the federal and state levels, authorities, including Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers, managed care plans and other third-party payers.

No uniform policy requirement for coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payers in the United States or Europe. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payer to payer. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payer separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Our inability to promptly obtain and sufficiently maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement rates from third party payers could significantly harm our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize our approved drugs and our overall financial condition.

A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and other third-party payers have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medical products. There have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in the United States and in some foreign jurisdictions that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. These legislative and/or regulatory changes may negatively impact the reimbursement for our products, following approval. The availability of numerous generic pain medications may also substantially reduce the likelihood of reimbursement for DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, and DSUVIA/DZUVEO and Zalviso in Europe and elsewhere. The application of user fees to generic drug products may expedite the approval of additional pain medication generic drugs. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with our sales of DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, European sales of Zalviso, and future product sales of DZUVEO, due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. If we fail to successfully secure and maintain reimbursement coverage for our products or are significantly delayed in doing so, we will have difficulty achieving market acceptance of our products and our business will be harmed.

Furthermore, market acceptance and sales of our products will depend on reimbursement policies and may be affected by future healthcare reform measures. Government authorities and third-party payers, such as private health insurers, hospitals and health maintenance organizations, decide which drugs they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, or DZUVEO or Zalviso in Europe. Also, reimbursement amounts may reduce the demand for, or the price of, our products. For example, we anticipate we may need comparator studies of DZUVEO in Europe to ensure premium reimbursement in certain countries. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, or DZUVEO or Zalviso in Europe.

Additionally, the regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drugs vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a product before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenues able to be generated from the sale of the product in that country. For example, separate pricing and reimbursement approvals may impact any future collaboration partners’ ability to market and successfully commercialize our products in the 27 member states of the European Union. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in DSUVIA in the United States, or Zalviso, even after obtaining FDA marketing approval.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses.

If we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses of our products, including DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, we may become subject to significant liability. Such enforcement has become more common in the industry. The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about prescription drug products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. While we have received marketing approval for DSUVIA for our proposed indication, physicians may nevertheless use our products for their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label, if the physicians personally believe in their professional medical judgment it could be used in such manner. However, if the FDA determines that our promotional materials or training constitutes promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance of an untitled letter, a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties and a requirement for corrective advertising, including Dear Doctor letters. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action if they consider our promotional or training materials to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, contractual damages, reputational harm, increased losses and diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. The FDA or other enforcement authorities could also request that we enter into a consent decree or a corporate integrity agreement or seek a permanent injunction against us under which specified promotional conduct is monitored, changed or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of DSUVIA or Zalviso, if approved, in the United States, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

If we are unable to establish and maintain relationships with group purchasing organizations any future revenues or future profitability could be jeopardized.

Many end-users of pharmaceutical products have relationships with group purchasing organizations, or GPOs, whereby such GPOs provide such end-users access to a broad range of pharmaceutical products from multiple suppliers at competitive prices and, in certain cases, exercise considerable influence over the drug purchasing decisions of such end-users. Hospitals and other end-users contract with the GPO of their choice for their purchasing needs. We expect to derive revenue from end-user customers that are members of GPOs for DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved. Establishing and maintaining strong relationships with these GPOs will require us to be a reliable supplier, remain price competitive and comply with FDA regulations. The GPOs with whom we have relationships may have relationships with manufacturers that sell competing products, and such GPOs may earn higher margins from these products or combinations of competing products or may prefer products other than ours for other reasons. If we are unable to establish or maintain our GPO relationships, sales of DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, and related revenues could be negatively impacted.

We intend to rely on a limited number of distributors and pharmaceutical wholesalers to distribute DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, in the United States.

We intend to rely primarily upon distributors and pharmaceutical wholesalers in connection with the distribution of DSUVIA and Zalviso, if approved, in the United States. As part of the DSUVIA REMS program, we monitor distribution and audit wholesalers’ data and will monitor such data from other distributors. If our distributors and wholesalers do not comply with the DSUVIA REMS requirements, or if we are unable to establish or maintain our business relationships with these distributors and pharmaceutical wholesalers on commercially acceptable terms, or if our distributors and wholesalers are unable to distribute our drugs for regulatory, compliance or any other reason, it could have a material adverse effect on our sales and may prevent us from achieving profitability.

Risks Related to Clinical Development and Regulatory Approval

Existing and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to commercialize our products and affect the prices we may obtain.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, the legislative landscape continues to evolve, including changes to the regulation of opioid-containing products. There have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding healthcare systems that could prevent or delay marketing approval of Zalviso outside of Europe. These changes will restrict or regulate post-approval activities for DSUVIA, DZUVEO and Zalviso, and affect our ability to profitably sell any products for which we obtain marketing approval. For example, in February 2016, the FDA announced a comprehensive action plan to take concrete steps towards reducing the impact of opioid abuse on American families and communities. As part of this plan, the FDA announced that it intended to review product and labeling decisions and re-examine the risk-benefit paradigm for opioids. In June 2019, the FDA issued draft guidance related to a new benefit/risk framework for new opioid analgesic products, which proposes that the new product candidate show some benefit over an existing product. In September 2019, the FDA held a public hearing to receive stakeholder input on the approval process for new opioids. In January 2020, FDA’s Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee recommended against the approval of a new opioid analgesic, oxycodegol, the NDA for which was subsequently withdrawn by its sponsor. The timing of the resubmission of the Zalviso NDA is dependent upon the finalization of the FDA’s new opioid approval guidelines and process.

In the European Union, or EU, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to government control. The EU also provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. In addition, the EMA has a “sunset clause” which provides that the marketing authorization of a medicine will cease to be valid if it is not placed on the market within three years of the authorization being granted or if it is removed from the market for three consecutive years; however, the European Commission has extended this date to March 1, 2022 for DZUVEO.

In the United States, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act was enacted in an effort to, among other things, broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Aspects of the Affordable Care Act that may impact our business include:

The Affordable Care Act continues to substantially change health care financing and delivery by both governmental and private insurers, which may increase our regulatory burdens and operating costs.

There remain judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, several bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the Affordable Care Act have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 includes a provision that repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Affordable Care Act on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate”. Additionally, the 2020 federal spending package permanently eliminated, effective January 1, 2020, the Affordable Care Act’s mandated “Cadillac” tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax, and effective January 1, 2021, also eliminated the health insurer tax. In December 2018, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, published a final rule, effective in 2020, permitting further collections and payments to and from certain Affordable Care Act qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the Affordable Care Act risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of federal district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. Further, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or the BBA, among other things, amended the Affordable Care Act, effective January 1, 2019, to increase from 50% to 70% the point-of-sale discount that is owed by pharmaceutical manufacturers who participate in Medicare Part D and to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Additionally, on December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the District Court ruling that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the Affordable Care Act are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing this case, but it is unknown when a decision will be reached. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through May 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act. It is unclear how the Supreme Court ruling, other such litigation and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the Affordable Care Act. We expect that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as it may be amended or repealed in the future, and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our industry generally and on our ability to successfully commercialize our products. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our products may lose regulatory approval and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. Aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year went into effect on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2030 unless Congressional action is taken. However, COVID-19 support legislation suspended the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, and extended the sequester by one year, through 2030. The American Taxpayer Relief Act further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals.

Moreover, the Drug Supply Chain Security Act of 2013 imposes additional obligations on manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, among others, related to product tracking and tracing. Among the requirements of this legislation, manufacturers are required to provide certain information regarding the drug product to individuals and entities to which product ownership is transferred, label drug product with a product identifier, and keep certain records regarding the drug product.

In the United States, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. At the federal level, the Trump administration’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2021 included a $135 billion allowance to support legislative proposals seeking to reduce drug prices, increase competition, lower out-of-pocket drug costs for patients, and increase patient access to lower-cost generic and biosimilar drugs. On March 10, 2020, the Trump administration sent “principles” for drug pricing to Congress, calling for legislation that would, among other things, cap Medicare Part D beneficiary out-of-pocket pharmacy expenses, provide an option to cap Medicare Part D beneficiary monthly out-of-pocket expenses, and place limits on pharmaceutical price increases. Additionally, the Trump Administration previously released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contained proposals to increase manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. On July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, President Trump announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that attempt to implement several of the administration’s proposals On November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, the implementation of which has also been delayed pending review by the Biden administration until March 22, 2021. Further, on November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. On December 28, 2020, the U.S. District Court in Northern California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against implementation of the interim final rule. However, it is unclear whether the Biden administration will work to reverse these measures or pursue similar policy initiatives. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Furthermore, even after initial price and reimbursement approvals, reductions in prices and changes in reimbursement levels can be triggered by multiple factors, including reference pricing systems and publication of discounts by third party payers or authorities in other countries. In Europe, prices can be reduced further by parallel distribution and parallel trade, i.e. arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced countries. If any of these events occur, revenue from sales of Zalviso and DZUVEO in Europe would be negatively affected.

We expect that additional healthcare reform measures will be adopted within and outside the United States in the future, any of which could negatively impact our business. For instance, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payers of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect the demand for any drug products for which we have obtained or may obtain regulatory approval, our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our products, our ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement approval for a product, our ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability, and the level of taxes that we are required to pay.

We may experience market resistance, delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency policy regarding opioids generally, and sufentanil specifically.

In February 2016, the FDA announced a comprehensive action plan to take concrete steps towards reducing the impact of opioid abuse on American families and communities. As part of this plan, the FDA announced that it intended to review product and labeling decisions and re-examine the risk-benefit paradigm for opioids. In June 2019, the FDA issued draft guidance related to a new benefit/risk framework for new opioid analgesic products, which proposes that the new product candidate show some benefit over an existing product. In September 2019, the FDA held a public hearing to receive stakeholder input on the approval process for new opioids. The timing of the resubmission of the Zalviso NDA is dependent upon the finalization of the FDA’s new opioid approval guidelines and process.

In May 2017, an Opioid Policy Steering Committee was established to address and advise regulators on opioid use. The Committee was charged with three initial questions: (i) should the FDA require mandatory education for healthcare professionals, or HCPs, who prescribe opioids; (ii) should the FDA take steps to ensure the number of prescribed opioid doses is more closely tailored to the medical indication; and (iii) is the FDA properly considering the risk of abuse and misuse of opioids during its drug review process. Zalviso has not been designed with an abuse-deterrent formulation and is not tamper-resistant. As a result, Zalviso has not undergone testing for tamper-resistance or abuse deterrence.

The FDA can delay, limit or deny marketing approval for many reasons, including:

• a product candidate may not be considered safe or effective;

Part of the regulatory approval process includes compliance inspections of manufacturing facilities to ensure adherence to applicable regulations and guidelines. The regulatory agency may delay, limit or deny marketing approval of our product candidate, Zalviso, as a result of such inspections. We, our contract manufacturers, and their vendors, are all subject to preapproval and post-approval inspections at any time. The results of these inspections could impact our ability to obtain FDA approval for Zalviso and, if approved, our ability to launch and successfully commercialize Zalviso in the United States. In addition, results of FDA inspections could impact our ability to maintain FDA approval of DSUVIA, and our ability to expand and sustain commercial sales of DSUVIA in the United States.

Any delay in, or failure to receive or maintain, approval for Zalviso in the United States could prevent us from generating meaningful revenues or achieving profitability. Zalviso may not be approved even if we believe it has achieved its endpoints in clinical trials. Regulatory agencies, including the FDA, or their advisors, may disagree with our trial design and our interpretations of data from preclinical studies and clinical trials. Regulatory agencies may change requirements for approval even after a clinical trial design has been approved. The FDA exercises significant discretion over the regulation of combination products, including the discretion to require separate marketing applications for the drug and device components in a combination product. Zalviso is being regulated as a drug product under the NDA process administered by the FDA. The FDA could in the future require additional regulation of Zalviso, or DSUVIA, under the medical device provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA. We must comply with the Quality Systems Regulation, or QSR, which sets forth the FDA’s current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, requirements for medical devices, and other applicable government regulations and corresponding foreign standards for drug cGMPs. If we fail to comply with these regulations, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

TLPH US Equity

TLPH · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item1. Business

Item1A. Risk Factors

TLPH US Equity☆

TLPH · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item1. Business

Item1A. Risk Factors

TLPH US Equity