Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc.
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 1, 2007
Registration
No.
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
FORM S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
Cumberland Pharmaceuticals
Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Tennessee
|
|
2834
|
|
62-1765329
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
2525 West End Avenue,
Suite 950
Nashville, Tennessee
37203
(615) 255-0068
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number, including
area code, of registrants
principal executive offices)
A.J. Kazimi
Chairman and CEO
2525 West End Avenue,
Suite 950
Nashville, Tennessee
37203
(615) 255-0068
(Name, address, including zip
code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for
service)
Copies to:
|
|
|
Martin S.
Brown, Esq.
Virginia Boulet, Esq.
Adams and Reese LLP
424 Church Street, Suite 2800
Nashville, Tennessee 37219
(615) 259-1450
|
|
Donald J. Murray, Esq.
Dewey Ballantine LLP
1301 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019-6092
(212) 259-8000
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed offering to the
public: As soon as practicable after this
registration statement becomes effective.
If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933 check the
following box: o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
please check the following box and list the Securities Act
registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
|
Title of Each Class of
|
|
|
Aggregate Offering
|
|
|
Amount of
|
Securities to be Registered
|
|
|
Price(1)
|
|
|
Registration Fee
|
Common Stock, no par value per share
|
|
|
$115,000,000
|
|
|
$3,531
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Estimated solely for purpose of
calculating the registration fee pursuant to Rule 457(o)
under the Securities Act.
|
The registrant hereby amends this registration statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this registration statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the registration
statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission,
acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.
The
information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and
may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the
registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an
offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting an offer
to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is
not permitted.
|
|
|
|
PRELIMINARY
PROSPECTUS
|
SUBJECT
TO COMPLETION
|
,
2007
|
Shares
Common
Stock
This is the initial public offering of our common stock. No
public market currently exists for our common stock. We are
offering all of
the shares
of our common stock offered by this prospectus.
We have applied to have our common stock included for quotation
on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol CPIX.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
Before buying any shares, you should carefully read the
discussion of material risks of investing in our common stock in
Risk factors beginning on page 6 of this
prospectus.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or
complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
share
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Public offering price
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting discounts and
commissions
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to us
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
The underwriters may also purchase up to an
additional shares
of our common stock at the public offering price, less the
underwriting discounts and commissions payable by us, to cover
over-allotments, if any, within 30 days from the date of
this prospectus. If the underwriters exercise this option in
full, the total underwriting discounts and commissions will be
$ and our total proceeds, before
expenses, will be $ .
The underwriters are offering the common stock as set forth
under Underwriting. Delivery of the shares will be
made on or
about ,
2007.
UBS
Investment Bank
Inside front cover of prospectus to feature two product photos:
[Artwork to be submitted]
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus. We have not, and the underwriters have not,
authorized anyone to provide you with additional information or
information different from that contained in this prospectus. We
are offering to sell, and seeking offers to buy, shares of our
common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are
permitted. The information contained in this prospectus is
accurate only as of the date of this prospectus, regardless of
the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of shares
of our common stock.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Through and
including ,
2007 (the 25th day after the date of this prospectus),
federal securities laws may require all dealers that effect
transactions in our common stock, whether or not participating
in this offering, to deliver a prospectus. This is in addition
to the dealers obligation to deliver a prospectus when
acting as underwriters and with respect to their unsold
allotments or subscriptions.
Amelior®,
Acetadote®
and the Cumberland Pharmaceuticals logo are trademarks or
service marks of Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. All other
trademarks or service marks appearing in this prospectus are the
property of their respective holders.
.1
Prospectus summary
This summary highlights select contents of this prospectus,
and may not contain all of the information that you should
consider before investing in our common stock. This summary
should be read together with the more detailed information found
elsewhere in this prospectus, including Risk factors
and our consolidated financial statements and related notes
beginning on
page F-1.
References in this prospectus to Cumberland,
we, us and our refer to
Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. and our consolidated
subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise.
OUR
COMPANY
We are a profitable and growing specialty pharmaceutical company
focused on the acquisition, development and commercialization of
branded prescription products. Our primary target markets are
hospital acute care and gastroenterology, which are
characterized by relatively concentrated physician prescriber
bases. Unlike many emerging pharmaceutical and biotechnology
companies, we have established a product development and
commercial operating infrastructure that is scalable to
accommodate our expected growth. Our management team consists of
pharmaceutical industry veterans experienced in business
development, clinical and regulatory affairs, and sales and
marketing.
Since our inception in 1999, we have successfully funded the
acquisition and development of our product portfolio with
limited external investment, while maintaining profitable
operations over the past three years. Our portfolio consists of
two products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
or FDA, one late-stage development product candidate nearing
completion of Phase III clinical trials and several
early-stage development projects. We were directly responsible
for the clinical development and regulatory approval of
Acetadote, one of our marketed products, and are currently
completing development of Amelior, our lead product candidate.
We promote Acetadote and our other FDA-approved product,
Kristalose, through dedicated hospital and gastroenterology
sales forces, which together are comprised of 42 sales
representatives and managers. We believe that our target markets
are highly concentrated, and consequently can be penetrated
effectively by small, dedicated sales forces without large-scale
promotional activity. For the years 2004, 2005 and 2006, our net
revenue was $12.0 million, $10.7 million and
$17.8 million, respectively, and our net income was
$558,000, $2.0 million and $4.4 million, respectively.
OUR
PRODUCTS
Our key products and product candidates include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
Indication
|
|
Delivery
|
|
Status
|
|
|
Amelior®
|
|
Pain and Fever
|
|
Injectable
|
|
Phase III
|
Acetadote®
|
|
Acetaminophen Poisoning
|
|
Injectable
|
|
Marketed
|
Kristalose®
|
|
Chronic and Acute Constipation
|
|
Oral Solution
|
|
Marketed
|
|
|
Amelior, our lead pipeline candidate, is an intravenous
formulation of ibuprofen that we expect will be the first
injectable product approved in the U.S. for the treatment
of both pain and fever. Amelior is currently in Phase III
clinical trials. We expect to complete clinical development by
early 2008 and are preparing to submit our new drug application,
or NDA, to the FDA for review. Amelior is designed to provide
physicians with a safe, effective treatment alternative for
patients who are unable to take oral medication for pain relief
and fever reduction. If approved, we plan to market Amelior in
the U.S. through our hospital sales force and in
international markets through alliances with marketing partners.
We believe Amelior currently represents our most significant
product opportunity.
According to IMS Health, the U.S. market for injectable
analgesics, or pain relievers, exceeded $302 million, or
491 million units, in 2006. This market consists primarily
of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug ketorolac and
generic opioids. Despite having a poor safety profile, usage of
1
ketorolac has grown from approximately 38 million units in
2003, or 7% of the market, to approximately 43 million
units in 2006, or 9% of the market, according to IMS Health.
Injectable opioids such as morphine and meperidine accounted for
approximately 447 million units sold in 2006. While opioids
are widely used for acute pain management, they are associated
with a variety of side effects including sedation, nausea,
vomiting, headache, cognitive impairment and respiratory
depression. Based on the results of clinical studies to date, we
believe Amelior represents a potentially safer alternative to
ketorolac, the only non-opioid injectable pain relief drug
available in the U.S. Further, we believe Amelior is a safe and
effective treatment for hospitalized patients with fever who are
unable to take oral medication. There is currently no approved
injectable treatment for fever in the U.S.
Acetadote is the only intravenous formulation of
N-acetylcysteine, or NAC, approved in the U.S. for the
treatment of acetaminophen poisoning. Though safe at recommended
doses, acetaminophen can cause liver damage with excessive use.
Acetaminophen overdose is the most common cause of acute liver
failure in adults in the U.S. According to the American
Association of Poison Control Centers Toxic Exposure
Surveillance System, acetaminophen was the leading cause of
poisonings presenting to emergency departments in the
U.S. in 2005, with approximately 77,000 cases treated.
NAC is accepted worldwide as the standard of care for treating
acetaminophen overdose. Until our 2004 launch of Acetadote, the
only FDA-approved form of NAC available in the U.S. was an
oral preparation. Medical literature suggests that, for a number
of patients, IV treatment is the only reasonable route of
administration due to nausea and vomiting associated with the
administration of oral NAC for acetaminophen overdose. Sales of
Acetadote have increased consistently since we launched the
product in June 2004, with wholesaler sales to hospitals growing
43% from $9 million in 2005 to $13 million in 2006. We
believe that we can continue to expand market share, and that
our Acetadote sales and marketing platform should help
facilitate the anticipated launch of Amelior.
Kristalose, a prescription laxative product, is a
crystalline form of lactulose designed to enhance patient
acceptance and compliance. Based on data from IMS Health, the
U.S. prescription laxative market has grown rapidly over
the past few years, increasing from approximately
$206 million in 2003 to $389 million in 2006,
representing a compound annual growth rate of 24%. Wholesaler
sales of Kristalose to pharmacies were $10.5 million in
2006. During that year, we acquired exclusive
U.S. commercialization rights to Kristalose, subsequently
assembling a dedicated field sales force and re-launching the
product in October 2006 under the Cumberland brand. We believe
that we can increase market share for Kristalose given its many
positive, competitive attributes including better taste,
consistency, ease of use and cost relative to competing products.
Early-stage product candidates. Our
early-stage product candidates are being developed by Cumberland
Emerging Technologies, Inc., or CET, our 86%-owned subsidiary.
CET collaborates with leading research institutions to identify
and advance the development of promising pre-clinical product
candidates within our target segments. Current CET projects
include an improved treatment for fluid buildup in the lungs of
cancer patients and an anti-infective for treating fungal
infections in immuno-compromised patients.
OUR COMPETITIVE
STRENGTHS
We believe our key competitive strengths include the following:
|
|
Ø
|
A significant late-stage product opportunity in Amelior;
|
|
Ø
|
Strong growth potential of our existing marketed products,
Acetadote and Kristalose;
|
|
Ø
|
Our focus on underserved niche markets, including hospital acute
care and gastroenterology;
|
|
Ø
|
A profitable business with a history of fiscal discipline; and
|
|
Ø
|
Extensive management expertise in business development, clinical
and regulatory affairs, and sales and marketing.
|
2
OUR
STRATEGY
Our objective is to develop, acquire and commercialize branded
pharmaceutical products for specialty physician market segments.
Our strategy to achieve this objective includes the following
key elements:
|
|
Ø
|
Successfully develop and commercialize Amelior, our lead product
candidate in Phase III clinical trials;
|
|
Ø
|
Maximize sales of our marketed products, Acetadote and
Kristalose;
|
|
Ø
|
Expand our dedicated hospital and gastroenterology sales forces;
|
|
Ø
|
Expand our product portfolio by acquiring rights to additional
marketed products and late-stage product candidates; and
|
|
Ø
|
Develop a pipeline of early-stage products through CET, our
majority-owned subsidiary.
|
RISKS AFFECTING
US
Our business is subject to numerous risks that could prevent us
from successfully implementing our business strategy. These and
other risks are discussed further in the section entitled
Risk factors immediately following this prospectus
summary, and include the following:
|
|
Ø
|
Our Amelior product candidate has not been approved for sale and
may never be successfully commercialized;
|
|
Ø
|
We currently market two products, Acetadote and Kristalose. An
adverse development regarding either of these products could
have a material and adverse impact on us;
|
|
Ø
|
If any manufacturer we rely upon fails to produce our products
and product candidates in the amounts we require on a timely
basis, or fails to comply with stringent regulations applicable
to pharmaceutical drug manufacturers, we may face delays in the
commercialization of Amelior, or may be unable to meet demand
for the product supplied by the manufacturer and may lose
potential revenues;
|
|
Ø
|
We are dependent on a variety of other third parties. If these
third parties fail to perform as we expect, our operations could
be disrupted and our financial results could suffer; and
|
|
Ø
|
If we are unable to maintain and build an effective sales and
marketing infrastructure, we will not be able to successfully
commercialize and grow our products and product candidates.
|
CORPORATE
INFORMATION
We were incorporated in Tennessee in 1999. Our principal
executive offices are located at 2525 West End Avenue,
Suite 950, Nashville, Tennessee 37203, and our telephone
number is
(615) 255-0068.
Our website address is www.cumberlandpharma.com. The information
on, or accessible through, our website is not part of this
prospectus.
3
The offering
|
|
|
Common stock we are offering |
|
shares |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
shares |
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We estimate that the net proceeds from this offering will be
approximately $ million, or
approximately $ million if
the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full,
assuming an initial public offering price of
$ per share. We expect to use
the net proceeds from this offering primarily for potential
acquisitions, product development and expansion, and general
corporate purposes. We may use a portion of the net proceeds to
acquire the rights to one or more marketed, FDA-approved
products or one or more product candidates in late-stage
development. We may use a portion of the net proceeds to expand
our operations in order to prepare for the launch of one or more
new products. We may also repay outstanding borrowings under our
credit facilities. |
|
Proposed Nasdaq Global Market Symbol |
|
CPIX |
The number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after
this offering is based
on shares
outstanding as
of
and excludes:
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock issuable upon exercise of options issued under
our 1999 Stock Option Plan and options issued in connection with
debt financings in 2001 and 2003, at a weighted average exercise
price of $ per share;
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding warrants
at a weighted average exercise price of
$ and
$ per share;
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock issuable upon conversion of outstanding
preferred stock; and
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock reserved for future issuance under our current
stock option plans.
|
Unless otherwise indicated, all information in this prospectus
assumes the underwriters do not exercise their option to
purchase up
to shares
of our common stock to cover over-allotments.
4
Summary consolidated
financial data
The tables below summarize our financial data as of the dates
and for the periods indicated. You should read the following
information together with the more detailed information
contained in Selected consolidated financial data,
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations and our consolidated
financial statements and the accompanying notes included
elsewhere in this prospectus.
Pro forma data below gives effect to the conversion
of
shares of our preferred stock
into
shares of common stock. Pro forma as adjusted data below gives
effect to the sale
of
shares of common stock that we are offering at an assumed
initial public offering price of $
per share, after deducting underwriting discounts and
commissions and estimated offering expenses to be paid by us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
Statement of
operations data:
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands,
except per share data)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
12,032
|
|
|
$
|
10,690
|
|
|
$
|
17,815
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
1,569
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
2,224
|
|
Net income before income taxes
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
770
|
|
|
|
1,708
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
1,954
|
|
|
|
4,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per sharebasic
|
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.41
|
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per sharediluted
|
|
$
|
0.07
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstandingbasic
|
|
|
4,541
|
|
|
|
4,748
|
|
|
|
4,899
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstandingdiluted
|
|
|
7,741
|
|
|
|
8,045
|
|
|
|
8,016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
Balance sheet
data:
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro
Forma
|
|
|
as
Adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
6,255
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
3,945
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
26,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt and other
long-term obligations
|
|
|
10,543
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
11,126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
Risk factors
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
You should carefully consider the following risks, together with
all of the information included in this prospectus, before
investing in our common stock. In addition to the risks outlined
below, there may be other unforeseen risks which may not or
cannot be identified at this time. If any of these risks were to
occur, our business, financial condition and results of
operations could be materially and adversely affected. In that
case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and
you might lose all or part of your investment.
RISKS RELATED TO
OUR BUSINESS
Our Amelior
product candidate has not been approved for sale and may never
be successfully commercialized.
We anticipate that a substantial portion of our future growth
will come from sales of our Amelior product candidate. However,
Amelior has neither been approved nor marketed by the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration, or FDA, and it is still subject to
risks associated with its clinical development.
Amelior is undergoing Phase III clinical trials to test its
efficacy and safety. Delays in the completion of these clinical
trials, which can result from unforeseen issues, FDA
interventions, problems with enrolling patients and other
reasons, could significantly delay commercial launch and affect
our product development costs. Moreover, results from these
clinical studies may not be as favorable as the results we
obtained in prior, completed studies.
If the results of our clinical trials are favorable, we intend
to submit to the FDA an application for marketing approval for
Amelior. The FDA may decline to accept our application. If the
FDA declines our application, it may require that we conduct
additional studies and submit additional data prior to
resubmitting the application. If the FDA accepts and reviews the
application, it may still require that we conduct additional
studies or submit other data. Conducting studies and collecting,
analyzing and submitting necessary data can be time-consuming
and expensive. The FDA may not act on our application during the
timeframe that we expect. Moreover, the FDA might not approve
our application, in which event we would not be able to sell
Amelior in the U.S., or it might approve Amelior for only
limited uses, in which event the market for this product could
be significantly reduced, adversely affecting our commercial
opportunity. In addition, new government regulations could
prevent or delay regulatory approval of Amelior.
Amelior, which is injectable ibuprofen, is a non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drug, or NSAID. The widespread use of NSAIDs
has meant that the adverse effects of these relatively safe
drugs have become increasingly prevalent. The two main adverse
drug reactions associated with NSAIDs relate to the
gastrointestinal tract and the kidneys. Recent studies suggest
there may also be a risk of cardiovascular adverse effects
associated with NSAIDs. While we are currently studying the
safety of Amelior in our clinical trials, the FDA may require
additional safety data be collected prior to or after any
approval of the product.
Even if Amelior is successfully developed and approved by the
FDA, it may never gain significant acceptance in the marketplace
and therefore never generate substantial revenue or profits for
us. Physicians may determine that existing drugs are adequate to
address patients needs. For example, oral non-narcotic
pain and fever reducers, as well as narcotic IV pain
relievers, are widely available and commonly prescribed. If
physicians determine that Amelior is safe and effective, it will
still compete, on a
patient-by-patient
and
physician-by-physician
basis, with other therapeutic alternatives. Additionally, we are
aware of other companies developing products that would address
the same market that we are targeting for Amelior. The extent to
which Amelior will be reimbursed by the U.S. government or third-
6
Risk
factors
party payors is also currently unknown, and reimbursement levels
of Amelior compared to those of other competitive drugs will
also affect the level of market acceptance.
As a result of the foregoing and other factors, we do not know
the extent to which Amelior will contribute to our future growth.
We currently
market two products, Acetadote and Kristalose. An adverse
development regarding either of these products could have a
material and adverse impact on us.
We currently market and sell two products, Acetadote and
Kristalose. Changes impacting either product in areas such as
competition, government regulation, intellectual property,
reimbursement and manufacturing would profoundly affect us.
Similarly, a product contamination or other safety issue in
either of our product markets, whether or not directly involving
our products, could negatively impact us.
If any
manufacturer we rely upon fails to produce our products and
product candidates in the amounts we require on a timely basis,
or fails to comply with stringent regulations applicable to
pharmaceutical drug manufacturers, we may face delays in the
commercialization of Amelior, or may be unable to meet demand
for the product supplied by the manufacturer and may lose
potential revenues.
We do not manufacture any of our products or product candidates,
and we do not currently plan to develop any capacity to do so.
Our dependence upon third parties for the manufacture of
products could adversely affect our profit margins or our
ability to develop and deliver products on a timely and
competitive basis. If for any reason we are unable to obtain or
retain third-party manufacturers on commercially acceptable
terms, we may not be able to sell our products as planned.
Furthermore, if we encounter delays or difficulties with
contract manufacturers in producing our products, the
distribution, marketing and subsequent sales of these products
could be adversely affected. In either event, we may choose to
or need to seek an alternative source of supply for, or abandon,
a product line or sell a product line on unsatisfactory terms.
Our agreement with Bioniche Teoranta, or Bioniche, for the
exclusive manufacture and supply of Acetadote requires that we
obtain Acetadote only from Bioniche, even if we could obtain
Acetadote from another supplier on terms more favorable than the
terms of our agreement with Bioniche.
We have minimum purchase obligations under our Acetadote supply
agreement with Bioniche and our Kristalose supply agreement with
Inalco S.p.A. and Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., or collectively
Inalco. If our purchase obligations exceed demand for these
products, we may be forced to either breach our contract with
that manufacturer or purchase a supply of the product that we
may be unable to sell. Our contract with Bioniche extends until
2011, and our contract with Inalco extends until 2021.
On February 2, 2007, Mayne Pharma Pty. Ltd., our exclusive
manufacturer of Amelior, was acquired by Hospira, Inc. If
Hospira encounters integration problems or if we have
disagreements with Hospira, with whom we have not collaborated
in the past, our supply of Amelior could be interrupted.
Amelior is manufactured at a single facility in Australia.
Acetadote is manufactured at a single facility in Ireland and
the active pharmaceutical ingredient for Kristalose is
manufactured at a single facility in Italy. If any one of these
facilities is damaged or destroyed, or if local conditions
result in a work stoppage, we could suffer a delay or suspension
of clinical trials, in the case of Amelior, or an inability to
meet demand in the case of our marketed products. Kristalose is
manufactured through a complex process involving trade secrets
of the manufacturer. Accordingly, it would be particularly
difficult to find a new manufacturer of Kristalose on an
expedited basis.
7
Risk
factors
In addition, all manufacturers of our products and product
candidates must comply with current good manufacturing
practices, referred to as cGMP, enforced by the FDA through its
facilities inspection program. These requirements include
quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of
records and documentation. Manufacturers of our product
candidates may be unable to comply with cGMP requirements and
with other FDA, state and foreign regulatory requirements. We
have no control over our manufacturers compliance with
these regulations and standards. If our third-party
manufacturers do not comply with these requirements, we could be
subject to:
|
|
Ø
|
fines and civil penalties;
|
|
Ø
|
suspension of production or distribution;
|
|
Ø
|
suspension or delay in product approval;
|
|
Ø
|
product seizure or recall; and
|
|
Ø
|
withdrawal of product approval.
|
We are dependent
on a variety of other third parties. If these third parties fail
to perform as we expect, our operations could be disrupted and
our financial results could suffer.
We have a relatively small internal infrastructure. We rely on a
variety of third parties, other than our third-party
manufacturers, to help us operate our business. Other third
parties on which we rely include:
|
|
Ø
|
Cardinal Health Specialty Pharmaceutical Services, a logistics
and fulfillment company and business unit of Cardinal, which
warehouses and ships both Kristalose and Acetadote;
|
|
Ø
|
Advogent Group, Inc., a spin-off of Cardinal, which provides a
field sales force that is the primary selling team for
Kristalose; and
|
|
Ø
|
Vanderbilt University and the Tennessee Technology Development
Corporation, co-owners with us of Cumberland Emerging
Technologies, Inc., or CET, and the universities that
collaborate with us in connection with CETs research and
development programs.
|
If these third parties do not continue to provide services to
us, or collaborate with us, we might not be able to obtain
others who can serve these functions. This could disrupt our
business operations, delay completion of clinical trials,
regulatory approval and market launch of Amelior or any future
product candidate, increase our operating expenses and otherwise
adversely affect our operating results.
If we are unable
to maintain and build an effective sales and marketing
infrastructure, we will not be able to commercialize and grow
our products and product candidates successfully.
Historically, we have relied on Cardinal, to provide sales
representatives to promote our products. Recently, we exercised
an option under our agreement with Cardinal to convert the
hospital sales force for our products to Cumberland employees.
This conversion was completed in January 2007. Our ability to
maintain and increase our revenues and profitability,
particularly in the near term, will depend on our ability to
address any issues or inefficiencies that arise from
transitioning this sales force from Cardinal employees to our
employees.
As we grow, we may not be able to secure sales personnel or
organizations that are adequate in number or expertise to
successfully market and sell our products. This risk would be
accentuated if we acquire products in areas outside of acute
care/emergency medicine and gastroenterology, since our sales
forces specialize in these areas. If we are unable to expand our
sales and marketing capability or any other capabilities
necessary to commercialize our products and product candidates,
we will need to contract
8
Risk
factors
with third parties to market and sell our products. If we are
unable to establish and maintain adequate sales and marketing
capabilities:
|
|
Ø
|
we may not be able to increase our product revenue;
|
|
Ø
|
we may generate increased expenses; and
|
|
Ø
|
we may not continue to be profitable.
|
Competitive
pressures could reduce our revenues and profits.
The pharmaceutical industry is intensely competitive. Our
strategy is to target differentiated products in specialized
markets. However, this strategy does not relieve us from
competitive pressures, and can entail distinct competitive
risks. For example, a new entrant into a smaller market could
have a disproportionately large impact on others in the market.
In addition, certain of our competitors do not aggressively
promote their products in our markets. A relatively modest
increase in promotional activity in our markets could result in
large shifts in market share, adversely affecting us.
Kristalose competes in the U.S. with several other prescription
laxative products, two of which are marketed by large,
international pharmaceutical companies. Acetadote competes
domestically with several orally administered prescription
products for treating acetaminophen overdose. We are aware of
products under development, including an intravenous
acetaminophen product, which could compete with Amelior. We have
limited patent protection against direct competition.
We compete with numerous pharmaceutical, specialty
pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Our competitors may
sell or develop drugs that are more effective and useful and
less costly than ours, and they may be more successful in
manufacturing and marketing their products. Many of our
competitors have significantly greater financial and marketing
resources than we do. Additional competitors may enter our
markets.
The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by constant and
significant investment in new product development, which can
result in rapid technological change. The introduction of new
products could substantially reduce our market share or render
our products obsolete. The selling prices of pharmaceutical
products tend to decline as competition increases, through new
product introduction or otherwise, which could reduce our
revenues and profitability.
Governmental and private health care payors have recently
emphasized substitution of branded pharmaceuticals with less
expensive generic equivalents. An increase in the sales of
generic pharmaceutical products could result in a decrease in
our revenues. While there are no generic equivalents competing
with Amelior, Acetadote or Kristalose at this time, in the
future we could face generic competition.
Our future growth
depends on our ability to identify and acquire rights to
products. If we do not successfully identify and acquire rights
to products and successfully integrate them into our operations,
our growth opportunities would be limited.
We acquired rights to Amelior, Acetadote and Kristalose. Our
business strategy is to continue to acquire rights to
FDA-approved products as well as pharmaceutical product
candidates in the late stages of development. We do not plan to
conduct basic research or early-stage product development,
except to the extent of our investment in CET. We have limited
resources to acquire third-party products, businesses and
technologies and integrate them into our current infrastructure.
Many acquisition opportunities involve competition among several
potential purchasers including large multi-national
pharmaceutical companies and other competitors that have access
to greater financial resources than we do.
9
Risk
factors
With future acquisitions, we may face financial and operational
risks and uncertainties, including:
|
|
Ø
|
not realizing the expected economic return or other benefits
from an acquisition;
|
|
Ø
|
incurring higher than expected acquisition and integration costs;
|
|
Ø
|
assuming or otherwise being exposed to unknown liabilities;
|
|
Ø
|
developing or integrating new products that could disrupt our
business and divert our managements time and attention;
|
|
Ø
|
not being able to preserve key suppliers or distributors of any
acquired products;
|
|
Ø
|
incurring substantial debt or issue dilutive securities to pay
for acquisitions; and
|
|
Ø
|
acquiring products that could substantially increase our
amortization expenses.
|
We are not precluded from engaging in a large acquisition in the
future, including an acquisition that entails the investment of
substantially all of the proceeds from this offering. While
large acquisitions potentially present large opportunities, they
also could magnify the risks identified above.
We may not be able to engage in future product acquisitions, and
those we do complete may not be beneficial to us in the long
term.
Continued
consolidation of distributor networks in the pharmaceutical
industry as well as increases in retailer concentration may
limit our ability to profitably sell our products.
We sell most of our products to large pharmaceutical
wholesalers, who in turn sell to, thereby supplying, hospitals
and retail pharmacies. The distribution network for
pharmaceutical products has become increasingly consolidated in
recent years. Today, three large wholesalers control most of the
market. Further consolidation among, or any financial
difficulties of, pharmaceutical wholesalers or retailers could
result in the combination or elimination of warehouses, which
could cause product returns to us. In addition, further
consolidation or financial difficulties could also cause our
customers to reduce the amounts of our products that they
purchase, which would materially and adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
If governmental
or third-party payors do not provide adequate reimbursement for
our products, our revenue and prospects for continued
profitability will be limited.
Our financial success depends, in part, on the availability of
adequate reimbursement from third-party healthcare payors. Such
third-party payors include governmental health programs such as
Medicare and Medicaid, managed care providers and private health
insurers. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the
pricing of medical products and services, while governments
continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the
cost of healthcare. Adoption of such legislation could further
limit reimbursement for pharmaceuticals. For example, in
December 2003, Congress enacted a limited prescription drug
benefit for Medicare beneficiaries in the Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003. Under this
program, drug prices for certain prescription drugs are
negotiated by drug plans, with the goal to lower costs for
Medicare beneficiaries. Future cost control initiatives could
decrease the price that we would receive for any products, which
would limit our revenue and profitability. In addition,
legislation and regulations affecting the pricing of
pharmaceuticals might change.
Reimbursement practices of third-party payors might preclude us
from achieving market acceptance for our products or maintaining
price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our
investment in product acquisition and development. If we cannot
obtain adequate reimbursement levels, our business, financial
condition and results of operations would be materially and
adversely affected.
10
Risk
factors
Formulary
practices of third-party payors could adversely affect our
competitive position.
Many managed health care organizations are now controlling the
pharmaceutical products listed on their formulary lists. The
benefit of having products listed on these formulary lists
creates competition among pharmaceutical companies which, in
turn, has created a trend of downward pricing pressure in our
industry. In addition, many managed care organizations are
pursuing various ways to reduce pharmaceutical costs and are
considering formulary contracts primarily with those
pharmaceutical companies that can offer a full line of products
for a given therapy sector or disease state. Our products might
not be included on the formulary lists of managed care
organizations, and downward pricing pressure in our industry
generally could negatively impact our operations.
Our CET joint
initiative may not result in our gaining access to commercially
viable products.
Our CET joint initiative with Vanderbilt University and
Tennessee Technology Development Corporation is designed to help
us investigate, in a cost-effective manner, early-stage products
and technologies. However, we may never gain access to
commercially viable products from CET for a variety of reasons,
including:
|
|
Ø
|
CET investigates early-stage products, which have the greatest
risk of failure prior to FDA approval and commercialization;
|
|
Ø
|
In some programs, we do not have pre-set rights to product
candidates developed by CET. We would need to agree with CET and
its collaborators on the terms of any product license to, or
acquisition by, us;
|
|
Ø
|
We rely principally on government grants to fund CETs
research and development programs. If these grants were no
longer available, we or our co-owners might be unable or
unwilling to fund CET operations at current levels or at
all;
|
|
Ø
|
We may become involved in disputes with our co-owners regarding
CET policy or operations, such as how best to deploy CET assets
or which product opportunities to pursue. Disagreement could
disrupt or halt product development; and
|
|
Ø
|
CET may disagree with one of the various universities with which
CET is collaborating on research. A disagreement could disrupt
or halt product development.
|
The size of our
organization and our activities are growing, and we may
experience difficulties in managing growth.
As of April 30, 2007, we had 33 full-time employees.
We may need to continue to expand our managerial, operational,
financial and other resources in order to increase our marketing
efforts with regard to our currently marketed products, continue
our business development and product development activities and
commercialize our product candidates. We have experienced, and
may continue to experience, rapid growth in the scope of our
operations in connection with the commercial launch of new
products. Our financial performance will depend, in part, on our
ability to manage any such growth effectively. Our management,
personnel, systems and facilities currently in place may not be
adequate to support this future growth.
We depend on our
key personnel, the loss of whom would adversely affect our
operations. If we fail to attract and retain the talent required
for our business, our business will be materially
harmed.
We are a relatively small company, and we depend to a great
extent on principal members of our management and scientific
staff. If we lose the services of any key personnel, in
particular, A.J. Kazimi,
11
Risk
factors
our Chief Executive Officer, it could have a material adverse
effect on our business prospects. We currently have a key man
life insurance policy covering the life of Mr. Kazimi. We
have entered into agreements with each of our employees that
contain restrictive covenants relating to non-competition and
non-solicitation of our customers and suppliers for one year
after termination of employment. Nevertheless, each of our
officers and key employees may terminate his or her employment
at any time without notice and without cause or good reason, and
so as a practical matter these agreements do not guarantee the
continued service of these employees. Our success depends on our
ability to attract and retain highly qualified scientific,
technical and managerial personnel and research partners.
Competition among pharmaceutical companies for qualified
employees is intense, and we may not be able to retain existing
personnel or attract and retain qualified staff in the future.
If we experience difficulties in hiring and retaining personnel
in key positions, we could suffer from delays in product
development, loss of customers and sales and diversion of
management resources, which could adversely affect operating
results.
We face potential
product liability exposure, and if successful claims are brought
against us, we may incur substantial liability for a product or
product candidate and may have to limit its
commercialization.
We face an inherent risk of product liability lawsuits related
to the testing of our product candidates and the commercial sale
of our products. An individual may bring a liability claim
against us if one of our product candidates or products causes,
or appears to have caused, an injury. If we cannot successfully
defend ourselves against the product liability claim, we may
incur substantial liabilities. Liability claims may result in:
|
|
Ø
|
decreased demand for our products;
|
|
Ø
|
injury to our reputation;
|
|
Ø
|
withdrawal of clinical trial participants;
|
|
Ø
|
significant litigation costs;
|
|
Ø
|
substantial monetary awards to or costly settlement with
patients;
|
|
Ø
|
product recalls;
|
|
Ø
|
loss of revenue; and
|
|
Ø
|
the inability to commercialize our product candidates.
|
We are highly dependent upon medical and patient perceptions of
us and the safety and quality of our products. We could be
adversely affected if we or our products are subject to negative
publicity. We could also be adversely affected if any of our
products or any similar products sold by other companies prove
to be, or are asserted to be, harmful to patients. Also, because
of our dependence upon medical and patient perceptions, any
adverse publicity associated with illness or other adverse
effects resulting from the use or misuse of our products or any
similar products sold by other companies could have a material
adverse impact on our results of operations.
We have product liability insurance that covers our clinical
trials and the marketing and sale of our products up to a
$10 million annual aggregate limit, subject to specified
deductibles. Our current or future insurance coverage may prove
insufficient to cover any liability claims brought against us.
Because of the increasing costs of insurance coverage, we may
not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost
or obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy
any liability that may arise.
12
Risk
factors
We have never
paid dividends on our capital stock, and we do not anticipate
paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
We have never paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We do
not anticipate paying cash dividends to our shareholders in the
foreseeable future. The availability of funds for distributions
to shareholders will depend substantially on our earnings. Even
if we become able to pay dividends in the future, we expect that
we would retain such earnings to enhance capital
and/or
reduce long-term debt.
RISKS RELATING TO
GOVERNMENT REGULATION
We are subject to
stringent government regulation. All of our products face
regulatory challenges.
Virtually all aspects of our business activities are regulated
by government agencies. The manufacturing, processing,
formulation, packaging, labeling, distribution, promotion and
sampling, and advertising of our products, and disposal of waste
products arising from such activities, are subject to
governmental regulation. These activities are regulated by one
or more of the FDA, the Federal Trade Commission, or the FTC,
the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Department
of Agriculture and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, or the EPA, as well as by comparable agencies in foreign
countries. These activities are also regulated by various
agencies of the states and localities in which our products are
sold. For more information, see BusinessGovernment
Regulation.
Like all pharmaceutical manufacturers, we are subject to
regulation by the FDA under the authority of the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act, or the FDC Act. All new drugs
must be the subject of an FDA-approved new drug application, or
NDA, before they may be marketed in the U.S. The FDA has the
authority to withdraw existing NDA approvals and to review the
regulatory status of products marketed under the enforcement
policy. The FDA may require an approved NDA for any drug product
marketed under the enforcement policy if new information reveals
questions about the drugs safety and effectiveness. All
drugs must be manufactured in conformity with cGMP, and drug
products subject to an approved NDA must be manufactured,
processed, packaged, held and labeled in accordance with
information contained in the NDA. Since we rely on third parties
to manufacture our products, cGMP requirements directly affect
our third party manufacturers and indirectly affect us. The
manufacturing facilities of our third-party manufacturers are
continually subject to inspection by such governmental agencies,
and manufacturing operations could be interrupted or halted in
any such facilities if such inspections prove unsatisfactory.
Our third-party manufacturers are subject to periodic inspection
by the FDA to assure such compliance.
Pharmaceutical products must be distributed, sampled and
promoted in accordance with FDA requirements. The FDA also
regulates the advertising of prescription drugs. The FDA has the
authority to request post-approval commitments that can be
time-consuming and expensive to comply with.
Under the FDC Act, the federal government has extensive
enforcement powers over the activities of pharmaceutical
manufacturers to ensure compliance with FDA regulations. Those
powers include, but are not limited to, the authority to
initiate court action to seize unapproved or non-complying
products, to enjoin non-complying activities, to halt
manufacturing operations that are not in compliance with cGMP,
and to seek civil monetary and criminal penalties. The
initiation of any of these enforcement activities, including the
restriction or prohibition on sales of our products, could
materially adversely affect our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
Any change in the FDAs enforcement policy could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
13
Risk
factors
We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations or
statutes or legal interpretation, when and if promulgated or
enacted, may have on our business in the future. Such changes
could, among other things, require:
|
|
Ø
|
changes to manufacturing methods;
|
|
Ø
|
expanded or different labeling;
|
|
Ø
|
recall, replacement or discontinuance of certain products;
|
|
Ø
|
additional record keeping; and
|
|
Ø
|
expanded documentation of the properties of certain products and
scientific substantiation.
|
Such changes, or new legislation, could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
RISKS RELATING TO
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Our strategy to
secure and extend marketing exclusivity or patent rights may
provide only limited protection from competition.
We seek to secure and extend marketing exclusivity for our
products through a variety of means, including FDA exclusivity
and patent rights. Acetadote has been designated as an
orphan drug and is indicated to prevent or lessen
hepatic (liver) injury when administered intravenously within
eight to ten hours after ingesting quantities of acetaminophen
that are potentially toxic to the liver. As such, Acetadote is
protected until 2011 against competition from another drug using
the same active ingredient to treat the same indication. Orphan
drug marketing exclusivity does not, however, protect a drug
from competition by a different drug marketed for the same
indications.
We do not have composition of matter or
use patents for our marketed products. We do have a
U.S. patent, No. 6,727,286, and some related
international patents, which are directed to ibuprofen solution
formulations, methods of making the same, and methods of using
the same, and which are related to our formulation and
manufacture of Amelior. We have applied for additional U.S. and
international patent protection for our invention related to
ibuprofen solution formulations, methods of making the same, and
methods of using the same, but those applications may not result
in issued patents. Additionally, the active ingredient in
Amelioribuprofenis in the public domain, and if a
competitor were to develop a sufficiently distinct formulation,
it could develop and seek FDA approval for an ibuprofen product
that competes with Amelior. Following successful completion of
our clinical studies, we also plan to seek three-year marketing
exclusivity for Amelior.
Inalco manufactures Kristalose and owns two U.S. patents,
Nos. 5,003,061 and 5,480,491, related to the manufacture of
Kristalose. These patents are not directed to the composition or
use of Kristalose and do not prevent a competitor from
developing a formulation and developing and seeking FDA approval
for a product that competes with Kristalose.
While we consider patent protection when evaluating product
acquisition opportunities, any products we acquire in the future
may not have significant patent protection. Neither the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office nor the courts have a
consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed or the
degree of protection afforded under many pharmaceutical patents.
Patent applications in the U.S. and many foreign jurisdictions
are typically not published until 18 months following their
priority filing date, and in some cases not at all. In addition,
publication of discoveries in scientific literature often lags
significantly behind actual discoveries. Therefore, neither we
nor our licensors can be certain that we or they were the first
to make the inventions claimed in our issued patents or pending
patent applications, or that we or they were the first to file
for protection of the inventions set forth in these
14
Risk
factors
patent applications. In addition, changes in either patent laws
or in interpretations of patent laws in the U.S. and other
countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or
narrow the scope of our patent protection. Furthermore, our
competitors may independently develop similar technologies or
duplicate technology developed by us in a manner that does not
infringe our patents or other intellectual property. As a result
of these factors, our patent rights may not provide any
commercially valuable protection from competing products.
If we are unable
to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information
and know-how, the value of our technology and products could be
adversely affected.
In addition to patents, we rely upon trade secrets, unpatented
proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation
where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or
attainable. For example, the manufacturing process for
Kristalose involves substantial trade secrets and proprietary
know-how. We have entered into confidentiality agreements with
certain key employees and consultants pursuant to which such
employees and consultants must assign to us any inventions
relating to our business if made by them while they are our
employees, as well as certain confidentiality agreements
relating to the acquisition of rights to products.
Confidentiality agreements can be breached, though, and we might
not have adequate remedies for any breach. Also, others could
acquire or independently develop similar technology.
We depend on our
licensors for the maintenance and enforcement of our
intellectual property and have limited, if any, control over the
amount or timing of resources that our licensors devote on our
behalf.
When we license products, we often depend on our licensors to
protect the proprietary rights covering those products. We have
limited, if any, control over the amount or timing of resources
that our licensors devote on our behalf or the priority they
place on maintaining patent or other rights and prosecuting
patent applications to our advantage. While any such licensor is
expected to be under contractual obligations to us to diligently
prosecute its patent applications and allow us the opportunity
to consult, review and comment on patent office communications,
we cannot be sure that it will perform as required. If a
licensor does not perform and if we do not assume the
maintenance of the licensed patents in sufficient time to make
required payments or filings with the appropriate governmental
agencies, we risk losing the benefit of all or some of those
patent rights.
If the use of our
technology conflicts with the intellectual property rights of
third parties, we may incur substantial liabilities, and we may
be unable to commercialize products based on this technology in
a profitable manner or at all.
Third parties, including our competitors, could have or acquire
patent rights that they could enforce against us. In addition,
we may be subject to claims from others that we are
misappropriating their trade secrets or confidential proprietary
information. If our products conflict with the intellectual
property rights of others, they could bring legal action against
us or our licensors, licensees, manufacturers, customers or
collaborators. If we were found to be infringing a patent or
other intellectual property rights held by a third party, we
could be forced to seek a license to use the patented or
otherwise protected technology. We might not be able to obtain
such a license on terms acceptable to us or at all. If an
infringement or misappropriation legal action were to be brought
against us or our licensors, we would incur substantial costs in
defending the action. If such a dispute were to be resolved
against us, we could be subject to significant damages, and the
manufacturing or sale of one or more of our products could be
enjoined.
15
Risk
factors
We may be
involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the
patents of our collaborators or licensors, which could be
expensive and time consuming.
Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our
collaborators or licensors. To counter infringement or
unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement
claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition,
in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent
of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop
the other party from using the technology at issue on the
grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in
question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense
proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being
invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent
applications at risk of not issuing.
Interference proceedings brought by the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office may be necessary to determine the priority of
inventions with respect to our patent applications or those of
our collaborators or licensors. Litigation or interference
proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in
substantial costs and distract our management. We may not be
able, alone or with our collaborators and licensors, to prevent
misappropriation of our proprietary rights, particularly in
countries where the laws may not protect such rights as fully as
in the U.S.
Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery
required in connection with intellectual property litigation,
some of our confidential information could be disclosed during
this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public
announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other
interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or
investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a
substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock.
If we breach any
of the agreements under which we license rights to our products
and product candidates from others, we could lose the ability to
continue commercialization of our products and development and
commercialization of our product candidates.
We have exclusive licenses for the marketing and sale of certain
products and may acquire additional licenses. Such licenses may
terminate prior to expiration if we breach our obligations under
the license agreement related to these pharmaceutical products.
For example, the licenses may terminate if we fail to meet
specified quality control standards, including cGMP with respect
to the products, or commit a material breach of other terms and
conditions of the licenses. Such early termination could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
Our agreement with Inalco appoints us as the exclusive marketer,
seller and distributor of Kristalose in the U.S. Either we or
Inalco may terminate this agreement upon the breach of any
material provision of the agreement if the breach is not cured
within 45 days following written notice. If our agreement
with Inalco were terminated, we would lose our right to continue
commercialization of Kristalose in the U.S.
Under an agreement between us and Vanderbilt University, we have
received certain clinical data to support our planned NDA
submission for Amelior. Either we or Vanderbilt may terminate
this agreement upon the breach of any material provision of the
agreement if the breach is not cured within 45 days
following written notice. If our agreement with Vanderbilt were
terminated, we would lose our right to use the data to support
our planned NDA submission, and this loss may hinder our ability
to commercialize Amelior in accordance with our plans.
16
Risk
factors
RISKS RELATED TO
OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We have
identified material weaknesses and a significant deficiency in
our internal controls that, if not properly corrected, could
result in material misstatements in our financial
statements.
In connection with our fiscal year 2006 financial statement
audit, we identified three material weaknesses, and an
additional significant deficiency (not rising to the level of a
material weakness), in our internal controls. A significant
deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control
deficiencies, that adversely affects our ability to initiate,
authorize, record, process, or report external financial data
reliably in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles such that there is more than a remote likelihood that
a misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements
that is more that inconsequential will not be prevented or
detected by our employees. A material weakness is a significant
deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that
results in more than a remote likelihood that a material
misstatement of our annual or interim financial statement will
not be presented or detected by our employees. We have
undertaken a remediation plan designed to correct these issues.
We summarize below the nature of the material weaknesses
referenced above as well as the related remediation steps that
we are implementing or plan to implement:
|
|
Ø
|
Non-Routine Transactions. We did not maintain
adequate policies and procedures related to our financial
reporting in order to account for significant, non-routine
transactions in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles. To remedy this material weakness, we are
implementing a new policy requiring management to review
quarterly the accounting treatment for all transactions and
contracts entered into.
|
|
Ø
|
Financial Statement Review Process. We lack
adequate personnel resources possessing sufficient expertise in
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles to effectively
perform a review of the annual financial statements. To remedy
this material weakness, we intend to establish a new internal
position that will be primarily responsible for SEC and other
external reporting requirements. This position will report to
the Vice President of Finance and Accounting.
|
|
Ø
|
Taxes. We do not have an adequate number of
personnel with appropriate qualifications and training in
accounting for income taxes to perform a sufficient review of
the income tax provision. To remedy this material weakness, we
are implementing new procedures that, among other things,
require us to further review the work of our external tax
provider and to increase communication and information-sharing
between our external tax provider and us.
|
The significant deficiency relates to our policies and
procedures for the review of our master listing of stock options
granted. To remedy this significant deficiency, we are reviewing
each transaction on our master listing against the relevant
source documents and implementing new policies requiring
quarterly review of the master listing by departments including
our finance and accounting departments.
If we are not able to timely remedy the material weaknesses and
significant deficiency described above, we may be unable to
provide to our shareholders the required financial information
in a timely and reliable manner, and we may misreport financial
information, either of which could subject us to stockholder
litigation and regulatory enforcement actions. This could
materially and adversely impact our financial condition and the
market value of our securities.
17
Risk
factors
Our operating
results are likely to fluctuate from period to period.
We are a relatively new company seeking to capture significant
growth. While our revenues and operating income have increased
over time, we anticipate that there may be fluctuations in our
future operating results. Potential causes of future
fluctuations in our operating results may include:
|
|
Ø
|
new product launches, which could increase revenues but also
increase sales and marketing expenses;
|
|
Ø
|
acquisition activity and other one-time charges (such as for
inventory expiration);
|
|
Ø
|
increases in research and development expenses resulting from
the acquisition of a product candidate that requires significant
additional development;
|
|
Ø
|
changes in the competitive, regulatory or reimbursement
environment, which could drive down revenues or drive up sales
and marketing or compliance costs; and
|
|
Ø
|
unexpected product liability or intellectual property claims and
lawsuits.
|
See also Managements discussion and analysis of
financial condition and results of operations
Liquidity and capital resources. Fluctuation in operating
results, particularly if not anticipated by investors and other
members of the financial community, could add to volatility in
our stock price.
Our focus on
acquisitions as a growth strategy has created a large amount of
intangible assets whose amortization could negatively affect our
results of operations.
Our total assets include intangible assets related to our
acquisitions. The value of these intangible assets represents
the excess of the acquisition purchase price over the fair value
of the separate assets we acquired. As of December 31,
2006, intangible assets relating to product and data
acquisitions represented approximately 37.1% of our total
assets. We may never realize the value of these assets.
Generally accepted accounting principles require that we
evaluate on a regular basis whether events and circumstances
have occurred that indicate that all or a portion of the
carrying amount of the asset may no longer be recoverable, in
which case we would write down the value of the asset and take a
corresponding charge to earnings. Any determination requiring
the write-off of a significant portion of unamortized intangible
assets would adversely affect our results of operations.
We may need
additional funding and may be unable to raise capital when
needed, which could force us to delay, reduce or eliminate our
product development or commercialization and marketing
efforts.
We may need to raise additional funds in order to meet the
capital requirements of running our business and acquiring and
developing new pharmaceutical products. If we require additional
funding, we may seek to sell common stock or other equity or
equity-linked securities, which could result in dilution to
purchasers of common stock in this offering. We may also seek to
raise capital through a debt financing, which would result in
ongoing debt-service payments and increased interest expense.
Any financings would also likely involve operational and
financial restrictions being imposed on us. We might also seek
to sell assets or rights in one or more commercial products or
product development programs. Additional capital might not be
available to us when we need it on acceptable terms or at all.
If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed, we
could be forced to scale back our operations to conserve cash.
18
Risk
factors
We have a
relatively short history of profitability and may not be able to
sustain or increase our net income levels.
We were incorporated in 1999 and incurred operating losses until
2004. We recorded our first year of profitability in 2004 and
have increased profitability in each of 2005 and 2006. As of
December 31, 2006, however, we still had an accumulated
deficit of ($7.4) million, representing the amount by which
our historical losses have exceeded our historical profits. We
may not be able to maintain or improve our current levels of
revenue or net income. In such event, investors are likely to
lose confidence in our ability to grow, and our stock price
would suffer.
RISKS RELATED TO
THIS OFFERING AND AN INVESTMENT IN OUR STOCK
As a new
investor, you will experience immediate and substantial dilution
in the net tangible book value of your shares.
The initial public offering price of our common stock in this
offering is considerably more than the net tangible book value
per share of our outstanding common stock. Investors purchasing
shares of common stock in this offering will pay a price that
substantially exceeds the value of our tangible assets after
subtracting liabilities. As a result, investors in this offering
will:
|
|
Ø
|
incur immediate dilution of
$ per share, based on an
assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share;
|
|
Ø
|
contribute % of the total amount
invested to date to fund our company based on an assumed initial
offering price to the public of
$ per share;
|
|
Ø
|
but will own only % of the shares
of common stock outstanding after the offering.
|
We may conduct substantial additional equity offerings or issue
equity as consideration in an acquisition or otherwise. These
future equity issuances, together with the exercise of
outstanding options or warrants, could result in future dilution
to investors.
The market price
of our common stock may fluctuate substantially.
The initial public offering price for the shares of our common
stock sold in this offering has been determined by negotiation
between the representatives of the underwriters and us. This
price may not reflect the market price of our common stock
following this offering. The price of our common stock may
decline. In addition, the market price of our common stock is
likely to be highly volatile and may fluctuate substantially.
The realization of any of the risks described in these
Risk factors could have a dramatic and material
adverse impact on the market price of our common stock. In
addition, securities class action litigation has often been
instituted against companies whose securities have experienced
periods of volatility in market price. Any such securities
litigation brought against us could result in substantial costs
and a diversion of managements attention and resources,
which could negatively impact our business, operating results
and financial condition.
We will incur
increased costs as a result of operating as a public company,
and our management will be required to devote additional time to
new compliance initiatives.
We will incur increased costs as a result of operating as a
public company, and our management will be required to devote
additional time to new compliance initiatives. As a public
company, we will incur legal, accounting and other expenses that
we did not incur as a private company. In addition, the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well
as rules subsequently implemented by
19
Risk
factors
the SEC and Nasdaq, have imposed various new requirements on
public companies, including requiring establishment and
maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and
changes in corporate governance practices. These rules and
regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance
costs and will render some activities more time-consuming and
costly.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act will require, among other things, that we
maintain effective internal controls for financial reporting and
disclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we must
perform system and process evaluation and testing of our
internal controls over financial reporting to allow management
and our independent registered public accounting firm to report
on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial
reporting, beginning with our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008, as required
by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Our testing, or
the subsequent testing by our independent registered public
accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal
controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material
weaknesses. As described in a previous risk factor, we have
identified certain deficiencies in the past. Our compliance with
Section 404 will require that we incur substantial
accounting expense and expend significant management efforts.
Moreover, if we are not able to comply with the requirements of
Section 404 in a timely manner, or if we or our independent
registered public accounting firm identifies deficiencies in our
internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be
material weaknesses, the market price of our stock could decline
and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by
Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which would
require additional financial and management resources.
There may not be
a viable public market for our common stock.
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our
common stock, and a regular trading market might not develop or
continue after this offering. Moreover, the market price of our
common stock might decline below the initial public offering
price.
We will have
broad discretion in how we use the proceeds of this offering,
and we may not use these proceeds effectively, which could
affect our results of operations and cause our stock price to
decline.
We will have broad discretion over the use of proceeds from this
offering. We expect that the net proceeds from this offering
will be used to fund clinical trials for Amelior and other
research, marketing and development activities, and to fund
working capital, capital expenditures and other general
corporate purposes. We may also use a portion of the net
proceeds to acquire products. We have no present agreements with
respect to any such product acquisitions. We will have
considerable discretion in the application of the net proceeds,
and you will not have the opportunity, as part of your
investment decision, to assess whether the proceeds are being
used appropriately. The net proceeds may be used for purposes
that do not increase our operating results or market value.
Until the net proceeds are used, they may be placed in
investments that do not produce significant income or that lose
value.
Future sales of
our common stock may depress our stock price.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in
the public market after this offering or the perception that
these sales may occur could cause the market price of our common
stock to decline. In addition, the sale of these shares in the
public market could impair our ability to raise capital through
the sale of additional common or preferred stock. After this
offering, we will
have shares
of common stock outstanding. Of these shares, all shares sold in
the offering, other than shares, if any, purchased by our
affiliates, will be freely tradable.
20
Risk
factors
Some provisions
of our second amended and restated charter, bylaws and Tennessee
law may inhibit potential acquisition bids that you may consider
favorable.
Our corporate documents contain provisions that may enable our
board of directors to resist a change in control of our company
even if a change in control were to be considered favorable by
you and other shareholders. These provisions include:
|
|
Ø
|
the authorization of undesignated preferred stock, the terms of
which may be established and shares of which may be issued
without shareholder approval;
|
|
Ø
|
advance notice procedures required for shareholders to nominate
candidates for election as directors or to bring matters before
an annual meeting of shareholders;
|
|
Ø
|
limitations on persons authorized to call a special meeting of
shareholders;
|
|
Ø
|
a staggered board of directors;
|
|
Ø
|
a requirement that vacancies in directorships are to be filled
by a majority of the directors then in office and the number of
directors is to be fixed by the board of directors; and
|
|
Ø
|
no cumulative voting.
|
These and other provisions contained in our second amended and
restated charter and bylaws could delay or discourage
transactions involving an actual or potential change in control
of us or our management, including transactions in which our
shareholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares
over then current prices, and may limit the ability of
shareholders to remove our current management or approve
transactions that our shareholders may deem to be in their best
interests and, therefore, could adversely affect the price of
our common stock.
In addition, we are subject to control share acquisitions
provisions and affiliated transaction provision of the Tennessee
Business Corporation Act, the applications of which may have the
effect of delaying or preventing a merger, takeover or other
change of control of us and therefore could discourage attempts
to acquire our company. For more information, see
Description of capital stockAnti-takeover effects of
Tennessee law and provisions of our charter and bylaws.
21
Special note
regarding forward-looking statements
Statements in this prospectus that are not historical factual
statements are forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements include, among other things,
statements regarding our intent, belief or expectations, and can
be identified by the use of terminology such as may,
will, expect, believe,
intend, plan, estimate,
should, seek, anticipate and
other comparable terms or the negative thereof. In addition, we,
through our senior management, from time to time make
forward-looking oral and written public statements concerning
our expected future operations and other developments. While
forward-looking statements reflect our good-faith beliefs and
best judgment based upon current information, they are not
guarantees of future performance and are subject to known and
unknown risks and uncertainties, including those mentioned in
Risk factors, Managements discussion and
analysis of financial condition and results of operations
and elsewhere in this prospectus. Actual results may differ
materially from the expectations contained in the
forward-looking statements as a result of various factors. Such
factors include, without limitation:
|
|
Ø
|
legislative, regulatory or other changes in the healthcare
industry at the local, state or federal level which increase the
costs of, or otherwise affect our operations;
|
|
Ø
|
changes in reimbursement available to us by government or
private payers, including changes in Medicare and Medicaid
payment levels and availability of third-party insurance
coverage;
|
|
Ø
|
competition; and
|
|
Ø
|
changes in national or regional economic conditions, including
changes in interest rates and availability and cost of capital
to us.
|
22
Use of proceeds
We estimate that the net proceeds to us from the sale of
the shares
of common stock offered hereby will be approximately
$ million, assuming an
initial public offering price of $
and after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and
estimated offering expenses. If the underwriters exercise their
over-allotment option in full, we estimate that our net proceeds
will be approximately
$ million. Each $1.00
increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price
of $ per share would increase
(decrease) the net proceeds to us from this offering by
approximately $ million,
assuming that the number of shares offered by us, as set forth
on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same.
Depending on market conditions at the time of pricing of this
offering and other considerations, we may sell fewer or more
shares than the number set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus.
The principal purposes of this offering are to obtain additional
capital and to create a public market for our common stock. We
expect to use the net proceeds from this offering primarily for
potential acquisitions, product development and expansion and
general corporate purposes. We may use a portion of the net
proceeds to acquire the rights to one or more marketed,
FDA-approved products or one or more product candidates. We may
also use a portion of the net proceeds to expand our operations
in order to prepare for the launch of one or more new products,
including expanding our sales forces. We may also use a portion
of the net proceeds of this offering to repay all or a portion
of our outstanding borrowings under our credit facility. Amounts
loaned under our credit facility bear interest at BBA LIBOR
Daily Floating Rate plus 2.50% per annum, and the facility
expires in April 2008 with respect to the revolving line of
credit and in April 2009 with respect to the term loan.
The amounts we actually expend for the above-specified purposes
may vary depending on a number of factors, including changes in
our business strategy, the amount of our future revenues and
expenses and our future cash flow. If our future revenues or
cash flow are less than we currently anticipate, we may need to
support our ongoing business operations with net proceeds from
this offering that we would otherwise use to support
acquisitions and other methods of growth.
Until we use the net proceeds from this offering for the above
purposes, we intend to invest the funds in short-term,
investment-grade, interest-bearing securities as directed by our
investment policy. Our goals with respect to the investment of
these net proceeds are capital preservation and liquidity so
that such funds are readily available.
Dividend policy
We have not declared or paid any dividends on our common stock
and do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock
for the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain any
future earnings for use in the operation of our business and to
fund future growth. The payment of any dividends by us on our
common or preferred stock is limited by our loan agreement with
Bank of America. Any future decision to declare and pay
dividends will be at the sole discretion of our board of
directors.
23
Capitalization
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
December 31, 2006:
|
|
Ø
|
on an actual basis;
|
|
Ø
|
on a pro forma basis to give effect to the conversion of all of
our outstanding preferred stock
into shares of
common stock; and
|
|
Ø
|
on a pro forma as adjusted basis to give further effect to the
sale
of shares
of common stock that we are offering at an assumed initial
public offering price of
$ per share, after deducting
underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering
expenses to be paid by us.
|
You should read the following table in conjunction with our
consolidated financial statements and related notes and
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations appearing elsewhere in
this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro
Forma
|
|
|
as
Adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
Cash and cash
equivalents(1)
|
|
$
|
6,255
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt and long-term
obligations
|
|
|
6,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, no par value;
3,000,000 shares authorized, 855,495 shares issued and
outstanding, actual;
and shares
authorized, no shares issued or outstanding, pro forma and pro
forma as
adjusted(2)
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock, no par value;
10,000,000 shares authorized; 4,922,075 shares issued
and outstanding,
actual; shares
authorized, shares
issued and outstanding, pro forma;
and shares
authorized, shares
issued and outstanding on a pro forma as adjusted
basis(3)
|
|
|
15,743
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in
capital(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(7,360
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders
equity(1)
|
|
|
11,126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
capitalization(1)
|
|
$
|
17,783
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Each $1.00 increase or decrease in
the assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share would increase or
decrease, as applicable, the amount of cash and cash
equivalents, additional paid-in capital, total
shareholders equity and total capitalization by
approximately $ million,
assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the
cover of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting
the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions payable by
us.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Upon the completion of this
offering, the outstanding shares of preferred stock will convert
into an aggregate
of shares
of common stock.
|
|
(3)
|
|
Excludes:
|
|
|
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding options at
a weighted average exercise price of
$ per share;
|
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock reserved for future issuance under our 2007
Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan and our 2007
Directors Plan; and
|
|
|
Ø
|
shares
of common stock issuable upon the exercise of outstanding
warrants at a weighted average exercise price of
$ per share.
|
24
Dilution
Our net tangible book as of December 31, 2006 was
$1.3 million, or $ per share.
Net tangible book value per share represents the amount of our
total tangible assets less total liabilities, divided by the
total number of shares of common stock outstanding. Our pro
forma net tangible book value as of December 31, 2006 was
$
million, or
$
per share of common stock. Pro forma net tangible book value per
share gives effect to the conversion of all of our preferred
stock
into shares
of our common stock, which will occur upon completion of this
offering.
After giving further effect to the sale by us
of shares
of common stock in this offering at an assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per
share, after taking into account the automatic conversion of our
preferred stock upon completion of this offering, and after
deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses payable by us, our pro forma as adjusted net
tangible book value as of December 31, 2006 would have been
approximately
$ million,
or approximately
$ per
share. This amount represents an immediate increase in pro forma
net tangible book value of
$ per
share to our existing shareholders and an immediate dilution in
pro forma net tangible book value of approximately
$ per
share to new investors purchasing shares of common stock in this
offering. We determine dilution by subtracting the pro forma as
adjusted net tangible book value per share after this offering
from the amount of cash that a new investor paid for a share of
common stock.
The following table illustrates this dilution on a per share
basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed initial public offering
price per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Net tangible book value per share
as of December 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on net tangible book value
per share on conversion of preferred stock into common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net tangible book value
per share as of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase per share attributable to
this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma as adjusted net tangible
book value per share after this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution per share to new investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per
share would increase (decrease) our pro forma as adjusted net
tangible book value as of December 31, 2006 by
approximately
$ million,
the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share
after this offering by
$
and the dilution in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book
value to new investors in this offering by
$ per
share, assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth
on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and after
deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us.
25
Dilution
The following table summarizes, as of December 31, 2006,
the differences between the number of shares purchased from us,
the total consideration paid to us and the average price per
share that existing shareholders and new investors paid. The
table gives effect to the conversion of all of our outstanding
preferred stock
into shares of
common stock, which will occur upon completion of this offering.
The calculation below is based on an assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per
share and before deducting underwriting discounts and
commissions and estimated offering expenses that we must pay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Total
Shares
|
|
|
Total
Consideration
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Number
|
|
%
|
|
|
Number
|
|
%
|
|
|
per
Share
|
|
|
Existing shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
New investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per
share would increase (decrease) total consideration paid to us
by investors participating in this offering by approximately
$ million,
assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the
cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and after
deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us.
The discussion and tables above assume no exercise of the
underwriters over-allotment option. If the
underwriters over-allotment option is exercised in full,
the number of shares of common stock held by existing
shareholders will be further reduced
to ,
or % of the total number of shares of common stock to
be outstanding after this offering, and the number of shares of
common stock held by investors participating in this offering
will be further increased
to ,
or % of the total number of shares of common stock to
be outstanding after this offering.
In addition, the above discussion and table assume no exercise
of stock options after December 31, 2006. As of
December 31, 2006, we had outstanding options to purchase a
total
of shares
of common stock at a weighted average exercise price of
$ per
share and we had
reserved shares
of common stock issuable upon the exercise of outstanding
warrants at a weighted average exercise price of
$ per share. If all such
options and warrants had been exercised as of December 31,
2006, pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share
would have been $ per share,
and dilution to new investors would have been
$ per
share.
26
Selected
consolidated financial data
The following consolidated statement of operations data for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006 and
consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2005 and
2006 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial
statements and related notes, which are included elsewhere in
this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations data
for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003 and the
consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2002,
2003 and 2004 have been derived from our audited consolidated
financial statements that do not appear in this prospectus. The
following selected consolidated financial data should be read in
conjunction with, and is qualified by reference to, our
consolidated financial statements and related notes, which were
examined and reported upon by KPMG LLP, and
Managements discussion and analysis of financial
condition and results of operations appearing elsewhere in
this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
Statement of
operations
data(1):
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands,
except per share data)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
2,086
|
|
|
$
|
2,943
|
|
|
$
|
12,032
|
|
|
$
|
10,690
|
|
|
$
|
17,815
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
816
|
|
|
|
533
|
|
|
|
2,399
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
2,100
|
|
|
|
2,726
|
|
|
|
6,802
|
|
|
|
5,647
|
|
|
|
7,349
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
934
|
|
|
|
1,658
|
|
|
|
746
|
|
|
|
1,158
|
|
|
|
2,233
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
2,279
|
|
|
|
2,265
|
|
|
|
2,358
|
|
|
|
2,588
|
|
|
|
2,999
|
|
Amortization of product license
rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
515
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
5,313
|
|
|
|
6,654
|
|
|
|
10,729
|
|
|
|
9,940
|
|
|
|
15,592
|
|
Gain on insurance recovery
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(3,227
|
)
|
|
|
(3,710
|
)
|
|
|
1,569
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
2,224
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
765
|
|
|
|
1,012
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
722
|
|
Other expense (income)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income before minority interest
and income taxes
|
|
|
(3,289
|
)
|
|
|
(4,469
|
)
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
770
|
|
|
|
1,708
|
|
Minority interest in net loss of
consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,184
|
|
|
|
2,697
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(3,282
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4,469
|
)
|
|
$
|
558
|
|
|
$
|
1,954
|
|
|
$
|
4,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per
sharebasic
|
|
$
|
(0.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.41
|
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per
sharediluted
|
|
$
|
(0.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.07
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstandingbasic
|
|
|
4,116
|
|
|
|
4,261
|
|
|
|
4,541
|
|
|
|
4,748
|
|
|
|
4,899
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstandingdiluted
|
|
|
4,116
|
|
|
|
4,261
|
|
|
|
7,741
|
|
|
|
8,045
|
|
|
|
8,016
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The sum of the individual amounts
may not agree due to rounding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
December 31,
|
|
Balance sheet
data:
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,790
|
|
|
$
|
771
|
|
|
$
|
516
|
|
|
$
|
5,536
|
|
|
$
|
6,255
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
(485
|
)
|
|
|
(3,110
|
)
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
5,640
|
|
|
|
3,945
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,946
|
|
|
|
2,083
|
|
|
|
4,507
|
|
|
|
10,173
|
|
|
|
26,481
|
|
Total long-term debt and other
long-term obligations
|
|
|
2,358
|
|
|
|
3,108
|
|
|
|
2,436
|
|
|
|
2,398
|
|
|
|
10,543
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
|
|
2,743
|
|
Total shareholders equity
(deficit)
|
|
|
(1,762
|
)
|
|
|
(3,433
|
)
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
6,234
|
|
|
|
11,126
|
|
27
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
The following discussion and analysis of our financial
position and results of operations should be read together with
our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes
appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. This discussion and
analysis may contain forward-looking statements that involve
risks and uncertainties. You should review the Risk
factors section of this prospectus for a discussion of
important factors that could cause actual results to differ
materially from the results described in or implied by the
forward-looking statements described in the following discussion
and analysis.
OVERVIEW
We are a specialty pharmaceutical company focused on the
acquisition, development and commercialization of branded,
prescription products. We are building our product portfolio
primarily by acquiring rights to FDA-approved and late-stage
development products and marketing them to specialty physician
segments. Our primary target markets are hospital acute care and
gastroenterology. Our current portfolio consists of two marketed
products and one late-stage development product nearing
completion of Phase III clinical trials.
We pursued the development of Acetadote for the treatment of
acetaminophen poisoning and acquired rights to clinical data to
support its approval. Approval of the product was obtained in
January 2004 and we began to market Acetadote in the second
quarter of 2004 and launched the product with a dedicated
hospital sales force. In March 2006, we received approval from
the FDA for the use of Acetadote in pediatric patients.
We gained access to marketed gastroenterology products by
negotiating co-promotion agreements with the original developers
of these products. These agreements allowed us to enter the
gastroenterology market with minimal up-front costs and limited
ongoing operating risk. In 2005, we made a strategic decision to
de-emphasize our reliance on co-promotion agreements as a
primary growth driver. In April 2006, we acquired exclusive
commercial rights in the U.S. to Kristalose, a
gastroenterology product we had previously co-promoted under an
arrangement with Bertek Pharmaceuticals Inc., a subsidiary of
Mylan Laboratories Inc. In October 2006, we re-launched
Kristalose under the Cumberland brand with a dedicated field
sales force targeting gastroenterologists and other high
prescribers of laxative products.
Our research and development expenses have grown consistently
because of our program to develop Amelior. We expect research
and development expenses to increase in 2007 as we continue our
clinical work related to Amelior. We plan to complete the
Amelior clinical work in early 2008.
We have funded our operations with private equity capital of
approximately $14 million during the past six years. We
have supplemented this equity funding by re-investing our
profits and utilizing our credit facilities in order to support
our operations.
Prior to 2007, our sales forces were contracted to us by a third
party. In January 2007, we brought the hospital sales force
in-house via our
newly-formed,
wholly-owned
subsidiary, Cumberland Pharma Sales Corp. We continue to
outsource the dedicated gastroenterology sales force. All
expenses associated with the sales forces are included in
selling and marketing expense.
In 2000, we formed CET with Vanderbilt University and Tennessee
Technology Development Corporation to identify early-stage drug
development activities. CET partners with universities and other
research organizations to advance promising, early-stage product
candidates through the development process and on to
commercialization.
28
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely
to fluctuate in the future. These fluctuations can result from
competitive factors, new product acquisitions or introduction,
the nature, scope and result of our research and development
programs, pursuit of our growth strategy and other factors. As a
result of these fluctuations, our historical financial results
are not necessarily indicative of future results.
We were incorporated in 1999 and have been headquartered in
Nashville, Tennessee since inception.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND SIGNIFICANT JUDGMENTS AND
ESTIMATES
Accounting
Estimates and Judgments
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
requires management to make estimates, judgments and assumptions
that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and
expenses during the period. We base our estimates on past
experience and on other factors we deem reasonable given the
circumstances. Past results help form the basis of our judgments
about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not
determined from other sources. Actual results could differ from
those estimates. These estimates, judgments and assumptions are
most critical with respect to our accounting for revenue
recognition, provision for income taxes, stock-based
compensation, research and development accounting, and
intangible assets.
Revenue
Recognition
Our revenue is derived primarily from the product sales of
Acetadote and Kristalose. Revenue is recognized when persuasive
evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the
fee is fixed and determinable and collectibility is probable.
Delivery is considered to have occurred upon either shipment or
arrival at destination on shipping terms. When these conditions
are satisfied, we recognize gross revenue, which is the price we
charge generally to our wholesalers for a particular product. We
record allowances for estimated chargebacks, discounts and
damaged goods, and accruals for rebates and fees for services.
Allowances and accruals are established by management as its
best estimate at the time of sale based on each products
historical experience adjusted to reflect known changes in the
factors that impact such reserves. Allowances for chargebacks
and discounts, and accruals for rebates and returns are
established based on the contractual terms with customers;
analysis of historical levels of discounts, returns, chargebacks
and rebates; communications with customers and purchased
information about the rate of prescriptions being written and
the levels of inventory remaining in the distribution channel,
if known, as well as expectations about the market for each
product and anticipated introduction of competitive products.
The allowances for chargebacks and accruals for rebates and
returns are established by product, and are the most significant
estimates used in the recognition of our revenue from product
sales. If the actual amount of cash discounts taken,
chargebacks, rebates and expired product returns differ from the
amounts estimated by management, material differences may result
from the amount of our revenue recognized from product sales.
From January 2006 through part of April 2006, we recorded
contract sales revenue which was based on co-promotion
agreements primarily with Bertek Pharmaceuticals Inc., for the
sales of Kristalose. Co-promotion fees were calculated based on
a percent of gross sales or similar calculation. Contract sales
revenue is included in net revenues.
29
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
Other income, which is included in net revenues, includes rental
and grant income. Rental income and grant income were three
percent of net revenues in 2006.
Income
Taxes
We provide for deferred taxes using the asset and liability
approach. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities
are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to
operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards and differences
between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing
assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Our
principal differences are related to the timing of deductibility
of certain items such as depreciation, amortization and expense
for options issued to non-employees. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are measured using managements estimate of tax
rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which
management believes those temporary differences are expected to
be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and
liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in
the period that includes the enactment date.
In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets,
management considers whether it is more likely than not that
some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is
dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
the periods in which those temporary differences become
deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of
deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income, and
tax planning strategies in making this assessment. In order to
fully utilize the deferred tax asset of $4.0 million as of
December 31, 2006, we will need to generate future taxable
income of approximately $11.8 million prior to the
expiration of the net operating loss carry-forwards in 2025.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Prior to January 1, 2006 we applied the intrinsic-value-based
method of accounting prescribed by Accounting Principles Board
(APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock issued to
Employees, and related interpretations including
FIN No. 44, Accounting for Certain Transactions
involving Stock Compensation an interpretation of APB Opinion
No. 25, to account for our stock options issued under
the 1999 Stock Option Plan. Under this method, compensation
expense is recorded on the date of grant only if the current
market price of the underlying stock exceeded the exercise
price. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or
SFAS, No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation and Financial Accounting Standards Boards, or
FASB No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based
CompensationTransition and Disclosure, an amendment of
FASB Statement No. 123, established accounting and
disclosure requirements using a fair-value-based method of
accounting for stock-based employee compensation plans. As
permitted by then-existing accounting standards, we elected to
continue to apply the intrinsic-value-based method of accounting
described above, and adopted only the disclosure requirements of
SFAS No. 123, as amended.
Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS,
No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, which revises
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation and supersedes Accounting Principles Board, or
APB, Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees. SFAS 123(R) requires that share-based
payment transactions with employees be recognized in the
financial statements based on their fair value and recognized as
compensation expense over the vesting period. We adopted
SFAS 123(R) effective January 1, 2006, prospectively
for new equity awards issued subsequent to December 31,
2005.
30
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
Information on employee and non-employee stock options granted
in 2006 is summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Weighted
|
|
Average
|
|
Weighted
Average
|
|
|
Stock Options
|
|
Average
|
|
Intrinsic
Value
|
|
Fair Value of
|
Grants made
during quarter ended
|
|
Granted
|
|
Exercise
Price
|
|
per
Share
|
|
Option (per
Share)
|
|
|
March 31, 2006
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
$18.00
|
|
|
$4.00
|
|
|
$8.36
|
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
24,300
|
|
|
$18.74
|
|
|
$3.26
|
|
|
$9.90
|
September 30, 2006
|
|
|
9,075
|
|
|
$18.00
|
|
|
$4.00
|
|
|
$11.16
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
2,600
|
|
|
$18.00
|
|
|
$4.00
|
|
|
$11.01
|
Under SFAS No. 123(R), we calculate the fair value of
stock option grants using the Black-Scholes option-pricing
model. The assumptions used in the Black-Scholes model ranged
from two months to ten years for the expected term, 37%-63% for
the expected volatility, 4.34% to 5.08% for the risk free rate
and zero percent for dividend yield for the year ended
December 31, 2006. Future option expense could be impacted
by changes in our model assumptions.
For employee stock option grants, the weighted average expected
option terms for 2006 represent the application of the
simplified method as defined in SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin
(or SAB), No. 107 issued in March of 2005. The simplified
method defines the expected life as the average of the
contractual term of the options and the weighted average vesting
period for the option. For non-employee stock option grants, the
expected option terms for 2006 represent the contractual term.
Estimated volatility for 2006 was determined in accordance of
SAB No. 107 and was determined by reviewing historical
volatility of similar public companies.
As of December 31, 2006, we had approximately $322,000 of
unrecognized share-based compensation expense related to
unvested option awards. Additionally, as of December 31,
2006, we had outstanding vested options to purchase
3,899,088 shares of our common stock and unvested options
to purchase 105,890 shares of our common stock.
Furthermore, as of December 31, 2006, we had outstanding
34,479 warrants to purchase shares of our common stock.
Research and
Development
We account for research and development costs and accrue
expenses, based on estimates of work performed, patient
enrollment or fixed-fee-for-services. As work is performed
and/or
invoices are received, we adjust our estimates and accruals. To
date, our accruals have been within our estimates. Total
research and development costs are a function of studies being
conducted and will increase or decrease depending on the level
of activity in any particular year.
Intangible
Assets
Intangible assets include license agreements, product rights and
other identifiable intangible assets. We assess the impairment
of identifiable intangible assets whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be
recoverable. In determining the recoverability of our intangible
assets, we must make assumptions regarding estimated future cash
flows and other factors. If the estimated undiscounted future
cash flows do not exceed the carrying value of the intangible
assets, we must determine the fair value of the intangible
assets. If the fair value of the intangible assets is less than
the carrying value, an impairment loss will be recognized in an
amount equal to the difference.
31
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated,
certain items from our statement of operations expressed as a
percentage of net revenues, as well as the
period-to-period
change in these items.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
%
Change
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2004-2005
|
|
|
2005-2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
(11.2
|
%)
|
|
|
66.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of products sold
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
13.5
|
|
|
|
(34.7
|
)
|
|
|
349.9
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
56.5
|
|
|
|
52.8
|
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
(17.0
|
)
|
|
|
30.1
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
|
55.2
|
|
|
|
92.9
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
19.6
|
|
|
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
Amortization of product license
rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
117.4
|
|
|
|
614.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
89.2
|
|
|
|
93.0
|
|
|
|
87.5
|
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)
|
|
|
56.9
|
|
Gain on insurance recovery
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
|
(52.2
|
)
|
|
|
196.5
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
133.8
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
(93.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income before income taxes
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
38.0
|
|
|
|
121.7
|
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
127.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income(2)
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
18.3
|
|
|
|
24.7
|
|
|
|
250.1
|
|
|
|
125.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Not meaningful.
|
|
(2)
|
|
The sum of the individual amounts
do not agree to the total due to rounding.
|
Description of
operating accounts
Net revenues consist of net product revenue, revenue from
co-promotion agreements and other revenue. Net product revenue
consists primarily of gross revenue less discounts and
allowances, such as cash discounts, rebates, chargebacks and
returns. Revenue from co-promotion agreements includes product
promotion fees. Other income includes rental and grant income.
Cost of products sold consists primarily of the cost of
each unit of product sold. Cost of products sold also includes
expense for slow moving or expired product.
Selling and marketing expense consists primarily of
expense relating to the promotion, distribution and sale of
products, including salaries and related costs.
Research and development expense consists primarily of
clinical trial expenses, salary and wages and related costs of
materials and supplies, and certain activities of third-party
providers participating in our clinical studies.
General and administrative expense includes finance and
accounting expenses, executive expenses, office expenses and
business development expenses, including salaries and related
costs.
32
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
Amortization of product license rights resulted from our
acquisition of the exclusive U.S. commercialization rights to
Kristalose.
Interest income consists primarily of interest income
earned on cash deposits.
Interest expense consists primarily of interest incurred
on debt and other long-term obligations.
Income tax benefit consists primarily of the realization
of our deferred tax assets less taxes incurred on income.
Year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to year ended December 31,
2005
Net revenues. Net revenues in 2006 totaled
$17.8 million, representing an increase of
$7.1 million, or 66.7%, over net revenues in 2005 of
$10.7 million. This increase was primarily due to
additional product revenue from sales of Kristalose, as well as
continued growth of Acetadote. In April 2006, we entered into an
agreement to acquire the exclusive U.S. commercial rights
to Kristalose and began recording revenue based on shipments of
the product. Prior to April 2006, we co-promoted Kristalose and
recorded a co-promotion fee based on a percentage of the
products sales. In 2005, revenue was reduced by
$2.0 million for promotional costs owed to a wholesaler.
Additionally, unlike prior years, in 2006, we did not offer any
special purchasing opportunities to our customers prior to
product price increases.
Cost of products sold. Cost of products sold
in 2006 totaled $2.4 million, representing an increase of
$1.9 million, or 349.9%, over cost of products sold in 2005
of $533,000. Cost of products sold as a percentage of net
revenues was 13.5% and 5.0% in 2006 and 2005, respectively. The
majority of the increase was due to recording the cost of
products sold associated with Kristalose beginning in April
2006. Prior to that date, we recorded no Kristalose cost of
products sold because of the co-promotion arrangement referred
to above. Acetadote cost of products sold, as a percentage of
Acetadote net revenue, was not materially different between 2006
and 2005.
Selling and marketing. Selling and marketing
expense in 2006 totaled $7.3 million, representing an
increase of $1.7 million, or 30.1%, over selling and marketing
expense in 2005 of $5.6 million. Selling and marketing
expense as a percentage of net revenues was 41.2% and 52.8% in
2006 and 2005, respectively. The increase was primarily due to
the launch of our new dedicated gastroenterology field sales
force as well as other sales and marketing costs associated with
the re-launch of Kristalose. We anticipate selling and marketing
expense will grow, as we expand both sales forces as well as our
product lines.
Research and development. Research and
development expense in 2006 totaled $2.2 million,
representing an increase of $1.1 million, or 92.9%, over
research and development expense in 2005 of $1.2 million.
Research and development expense as a percentage of net revenues
was 12.5% and 10.8% in 2006 and 2005, respectively. This
increase was primarily due to increased clinical studies
activities associated with the development of Amelior. Research
and development expense is expected to continue to grow in 2007,
as we work to complete our final studies of Amelior prior to
submission for approval to the FDA.
General and administrative. General and
administrative expense in 2006 totaled $3.0 million,
representing an increase of $412,000, or 15.9%, over general and
administrative expense in 2005 of $2.6 million. General and
administrative expense as a percentage of net revenues was 16.8%
and 24.2% in 2006 and 2005, respectively. The dollar increase in
general and administrative expense was primarily due to an
increase in salaries and related expenses from 2005, as a result
of the addition of personnel to support our growth. We expect
general and administrative expense to increase in future
33
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
periods as we continue to add staff, expand our infrastructure
and support the requirements of a public company.
Amortization of product license
rights. Amortization of product license rights
totaled $515,000 in 2006. This expense is a result of
amortization associated with our acquisition of the exclusive
U.S. commercialization rights to Kristalose. We expect to incur
annual amortization expense relating to these product license
rights through March 2021.
Interest income. Interest income in 2006
totaled $209,000 compared to interest income in 2005 of $89,000.
The majority of the increase in interest income was due to
larger cash balances in 2006.
Interest expense. Interest expense in 2006
totaled $722,000 compared to interest expense in 2005 of
$63,000. The majority of the increase in interest expense was
due to interest expense associated with debt incurred to finance
the acquisition of Kristalose. In 2005, we had minimal debt and
thus, minimal interest expense.
Income tax benefit. Net income tax benefit in
2006 totaled $2.7 million compared to net income tax
benefit in 2005 of $1.2 million. The increase was due to
full recording of our deferred tax asset after determining that
it was more likely than not that we would realize the benefits
of the deferred tax asset.
Year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to year ended December 31,
2004
Net revenues. Net revenues in 2005 totaled
$10.7 million, representing a decrease of $1.3 million, or
11.2%, over net revenues in 2004 of $12.0 million. This
decrease was primarily due to promotional costs owed to a
wholesaler. This was partially off-set by a full year of sales
of Acetadote in 2005, versus nine months in 2004. In 2005, two
products accounted for all product sales, and there were two
additional products for which we received a portion of product
revenue based on promotion agreements. In 2004 and 2005, we
provided our key customers the opportunity to purchase
additional product prior to implementing a price increase.
Certain customers took advantage of this opportunity and
purchased additional product. The last year we offered such an
incentive to our customers was 2005.
Cost of products sold. Cost of products sold
in 2005 totaled $533,000, representing a decrease of $283,000,
or 34.7%, over cost of products sold in 2004 of $816,000. Cost
of products sold as a percentage of net revenues was 5.0% and
6.8% in 2005 and 2004, respectively. The majority of the
decrease was due to a change in the product mix, which in 2004
included a higher ratio of gastroenterology products as compared
to 2005. Gastroenterology products tend to have a higher
manufacturing cost per unit than our other products.
Selling and marketing. Selling and marketing
expense in 2005 totaled $5.6 million representing a
decrease of $1.2 million, or 17.0%, over selling and marketing
expense in 2004 of $6.8 million. Selling and marketing
expense as a percentage of net revenues was 52.8% and 56.5% in
2005 and 2004, respectively. The decrease was due to lower
royalty costs, a reduction in marketing costs relative to 2004
when we launched Acetadote, reduced distribution costs and
reduced sales force expenses.
Research and development. Research and
development expense in 2005 totaled $1.2 million,
representing an increase of $412,000 or 55.2%, over research and
development expense in 2004 of $746,000. Research and
development expense as a percentage of net revenues was 10.8%
and 6.2% in 2005 and 2004, respectively. This increase was
primarily due to increased expenses relating to clinical studies
associated with the development of Amelior.
General and administrative. General and
administrative expense in 2005 totaled $2.6 million,
representing an increase of $230,000, or 9.7%, over general and
administrative expense in 2004 of
34
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
$2.4 million. General and administrative expense as a
percentage of net revenues was 24.2% and 19.6% in 2005 and 2004,
respectively. This increase was primarily due to increased stock
option expense for consulting services as well as increased
salaries and related expenses.
Interest income. Interest income in 2005
totaled $89,000 compared to interest income in 2004 of $1,000.
The majority of the increase in interest income in 2005 resulted
from higher levels of cash and cash equivalents.
Interest expense. Interest expense in 2005
totaled $63,000 compared to interest expense in 2004 of
$1.0 million. The majority of the decrease in interest
expense in 2005 resulted from lower levels of outstanding debt
as 2004 had significant interest expense associated with
convertible debt which was converted to equity in 2004.
Income tax benefit. Net income tax benefit in
2005 totaled $1.2 million. We had no income tax benefit in
2004. The existence of the income tax benefit was due to
initial, partial recording of our deferred tax asset after
determining that it was more likely than not that we would
realize at least a portion of benefits of the deferred tax asset.
LIQUIDITY AND
CAPITAL RESOURCES
As of December 31, 2006, cash and cash equivalents was
$6.3 million, working capital was $3.9 million and our
current ratio (current assets to current liabilities) was 1.5 to
1. Management expects funds for our operating and capital
requirements will be provided by continuing revenue and existing
cash balances, as well as from collaborative agreements and
other financing arrangements. As of December 31, 2006, we
also had the ability to make additional draws of up to
$3 million on our line of credit and will have substantial
proceeds from this offering.
The following table summarizes our net increase (decrease) in
cash and cash equivalents for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2005 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
(1,439
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,416
|
|
|
$
|
2,163
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
(318
|
)
|
|
|
(6,553
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
1,236
|
|
|
|
2,922
|
|
|
|
5,109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
(255
|
)(1)
|
|
$
|
5,020
|
|
|
$
|
719
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The sum of the individual amounts
do not agree to the total due to rounding.
|
Net cash provided by operating activities was $2.2 million
for the year ended December 31, 2006. During this time, net
income of $4.4 million was partially offset by net changes
in assets and liabilities of $713,000 and adjustments to
reconcile net income to net cash for depreciation, amortization,
stock-based compensation, and deferred tax benefit.
Net cash used in investing activities was $6.6 million for
the year ended December 31, 2006. This use of cash was
primarily due to a payment of $6.5 million for the
acquisition of exclusive U.S. rights to Kristalose.
35
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
Net cash provided by financing activities was $5.1 million
for the year ended December 31, 2006, including
$5.5 million of proceeds from the issuance of long-term
debt to fund the acquisition of rights to Kristalose.
In April 2006, we entered into an agreement with Inalco to
acquire exclusive U.S. commercial rights for Kristalose. In
order to complete this transaction, we obtained funding from
Bank of America in the form of a three-year term loan for
$5.5 million and a new two-year revolving line of credit
agreement, both with an interest rate of LIBOR plus 2.5% (7.83%
as of December 31, 2006). The borrowings are collateralized
by a first lien against all of our assets. We are paying off the
term loan in quarterly installments, with the final payment due
in 2009. This agreement contains various covenants, all of which
we were in compliance with as of December 31, 2006. In
addition to the three-year term loan, we deferred
$4.5 million of the purchase price, with $1.5 million
due in 2007 and $3.0 million due in 2009.
In conjunction with this line of credit agreement and term loan
agreement, we issued to the lender warrants to purchase up to
1,979 shares of common stock at $18.00 per share. The
warrants expire in April 2016. The estimated fair value of such
warrants of $25,680, as determined using the Black-Scholes
model, has been recorded in the accompanying financial
statements as permanent equity in accordance with Emerging
Issues Task Force, or EITF,
No. 00-19,
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to,
and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock.
In conjunction with the Kristalose agreement with Inalco, we are
obligated to purchase a minimum amount of Kristalose inventory
each year. We expect our normal inventory purchasing to be above
the required minimum amount.
As part of our agreement with Bioniche, our supplier of
Acetadote, we are obligated to purchase a minimum amount of
Acetadote inventory each year beginning in 2007, through 2011.
We expect that our normal inventory purchasing to be above the
required minimum amount.
In the second quarter of 2005, we received approximately
$2.0 million from various investors in exchange for
convertible promissory notes with a maturity date six months
from the date of issuance. The notes bore interest at a fixed
annual rate of 3.5%. In the fourth quarter of 2005, and pursuant
to the terms of the notes, the principal value plus all elected
accrued interest was converted into shares of our common stock.
In April 2005, we conducted a private placement of our common
stock in which we issued 100,000 shares of common stock for
total gross proceeds of $1.8 million, with net proceeds of
$1.7 million. The purpose of this offering was to provide
funding to advance product agreements, to complete product
development and for general corporate purposes.
In May 2004, we issued 43,000 shares of our common stock to
S.C.O.U.T. Healthcare Fund, L.P., or S.C.O.U.T., for cash
consideration of $516,000.
On October 21, 2003, we amended our $1.0 million,
one-year revolving line of credit. Under the terms of the
amended agreement, we had borrowing capacity up to the lesser of
$3.5 million or 80% of our eligible receivables, plus 50%
of our eligible inventory. The agreement was extended to March
2006. The agreement contained various provisions and covenants
with which we were in compliance at December 31, 2005.
On September 5, 2003, we received $1.0 million from
S.C.O.U.T. in the form of a convertible promissory note with a
maturity date of September 5, 2004. The note bore interest
at a fixed annual rate of 10%. Pursuant to the terms of the
note, on its maturity date the principal value of the note plus
all accrued interest automatically converted into
91,667 shares of our common stock.
36
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
During 2000, we signed an agreement with a third party to cover
a variety of development efforts related to a specific
pharmaceutical drug, including preparation of submissions to the
FDA. Under the terms of the agreement, we deferred a portion of
each bill from the third party. One-third of the deferred amount
accrued interest at an annual rate of 12.5% and was due after
eighteen months. The remaining two-thirds will be due upon
specific milestone events. Upon meeting the first milestone, an
amount equal to one-third of the original deferred amount, or
approximately $205,000, will become due and payable. Upon
completion of the final milestone event, an amount equal to five
times one-third of the original deferred amount, or
approximately $1 million, will become due and payable to
the third party. Since the application of these factors is
contingent upon specific events which may or may not occur in
the future and which have not occurred as of December 31,
2006, the expense for these factors has not been recorded.
The following table sets forth a summary of our contractual cash
obligations as of December 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by
Year
|
|
Contractual
obligations
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011+
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
Amounts reflected in the
balance sheet:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line of credit
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
826
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Term loan
|
|
|
1,833
|
|
|
|
1,833
|
|
|
|
917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other contractual obligations
|
|
|
2,078
|
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other cash obligations not
reflected in the balance sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
487
|
|
|
|
492
|
|
|
|
460
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Purchase
obligations(1)
|
|
|
2,084
|
|
|
|
2,384
|
|
|
|
2,684
|
|
|
|
2,984
|
|
|
|
809
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Represents minimum purchase
obligations under Kristalose and Acetadote manufacturing
agreements.
|
OFF-BALANCE SHEET
ARRANGEMENTS
During 2004, 2005 and 2006, we did not engage in any off-balance
sheet arrangements.
RECENT ACCOUNTING
PRONOUNCEMENTS
In September 2005, the EITF issued EITF Issue
No. 04-13,
Accounting for Purchases and Sales of Inventory with the Same
Counterparty. EITF
No. 04-13
provides guidance as to when purchases and sales of inventory
with the same counterparty should be accounted for as a single
exchange transaction. EITF
No. 04-13
also provides guidance as to when a non-monetary exchange of
inventory should be accounted for at fair value. EITF
No. 04-13
will be applied to new arrangements entered into, and
modifications or renewals to existing arrangements occurring
after January 1, 2007. The application of EITF
No. 04-13
is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial
statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 157,
Fair Value Measurement, or Statement 157.
SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
the measurement of fair value, and enhances disclosures about
fair value measurements. The Statement does not require any new
fair value measures. The Statement is effective for fair value
measures already required or permitted by other standards for
fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We are
required to adopt Statement 157 beginning on
January 1, 2008. Statement 157 is required to be
applied prospectively, except for certain financial instruments.
Any transition adjustment will be recognized as an adjustment to
opening retained earnings in the year of adoption. We are
currently evaluating the impact of adopting Statement 157
on our results of operations and financial position.
37
Managements
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of
operations
In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an
interpretation of FASB Statement 109 (FIN 48).
FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income
taxes recognized in an enterprises financial statements
and prescribes a threshold of more-likely-than-not for
recognition of tax benefits of uncertain tax positions taken or
expected to be taken in a tax return. FIN 48 also provides
related guidance on measurement, de-recognition, classification,
interest and penalties, and disclosure. The provisions of
FIN 48 are effective for us as of January 1, 2007,
with any cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle
recorded as an adjustment to opening retained earnings. We are
in the process of assessing the impact of adopting FIN 48
on our results of operations and financial position.
RECENTLY ADOPTED
ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In March 2005, the FASB issued Statement No. 123R (which
replaces Statement No. 123 issued in 1995), Share-Based
Payments, which addresses accounting for transactions in
which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or
services, with a primary focus on transactions in which an
entity obtains employee services in share-based payment
transactions. This Statement is a revision of Statement
No. 123 and supersedes APB Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and its related
implementation guidance. For nonpublic companies, this Statement
requires measurement of the cost of employee services received
in exchange for stock compensation based on the grant-date fair
value of the employee stock options. Incremental compensation
costs arising from subsequent modifications of awards after the
grant date must be recognized. This Statement was effective for
us as of January 1, 2006.
QUANTITATIVE AND
QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE OF MARKET RISKS
Our exposure to market risk is related to interest rates on our
cash on deposit in highly liquid money market accounts. The main
objective of our cash investment activities is to preserve
principal while maximizing interest income through low risk
investments. Derivative instruments are not included in our
investment portfolio. Our investment policy focuses on principal
preservation and liquidity.
While we operate primarily in the U.S., we do have foreign
currency exposure considerations. Acetadote is manufactured by a
supplier that denominates supply prices in Canadian dollars.
Additionally, much of our research and development is performed
abroad. Foreign currency transactions in U.S. dollars totaled
approximately $1.4 million in 2006.
38
Business
OVERVIEW
We are a profitable and growing specialty pharmaceutical company
focused on the acquisition, development and commercialization of
branded prescription products. Our primary target markets are
hospital acute care and gastroenterology, which are
characterized by relatively concentrated physician prescriber
bases. Unlike many emerging pharmaceutical and biotechnology
companies, we have established a product development and
commercial operating infrastructure that is scalable to
accommodate our expected growth. Our management team consists of
pharmaceutical industry veterans with significant experience in
business development, clinical and regulatory affairs, and sales
and marketing.
Since our inception in 1999, we have successfully funded the
acquisition and development of our product portfolio with
limited external investment and maintained profitable operations
over the past three years. Our portfolio consists of two
products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or
FDA, one late-stage development product candidate nearing
completion of Phase III clinical trials and several
early-stage development projects. We were directly responsible
for the clinical development and regulatory approval of
Acetadote, one of our marketed products, and are currently
completing development of Amelior, our lead product candidate.
We promote Acetadote and our other FDA-approved product,
Kristalose, through dedicated hospital and gastroenterology
sales forces, which are comprised of 42 sales representatives
and managers.
Our key products and product candidates include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
Indication
|
|
Delivery
|
|
Status
|
|
|
Amelior®
|
|
Pain and Fever
|
|
Injectable
|
|
Phase III
|
Acetadote®
|
|
Acetaminophen Poisoning
|
|
Injectable
|
|
Marketed
|
Kristalose®
|
|
Chronic and Acute Constipation
|
|
Oral Solution
|
|
Marketed
|
|
|
Amelior, our lead pipeline candidate, is an intravenous
formulation of ibuprofen that we expect will be the first
injectable product approved in the U.S. for the treatment
of both pain and fever. Amelior is currently in Phase III
clinical trials. We expect to complete clinical development by
early 2008 and are preparing to submit our new drug application,
or NDA, to the FDA for review. Amelior is designed to provide
physicians with a safe, effective treatment alternative for
patients who are unable to take oral medication for pain relief
or fever reduction. If approved, we plan to market Amelior in
the U.S. through our hospital sales force and in
international markets through alliances with marketing partners.
We believe Amelior currently represents our most significant
product opportunity.
Injectable analgesics, or pain relievers, currently available in
the U.S. include opioids, such as morphine and meperdine,
and ketorolac, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, or NSAID.
While opioids accounted for over 91% of market volume, with
approximately 447 million units sold in 2006, they are
known to cause undesirable side effects including nausea,
vomiting and cognitive impairment. Ketorolac is the only
non-opioid injectable analgesic approved for sale in the U.S.
and has also been known to cause unwanted side effects. Despite
strong safety warnings from the FDA, use of ketorolac in the
U.S. has grown from approximately 38 million units
sold in 2003 (7% of the market) to approximately 43 million
units sold in 2006 (9% of the market) according to IMS Health
Inc., or IMS Health. Based on the results of clinical studies to
date, we believe Amelior represents a potentially safer
alternative therapy to ketorolac. Further, we believe Amelior is
a safe and effective treatment for hospitalized patients with
fever who are unable to take oral medication. There is currently
no approved injectable treatment for fever in the U.S.
39
Business
Acetadote is an intravenous formulation of
N-acetylcysteine, or NAC, indicated for the treatment of
acetaminophen poisoning. According to the American Association
of Poison Control Centers Toxic Exposure Surveillance
System, acetaminophen was the leading cause of poisonings
presenting to emergency departments in the U.S., with
approximately 77,000 cases treated in 2005. In January 2004,
Acetadote received FDA approval as an orphan drug, a designation
which provides for seven years of marketing exclusivity from
date of approval. Since its launch in June 2004, we have
consistently grown product sales for Acetadote, with wholesaler
sales to hospitals growing 43% to $13 million in 2006. We
believe that we can continue to expand market share, and that
our Acetadote sales and marketing platform should help
facilitate the commercial launch of Amelior.
Kristalose, a prescription laxative product, is a
crystalline form of lactulose designed to enhance patient
acceptance and compliance. Based on data from IMS Health, the
market for prescription laxatives in the U.S. grew from
approximately $206 million in 2003 to $389 million in
2006, driven largely by new product introductions and increased
promotional activity by our competitors. Wholesaler sales of
Kristalose to pharmacies were $10.5 million in 2006. We
acquired exclusive U.S. commercialization rights to
Kristalose during that year, assembled a new dedicated field
sales force and re-launched the product in October 2006 under
the Cumberland brand. We believe that Kristalose has competitive
advantages over competing prescription laxatives, and that the
potential for growth of this product is significant.
Early-stage product candidates. Our
early-stage product candidates are being developed through
Cumberland Emerging Technologies, Inc., or CET, our 86%-owned
subsidiary. CET collaborates with leading research institutions
to identify and pursue promising pre-clinical programs within
our target market segments. We have negotiated rights to develop
and commercialize these product candidates. Current CET projects
include an improved treatment for fluid buildup in the lungs of
cancer patients and an anti-infective for treating fungal
infections in immuno-compromised patients. In conjunction with
these research institutions, we have obtained grant funding to
support the development of these programs.
OUR COMPETITIVE
STRENGTHS
Significant
late-stage product opportunity in Amelior
We believe Amelior currently represents our most significant
product opportunity based on the large potential markets for
intravenous treatment of pain and fever, as well as clinical
results for the product to date. We have conducted several
clinical trials to support this product and expect to complete
Phase III clinical studies by early 2008. Based on our
clinical results to date, we believe Amelior represents a
potentially safer alternative to ketorolac, which is the only
injectable non-opioid analgesic currently on the
U.S. market, with approximately 43 million units sold
in 2006. We have retained exclusive commercialization rights for
Amelior in the U.S. and plan to market the product through our
existing hospital sales force.
Strong growth
potential of our existing marketed products, Acetadote and
Kristalose
We believe that there is significant opportunity to increase
sales of our two currently approved products, Acetadote and
Kristalose. Since its launch in June 2004, we have consistently
grown product sales for Acetadote. During 2006, hospital
purchases of Acetadote from wholesalers grew 43% to
$13 million. Kristalose competes in the high growth
U.S. prescription laxatives market which, based on data
from IMS Health, grew from approximately $206 million in
2003 to $389 million in 2006, or a compound annual growth
rate of approximately 24%. After acquiring exclusive U.S. rights
to Kristalose in April 2006, we assembled an experienced,
dedicated sales force and designed a new marketing
40
Business
program, re-launching the product in October 2006. We believe
both Kristalose and Acetadote have favorable competitive
profiles, and that we can increase market share for each.
Focus on
underserved niche markets
We focus our efforts on specialty physician segments where we
believe we can leverage our industry expertise and sales
capability to deliver products that address unmet medical needs.
Currently, our primary target markets are hospital acute care
and gastroenterology. We consider these markets attractive
because of their relatively concentrated prescriber bases, which
allow us to reach target prescribers with a small number of
sales representatives. Moreover, we believe these markets are
less prone to competition from larger pharmaceutical companies
than other pharmaceutical sectors.
Profitable
business with a history of fiscal discipline
We have been profitable since 2004, during which time we have
generated sufficient cash flows to fund our development and
marketing programs without the need for significant external
financing. As an emerging pharmaceutical company with limited
resources, we have historically focused on product opportunities
with relatively low acquisition, development, and
commercialization costs. Further, we believe that our
third-party manufacturing and distribution relationships allow
us to outsource these functions efficiently while directing most
of our resources to our core competencies of business
development, clinical and regulatory affairs, and sales and
marketing.
Integrated
specialty pharmaceutical company with extensive management
expertise
Our executives have significant pharmaceutical industry
experience in business development, clinical and regulatory
affairs, and sales and marketing. This team is augmented by our
Pharmaceutical and Medical Advisory Boards, which consist of
highly experienced healthcare professionals.
|
|
Ø
|
Our business development team is led by our CEO and our Director
of Business Development and is comprised of a multi-disciplinary
group of executives. This team sources product opportunities
independently as well as through our international network of
pharmaceutical and medical industry insiders. Their efforts have
resulted in acquisition, license, co-promotion and strategic
alliance agreements, and have provided us with rights to our
current portfolio. This group is also responsible for acquiring
rights to early-stage product candidates through CET.
|
|
Ø
|
Our clinical, regulatory affairs and product development team is
led by three professionals with substantial experience advancing
late-stage clinical candidates successfully through the FDA
approval process. This team was directly responsible for
obtaining FDA approval for Acetadote and is responsible for our
development of Amelior. We have established internal
capabilities to develop proprietary product formulations, design
and manage our clinical trials, prepare all regulatory
submissions and manage our medical call center.
|
|
Ø
|
Our sales and marketing team is managed by five executives who
have broad experience marketing branded pharmaceuticals. They
manage the dedicated hospital and gastroenterology sales forces
that promote our products and that together are comprised of 42
sales representatives and managers. Our executives also direct
our national marketing campaigns and manage relationships with
key accounts.
|
41
Business
OUR
STRATEGY
Our objective is to develop, acquire and commercialize branded
pharmaceutical products for specialty physician market segments.
Specifically, we plan to:
Successfully
develop and commercialize Amelior, our Phase III product
candidate
Amelior is in late-stage Phase III clinical development for
the treatment of pain and fever. We have gathered positive data
regarding the safety and efficacy of this product, and we expect
to complete clinical trials in early 2008. We believe that there
is significant market potential for Amelior in both pain and
fever. We intend to penetrate the U.S. hospital market with
our existing hospital sales force and to commercialize the
product internationally through alliances with marketing
partners.
Maximize sales of
our marketed products
Over the past three years, we have employed an effective
marketing campaign resulting in consistent sales growth for our
product Acetadote. We intend to expand our hospital sales force
in anticipation of a potential launch of Amelior. We believe we
can leverage this expanded sales force to increase Acetadote
sales. We are also supporting several studies to explore other
potential indications for Acetadote. In October 2006, we
re-launched Kristalose under the Cumberland brand with a new
marketing program and dedicated sales force, which we expect to
expand significantly over time. This marketing program is
designed to enhance brand awareness through increased
promotional activity and highlights Kristaloses many
positive, competitive attributes. In addition to our sales
efforts, we may also pursue co-promotion arrangements with third
parties to support growth of our products.
Expand sales
force operations
We intend to continue building our sales and marketing
infrastructure in order to drive prescription volume and product
sales. We currently utilize two distinct sales teams:
|
|
Ø
|
We promote Acetadote, and plan to promote Amelior,
through our dedicated hospital sales team consisting of 16
representatives and managers covering approximately 1,400 major
U.S. medical centers. We expect to significantly increase
this sales force in order to fully capitalize on the market
potential of Acetadote and Amelior.
|
|
Ø
|
We promote Kristalose through a dedicated field sales force
of 26 sales representatives and managers to approximately 6,400
gastroenterologists and other high prescribers of laxatives. We
believe that we can increase the market for Kristalose
significantly by investing in our marketing program and
significantly expanding this sales force.
|
Expand our
product portfolio by acquiring rights to additional products and
late-stage product candidates
We intend to build a portfolio of complementary, niche products
largely through product acquisitions. We focus on
under-promoted, FDA-approved drugs with existing brand
recognition as well as late-stage development products which
address unmet medical needs, a strategy which we believe helps
minimize our exposure to the significant risk, cost and time
associated with drug discovery and research. We plan to continue
to target products that are competitively differentiated, have
valuable trademarks or other intellectual property, and allow us
to leverage our existing infrastructure. We also plan to explore
opportunities to seek approval for new uses of existing
pharmaceutical products.
42
Business
Develop a
pipeline of early-stage products through CET
In order to build our product pipeline, we are supplementing our
acquisition and late-stage development activities with the
early-stage drug development activities of CET, our
majority-owned subsidiary. CET partners with universities and
other research organizations to cost-effectively develop
promising, early-stage product candidates. Current pre-clinical
projects nearing clinical-stage development include:
|
|
Ø
|
a treatment for fluid buildup in the lungs of cancer patients,
in collaboration with Vanderbilt University, and
|
|
Ø
|
a highly purified anti-infective for treating fungal infections
in immuno-compromised patients, in collaboration with the
University of Mississippi.
|
INDUSTRY
The hospital
market
According to IMS Health, U.S. hospitals accounted for
approximately $31 billion, or 11%, of
U.S. pharmaceutical sales in 2006. IMS Health also reports
that in 2006, marketing and promotional efforts focused on
hospital-use drugs represented only about $662 million, or
3%, of approximately $21 billion total pharmaceutical
industry spending on promotional activity. The majority of
promotional spending is directed towards large outpatient
markets promoting drugs intended for chronic use rather than
short-term use in the hospital setting. We believe the lack of
promotional emphasis on the hospital marketplace indicates that
the hospital market is underserved. We also believe that the
hospital market is highly concentrated, with a small number of
large institutions responsible for a majority of pharmaceutical
spending, and consequently that it can be penetrated effectively
without large-scale promotional activity by a small, dedicated
sales force.
Market for
injectable analgesics
Therapeutic agents used to treat pain are collectively known as
analgesics. Physicians prescribe injectable analgesics for
hospitalized patients who have high levels of acute pain,
require rapid pain relief or cannot take oral analgesics.
According to IMS Health, the U.S. market for injectable
analgesics exceeded $302 million, or 491 million
units, in 2006. This market is comprised principally of generic
opioids and the NSAID ketorolac. Injectable opioids such as
morphine, meperidine, hydromorphone and fentanyl accounted for
approximately 447 million units sold in 2006. While opioids
are widely used for acute pain management, they are associated
with a variety of unwanted side effects including sedation,
nausea, vomiting, constipation, headache, cognitive impairment
and respiratory depression. Respiratory depression, if not
monitored closely, can be deadly. Opioid-related side effects
can warrant dosing limitations, which may reduce overall
effectiveness of pain relief. Side effects from opioids can
cause a need for further medication or treatment, and can
increase lengths of stay in post-anesthesia care units as well
as overall hospital stay, which can lead to increased costs for
hospitals and patients.
Despite having a poor safety profile, usage of ketorolac, the
only non-opioid injectable analgesic available in the U.S., has
grown from approximately 38 million units in 2003, or 7% of
the market, to approximately 43 million units in 2006,
representing 9% of the market, according to IMS Health. The FDA
specifically warns that ketorolac should not be used in various
patient populations that are at-risk for bleeding, as a
prophylactic analgesic prior to major surgery or for
intraoperative administration when stoppage of bleeding is
critical.
43
Business
Fever
Significant fever is generally defined as a temperature of
greater than 102 degrees Fahrenheit. High fevers can cause
hallucinations, confusion, convulsions and death. Hospitalized
patients are subject to increased risk for developing fever,
especially from exposure to infectious agents. Patients with
endotracheal intubation, sedation, reduced gastric motility,
nausea or recent surgery are frequently unable to ingest,
digest, absorb, or tolerate oral products to reduce fever.
Treatment for these patients ranges from rectal delivery of
medication to physical cooling measures such as tepid baths, ice
packs and cooling blankets. In the U.S., there is currently no
FDA-approved intravenous medication for the treatment of fever.
Acetaminophen
poisoning
Acetaminophen is one of the most widely used drugs for oral
treatment of pain and fever in the U.S. and can be found in many
common
over-the-counter,
or OTC products and prescription narcotics. Though safe at
recommended doses, the drug can cause liver damage with
excessive use. According to the American Association of Poison
Control Centers Toxic Exposure Surveillance System,
acetaminophen poisoning is the leading cause of toxic drug
ingestions in the U.S. In 2005, approximately 77,000 people
were treated and 333 people died due to acetaminophen
poisoning in the U.S.
In a study published in 2005 that examined acute liver failure,
researchers concluded that acetaminophen poisoning was
responsible for acute liver failure in over half the patients
examined in 2003, up from 28% in 1998. While an estimated 48% of
cases were due to the accidental use of acetaminophen over
several days, causing chronic liver failure, an estimated 44% of
the cases were intentional overdoses, causing acute liver
failure.
According to the FDA, four grams of acetaminophen is the daily
maximum dosage recommended for adults. Ingesting eight grams of
acetaminophen in a single day causes a significant number of
people, whose livers have been previously stressed by a virus,
medication or alcohol, to experience more serious complications.
When used in conjunction with opiates, acetaminophen can be
effective in relieving pain after surgery or injury; however,
some patients who take acetaminophen/opiate combination drugs on
a chronic basis eventually require increasing amounts to achieve
the same level of pain relief, which can also lead to liver
failure.
Market for the
treatment of Acetaminophen overdose
NAC is widely accepted as the standard of care for acetaminophen
overdose. Throughout Europe and much of the rest of the world,
NAC has been available in an injectable formulation for over
25 years. Until the 2004 approval of Acetadote, however,
the only FDA-approved form of NAC available in the U.S. was
an oral preparation. Prior to the approval of Acetadote, many
U.S. hospitals prepared an off-label, IV form of NAC from
the oral solution to treat patients suffering from acetaminophen
poisoning. For a number of these patients, an IV product is
the only reasonable route of administration due to nausea and
vomiting associated with the administration of oral NAC for the
overdose. Moreover, IV treatment requires fewer doses and a
shorter treatment protocol, reducing treatment from three days
to one day.
Acetaminophen poisoning treatment is typically initiated in the
emergency department and continued in the intensive care unit.
NAC is marketed to emergency physicians and nurses, critical
care physicians, clinical and medical toxicologists and poison
control centers. According to The Medical Letter on Drugs and
Therapeutics, NAC is virtually 100% effective in preventing
severe liver damage, renal failure and death if administered
within eight to ten hours of the overdose.
44
Business
The
gastrointestinal market
According to the National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and
Kidney Diseases, gastrointestinal diseases result in
approximately 50 million physician visits and
14 million hospitalizations annually. Many of these
physician visits are to one of the only 11,700
gastroenterologists in the U.S.
There are over 40 common, well-defined gastrointestinal
conditions recognized in the U.S., including constipation,
chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, gastroesophageal reflux
disease, infectious diarrhea, irritable bowel syndrome, lactose
intolerance, pancreatitis and peptic ulcers. Because the market
for gastrointestinal diseases is broad in patient scope, yet
relatively narrow in physician base, we believe that it is an
attractive specialty focus which can provide a wide variety of
product opportunities but can be penetrated with a modest sales
force.
Market for
treatment of constipation
Constipation is a common condition in the U.S., affecting
approximately 20% of the population each year. While many
occurrences are non-recurring, a significant number are chronic
in nature and require some treatment to control or resolve.
Constipation treatments are sold in both the OTC, and
prescription segments. We believe that the prescription laxative
market in which Kristalose competes has historically consisted
of a few highly promoted brands including
MiraLax®
(polyethylene glycol 3350), which is now being sold as an OTC
product, Amitiza and
Zelnorm®,
which is used for multiple indications including constipation,
as well as several generic forms of liquid lactulose and
polyethylene glycol 3350. Zelnorm was removed from the market in
March 2007 due to adverse safety findings, and is pending
further FDA review. According to data from IMS Health, this
market grew from approximately $206 million in 2003 to
$389 million in 2006, a compound annual growth rate of
approximately 24%. This increase in sales resulted primarily
from new product introductions and increased promotion of
branded products.
PRODUCTS
Our key products and product candidates include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
Indication
|
|
Delivery
|
|
Status
|
|
|
Amelior®
|
|
Pain and Fever
|
|
Injectable
|
|
Phase III
|
Acetadote®
|
|
Acetaminophen Poisoning
|
|
Injectable
|
|
Marketed
|
Kristalose®
|
|
Chronic and Acute Constipation
|
|
Oral Solution
|
|
Marketed
|
|
|
Amelior
Amelior is an intravenous formulation of ibuprofen. We expect
Amelior will be the first injectable non-opioid product
available in the U.S. for the treatment of pain and fever.
The product is currently in Phase III clinical trials, and
we are preparing for our NDA submission to the FDA for
regulatory approval. If approved, we believe Amelior will
provide physicians with a safe, effective treatment alternative
for acute care patients requiring an intravenous product for
pain relief or fever reduction. We have retained the
U.S. marketing rights for Amelior and, if approved, plan to
market it in the U.S. through our hospital sales force. We
plan to commercialize the product outside of the
U.S. through alliances with international marketing
partners.
Ibuprofen, an NSAID, is a widely-used product now taken orally
for pain relief and fever reduction, but is currently
unavailable in an injectable formulation for this use. In May
1999, we acquired from Vanderbilt University an exclusive,
worldwide license to data on the use of intravenous ibuprofen.
45
Business
Published in the New England Journal of Medicine in March
1997, this data indicated that intravenous ibuprofen was
effective in reducing high fever in critically ill patients who
were largely unable to receive oral medication. Following
discussion with and recommendation by the FDA, we implemented a
development program for Amelior designed to obtain approval for
a dual indication for the productreduction of pain and
treatment of fever.
We expect Amelior will be administered primarily to hospitalized
patients who are unable to receive analgesics or antipyretics
orally. We believe Amelior represents our most significant
product opportunity to date.
Development
history
We have actively managed the development of Amelior by
implementing the following steps:
|
|
Ø
|
We obtained exclusive rights to an investigator IND which
contains supportive safety and efficacy data in which
hospitalized adult patients with sepsis received intravenous
ibuprofen.
|
|
Ø
|
We developed a patented formulation for Amelior as well as a
proprietary manufacturing process.
|
|
Ø
|
We completed a clinical study to establish the pharmacokinetic
equivalence of oral and intravenous ibuprofen in February 2001,
a study to establish safe administration of the optimized
dilution of Ameliors IV preparation in March 2002, and a
study to demonstrate that the product is effective in reducing
fever in hospitalized adult malaria patients in July 2002.
|
|
Ø
|
We completed a dose-ranging study to determine the optimum dose
to treat fever in hospitalized adult patients in August 2005.
|
|
Ø
|
We completed enrollment for a dose-ranging study to determine
the products effectiveness in controlling pain in
post-surgical adult patients in October 2006.
|
|
Ø
|
In January 2007, we initiated a pivotal study to demonstrate the
products effectiveness in controlling pain in
post-surgical adult patients. In April 2007, a subsequent study
was initiated to support the products use in additional
surgical populations.
|
|
Ø
|
Over four years of stability studies for Amelior have been
successfully completed.
|
|
Ø
|
A study to obtain data to support pediatric use is ongoing.
|
|
Ø
|
An integrated safety database is being built, combining both
published experience with data from these new studies.
|
We intend to complete clinical development of Amelior by early
2008.
Commercialization
strategy
We intend to expand our existing U.S. hospital sales force
to promote Amelior to physicians, nurses and pharmacy
directors, principally in the hospital setting. We believe that
we can achieve our commercial goals by utilizing our experienced
sales organization, and supporting them with an internal
marketing infrastructure that targets high-use institutions. We
have an international strategic alliance with Mayne Pharma Pty.
Ltd., which will manufacture commercial supplies of Amelior. We
intend to partner with third-parties to reach markets outside
the U.S. or to expand our reach to physician groups outside
the hospital where applicable.
Acetadote
Acetadote is N-acetylcysteine, or NAC, for the intravenous
treatment of acetaminophen overdose. Until we obtained FDA
approval for Acetadote in 2004, the only FDA-approved form of
NAC available in
46
Business
the U.S. was an oral preparation. Medical literature
suggested that many hospitals prepared an off-label, IV form of
NAC from the oral solution for easier administration and
accuracy in dosing. Given this market dynamic, we concluded that
a medical need existed for an FDA-approved, injectable
formulation of NAC for the U.S. market.
We actively managed the development and regulatory approval of
Acetadote by implementing the following steps:
|
|
Ø
|
We held initial discussions with the FDA to design a development
plan.
|
|
Ø
|
Acetadote was granted orphan drug status in October 2001, which
provides for seven years of marketing exclusivity from date of
marketing approval.
|
|
Ø
|
We submitted our NDA in July 2002.
|
|
Ø
|
We submitted a complete response to FDA initial review questions
in July 2003.
|
|
Ø
|
We received FDA marketing approval for Acetadote in January 2004
for the treatment of acetaminophen overdose.
|
|
Ø
|
Acetadote was launched in June 2004.
|
|
Ø
|
Early in 2006, the FDA-approved revised labeling for the
product, which included an expanded indication for dosing in
pediatric patients.
|
In connection with the FDAs approval of Acetadote, we
committed to certain post-marketing activities for the product.
Our first phase IV commitment (pediatric) was completed and
accepted by the FDA in December 2004. Our second phase IV
commitment (clinical) was completed and accepted by the FDA in
August 2006. We anticipate completing our third and final
phase IV commitment (manufacturing) for Acetadote in 2007.
We are also supporting a number of studies to explore other
potential indications for the product.
We believe Acetadote has clinical and financial benefits
relative to oral NAC, including ease of administration,
minimizing nausea and vomiting associated with oral NAC,
accurate dosage control, shorter treatment protocol and
reduction in overall cost of acetaminophen overdose management.
Acetadote makes NAC administration easier to tolerate for
patients and easier to administer for medical providers. We
believe Acetadote also offers a significant cost benefit to both
patient and hospital by reducing the treatment regimen, usually
from three days to one day.
Acetadote is manufactured for us by Bioniche Teoranta at its
FDA-approved manufacturing facility in Ireland.
Kristalose
Kristalose is a prescription laxative administered orally for
the treatment of constipation. In patients with a history of
chronic constipation, lactulose therapy increases the number of
bowel movements per day and the number of days on which they
occur. Lactulose is a product with a long history of use as a
laxative, and as a treatment for hepatic encephalopathy, which
is a deterioration of the liver resulting in a
build-up of
ammonia. Kristalose is an innovative, dry powder crystalline
formulation of lactulose which is designed to enhance patient
compliance and acceptance.
We co-promoted Kristalose from 2002 until April 2006 under an
agreement with Bertek Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the branded
division of Mylan Laboratories, Inc. Following Mylans
discontinuance of Bertek operations in 2006, we acquired
exclusive U.S. commercialization rights to Kristalose. We
re-launched Kristalose under the Cumberland brand in October
2006 with a dedicated, contract sales force of 26 sales
representatives and managers. We direct our sales efforts to
physicians
47
Business
who are the most prolific writers of prescription laxatives.
These physicians include gastroenterologists, pediatricians,
internists and colon and rectal surgeons.
We believe Kristalose offers competitive advantages over other
laxative products. Packaged in single dose packets, Kristalose
is very portable, is reconstituted in as little as four ounces
of water, is clear, virtually tasteless, does not change the
viscosity of the water and contains almost no calories, all of
which we believe cause Kristalose to compare favorably to liquid
lactulose products. Compared to polyethylene glycol 3350
products, we believe Kristalose has a fast onset of action and a
better pregnancy category rating. Compared with
Zelnorm®
and
Amitiza®,
Kristalose has fewer potential side effects or contraindications
and is less expensive.
Kristalose is manufactured for us by Inalco S.p.A. at an
FDA-approved facility in Italy.
Early-stage
product candidates
Our early-stage product candidates are being developed by CET,
which collaborates with leading research institutions to
identify and pursue promising pre-clinical programs. Two of the
more advanced CET development programs are:
|
|
Ø
|
In collaboration with Vanderbilt University, we are currently
developing a new treatment for fluid buildup in the lungs of
cancer patients. The product candidate is a protein therapeutic
being designed to treat pleural effusion, a
condition which occurs when cancer spreads to the surface of the
lung and chest cavity, causing fluid to accumulate and patients
to suffer shortness of breath and chest pain. An estimated
100,000 patients are affected by this condition each year.
Currently, the substances used in treating this cause pain and
have only a
60-90%
success rate. Vanderbilt University researchers believe they
have found a method of treating this condition which may involve
less pain, a higher success rate and faster healing time,
resulting in significantly shorter hospital stays.
|
|
Ø
|
In collaboration with the University of Mississippi, we are
developing a highly purified, injectable anti-infective used to
treat fungal infections in immuno-compromised patients. This
product candidates active ingredient is currently
FDA-approved in a different formulation, and while it is the
therapeutic of choice for infectious disease specialists in
treating such fungal infections, it can produce serious side
effects related to renal toxicity, often resulting in dosage
limitations or discontinued use. University of Mississippi
researchers have developed what they believe is a purer and
safer form of the anti-infective.
|
BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT
Since inception, we have had an active business development
program focused on acquiring rights to marketed products and
product candidates that fit our strategy and target markets. We
source our business development leads both through our senior
executives and our international network of pharmaceutical and
medical industry insiders. These opportunities are reviewed and
considered on a regular basis by a multi-disciplinary team of
our managers against a list of selection criteria. We have
historically focused on product opportunities with relatively
low acquisition, development and commercialization costs,
employing a variety of deal structures.
We intend to continue to build a portfolio of complementary,
niche products largely through product acquisitions. Our primary
targets are under-promoted, FDA-approved drugs with existing
brand recognition and late-stage development products that
address unmet medical needs in the hospital acute care and
gastroenterology markets. We also plan to explore opportunities
to acquire rights to and seek approval for new uses of
pharmaceutical products. We believe that by focusing mainly on
approved or
48
Business
late-stage products, we can minimize the significant risk, cost
and time associated with drug development. We have completed
three material acquisitions including:
|
|
Ø
|
exclusive, worldwide rights from Vanderbilt University to data
for intravenous ibuprofen to support our FDA submission for
Amelior;
|
|
Ø
|
exclusive, worldwide rights to clinical data supporting the
safety and efficacy of Acetadote, which served as a key
component of our FDA submission and approval; and
|
|
Ø
|
exclusive U.S. commercial rights to Kristalose.
|
Our business development team is also responsible for
identifying appropriate CET product candidates and negotiating
with our university partners to secure rights to these
candidates. Through CET, we are collaborating with a growing
list of research institutions including:
|
|
Ø
|
Vanderbilt University;
|
|
Ø
|
University of Mississippi, School of Pharmacy; and
|
|
Ø
|
University of Tennessee Research Foundation.
|
Since 2004, these collaborations secured nearly $1 million
in National Institutes of Health grant funding for the
development of promising new products and several additional
proposals have been submitted or are awaiting review.
CLINICAL AND
REGULATORY AFFAIRS
We have established in-house capabilities for the management of
our clinical, professional and regulatory affairs. Our team
develops and manages our clinical trials, prepares regulatory
submissions, manages ongoing product-related regulatory
responsibilities and manages our medical information call
center. They were responsible for devising the regulatory and
clinical strategy and obtaining FDA approval for Acetadote and
are responsible for ongoing development of Amelior.
Clinical
development
Our in-house clinical development personnel are responsible for:
|
|
Ø
|
creating clinical development strategies;
|
|
Ø
|
designing and monitoring our clinical trials;
|
|
Ø
|
creating case report forms and other study-related documents;
|
|
Ø
|
overseeing clinical work contracted to third parties; and
|
|
Ø
|
overseeing CET grant funding proposals.
|
Regulatory and
quality affairs
Our internal regulatory and quality affairs team is responsible
for:
|
|
Ø
|
preparing and submitting NDAs and fulfilling post-approval
marketing commitments;
|
|
Ø
|
maintaining investigational and marketing applications through
the submission of appropriate reports;
|
|
Ø
|
submitting supplemental applications for additional label
indications, product line extensions and manufacturing
improvements;
|
|
Ø
|
evaluating regulatory risk profiles for product acquisition
candidates, including compliance with manufacturing, labeling,
distribution and marketing regulations;
|
49
Business
|
|
Ø
|
monitoring applicable third-party service providers for quality
and compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, Good
Laboratory Practices, and Good Clinical Practices, and
performing periodic audits of such vendors; and
|
|
Ø
|
maintaining systems for document control, product and process
change control, customer complaint handling, product stability
studies and annual drug product reviews.
|
Professional and
medical affairs
Our clinical and regulatory team provides in-house, medical
information support for our marketed products. This includes
interacting directly with healthcare professionals to address
any product or medical inquiries through our medical information
call center. Our call center was previously operated by the
Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center, or RMPDC. In 2006, we
expanded our clinical and regulatory capabilities and brought
our call center in-house in an effort to ensure the highest
level of quality and service. The RMPDC continues to supplement
our efforts by providing
after-hours
support for our call center and assisting us with our adverse
event collection/reporting and global pharmacovigilance
activities. In addition to coordinating the call center, our
clinical/regulatory group generates medical information letters,
provides informational memos to our sales forces and assists
with ongoing training for the sales forces.
SALES AND
MARKETING
Our sales and marketing team has broad industry experience in
selling branded pharmaceuticals. They manage the dedicated
hospital and gastroenterology sales forces, which are comprised
of 42 sales representatives and managers, direct our national
marketing campaigns and maintain key national account
relationships. We promote our products to hospitals and
office-based physicians across the U.S. and plan to
commercialize our products internationally through marketing
alliances.
In January 2007, we converted our hospital sales force, which
had previously been contracted to us by Cardinal Health Inc., or
Cardinal, to Cumberland employees through our newly-formed,
wholly-owned subsidiary, Cumberland Pharma Sales Corp. The
hospital sales team is comprised of 16 sales representatives and
managers, covering approximately 1,400 major medical centers
across the U.S. The gastroenterology-focused team, formed
in September 2006 with our re-launch of Kristalose, is a field
sales force comprised of 26 representatives and managers and
covering approximately 6,400 high prescribers of laxatives. This
gastroenterology sales force is contracted to us by Advogent
Group, Inc., or Advogent. Under our agreement, we pay Advogent a
monthly fee, a portion of which is used to compensate the sales
force. We also reimburse Advogent for bonuses and expense
reimbursement paid to the sales force. This agreement terminates
in August 2008. We have the option, with Advogents
consent, to extend the contract for one additional year. We also
have the option to bring this sales force in-house. We expect to
expand both sales forces significantly over the next several
years.
Our sales and marketing executives conduct ongoing market
analyses to evaluate marketing campaigns and promotional
programs. The evaluations include development of product
profiles, testing of the profiles against the needs of the
market, determining what additional product information or
development work is needed to effectively market the products
and preparing financial forecasts. We utilize professional
branding and packaging as well as promotional items to support
our products, including direct mail, sales brochures, journal
advertising, educational and reminder leave-behinds, patient
educational pieces and product sampling. We also attend regular
trade shows to promote broad awareness of our products.
50
Business
Our National Accounts group is responsible for key large buyers
and related marketing programs. This group supports sales and
marketing efforts by maintaining relationships with our
wholesaler customers as well as with third-party payors such as
Group Purchasing Organizations, Pharmacy Benefit Managers,
Hospital Buying Groups, state and federal government purchasers
and influencers and health insurance companies.
International
Sales and Marketing
Consistent with our strategy to outsource non-core functions, we
have licensed to third parties the right to distribute Amelior
outside the U.S. We have granted Alveda Pharmaceuticals
Inc., or Alveda, an exclusive license to distribute Amelior in
Canada subject to receipt of regulatory approval. Alveda is
obligated to make payments to us upon Ameliors achieving
specified regulatory milestones in Canada and to pay us a
royalty based on Canadian sales of Amelior. This license
terminates five years after regulatory approval is obtained in
Canada for the later of the fever or pain indications. We have
granted Mayne Pharma (SEA) Pte Limited an exclusive license to
market and distribute Amelior in Southeast Asia subject to the
receipt of regulatory approval. Mayne Pharma (SEA) Pte Limited
is obligated to make payments to us upon Ameliors
achieving specified regulatory milestones in Southeast Asia as
well royalty payments. The initial term of the agreement expires
on the fifth anniversary of Amelior obtaining regulatory
approval in Southeast Asia.
MANUFACTURING AND
DISTRIBUTION
We outsource certain non-core, capital-intensive functions,
including manufacturing and distribution. Our executives have
years of experience in these areas and manage these third-party
relationships with a focus on quality assurance.
Manufacturing
Our key manufacturing relationships include:
|
|
Ø
|
In July 2000, we established an international manufacturing
alliance with Australia-based Mayne Pharma Pty. Ltd., or Mayne.
Mayne sources active pharmaceutical ingredients, or APIs, and
manufactures Amelior exclusively for us under an agreement that
expires on the fifth anniversary of FDA approval of Amelior,
subject to early termination upon 45 days prior notice in
the event of uncured material breach by us or Mayne. The
agreement will automatically renew for successive three-year
terms unless Mayne or we provide at least 12 months prior
written notice of non-renewal. Under the agreement, we pay Mayne
a transfer price per unit of Amelior supplied. In addition, we
reimburse Mayne for
agreed-upon
development, regulatory and inspection and audit costs. We have
also granted Mayne a right of first negotiation with respect to
the manufacture of all future pharmaceutical products we intend
to sell and the distribution of these products in Australia, New
Zealand, Canada and mutually agreed Southeast Asian and Latin
American countries.
|
|
Ø
|
Bioniche Teoranta, or Bioniche, sources APIs and manufactures
Acetadote exclusively for us for sale in the U.S. at its
FDA-approved manufacturing facility in Ireland. Our relationship
with Bioniche began in January 2002. Bioniche manufactures and
packages Acetadote for us, and we purchase Acetadote exclusively
from Bioniche, pursuant to an agreement expiring in January
2011. This agreement is subject to early termination upon prior
written notice in the event of an uncured material default by us
or Bioniche. We have an option to renew the agreement for a
five-year term upon expiration. Under the agreement, we pay
Bioniche a transfer price per unit of Acetadote supplied, which
transfer price is subject to annual adjustment, and a royalty
based on our net sales of the product. In addition, we are
required to purchase minimum quantities of Acetadote.
|
51
Business
|
|
Ø |
Inalco S.p.A. and Inalco Biochemicals, Inc., or collectively
Inalco, from which we licensed exclusive
U.S. commercialization rights to Kristalose in April 2006,
source APIs and provide us with a manufacturing supply for the
product under an agreement that expires in 2021. The agreement
renews automatically for successive three-year terms unless we
or Inalco provide written notice of intent not to renew at least
12 months prior to expiration of a term. Either we or
Inalco may terminate this agreement upon at least 45 days
prior written notice in the event of uncured material breach.
Under the agreement, we are required to pay Inalco a transfer
price per unit of Kristalose supplied and a royalty based on our
net sales of Kristalose. In addition, we are required to
purchase minimum quantities of Kristalose.
|
Distribution
Like many other pharmaceutical companies, we employ an outside
contractor to facilitate our distribution efforts. Since August
2002, Specialty Pharmaceutical Services, or SPS, (formerly CORD
Logistics, Inc.) has exclusively handled all aspects of our
product logistics efforts, including warehousing, shipping,
customer billing and collections. A division of Cardinal, SPS is
located just outside of Nashville, Tennessee, and has a
well-established infrastructure. We maintain ownership of
finished products until their sale to our customers.
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY
We seek to protect our products from competition through a
combination of patents, trademarks, trade secrets, FDA
exclusivity and contractual restrictions on disclosure.
Proprietary rights, including patents, are an important element
of our business. We seek to protect our proprietary information
by requiring our employees, consultants, contractors and other
advisors to execute agreements providing for protection of our
confidential information on commencement of their employment or
engagement, through which we seek to protect our intellectual
property. We also require confidentiality agreements from
entities that receive our confidential data or materials.
Amelior
We are the owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,727,286, which
is directed to ibuprofen solution formulations, methods of
making the same, and methods of using the same, and which
expires in 2021. This U.S. patent is associated with our
completed international application
No. PCT/US01/42894.
We have filed for international patent protection in association
with this PCT application in various countries, some of which
have been allowed and some of which remain pending.
We have applied for additional protection for our invention
related to ibuprofen solution formulations, methods of making
the same and methods of using the same through
U.S. application
No. 10/739,050
and international application
No. PCT/US04/39770,
both of which remain pending.
We have an exclusive, worldwide license to clinical data for
intravenous ibuprofen from Vanderbilt University, in
consideration for royalty and other payment obligations that are
conditioned upon approval by the FDA of Amelior.
If Amelior is approved by the FDA, we intend to seek three years
marketing exclusivity from the FDA based on the clinical studies
we have sponsored to pursue approval of the product.
Acetadote
Acetadote was approved by the FDA in January 2004 as an orphan
drug for the intravenous treatment of acetaminophen overdose. As
an orphan drug, Acetadote is entitled to seven years of
marketing
52
Business
exclusivity for the treatment of this approved indication. We
have applied for patent protection for a new formulation of
Acetadote through U.S. patent application
No. 11/209,804,
as well as through international application
No. PCT/US06/20691,
both of which are directed to acetylcysteine compositions,
methods of making the same and methods of using the same. In
addition, we have an exclusive, worldwide license to NAC
clinical data from Newcastle Master Misercordiae Hospital in
Australia. We have no expected outstanding payment obligations
pursuant to this contract.
Kristalose
We are the exclusive licensee of two U.S. patents owned by
Inalco relating to Kristalose. The first, U.S. Patent
No. 5,003,061, is directed to a method for preparing
high-purity crystalline lactulose. The second, U.S. Patent
No. 5,480,491, is directed to a process for preparation of
crystalline lactulose. Our license rights include an exclusive
license to use related Inalco know-how and the Kristalose
trademark to manufacture, market and distribute Kristalose in
the U.S. Under our agreement with Inalco, Inalco is solely
responsible for prosecuting and maintaining both the patents and
know-how that we license from them. Our license expires in 2021
and is subject to earlier termination for material breach. Our
payment obligations under this agreement are described under
Manufacturing and Distribution
Manufacturing.
COMPETITION
The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense
competition and rapid innovation. Our continued success in
developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products will
depend, in part, upon our ability to compete against existing
and future products in our target markets. Competitive factors
directly affecting our markets include but are not limited to:
|
|
Ø
|
product attributes such as efficacy, safety,
ease-of-use
and cost-effectiveness;
|
|
Ø
|
brand awareness and recognition driven by sales and marketing
and distribution capabilities;
|
|
Ø
|
intellectual property and other exclusivity rights;
|
|
Ø
|
availability of resources to build and maintain developmental
and commercial capabilities;
|
|
Ø
|
successful business development activities;
|
|
Ø
|
extent of third-party reimbursements; and
|
|
Ø
|
establishment of advantageous collaborations to conduct
development, manufacturing or commercialization efforts.
|
A number of our competitors possess research and development and
sales and marketing capabilities as well as financial resources
greater than ours. These competitors, in addition to emerging
companies and academic research institutions, may be developing,
or in the future could develop, new technologies that could
compete with our current and future products or render our
products obsolete.
Amelior
We are developing Amelior for the treatment of pain and fever,
primarily in a hospital setting. A variety of products already
address the acute pain market.
|
|
Ø
|
Morphine, the most commonly used product for the treatment of
acute, post-operative pain, is manufactured and distributed by
several generic pharmaceutical companies.
|
|
Ø
|
Depodur®
is an extended release injectable formulation of morphine that
is marketed by SkyePharma PLC.
|
53
Business
|
|
Ø
|
Other generic injectable opioids, including fentanyl, meperidine
and hydromorphone.
|
|
Ø
|
Ketorolac (brand name
Toradol®),
an injectable NSAID, is also manufactured and distributed by
several generic pharmaceutical companies.
|
We are aware of other product candidates in development to treat
acute pain including injectable NSAIDs, novel opioids, new
formulations of existing therapies and extended release
anesthetics. We believe the companies developing injectable,
non-narcotic analgesics for the treatment of post-surgical pain
are the primary potential competitors to Amelior. Cadence
Pharmaceuticals Inc. is developing an injectable formulation of
acetaminophen for the treatment of pain and fever, and Javelin
Pharmaceuticals Inc. is developing an injectable form of an
NSAID, diclofenac.
In addition to the injectable analgesic products above, many
companies are developing analgesics for specific indications
such as migraine and neuropathic pain, oral extended-release
forms of existing narcotic and non-narcotic products, and
products with new methods of delivery such as transdermal.
We are not aware of any approved injectable products indicated
for the treatment of fever in the U.S. There are, however,
numerous drugs available to physicians to reduce fevers in
hospital settings via oral administration to the patient,
including acetaminophen, ibuprofen and aspirin. These drugs are
manufactured by numerous pharmaceutical companies.
Acetadote
Acetadote is our injectable formulation of NAC for the treatment
of acetaminophen overdose. NAC is accepted worldwide as the
standard of care for acetaminophen overdose. Despite the
availability of injectable NAC outside the United States,
Acetadote, to our knowledge, is the only injectable NAC product
approved in the U.S. to treat acetaminophen overdose. Our
competitors in the acetaminophen overdose market are those
companies selling orally administered NAC including, but not
limited to, Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bedford Laboratories
division of Ben Venue Laboratories, Inc., Roxane Laboratories,
Inc. and Hospira Inc.
Kristalose
Kristalose is a dry powder crystalline prescription formulation
of lactulose indicated for the treatment of constipation. The
U.S. constipation therapy market includes various
prescription and OTC products. The prescription products which
we believe are our primary competitors are
Amitiza®
and liquid lactuloses:
|
|
Ø
|
Amitiza is indicated for the treatment of chronic idiopathic
constipation in adults and is marketed by Sucampo
Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited;
and
|
|
Ø
|
Liquid lactulose products are marketed by a number of
pharmaceutical companies.
|
In addition, Kristalose competed with the prescription product
Zelnorm®
until it was pulled from the market in March 2007 due to adverse
safety findings. Indicated for treatment of chronic idiopathic
constipation in persons under aged 65 and produced by Novartis
Pharma AG, Zelnorm is under further review by the FDA.
There are several hundred OTC products used to treat
constipation marketed by numerous pharmaceutical and consumer
health companies.
MiraLax®
(polyethylene glycol 3350), previously a prescription product,
is indicated for the treatment of constipation and is
manufactured and marketed by Braintree Laboratories, Inc. and
other generic pharmaceutical firms. Under an agreement with
Braintree, Schering-Plough introduced MiraLax as an OTC product
in February 2007.
54
Business
EMPLOYEES
As of April 30, 2007, we had 33 full-time employees,
which included 16 hospital sales representatives and managers.
We also have a dedicated gastroenterology field sales force
under contract that is comprised of 26 dedicated sales
representatives and managers. We believe that employing
experienced, independent contractors and consultants is a
cost-efficient and effective way to accomplish our goals. A
number of additional individuals have provided or are currently
providing services to us pursuant to agreements between the
individuals or their employers and us. None of our employees are
represented by a collective bargaining unit. We believe that we
have positive relationships with our employees.
FACILITIES
We currently lease approximately 6,300 square feet of
office space in Nashville, Tennessee for our headquarters under
an agreement expiring in December 2010. We have an option to
renew this lease for a five-year term upon expiration. We also
have entered into an occupancy agreement for approximately
9,000 square feet of additional office space adjoining our
headquarters. This occupancy agreement will be replaced by a
sublease for the same space, effective June 1, 2007. The
sublease expires in October 2010. We believe that these
facilities are adequate to meet our current needs for office
space. We currently do not plan to purchase or lease facilities
for manufacturing, packaging or warehousing, as such services
are provided to us by third-party contract groups.
Under an agreement expiring in May 2011, CET leases
approximately 6,900 square feet of office and wet
laboratory space in Nashville, Tennessee. CET uses this space to
operate the CET Life Sciences Center for product development
work to be carried out in collaboration with universities,
research institutions and entrepreneurs. CET has an option to
lease up to 20,000 square feet at the Life Sciences Center
should it need additional space. The CET Life Sciences Center
provides laboratory and office space, equipment and
infrastructure to early-stage life sciences companies and
university spin-outs.
GOVERNMENT
REGULATION
Pharmaceutical companies are subject to extensive regulation by
national, state, and local agencies in countries in which they
do business. The manufacture, distribution, marketing and sale
of pharmaceutical products is subject to government regulation
in the U.S. and various foreign countries. Additionally, in the
U.S., we must follow rules and regulations established by the
FDA requiring the presentation of data indicating that our
products are safe and efficacious and are manufactured in
accordance with cGMP regulations. If we do not comply with
applicable requirements, we may be fined, the government may
refuse to approve our marketing applications or allow us to
manufacture or market our products and we may be criminally
prosecuted.
We and our manufacturers and clinical research organizations may
also be subject to regulations under other federal, state and
local laws, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act,
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Air Act
and import, export and customs regulations as well as the laws
and regulations of other countries.
FDA Approval
Process
The steps required to be taken before a new prescription drug
may be marketed in the U.S. include:
|
|
Ø
|
completion of pre-clinical laboratory and animal testing;
|
|
Ø
|
the submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug
application, or IND, which must be evaluated and found
acceptable by the FDA before human clinical trials may commence;
|
55
Business
|
|
Ø
|
performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical
trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug
for its intended use; and
|
|
Ø
|
submission and approval of a NDA.
|
The sponsor of the drug typically conducts human clinical trials
in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In
Phase I clinical trials, the product is tested in a small
number of patients or healthy volunteers, primarily for safety
at one or more dosages. In Phase II clinical trials, in
addition to safety, the sponsor evaluates the efficacy of the
product on targeted indications, and identifies possible adverse
effects and safety risks in a patient population. Phase III
clinical trials typically involve testing for safety and
clinical efficacy in an expanded population at
geographically-dispersed test sites.
The FDA requires that clinical trials be conducted in accordance
with the FDAs good clinical practices (GCP) requirements.
The FDA may order the partial, temporary or permanent
discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time or impose other
sanctions if it believes that the clinical trial is not being
conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an
unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. The
institutional review board (IRB), or ethics committee (outside
of the U.S.), of each clinical site generally must approve the
clinical trial design and patient informed consent and may also
require the clinical trial at that site to be halted, either
temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the
IRBs requirements, or may impose other conditions.
The results of the pre-clinical and clinical trials, together
with, among other things, detailed information on the
manufacture and composition of the product and proposed
labeling, are submitted to the FDA in the form of an NDA for
marketing approval. The FDA reviews all NDAs submitted before it
accepts them for filing and may request additional information
rather than accepting an NDA for filing. Once the submission is
accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the
NDA. Under the policies agreed to by the FDA under the
Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA has ten months
in which to complete its initial review of a standard NDA and
respond to the applicant. The review process and the PDUFA goal
date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the
NDA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or
clarification regarding information already provided in the
submission within the last three months of the PDUFA goal date.
If the FDAs evaluations of the NDA and the clinical and
manufacturing procedures and facilities are favorable, the FDA
may issue an approval letter. The FDA may also issue an
approvable letter setting forth further conditions that must be
met in order to secure final approval of the NDA. If and when
those conditions have been met to the FDAs satisfaction,
the FDA will issue an approval letter. An approval letter
authorizes commercial marketing of the drug for certain
indications. According to the FDA, the median total approval
time for NDAs approved during calendar year 2004 was
approximately 13 months for standard applications. If the
FDAs evaluations of the NDA submission and the clinical
and manufacturing procedures and facilities are not favorable,
it may refuse to approve the NDA and issue a not-approvable
letter.
The time and cost of completing these steps and obtaining FDA
approval can vary dramatically depending on the drug. However,
to complete these steps for a novel drug can take many years and
cost millions of dollars.
Section 505(b)(2)
New Drug Applications
As an alternate path for FDA approval of new indications or new
formulations of previously-approved products, a company may file
a Section 505(b)(2) NDA, instead of a
stand-alone or full NDA.
Section 505(b)(2) of the FDC Act was enacted as part of the
Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984,
otherwise known as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments.
Section 505(b)(2) permits the submission of an NDA where at
least some of the information required for approval comes
56
Business
from studies not conducted by or for the applicant and for which
the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. Some
examples of products that may be allowed to follow a 505(b)(2)
path to approval are drugs which have a new dosage form,
strength, route of administration, formulation or indication.
We successfully secured FDA approval of a 505(b)(2) NDA for
Acetadote in January 2004. We also plan to pursue marketing
approval for Amelior pursuant to the 505(b)(2) pathway.
Upon approval of a full or 505(b)(2) NDA, a drug may
be marketed only for the FDA-approved indications in the
approved dosage forms. Further clinical trials are necessary to
gain approval for the use of the product for any additional
indications or dosage forms. The FDA may also require
post-market reporting and may require surveillance programs to
monitor the side effects of the drug, which may result in
withdrawal of approval after marketing begins.
Special Protocol
Assessment Process
The special protocol assessment, or SPA, process generally
involves FDA evaluation of a proposed Phase III clinical
trial protocol and a commitment from the FDA that the design and
analysis of the trial are adequate to support approval of an
NDA, if the trial is performed according to the SPA and meets
its endpoints. The FDAs guidance on the SPA process
indicates that SPAs are designed to evaluate individual clinical
trial protocols primarily in response to specific questions
posed by the sponsors. In practice, the sponsor of a product
candidate may request an SPA for proposed Phase III trial
objectives, designs, clinical endpoints and analyses. A request
for an SPA is submitted in the form of a separate amendment to
an IND, and the FDAs evaluation generally will be
completed within a
45-day
review period under applicable PDUFA goals, provided that the
trials have been the subject of discussion at an
end-of-Phase II
and pre-Phase III meeting with the FDA, or in other limited
cases.
On June 14, 2004, we submitted a request for SPA of our
Amelior Phase III clinical study. During a meeting with the
FDA on September 29, 2004, the FDA confirmed that the
efficacy data from our study of post-operative pain with a
positive outcome will be considered sufficient to support a
505(b)(2) application for the pain indication. Final
determinations by the FDA with respect to a product candidate,
including as to the scope of its labeling, are made
after a complete review of the applicable NDA and are based on
the entire data in the application. Moreover, notwithstanding
any SPA, FDA approval of an NDA is subject to future public
health concerns unrecognized at the time of protocol assessment.
Orphan Drug
Designation
The Orphan Drug Act of 1983, or Orphan Drug Act, encourages
manufacturers to seek approval of products intended to treat
rare diseases and conditions with a prevalence of
fewer than 200,000 patients in the U.S. or for which there
is no reasonable expectation of recovering the development costs
for the product. For products that receive orphan drug
designation by the FDA, the Orphan Drug Act provides tax credits
for clinical research, FDA assistance with protocol design,
eligibility for FDA grants to fund clinical studies, waiver of
the FDA application fee, and a period of seven years of
marketing exclusivity for the product following FDA marketing
approval. Acetadote received Orphan Drug designation in October
2001 and was approved by the FDA for the intravenous treatment
of moderate to severe acetaminophen overdose in January 2004. As
an orphan drug, Acetadote is entitled to marketing exclusivity
until January 2011 for the treatment of this approved
indication. This exclusivity would not prevent a product with a
different formulation from competing with Acetadote, however.
57
Business
The Hatch-Waxman
Act
The Hatch-Waxman Act provides three years of marketing
exclusivity for the approval of new and supplemental NDAs,
including Section 505(b)(2) NDAs, for, among other things,
new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug, if
new clinical investigations that were conducted or sponsored by
the applicant are essential to the approval of the application.
It is under this provision that we expect to receive three years
marketing exclusivity for Amelior.
Other regulatory
requirements
Regulations continue to apply to pharmaceutical products after
FDA approval occurs. Post-marketing safety surveillance is
required in order to continue to market an approved product. The
FDA also may, in its discretion, require post-marketing testing
and surveillance to monitor the effects of approved products or
place conditions on any approvals that could restrict the
commercial applications of these products.
If we seek to make certain changes to an FDA-approved product,
such as promoting or labeling a product for a new indication,
making certain manufacturing changes or product enhancements or
adding labeling claims, we will need FDA review and approval
before the change can be implemented. While physicians may use
products for indications that have not been approved by the FDA,
we may not label or promote the product for an indication that
has not been approved. Securing FDA approval for new indications
or product enhancements and, in some cases, for manufacturing
and labeling claims, is generally a time-consuming and expensive
process that may require us to conduct clinical trials under the
FDAs IND regulations. Even if such studies are conducted,
the FDA may not approve any change in a timely fashion, or at
all. In addition, adverse experiences associated with use of the
products must be reported to the FDA, and FDA rules govern how
we can label, advertise or otherwise commercialize our products.
In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical
products, several other types of state and federal laws have
been applied to restrict certain marketing practices in the
pharmaceutical industry in recent years. These laws include
anti-kickback statutes and false claims statutes. The federal
health care program anti-kickback statute prohibits, among other
things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or
receiving remuneration to induce or in return for purchasing,
leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order
of any health care item or service reimbursable under Medicare,
Medicaid or other federally financed health care programs. This
statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between
pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers,
purchasers and formulary managers on the other. Violations of
the anti-kickback statute are punishable by imprisonment,
criminal fines, civil monetary penalties and exclusion from
participation in federal health care programs.
Federal false claims laws prohibit any person from knowingly
presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for
payment to the federal government, or knowingly making, or
causing to be made, a false statement to have a false claim
paid. Recently, several pharmaceutical and other health care
companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly
inflating drug prices they report to pricing services, which in
turn were used by the government to set Medicare and Medicaid
reimbursement rates, and for allegedly providing free product to
customers with the expectation that the customers would bill
federal programs for the product.
Outside of the U.S., our ability to market our products will
also depend on receiving marketing authorizations from the
appropriate regulatory authorities. The foreign regulatory
approval process includes all of the risks associated with the
FDA approval process described above. The requirements
58
Business
governing the conduct of clinical trials and marketing
authorization vary widely from country to country.
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
Except as described below, we are not a party to litigation or
other legal proceedings.
During the second quarter of 2006, our Chief Executive, a Vice
President of ours, and we were named as co-defendants in
Parniani v. Cardinal Health, Inc. et al., Case
No. 0:06-cv-02514-PJS-JJG
in the U.S. District Court in the District of Minnesota for
unspecified damages based on workers compensation and
related claims. A former employee of a third-party service
provider to us filed the complaint. The service provider, which
is also named as a co-defendant, has agreed to assume control of
our defense at its cost pursuant to a contract between it and
us. The service provider is seeking dismissal of the lawsuit
against us, our Chief Executive, and our Vice President, among
other co-defendants. Based upon the information available to us
to date, we believe that all asserted claims against us and the
individual defendants are without merit. However, if any of the
claims are deemed meritorious by judicial determination, we
expect to be indemnified by the service provider so that
resolution of this matter is not expected to have a material
adverse effect on our future financial results or financial
condition.
59
Management
OFFICERS AND
DIRECTORS
The following table sets forth the names and ages of our
directors, executive officers and key managers as of
April 30, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
|
Position
|
|
|
A.J. Kazimi
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer
|
Martin E.
Cearnal(1),(2)
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Director
|
Dr. Robert G. Edwards
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
Director
|
Dr. Lawrence W.
Greer(1),(2)
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Director
|
Thomas R.
Lawrence(1),(2)
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
Director
|
Jean W. Marstiller
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and
Corporate Secretary
|
Dr. Gordon R. Bernard
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Medical
Director
|
Leo Pavliv
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Vice President, Operations
|
J. William Hix
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Vice President, Sales &
Marketing
|
David L. Lowrance
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
|
James L. Herman
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
Senior Director, National Accounts
and Corporate Compliance Officer
|
Elizabeth C. Gerken
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
Director, Business Development
|
Bruce J. Kent
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
Senior Manager, District Sales
|
Amy D. Rock
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
Senior Manager, Regulatory Affairs
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Member of Audit Committee
|
|
(2)
|
|
Member of Compensation Committee
|
A.J. Kazimi, Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer. Mr. Kazimi founded our company in
1999 and has served as our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
of our Board of Directors since inception. His career includes
20 years in the biopharmaceutical industry. Prior to
joining our company, he spent eleven years from 1987 to 1998
helping to build Therapeutic Antibodies Inc., a
biopharmaceutical company, where as President and Chief
Operating Officer he made key contributions to the
companys growth from its
start-up
phase through its initial public offering and product launches.
Mr. Kazimi oversaw operations in three countries and was
personally involved with the companys product development
strategies, licensing and distribution agreements, and the
raising of more than $100 million through equity and debt
financings. From
1984-1987,
Mr. Kazimi worked at Brown-Forman Corporation, rising
through a series of management positions and helping to launch
several new products. Mr. Kazimi currently serves on the
board of directors for Aegis Sciences Corporation, a federally
certified forensic toxicology laboratory; the Tennessee
Biotechnology Association; and Aetos Technologies Inc., a
technology development company associated with Auburn
University. He also serves as Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Cumberland Emerging Technologies, Inc., or CET. He
holds a B.S. from the University of Notre Dame and an M.B.A.
from the Vanderbilt Owen Graduate School of Management.
Martin E. Cearnal, Director. Mr. Cearnal
has served as a member of our board of directors since 2004. He
is the former President and Chief Executive Officer of
Physicians World, which became the largest provider of
continuing medical education during his tenure from 1985 to
2000. Physicians World was acquired by Thomson Healthcare in
2000. Mr. Cearnal served as President of Thomson Physicians
World from 2000 to 2003, and Executive Vice President-Chief
Strategy Officer for Thomson Medical Education from 2003 through
2005. Since 2006, he has been Executive Vice President-Chief
Strategy Officer for Jobson Medical Information.
Mr. Cearnal has 40 years experience in the Healthcare
industry
60
Management
and has been involved with the launches of such noteworthy
pharmaceutical products as
Lipitor®,
Actos®,
Intron-A®,
Straterra®,
Botox®
and
Humira®.
Mr. Cearnal spent 17 years at Revlon Healthcare in a
variety of domestic and international pharmaceutical marketing
roles culminating in his position as Vice President, Marketing
for the International Operations. He serves the industry through
leadership and participation in several organizations, including
the Healthcare Marketing & Communications Council and
the Alliance for Continuing Medical Education. Mr. Cearnal
also serves as a member of our Audit Committee and our
Compensation Committee. He has a BS degree from Southeast
Missouri State University.
Dr. Robert G. Edwards,
Director. Dr. Edwards has served as a member
of our board of directors since 1999. From 1991 to 1999, he was
Chairman and Managing Director of the Australasian subsidiary of
Therapeutic Antibodies Inc., overseeing operations in Australia,
New Zealand and Southeast Asia. Dr. Edwards also served as
Deputy Director of the Institute for Medical &
Veterinary Science in South Australia, President of the Royal
College of Pathologists of Australasia, and member of the
Australian National Health & Medical Research Council.
He currently serves as a director for CET, and is chairman of
the CET Scientific Advisory Board. Dr. Edwards holds a
Primary Degree from London University, Master of Human
Physiology from London University and an M.D. from the
University of Adelaide.
Dr. Lawrence W. Greer,
Director. Dr. Greer has served as a member
of our board of directors since 1999. Since 2002, he has been
Senior Managing Partner of Greer Capital Advisors of Birmingham,
Alabama. Dr. Greer serves as investment advisor to two
private equity funds and general partner for two additional
private equity funds, including the S.C.O.U.T. Healthcare Fund
from which we have received equity financing. Dr. Greer and
his firm are established leaders in private healthcare
investments in the mid-south. Previously, he served as Vice
President-Investments of Dunn Investment Company, where he was
responsible for management of a marketable securities portfolio
plus personal management of a portfolio of 15 private equity
investments. He is the former Chairman of Southern BioSystems
which was acquired by DURECT Corporation in 2001. Dr. Greer
has also worked as an independent consultant in healthcare
administration and finance. Dr. Greer serves as the
chairman of the Audit Committee of our board of directors, as a
member of our Compensation Committee, and is an Audit Committee
financial expert. He also served as the chairman of the Audit
Committee for the Southtrust (Bank) Funds Board of Trustees for
several years. Dr. Greer holds a B.S. from Tulane
University, D.D.S. from Emory University and an M.B.A. from
Emory University.
Thomas R. Lawrence,
Director. Mr. Lawrence has served as a
member of our board of directors since 1999. Since 2003 he has
been Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Aetos Technologies
Inc., a corporation formed in 2003 by Auburn University to
market technological breakthroughs by its faculty. From 1998 to
2003, Mr. Lawrence advised business clients on matters of
marketing and corporate governance through his firm Capital
Consultants. He previously served as Co-Founder and Managing
Partner of Delta Capital Partners in Memphis from 1989 to 1998.
The partnership made investments in ten early-stage companies
which, by 1998, were valued at more than $30 million. Prior
to the formation of Delta, Mr. Lawrence founded several
companies in the areas of commercial leasing and venture capital
financing. He also worked for most of the 1980s as an
Institutional Sales Representative and Commercial Leasing
Specialist with the Investment Banking Group of Union Planters
Bank in Memphis, where he was responsible for the structure and
sale of over $1 billion in securities. Mr. Lawrence
serves as the chairman of our Compensation Committee, as a
member of our Audit Committee and as a director for CET. He
holds a B.S. from Mississippi State University.
Jean W. Marstiller, Senior Vice President and Corporate
Secretary. Ms. Marstiller joined our Company
in 1999. She oversees our administrative operations, human
resources, site services and information systems, and became our
Corporate Secretary in 2007. She has 17 years
biopharmaceutical industry
61
Management
experience and was formerly Director of Administrative
Operations at Therapeutic Antibodies Inc., where she worked from
1989 until 1998. In that capacity, she oversaw administrative
services, information systems, and human resources.
Ms. Marstiller was employed by Brown-Forman Corporation
from 1982 until 1987, where she held management level positions
in the areas of finance and operations. She holds a B.E. from
Vanderbilt University and attended the Vanderbilt Owen Graduate
School of Management.
Dr. Gordon R. Bernard, Senior Vice President and Medical
Director. Dr. Bernard has served as our
medical director since 1999. Dr. Bernard is the Assistant
Vice-Chancellor for Research at Vanderbilt University, and also
the Melinda Owen Bass Professor of Medicine and former Chief of
the Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at
Vanderbilt. In addition, he is the Medical Director of the
Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board and Chairman of
Vanderbilts Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee, which is
responsible for approving the Vanderbilt Medical Center
Formulary of approved drugs and therapeutics. Dr. Bernard
also chairs the National Institutes of Health, Acute Respiratory
Distress Syndrome Clinical Trials Network. He holds a B.S. from
the University of Southwestern Louisiana and an M.D. from
Louisiana State University.
Leo Pavliv, Vice President, Operations. Mr.
Pavliv has served as our Vice President, Operations since 2003,
and is responsible for Cumberlands overall drug
development, including manufacturing and quality operations. He
has 23 years of experience developing pharmaceutical and
biological products. From 1997 to 2003 he worked at Cato
Research, a contract research organization, most recently as
Vice President of Pharmaceutical Development where he oversaw
development of a wide variety of products throughout the
development cycle. Prior to 1997, he held various scientific and
management positions at both large pharmaceutical and smaller
biopharmaceutical firms including Parke-Davis from 1984 to 1986,
Agouron Pharmaceuticals from 1992 to 1997, ProCyte from 1989 to
1992, and Interferon Sciences from 1986 to 1989. He is a
registered pharmacist (R.Ph.) and is regulatory affairs
certified (RAC). Mr. Pavliv holds a B.S., Pharmacy, and an
M.B.A. from Rutgers University.
J. William Hix, Vice President, Sales and
Marketing. Mr. Hix is responsible for all
our sales and marketing efforts. He joined us in 2004 to form
and manage our national sales force promoting our acute care
product line to hospitals, poison control centers and
physicians. He was also instrumental in the design and
implementation of our field sales force which is responsible for
promoting our products in the gastroenterology market.
Mr. Hix brings significant industry experience to our
company having spent 30 years at Novartis/CIBA-GEIGY
Pharmaceutical Corporation from 1974 to 2004. There, his
responsibilities ranged from field sales, sales management,
sales operations, planning and promotion to marketing support
and operations. He holds a B.S. from the University of Memphis
and an M.B.A. from Our Lady of the Lake University.
David L. Lowrance, Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer. Mr. Lowrance is responsible for
overseeing all our accounting and financial activities,
including financial reporting and planning. He has been with us
since 2003 and has 17 years of accounting and financial
experience in both international business and manufacturing.
From 1994 to 2003, he spent eight years with two global
conglomerates, including four years as Senior Vice President for
Icore International, a division of Smiths Group, PLC. Prior to
that, Mr. Lowrance worked as a senior accountant for
Ernst & Young, LLP from 1990 to 1994. He is a Certified
Public Accountant, or CPA, and holds a B.B.A. from the
University of Georgia.
James L. Herman, Senior Director, National Accounts and
Corporate Compliance Officer. Mr. Herman
handles all national accounts sales, including wholesalers and
retail chain buying offices, managed care home offices and
federal government accounts. He is also charged with overseeing
our corporate compliance efforts. He has been with us since 2003
and has 17 years pharmaceutical industry experience. From
1998 to 2003, he was with Solvay Pharmaceuticals and served as
Director of
62
Management
Managed Care as well as Director of Trade Affairs and Customer
Service. From 1990 to 1998, Mr. Herman was with Schwarz
Pharma, where he held national sales leadership positions in
National Accounts and Managed Care. He holds a B.S. from Indiana
University and an M.B.A. from Cardinal Stritch University.
Elizabeth C. Gerken, Director, Business
Development. Ms. Gerken has served as our
head of business development since 2001. She coordinates all
business development activities and is actively engaged in the
identification of product opportunities, the process of due
diligence and the negotiation of deal terms for our agreements.
Ms. Gerken has 15 years pharmaceutical industry
experience. She worked at Eli Lilly and Company from 1992 to
2000 with management roles in strategic planning, brand
management, sales management, and business development. She
holds a B.E. from Vanderbilt University and an M.B.A. from the
Vanderbilt Owen Graduate School of Management.
Bruce J. Kent, Senior Manager, District
Sales. Mr. Kent joined us in July 2006 to
form and launch our field sales force. He is responsible for
managing that group of sales representatives which promotes our
gastroenterology product line. Mr. Kent has 19 years
of pharmaceutical industry experience. Beginning his career with
CIBA Pharmaceuticals in 1988, he spent 15 years with the
company now known as Novartis Pharmaceuticals, where he held
positions of increasing responsibility in sales, sales
management, managed healthcare, business analysis, and
ebusiness. Prior to joining our company, Mr. Kent
was the Executive Director of Sales for Rx Sample Solutions and
the head of the Northeast Regional Office from 2004 to 2006. He
holds a B.S. from the Pennsylvania State University.
Amy Dix Rock, Ph.D., Senior Manager, Regulatory
Affairs. Dr. Rock joined our company in 2001
and built our Regulatory Affairs Department and infrastructure.
In addition to managing all interactions between our company and
the FDA, Dr. Rock oversees the preparation of pre-approval
and post-approval regulatory submissions. Her additional
responsibilities include involvement in protocol development and
clinical trials management, overseeing our medical call center
and supporting our corporate compliance initiatives. She holds a
B.A. from Washington University, a PhD in Immunology from the
University of Kentucky, and an M.B.A. from the Vanderbilt Owen
Graduate School of Management.
ADVISORY
BOARDS
In order to augment the efforts of our management and directors,
we have established two key advisory boards to support our
management and directors.
Pharmaceutical
Advisory Board
Our Board of Pharmaceutical Advisors is comprised of eight
individuals who have spent their careers in the pharmaceutical
industry. This group includes former senior executives from a
number of the major pharmaceutical firms including
Warner-Lambert Co. and its Parke-Davis division, Pfizer, Inc.,
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, and CIBA Geigy Corp. These
individuals each advise members of our companys management
on a wide variety of issues based on their expertise. These
industry advisors are helping to build our company by actively
contributing to many areas of our business such as strategy,
business development, human resources, marketing, international
activities, accounting and logistics.
Medical Advisory
Board
We have also established a Board of Medical Advisors to support
our product development efforts. This board includes six
physicians with representatives from the U.S. and international
medical communities who are leaders in the fields of emergency,
critical care and infectious disease medicine as well as
toxicology and cardiology. These individuals meet as a group
with our management to help us identify
63
Management
unmet medical needs and underserved patient populations in our
target areas. They also help us identify and evaluate relevant
product opportunities.
BOARD
COMPOSITION
Our board of directors currently consists of five directors who
are divided into three classes serving staggered three-year
terms. Dr. Robert G. Edwards is a Class I
director who will serve until our 2008 annual meeting of
shareholders. Dr. Lawrence W. Greer and Thomas R.
Lawrence are Class II directors who will serve until our
2009 annual meeting. A.J. Kazimi and Martin E. Cearnal
are Class III directors who will serve until our 2010
annual meeting. Upon expiration of the term of a class of
directors, directors in that class will be eligible to be
elected for a new three-year term at the annual meeting of
shareholders in the year in which their term expires. Any
additional directorships resulting from an increase in the
number of directors will be distributed among the three classes
so that, as nearly as possible, each class will consist of
one-third of the directors. This classification of directors
could have the effect of increasing the length of time necessary
to change the composition of a majority of our board of
directors. In general, at least two annual meetings of
shareholders will be necessary for shareholders to effect a
change in a majority of the members of our board of directors.
DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
In December 2006 and in February 2007, our board of directors
undertook reviews of the independence of the directors and
considered whether any director had a material relationship with
us that could compromise his ability to exercise independent
judgment in carrying out his responsibilities. As a result of
this review, our board of directors determined that
Dr. Lawrence W. Greer and Martin E. Cearnal are
independent as defined under applicable National
Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation System, or
NASDAQ, rules and SEC rules and regulations. We expect that a
majority of our board will be independent within a year
following this offering as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, SEC rules and regulations and NASDAQ rules.
BOARD
COMMITTEES
The standing committees of our board consist of an audit
committee and a compensation committee. Both committees will
have three members following this offering, two of whom will be
independent. We expect that all directors on our audit and
compensation committees will be independent within a year
following this offering.
Audit
committee
The members of our audit committee are Dr. Lawrence W.
Greer, Martin E. Cearnal and Thomas R. Lawrence. The Chair of
the audit committee is Dr. Greer, who has been
affirmatively determined by our board of directors to be
independent in accordance with applicable rules. In addition,
the board of directors has determined that Dr. Greer is an
audit committee financial expert, as such term is
described in Item 407 of
Regulation S-K.
The primary function of the audit committee is to assist our
board of directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities
by reviewing the financial reports and certain financial
information provided by us to any governmental body or the
public, reviewing our systems of internal controls regarding
finance, accounting, legal compliance and ethics that we have
established and overseeing our auditing, accounting and
financial reporting processes generally. Consistent with this
function, we expect the audit committee to encourage continuous
improvement of, and to foster adherence to, our policies,
procedures and practices at all levels, to be responsible for
managing the relationship with our
64
Management
independent registered public accountants, and to provide a
forum for discussion with the independent registered public
accountants and our board.
Some of the audit committees responsibilities include:
|
|
Ø
|
appointing, determining the compensation for and overseeing our
relationship with our independent registered public accountants;
|
|
Ø
|
overseeing, reviewing and evaluating our financial statements,
the audits of our financial statements, our accounting and
financial reporting processes, the integrity of our financial
statements, our disclosure controls and procedures and our
internal audit functions;
|
|
Ø
|
reviewing and approving the services provided by our independent
registered public accountants, including the scope and results
of their audits and pre-approving permissible non-audit services
to be performed by them;
|
|
Ø
|
resolving disagreements between management and our independent
registered public accountants;
|
|
Ø
|
overseeing our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements
and compliance with ethical standards adopted by us;
|
|
Ø
|
establishing and maintaining whistleblower procedures; and
|
|
Ø
|
evaluating periodically our Standards of Business Conduct and
Ethics, Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers and
Procedures for Complaints and Concerns Regarding Accounting,
Internal Accounting Controls and Auditing Matters.
|
Compensation
committee
The members of our compensation committee are Dr. Lawrence
W. Greer, Martin E. Cearnal, and Thomas R. Lawrence. The Chair
of the compensation committee is Thomas R. Lawrence. The
responsibilities of the compensation committee include:
|
|
Ø
|
reviewing and recommending to the board of directors the
compensation and benefits of all of our executive officers and
directors;
|
|
Ø
|
evaluating the performance of the principal executive officer;
|
|
Ø
|
administering our equity incentive plans;
|
|
Ø
|
establishing and reviewing general policies relating to
compensation and benefits of our employees;
|
|
Ø
|
reviewing and evaluating the compensation discussion and
analysis prepared by management; and
|
|
Ø
|
preparing an executive compensation report for publication in
our annual proxy statement.
|
COMPENSATION
COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION
Thomas R. Lawrence, the Chair of our compensation committee, is
the Chairman of Aetos Technologies, Inc., a corporation formed
in 2003 by Auburn University to market technological
breakthroughs by its faculty. Mr. Kazimi, our Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer, serves on the board of directors of
Aetos Technologies. Other than this relationship, none of our
executive officers serves as a member of the board of directors
or compensation committee of any other entity that has one or
more executive officers who serve on our board of directors or
compensation committee.
CODES OF CONDUCT
AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
We are currently in the process of developing a Corporate
Compliance Program. Within this program, we plan to maintain
internal processes and review procedures that ensure our
business activities are
65
Management
conducted in compliance with applicable federal and state laws,
statutes, regulations or program requirements, including
guidance documents drafted specifically by governing entities
for the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries, consistent
with advancing, preserving and protecting public health.
To help ensure compliance, we plan to conduct regular, periodic
compliance audits by internal and external auditors and
compliance staff, who have expertise in federal and state
healthcare laws and regulations.
Our codes of conduct consist of a Standards of Business Conduct
and Ethics, a Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers, an
Insider Information, Trading or Dealing and Stock Tipping Policy
and Procedures for Complaints and Concerns Regarding Accounting,
Internal Accounting Controls, and Auditing Matters. As part of
our corporate compliance program, in 2006 we established a
compliance hotline to enable employees, directors and other
representatives to report compliance violations, including
violations of our codes of conduct.
Standards of
Business Conduct and Ethics
Our board of directors has adopted a Standards of Business
Conduct and Ethics which establish the standards of ethical
conduct applicable to all of our directors, officers, employees,
key advisors, consultants and contract organizations. The code
of ethics addresses, among other things, compliance with laws
and regulations, business practices, conflicts of interest,
employment policies and reporting procedures. Suspected
violations of this code may be reported on a confidential,
anonymous basis through the compliance hotline. The audit
committee oversees this process, tracks the complaints and
resolutions and reports the significant results to the full
board of directors. The code is distributed to all employees and
directors. All employees and directors must sign, date and
return a certification stating that they received, understand
and will comply with the code.
Code of Ethics
for Senior Financial Officers
In 2006, we adopted a Code of Ethics for Senior Financial
Officers. The code is designed to deter wrongdoing and to
promote honest and ethical conduct, full and accurate disclosure
in periodic reports, and compliance with laws and regulations by
our senior management who has financial responsibility. We
expect that any suspected violations of this code will be
reported to the audit committee. Any waiver of this code may
only be authorized by our audit committee and will be disclosed
as required by applicable law.
Insider
Information, Trading or Dealing and Stock Tipping
Policy
We are committed to fair trading for publicly traded securities
and have established standards of conduct for directors,
employees and others who obtain material or price-sensitive,
non-public information through their work with us. The policy is
distributed to all employees. Non-compliance with the policy may
be submitted on a confidential, anonymous basis through the
compliance hotline.
Procedures for
Complaints and Concerns Regarding Accounting, Internal
Accounting Controls, and Auditing Matters
In 2006, we established Procedures for Complaints and Concerns
Regarding Accounting, Internal Accounting Controls and Auditing
Matters to encourage any person who has a reasonable basis for a
complaint or concern regarding our financial statement
disclosures, accounting matters, internal accounting controls or
auditing matters to promptly submit a complaint or concern.
Complaints may be submitted on a confidential, anonymous basis
through the compliance hotline. The audit committee oversees
this process, immediately reviews the complaints and oversees
all necessary investigations. The audit committee tracks the
complaints and resolutions and reports the significant results
to the full board of directors.
66
Compensation
COMPENSATION
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
We provide what we believe is a competitive total compensation
package to our executive management team through a combination
of base salary, long-term equity incentive compensation plan and
broad-based benefits programs.
We place significant emphasis on performance-based incentive
compensation programs. This Compensation Discussion and Analysis
explains our compensation philosophy, policies and practices
with respect to our chief executive officer, chief financial
officer, and the other three most highly-compensated executive
officers or the named executive officers.
The objectives of
our executive compensation program
Our compensation committee is responsible for establishing and
administering the policies governing the compensation for our
executive officers. Our executive officers are appointed by our
board of directors.
Our executive compensation programs are designed to achieve the
following objectives:
|
|
Ø
|
attract and retain talented and experienced executives;
|
|
Ø
|
motivate and reward executives whose knowledge, skills and
performance are critical to our success;
|
|
Ø
|
align the interests of our executive officers and shareholders
by motivating executive officers to increase shareholder value
and rewarding executive officers when shareholder value
increases;
|
|
Ø
|
provide a competitive compensation package in which total
compensation is primarily determined by company and individual
results and the creation of shareholder value;
|
|
Ø
|
ensure fairness among the executive management team by
recognizing the contributions each executive makes to our
success; and
|
|
Ø
|
compensate our executives to manage our business to meet our
long-range objectives.
|
The compensation committee meets outside the presence of all of
our executive officers, including the named executive officers,
to consider appropriate compensation for our CEO. For all other
named executive officers, the committee meets outside the
presence of all executive officers except our CEO.
Mr. Kazimi annually reviews each other named executive
officers performance with the committee and makes
recommendations to the compensation committee with respect to
the appropriate base salary and the grants of long-term equity
incentive awards for all executive officers. Based in part on
these recommendations from our CEO, the compensation committee
approves the annual compensation package of our executive
officers other than our CEO. The compensation committee also
annually analyzes Mr. Kazimis performance and
determines his base salary and grants of long-term equity
incentive awards based on its assessment of his performance.
When making decisions on setting base salary and initial grants
of long-term equity incentive awards for new executive officers,
the compensation committee considers the importance of the
position to us, the past salary history of the executive officer
and the contributions to be made by the executive officer to us.
We use the following principles to guide our decisions regarding
executive compensation:
|
|
Ø
|
provide compensation opportunities targeted at market median
levels;
|
|
Ø
|
require performance goals to be achieved or common stock price
to increase in order for the majority of the target pay levels
to be earned;
|
|
Ø
|
offer a comprehensive benefits package to all full-time
employees; and
|
67
Compensation
|
|
Ø |
provide fair and equitable compensation.
|
Our executive
compensation programs
Overall, our executive compensation programs are designed to be
consistent with the objectives and principles set forth above.
The basic elements of our executive compensation programs are
base salary, long-term equity incentive plan awards, retirement
savings opportunities and health and welfare benefits. Each of
these elements is summarized below.
Base
salary
Annually we review salary ranges and individual salaries for our
executive officers. We establish the base salary for each
executive officer based on consideration of median pay levels in
the market and internal factors, such as the individuals
performance and experience, and the pay of others on the
executive team.
The base salaries paid to our named executive officers are set
forth below in the Summary Compensation Table. For the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2006, base cash compensation to our
named executive officers was approximately $1,079,090, with our
CEO receiving approximately $293,130 of that amount. We believe
that the base salary paid to our executive officers during 2006
achieves our executive compensation objectives, compares
favorably to market pay levels and is within our target of
providing a base salary at the market median.
In 2007, adjustments to our executive officers total
compensation were made based on an analysis of current market
pay levels of peer companies and in published surveys. In
addition to the market pay levels, factors taken into account in
making any changes for 2007 included the contributions made by
the executive officer, the performance of the executive officer,
the role and responsibilities of the executive officer and the
relationship of the executive officers base pay to the
base salary of our other executives.
Long-term equity
incentive compensation
We award long-term equity incentive grants to executive
officers, including the named executive officers, as part of our
total compensation package. These awards are consistent with our
pay for performance principles and align the interests of the
executive officers to the interests of our shareholders. The
compensation committee reviews and recommends to the board of
directors the amount of each award to be granted to each named
executive officer and the board of directors approves each
award. Long-term equity incentive awards to our executives were
made pursuant to our 1999 Stock Option Plan, or the 1999 Plan,
until April 2007, and thereafter, pursuant to our Long-Term
Incentive Compensation Plan.
1999
Stock Option Plan
Our 1999 Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options
and nonqualified stock options. Grants can be made under the
1999 Plan to any of our employees, directors and consultants.
The 1999 Plan is administered by a committee designated by our
board of directors. The committee, in its sole discretion,
granted options under the 1999 Plan to certain persons rendering
services to us. Except as otherwise determined by the committee
and stated in the applicable option agreement, the exercise
price per share of each option granted under the 1999 Plan will
be the fair market value per share, as defined in the 1999 Plan.
In general, the fair market value per share is determined by our
board of directors.
68
Compensation
An option may generally be exercised until the tenth anniversary
of the date that we granted the option. Option holders who
exercise their options may pay for their shares in cash, check
or such other consideration as is deemed acceptable by us.
As
of ,
there were outstanding options to purchase a total
of shares
of common stock pursuant to the 1999 Plan. The exercise price
per share under such options ranges from $ to
$ .
Under the 1999 Plan, all executive officers were granted
incentive option agreements for common stock at exercise prices
equal to fair market value at time of issuance, except
Mr. Kazimis, whose exercise price is 110% of fair
market value at time of issuance. Each option agreement has a
term of ten years, except for Mr. Kazimis option
agreements, which have five-year terms. All agreements have
defined vesting schedules.
Long-Term
Incentive Compensation Plan
The purposes of the Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan are:
|
|
Ø
|
to encourage our employees and consultants to acquire stock and
other equity-based interests; and
|
|
Ø
|
to replace the 1999 Plan without impairing the vesting or
exercise of any option granted thereunder.
|
The Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan authorizes the
issuance of each of the following incentives:
|
|
Ø
|
incentive stock options (options that meet Internal Revenue
Service requirements for special tax treatment);
|
|
Ø
|
non-statutory stock options (all stock options other than
Incentive Stock Options);
|
|
Ø
|
stock appreciation rights (right to receive any excess in fair
market values of shares over a specified exercise price);
|
|
Ø
|
restricted stock (shares subject to transfer and forfeiture
limitations); and
|
|
Ø
|
performance shares (contingent awards comprised of stock
and/or cash
and paid only if specified performance goals are met).
|
The compensation committee administers the Long-Term Incentive
Compensation Plan. The compensation committee is authorized to
select participants, determine the type and number of awards to
be granted, determine and later amend, subject to certain
limitations, the terms of any award, interpret and specify the
rules and regulations relating to the Long-Term Incentive
Compensation Plan and make all other necessary determinations.
Employees and consultants other than non-employee directors are
eligible to participate. We may cancel unvested or unpaid
incentives for terminated employees and consultants to the
extent permitted by law.
Upon the occurrence of a change of control event, as defined in
the Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan, all outstanding
options will automatically become exercisable in full, and
restrictions and conditions for other issued incentives will
generally be deemed terminated or satisfied. In addition, our
board of directors may amend or terminate the Long-Term
Incentive Compensation Plan, subject to shareholder approval, to
comply with tax or regulatory requirements.
Retirement
savings opportunity
Effective January 1, 2006, we established a 401(k) plan
covering all employees meeting certain minimum service and age
requirements. The plan allows all qualifying employees to
contribute the
69
Compensation
maximum tax-deferred contribution allowed by the Internal
Revenue Code. The non-Highly Compensated Employees, or non-HCEs,
do not have a minimum or maximum percentage limit that they can
defer. The HCEs, however, are limited to what they can defer
based on prior years testing. Hardship distributions are
permitted under well-defined circumstances. We do not currently
match employee contributions nor provide profit sharing at this
time; however, the plan is designed so that matching or profit
sharing can be arranged at any time.
Health and
welfare benefits
All full-time employees, including our named executive officers,
may participate in our health and welfare benefits programs,
including medical, dental and vision care coverage, disability
insurance and life insurance.
Employment
agreements, severance benefits and change in control
provisions
We have entered into employment agreements in 2007 with A.J.
Kazimi, our Chairman and CEO; Jean W. Marstiller, our Senior
Vice President, Administrative Services and Corporate Secretary;
Leo Pavliv, our Vice President, Operations; J. William Hix, our
Vice President, Sales and Marketing; and David L. Lowrance, our
Vice President and CFO. The following is a summary of the
material provisions of those employment agreements.
The employment agreements provide for an annual base salary of
$303,390 for Mr. Kazimi, $170,000 for Ms. Marstiller,
$211,000 for Mr. Pavliv, $180,000 for Mr. Hix, and
$158,400 for Mr. Lowrance. In addition, the employment
agreements provide that the individuals may be eligible for any
bonus program which has been approved by our board of directors.
Any such bonus is discretionary and will be subject to the terms
of the bonus program, the terms of which may be modified from
year-to-year
in the sole discretion of our board of directors. During the
period of employment under these agreements, each of our
executives will be entitled to additional benefits, including
eligibility to participate in any company-wide employee benefits
programs approved by our board of directors and reimbursement of
reasonable expenses.
Each executives employment is at-will and may be
terminated by us at any time, with or without notice and with or
without cause. Similarly, each executive may terminate his or
her employment with us at any time, with or without notice. The
employment agreements do not provide for any severance payments
in the event the employment is terminated for cause nor any
severance benefits in the event the employment is terminated as
a result of his or her death or permanent disability.
The employment agreements also include non-competition,
non-solicitation and nondisclosure covenants on the part of the
executives. During the term of each executives employment
with us and for one year after the executive ceases to be
employed by us, the employment agreements provide that he or she
may not compete with our business in any manner, unless the
executive discloses all facts to our board of directors and
receives a release allowing him or her to engage in a specific
activity. Pursuant to the employment agreements, the executives
also agree for a period of one year after the executive ceases
to be employed by us, he or she will not solicit business
related to the development or sales of pharmaceuticals products
from any entity, organization or person which is contracted with
us, which has been doing business with us, or a firm which the
executive knew we were going to solicit business from at the
time the executive ceased to be employed. Also, the executives
may not solicit our employees. The employment agreements also
impose obligations regarding confidential information and state
that any discoveries or improvements that are conceived,
developed or otherwise made by the executives, or with others,
are deemed our sole property. The employment agreements do not
contain any termination or change in control provisions.
70
Compensation
SUMMARY
COMPENSATION TABLE
The following table sets forth information, for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2006, regarding the aggregate
compensation we paid to our named executive officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonqualified
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
Compensation
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
Name and
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
Bonus
|
|
Awards
|
|
Awards
|
|
Earnings
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Total
|
Principal
Position
|
|
Year
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
|
A.J. Kazimi
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
293,130
|
|
|
96,255
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,825
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
410,210
|
Chairman and CEO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James D. Aderhold
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
194,000
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,940
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
251,940
|
former
V.P., Sales &
Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Pavliv
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
192,500
|
|
|
42,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
234,500
|
V.P., Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. William Hix
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
137,800
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162,800
|
V.P., Sales & Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean W. Marstiller
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
135,160
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190,340
|
Senior V.P. and Corporate Secretary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David L. Lowrance
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
126,500
|
|
|
28,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
155,000
|
V.P. and CFO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRANTS OF
PLAN-BASED AWARDS TABLE
The following table sets forth information regarding grants of
compensatory awards we paid to our named executive officers
during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
Exercise or
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
|
Shares of
|
|
Securities
|
|
Base Price
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
Stock or
|
|
Underlying
|
|
of Option
|
|
of Stock
|
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
Options
|
|
Awards
|
|
and Option
|
Name
|
|
Grant
Date
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
($/Sh)
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
A.J. Kazimi
|
|
|
6/30/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
19.80
|
|
|
8.33
|
James D. Aderhold
|
|
|
6/30/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,500
|
|
|
18.00
|
|
|
11.04
|
Leo Pavliv
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. William Hix
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean W. Marstiller
|
|
|
6/30/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,500
|
|
|
18.00
|
|
|
11.04
|
David L. Lowrance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our executive compensation policies and practices, pursuant to
which the compensation set forth in the Summary Compensation
Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table was paid or
awarded, are described above under, Compensation
Discussion and Analysis. A summary of certain material
terms of our compensation plans and arrangements is set forth
above under Compensation Discussion and
AnalysisEmployment Agreements, Severance Benefits and
Change in Control Provisions.
71
Compensation
OUTSTANDING
EQUITY AWARDS TABLE
The following table sets forth information regarding unvested
stock and unexercised option awards held by our named executive
officers as of December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
Market or
|
|
|
Option
Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Payout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market
|
|
Unearned
|
|
Unearned
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Value of
|
|
Shares,
|
|
Shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
Shares or
|
|
Units or
|
|
Units or
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Units
|
|
Units of
|
|
Other
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
Securities
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Stock
|
|
Stock
|
|
Rights
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
That
|
|
That
|
|
That
|
|
That
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Option
|
|
Option
|
|
Have
|
|
Have
|
|
Have
|
|
Have
|
|
|
Options(#)
|
|
Options(#)
|
|
Unearned
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Not
|
|
Not
|
|
Not
|
|
Not
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
Options(#)
|
|
Price($)
|
|
Date
|
|
Vested(#)
|
|
Vested($)
|
|
Vested(#)
|
|
Vested($)
|
|
A.J.
Kazimi(1)
|
|
|
292,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.22
|
|
|
01/23/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,048,545
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.10
|
|
|
09/15/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
12/18/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,154
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.58
|
|
|
01/04/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.70
|
|
|
01/31/08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.20
|
|
|
04/01/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,900
|
|
|
10,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.20
|
|
|
01/15/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
19.80
|
|
|
06/30/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James D.
Aderhold(2)
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
|
12/27/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
186,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
01/08/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
12/18/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
01/04/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
|
01/31/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
04/01/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
01/15/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,625
|
|
|
4,875
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.00
|
|
|
06/30/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo
Pavliv(3)
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
|
12/27/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.85
|
|
|
05/15/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
09/30/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
|
04/14/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
01/15/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. William
Hix(4)
|
|
|
29,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
05/03/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean W.
Marstiller(5)
|
|
|
72,840
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.20
|
|
|
01/23/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
|
09/15/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,615
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25
|
|
|
01/04/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
|
01/31/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
04/01/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,500
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
01/15/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
|
4,125
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.00
|
|
|
06/30/16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David L.
Lowrance(6)
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
|
01/30/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
04/01/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.00
|
|
|
01/15/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
Compensation
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
A.J. Kazimi:
292,500 Options granted on January 23, 1999; vested
immediately.
2,048,545 Option granted on September 15, 1999; vested 20%
equally each December 31 over 5 year period
1999-2003.
3,465 Options granted on December 18, 2001; vested
immediately.
6,154 Options granted on January 4, 2002; vested
immediately.
3,000 Options granted on January 31, 2003; vested
December 31, 2003.
1,700 Options granted on April 1, 2004; vested
immediately.
26,500 Options granted on January 15, 2005; 5,300 options
or 20% vested immediately; 20% more vested each
December 31, 2005 and 2006; the remaining options will vest
equally each December 31, 2007 and 2008.
10,000 Options granted on June 30, 2006; 25% vested on
December 31, 2006; the remainder of options vest 25%
equally each December 31, 2007, 2008, 2009.
|
|
(2)
|
|
James D. Aderhold:
5,000 Options granted on December 27, 1999; vested on
December 31, 2000.
186,300 Options granted on January 8, 2001; 36,300 vested
immediately; 50,000 options vested each December 31, 2001,
2002, 2003.
4,505 Options granted on December 18, 2001; vested
immediately.
9,650 Options granted on January 4, 2002; vested
immediately.
1,400 Options granted on January 31, 2003; vested
immediately.
525 Options granted on April 1, 2004; vested
immediately.
10,000 Options granted on January 15, 2005; 2,000 options
vested immediately; 2,000 options vested each December 31,
2005 and 2006; 2,000 options will vest each December 31,
2007 and 2008.
6,500 Options granted on June 30, 2006; 25% or 1,625
options vested on December 31, 2006. The remaining options
vest 1,625 each December 31, 2007, 2008 and 2009.
|
|
(3)
|
|
Leo Pavliv:
2,500 Options granted on December 27, 1999; vested
immediately.
9,000 Options granted on May 15, 2000; vested
immediately.
1,500 Options granted on September 30, 2001; vested
immediately.
80,000 Options granted on April 14, 2003; 25% vested each
December 31 over the 4 year period
2003-2006.
20,000 Options granted on January 15, 2005; all options
will vest on December 31, 2009.
|
|
(4)
|
|
J. William Hix:
29,000 Options granted on May 3, 2004; 5,000 vested
immediately; 8,000 options vested each December 31 2004,
2005, 2006.
|
|
(5)
|
|
Jean W. Marstiller:
72,840 Options granted on January 23, 1999; vested
immediately.
140,000 Options granted on September 15, 1999; 25,000
vested immediately; 23,000 vested each December 31,
1999-2003.
4,615 Options granted on January 4, 2002; vested
immediately.
200 Options granted on January 31, 2003; vested
immediately.
5,000 Options granted on April 1, 2004; vested
immediately.
7,500 Options granted on January 15, 2005; 1,500 vested
immediately; 1,500 vested each December 31, 2005 and 2006;
1,500 will vest each December 31, 2007 and 2008.
5,500 Options granted on June 30, 2006; 1,375 vested
December 31, 2006; 1,375 will vest each December 31,
2007, 2008, 2009.
|
|
(6)
|
|
David L. Lowrance:
45,000 Options granted on January 30, 2003; 5,000 vested
immediately; 10,000 options vested each December 31,
2003-2006.
2,000 Options granted on April 1, 2004; vested
immediately.
12,500 Options granted on January 15, 2005; all options
will vest on December 31, 2009.
|
73
Compensation
OPTION EXERCISES
AND STOCK VESTED
The following table sets forth information regarding the
exercise and vesting of stock and option awards held by our
named executive officers during the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option
Awards
|
|
Stock
Awards
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
Acquired
|
|
Value Realized
|
|
Shares
Acquired
|
|
Value Realized
|
Name
|
|
on
Exercise(#)
|
|
on
Exercise($)
|
|
on
Vesting(#)
|
|
on
Vesting($)
|
|
|
A.J. Kazimi
|
|
|
6,154
|
|
|
113,357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James D. Aderhold
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
105,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Pavliv
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. William Hix
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean W. Marstiller
|
|
|
7,830
|
|
|
139,374
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David L. Lowrance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENSION BENEFITS
TABLE
We do not have any plan that provides for payments or other
benefits at, following, or in connection with retirement.
NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED COMPENSATION TABLE
We do not have any plan that provides for the deferral of
compensation on a basis that is not tax qualified.
DIRECTOR
COMPENSATION TABLE
The following table sets forth information regarding the
aggregate compensation we paid to the members of our board of
directors during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
Nonqualified
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Paid
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
Deferred
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
in Cash
|
|
Awards
|
|
Awards
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Total
|
Name
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
Earnings
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
|
Martin E.
Cearnal(1)
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
24,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,500
|
Dr. Robert G.
Edwards(2)
|
|
|
26,500
|
|
|
24,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128,420
|
|
|
178,920
|
Dr. Lawrence W.
Greer(3)
|
|
|
26,500
|
|
|
69,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95,500
|
Thomas R.
Lawrence(4)
|
|
|
26,500
|
|
|
54,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,500
|
|
|
97,000
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
For service as a director in 2006,
Mr. Cearnal received fees equal to $26,500, paid as
follows: $2,500 cash, and shares of our common stock valued at
$24,000. These amounts exclude options to purchase
2,000 shares of our common stock that vested in 2006.
|
|
(2)
|
|
For service as a director in 2006,
Dr. Edwards received fees equal to $50,500, paid as
follows: $26,500 cash, and shares of our common stock valued at
$24,000. For consulting services provided in 2006 Dr. Edwards
received other compensation of $128,420, paid as follows:
$20,420 cash, and shares of our common stock valued at $108,000.
|
|
(3)
|
|
For service as a director in 2006,
Dr. Greer received fees equal to $50,500, paid as follows:
$26,500 cash, and shares of our common stock valued at $24,000.
In addition, for service as chairman of the Audit Committee of
the board of directors, Dr. Greer received a fee equal to
$45,000 paid in shares of our common stock valued at $45,000.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
For service as a director in 2006,
Mr. Lawrence received fees equal to $50,500, paid as
follows: $26,500 cash, and shares of our common stock valued at
$24,000. In addition, for service as chairman of the
Compensation Committee of the board of directors,
Mr. Lawrence received a fee of $30,000 cash. For consulting
services provided in 2006, Mr. Lawrence received other
compensation of $16,500, paid entirely in cash.
|
74
Compensation
Director
compensation
Compensation to each outside director for service on the board
of directors including board committee responsibilities for 2007
will consist of a total fee in the amount of $75,500. All fees
will be paid in a combination of cash and equity, as we and each
director shall agree. Cash fees will include $2,500 paid in the
first quarter of 2007 and the remainder accrued and paid on
either a monthly or quarterly basis. Directors will not receive
separate compensation for attendance at board meetings, board
committee meetings or other company related activities. In
addition, outside directors will be reimbursed for all
reasonable and necessary business expenses incurred in the
performance of their service on the board of directors.
As part of their director compensation for 2007, Martin E.
Cearnal and Dr. Lawrence W. Greer have elected to take
equity. Martin E. Cearnal will be granted 3,318 shares of
common stock and Dr. Lawrence W. Greer will be granted
2,200 shares of common stock.
Long-term equity incentive awards to our directors were made
pursuant to the 1999 Plan until April 2007, and
thereafter, pursuant to the 2007 Directors Compensation
Plan, or the Directors Plan.
The purposes of the Directors Plan are:
|
|
Ø
|
to strengthen our ability to attract, motivate, and retain
qualified independent directors; and
|
|
Ø
|
to replace the 1999 Plan without impairing the vesting or
exercise of any option granted to any director thereunder.
|
The Directors Plan authorizes the issuance to non-employee
directors of each of the following types of awards:
|
|
Ø
|
options (all options to be issued under the Directors Plan
will not meet IRS requirements for special tax treatment and
therefore are non-qualified options);
|
|
Ø
|
restricted stock grants (shares subject to various restrictions
and conditions as determined by our compensation committee); and
|
|
Ø
|
stock grants (award of shares or our common stock with full and
unrestricted ownership rights).
|
The compensation committee of our board of directors will
administer the Directors Plan, if it is adopted. In the
event of a change of control of our company (as defined in the
Directors Plan), all outstanding options would
automatically become exercisable in full, and restrictions and
conditions for other issued awards shall generally be deemed
terminated or satisfied. Our board of directors may amend or
terminate the Directors Plan, subject to shareholder
approval if necessary, to comply with tax or regulatory
requirements.
INDEMNIFICATION
OF DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND LIMITATION OF
LIABILITY
Our charter and bylaws provide for indemnification of our
directors to the fullest extent permitted by the Tennessee
Business Corporation Act, as amended from time to time. Our
directors shall not be liable to us or our shareholders for
monetary damages for breach of their fiduciary duty of care. The
Tennessee Business Corporation Act provides that a Tennessee
corporation may indemnify its directors and officers against
expenses, judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement
actually and reasonably incurred by them in connection with any
proceeding, whether criminal or civil, administrative or
investigative if, in connection with the matter in issue, the
individuals conduct was in good faith, and the individual
reasonably believed: in the case of conduct in the
individuals official capacity with the corporation, that
the individuals conduct was in its best interest; and in
all other cases, that the individuals behavior was at
least not opposed to its best interest; and in the case of a
criminal
75
Compensation
proceeding, the individual had no reason to believe the
individuals conduct was unlawful. In addition, we have
entered into indemnification agreements with our directors.
These provisions and agreements may have the practical effect in
certain cases of eliminating the ability of our shareholders to
collect monetary damages from directors. We believe that these
contractual agreements and the provisions in our charter and
bylaws are necessary to attract and retain qualified persons as
directors.
DIRECTORS AND
OFFICERS INSURANCE
We maintain a directors and officers insurance
policy that provides coverage to our directors and officers
relating to certain potential liabilities. The directors
and officers insurance policy, provided by The Hartford
with a coverage amount of up to $3,000,000, covers
wrongful act or securities claims.
76
Certain
relationships and related party transactions
Other than compensation agreements and other arrangements which
are described in Compensation and the transactions
described below, since January 1, 2004, there has not been,
and there is not currently proposed, any transaction or series
of similar transactions to which we were or will be a party in
which the amount involved exceeded or will exceed $120,000 and
in which any related party, including any director, executive
officer, holder of five percent or more of any class of our
capital stock or any member of their immediate families had or
will have a direct or indirect material interest.
All of the transactions set forth below were approved by a
majority of the board of directors, including a majority of any
independent and disinterested members of the board of directors.
We believe that all of the transactions set forth below had
terms no less favorable to us than we could have obtained from
unaffiliated third parties. In connection with this offering, we
have adopted a written policy which requires all future
transactions between us and any related persons (as defined in
Item 404 of
Regulation S-K)
be approved in advance by our audit committee.
In September 2003, we borrowed $1,000,000 from S.C.O.U.T. in the
form of a convertible promissory note with a maturity date of
September 2004. The President and majority shareholder of the
general partner of S.C.O.U.T., Dr. Lawrence W. Greer,
serves on our board of directors. Pursuant to the terms of the
note, on its maturity date, S.C.O.U.T. converted the principal
value of the note plus all interest accrued at a fixed rate of
ten percent per annum into 91,667 shares of our common
stock at a price of $12.00 per share.
In April 2004, S.C.O.U.T. purchased 43,000 shares of our
common stock at a price of $12.00 per share and a five-year
warrant to purchase 20,000 of our common stock at an exercise
price of $12.00 per share.
Board members were granted a total of 12,409, 23,120 and
15,600 shares of common stock in 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively, for services rendered as directors and
consultants. The amounts recorded for such services were
$249,000, $277,000, and $187,000 in 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Additionally, two board members received a total
of 11,000 options with an exercise price of $18.00 per
share in 2005 and 16,780 options with an exercise price of
$12.00 per share in 2004. No options were issued to board
members in 2006.
In connection with this offering, we have adopted a written
policy, the Policy and Procedures with Respect to Related Person
Transactions. Our board of directors has determined that our
audit committee is best suited to review and approve all future
related person transactions. The Policy and Procedures with
Respect to Related Person Transactions covers a transaction,
arrangement, or relationship in which we or any of our
subsidiaries is or will be a participant and the amount involved
exceeds $120,000 per year, and in which any related person
has or will have a direct or indirect interest. The Policy and
Procedures with Respect to Related Person Transactions defines a
related person as:
|
|
Ø
|
any person who is, or at any time since the beginning of our
last fiscal year was, a director or executive officer of ours or
a nominee to become a director of ours;
|
|
Ø
|
any person who is known to be the beneficial owner of more than
5% of any class of our voting securities;
|
|
Ø
|
any immediate family member of any of the foregoing
persons; and
|
|
Ø
|
any firm, corporation or other entity in which any of the
foregoing persons is employed or is a partner or principal or in
a similar position or in which such person has a 5% or greater
beneficial ownership interest.
|
No member of our audit committee shall review or approve a
related person transaction in which he or an immediate family
member of his is the related person. The audit committee shall
approve only those related person transactions that are in, or
are not inconsistent with, the best interests of us and our
shareholders.
77
Principal
shareholders
The following table sets forth information known to us with
respect to beneficial ownership of shares of our common stock as
of February 28, 2007 by (i) each of our directors,
(ii) each of our named executive officers; (iii) all
of our directors and executive officers as a group; and
(iv) each person or group of affiliated persons known to us
to be the beneficial owner of 5% or more of our outstanding
common stock.
Beneficial ownership and percentage ownership are determined in
accordance with the rules of the SEC. This information does not
necessarily indicate beneficial ownership for any other purpose.
In computing the number of shares beneficially owned by a person
and the percentage ownership of that person, shares of common
stock underlying options or warrants held by that person that
are currently exercisable or will become exercisable within
60 days of February 28, 2007 are deemed outstanding
and are included in the number of shares beneficially owned,
while the shares are not deemed outstanding for purposes of
computing percentage ownership of any other person. To our
knowledge, except as indicated in the footnotes to this table
and subject to community property laws where applicable, the
persons named in the table have sole voting and investment power
with respect to all shares of our common stock shown as
beneficially owned by them.
As of February 28, 2007, there were 228 holders of
record of our common stock and 42 holders of record of preferred
stock, which will automatically be converted into common stock
at the completion of this offering. For purposes of calculating
amounts beneficially owned by a shareholder before the offering,
the number of shares deemed issued and outstanding was
4,938,845 shares of common stock as of February 28,
2007. The percentage of beneficial ownership after this offering
is based
on shares
of common stock. For purposes of calculating the percentage
beneficially owned after the offering, the number of shares
deemed outstanding includes all shares deemed to be outstanding
before the offering, all shares into which our outstanding
shares of preferred stock will be converted as a result of the
offering and all shares being sold in the offering.
Unless otherwise indicated, the address for each person listed
is c/o Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., 2525 West End
Ave., Suite 950, Nashville, Tennessee 37203.
78
Principal
shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Percentage of
Shares
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Beneficially
Owned
|
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
|
Before
|
|
|
After
|
|
Executive
officers and directors
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Offering
|
|
|
Offering
|
|
|
|
|
A.J.
Kazimi(1)
|
|
|
3,647,317
|
|
|
|
49.92
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas R.
Lawrence(2)
|
|
|
122,288
|
|
|
|
2.47
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Robert G.
Edwards(3)
|
|
|
220,473
|
|
|
|
4.37
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Lawrence W.
Greer(4)
|
|
|
408,090
|
|
|
|
8.15
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Martin E.
Cearnal(5)
|
|
|
61,801
|
|
|
|
1.25
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
James D. Aderhold,
Jr.(6)
|
|
|
223,809
|
|
|
|
4.34
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Leo
Pavliv(7)
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
1.85
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Jean W.
Marstiller(8)
|
|
|
317,273
|
|
|
|
6.14
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon R.
Bernard(9)
|
|
|
56,592
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
David L.
Lowrance(10)
|
|
|
47,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. William
Hix(11)
|
|
|
29,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directors and executive officers
as a group (11 persons)
|
|
|
4,878,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5%
Shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Douglas J.
Marchant(12)
|
|
|
350,000
|
|
|
|
7.09
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. and Mrs. J. Kenneth
Hazen(13)(14)
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
6.07
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
S.C.O.U.T. Healthcare Fund,
L.P.(15)(16)
|
|
|
348,184
|
|
|
|
7.05
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Less than 1.0% of the outstanding
common stock.
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Includes 2,367,610 shares that
Mr. Kazimi has the right to acquire upon the exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Includes 19,233 shares
Mr. Lawrence has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(3)
|
|
Includes 107,904 shares
Dr. Edwards has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(4)
|
|
Includes
(i) 306,624 shares owned of record by S.C.O.U.T., a
limited partnership with respect to which Dr. Greer is the
President and majority Shareholder of the general partner,
(ii) 21,560 shares S.C.O.U.T. has the right to acquire
upon exercise of outstanding stock options,
(iii) 20,000 shares S.C.O.U.T. has the right to
acquire immediately from us pursuant to a warrant, and
(iv) 26,000 shares Dr. Greer has the right to
acquire immediately upon exercise of outstanding stock options.
|
|
(5)
|
|
Includes
(i) 11,700 shares Mr. Cearnal has the right to
acquire upon exercise of outstanding stock options and
(ii) 7,700 shares Mr. Cearnal will receive upon
conversion of his preferred stock.
|
|
(6)
|
|
Includes 215,005 shares
Mr. Aderhold has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(7)
|
|
Includes 93,000 shares
Mr. Pavliv has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(8)
|
|
Includes 228,530 shares
Ms. Marstiller has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(9)
|
|
Includes 2,308 shares
Dr. Bernard has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(10)
|
|
Includes 47,000 shares
Mr. Lowrance has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(11)
|
|
Includes 29,000 shares
Mr. Hix has the right to acquire upon exercise of
outstanding stock options.
|
|
(12)
|
|
The address for Mr. Marchant
is 60 Germantown Court, Suite 220, Cordova, Tennessee,
38018.
|
|
(13)
|
|
The address for Mr. and
Mrs. J. Kenneth Hazen is 260 St. Andrews Fairway, Memphis,
Tennessee, 38111.
|
|
(14)
|
|
The number of shares reflected
above as beneficially held by Mr. and Mrs. J. Kenneth
Hazen are held jointly.
|
|
(15)
|
|
Includes
(i) 21,560 shares S.C.O.U.T. has the right to acquire
upon exercise of outstanding stock options, and
(ii) 20,000 shares S.C.O.U.T. has the right to acquire
immediately from us pursuant to a warrant.
|
|
(16)
|
|
The address for S.C.O.U.T. is 2200
Woodcrest Place, Suite 309, Birmingham, Alabama, 35209.
|
79
Description of
capital stock
GENERAL
Our authorized capital stock consists of one hundred million
shares of common stock, no par value, three million shares of
Series A preferred stock, no par value, and twenty million
shares of undesignated preferred stock, no par value.
COMMON
STOCK
As
of , shares
of common stock were issued and outstanding (which does not
include shares of
common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options
issued pursuant to our 1999 Plan or other options or warrants to
purchase common stock, and which does not
include shares of
common stock issuable upon conversion of all outstanding shares
of our preferred stock). We plan to issue additional stock
options to our directors, employees and consultants, and we may
issue shares of common stock to sellers of rights to certain
pharmaceutical products. Giving effect to the sale
of shares
offered hereby and the conversion of all outstanding shares of
our preferred stock, there would
be shares
of common stock outstanding following this offering.
The holders of shares of common stock are entitled to one vote
per share on any matter that comes before the shareholders.
Cumulative voting is not authorized. Holders of shares of common
stock do not have preemptive rights to purchase securities that
we may subsequently issue. Subject to preferences that may be
applicable to any outstanding preferred stock, the holders of
common stock are entitled to receive such dividends as may be
declared by our board of directors out of funds legally
available for payment as dividends. However, we do not
anticipate paying any dividends in the foreseeable future to
holders of our common stock. In the event of a liquidation,
dissolution, or winding up of our affairs, the holders of
outstanding shares will be entitled to share pro rata according
to their respective interests in our assets and funds remaining
after payment of all of our debts and other liabilities and the
liquidation preference of any outstanding preferred stock. All
of the shares of common stock currently outstanding are fully
paid and nonassessable.
PREFERRED
STOCK
Our board of directors is authorized, without approval of our
shareholders, to provide for the issuance of shares of preferred
stock in one or more series, to establish the number of shares
in each series, and to fix the designations, powers,
preferences, and rights of each such series and the
qualifications, limitations, or restrictions. Among the specific
matters that may be determined by our board are:
|
|
Ø
|
the designation of each series;
|
|
Ø
|
the number of shares of each series;
|
|
Ø
|
the rights in respect of dividends, if any;
|
|
Ø
|
whether dividends, if any, shall be cumulative or non-cumulative;
|
|
Ø
|
the terms of redemption, repurchase obligation or sinking fund,
if any;
|
|
Ø
|
the rights in the event of any voluntary or involuntary
liquidation, dissolution or winding up of our affairs;
|
|
Ø
|
rights and terms of conversion, if any;
|
|
Ø
|
restrictions on the creation of indebtedness, if any;
|
|
Ø
|
restrictions on the issuance of additional preferred stock or
other capital stock, if any;
|
80
Description of
capital stock
|
|
Ø
|
restrictions on the payment of dividends on shares ranking
junior to the preferred stock; and
|
|
Ø
|
voting rights, if any.
|
Upon completion of this offering, no shares of preferred stock
will be outstanding and we have no current plans to issue
preferred stock. The issuance of shares of preferred stock, or
the issuance of rights to purchase preferred stock, could be
used to discourage an unsolicited acquisition proposal. For
example, a business combination could be impeded by the issuance
of a series of preferred stock containing class voting rights
that would enable the holder or holders of such series to block
any such transaction. Alternatively, a business combination
could be facilitated by the issuance of a series of preferred
stock having sufficient voting rights to provide a required
percentage vote of our shareholders. In addition, under some
circumstances, the issuance of preferred stock could adversely
affect the voting power and other rights of the holders of
common stock. Although prior to issuing any series of preferred
stock our board is required to make a determination as to
whether the issuance is in the best interests of our
shareholders, our board could act in a manner that would
discourage an acquisition attempt or other transaction that
some, or a majority, of our shareholders might believe to be in
their best interests or in which our shareholders might receive
a premium for their stock over prevailing market prices of such
stock. Our board of directors does not at present intend to seek
shareholder approval prior to any issuance of currently
authorized preferred stock, unless otherwise required by law or
applicable stock exchange requirements.
OUTSTANDING
OPTIONS AND WARRANTS
As
of ,
in addition to outstanding options to
acquire shares of
common stock issued pursuant to our 1999 Plan, we have issued
options to
purchase shares
of our common stock in connection with two debt financing rounds
in 2001 and 2003. These options have ten-year terms with
exercise prices of $ and
$ per share, respectively.
Total options outstanding as
of
have an average exercise price of
$ per share. We have also
issued warrants to purchase 32,500 shares of our common
stock at a price of $12.00 per share to Bank of America and
to S.C.O.U.T., a consulting and investment company in which
Dr. Lawrence W. Greer, one of our directors, is a
principal, and warrants to purchase 1,979 shares of our
common stock at a price of $18.00 per share to Bank of
America.
ANTI-TAKEOVER
EFFECTS OF TENNESSEE LAW AND PROVISIONS OF OUR CHARTER AND
BYLAWS
The Tennessee Business Combination Act, the Tennessee Investor
Protection Act, the Tennessee Greenmail Act and the Tennessee
Control Share Acquisition Act provide certain anti-takeover
protections for Tennessee corporations.
The Tennessee
Business Combination Act
The Tennessee Business Combination Act, or TBCA, governs all
Tennessee corporations. It imposes a five-year standstill on
transactions such as mergers, share exchanges, sales of assets,
liquidations and other interested party transactions between
Tennessee corporations and interested shareholders
and their associates or affiliates, unless the business
combination is approved by the board of directors before the
interested shareholder goes above the 10% ownership threshold.
Thereafter, the transaction either requires a two-thirds vote of
the shareholders other than the interested shareholder or
satisfaction of certain fair price standards.
The TBCA also provides for additional exculpatory protection for
the board of directors in resisting mergers, exchanges and
tender offers if a Tennessee corporations charter
specifically opts-in to such
81
Description of
capital stock
provisions. A Tennessee corporations charter may
specifically authorize the members of a board of directors, in
the exercise of their judgment, to give due consideration to
factors other than price and to consider whether a merger,
exchange, tender offer or significant disposition of assets
would adversely affect the corporations employees,
customers, suppliers, the communities in which the corporation
operates, or any other relevant factor in the exercise of their
fiduciary duty to the shareholders.
Our charter expressly opts-in and provides for exculpation of
the board of directors to the full extent permitted under the
TBCA. The opt-in will have the effect of protecting us from
unwanted takeover bids, because the board of directors is
permitted by the charter to take into account all relevant
factors in performing its duly authorized duties and acting in
good faith and in our best interests.
The Tennessee
Investor Protection Act
The Tennessee Investor Protection Act, or TIPA, generally
requires the registration, or an exemption from registration,
before a person can make a tender offer for shares of a
Tennessee corporation which, if successful, will result in the
offeror beneficially owning more than 10% of any class of
shares. Registration requires the filing with the Tennessee
Commissioner of Commerce and Insurance of a registration
statement, a copy of which must be sent to the target company,
and the public disclosure of the material terms of the proposed
offer. Additional requirements are imposed under that act if the
offeror beneficially owns 5% or more of any class of equity
securities of the target company, any of which was purchased
within one year prior to the proposed takeover offer. TIPA also
prohibits fraudulent and deceptive practices in connection with
takeover offers, and provides remedies for violations.
TIPA does not apply to an offer involving a vote by holders of
equity securities of the offeree company, pursuant to its
charter, on a share exchange, consolidation or sale of corporate
assets in consideration of the issuance of securities of another
corporation, or on a sale of its securities in exchange for cash
or securities of another corporation. Also exempt from TIPA are
tender offers which are open on substantially equal terms to all
shareholders, are recommended by the board of directors of the
target company, and include full disclosure of all terms.
The Tennessee
Greenmail Act
The Tennessee Greenmail act, or TGA, prohibits us from
purchasing or agreeing to purchase any of our securities, at a
price higher than fair market value, from a holder of 3% or more
of any class of its securities who has beneficially owned the
securities for less than two years. We can, however, make this
purchase if the majority of the outstanding shares of each class
of voting stock issued by us approves the purchase or if we make
an offer of at least equal value per share to all holders of
shares of the same class of securities as those held by the
prospective seller.
The Tennessee
Control Share Acquisition Act
Sections 48-103-301
through
48-103-312
of the Tennessee Control Share Acquisition Act, or TCSA, limit
the voting rights of shares owned by a person above certain
percentage thresholds, unless the non-interested shareholders of
the corporation approve the acquisition above the designated
threshold. However, the TCSA only applies to corporations whose
charter or bylaws contain an express declaration that control
share acquisitions are to be governed by the TCSA. In addition,
the charter or bylaws must specifically provide for the
redemption of control shares or appraisal rights for dissenting
shareholders in a control share transaction.
Our charter makes all of the express declarations necessary to
avail us of the full protection under the TCSA. The provisions
described above will have the general effect of discouraging, or
rendering more
82
Description of
capital stock
difficult, unfriendly takeover or acquisition attempts.
Consequently, such provisions would be beneficial to current
management in an unfriendly takeover attempt but could have an
adverse effect on shareholders who might wish to participate in
such a transaction. However, management believes that such
provisions are advantageous to shareholders in that they will
permit management and the shareholders to carefully consider and
understand a proposed acquisition and may require a higher level
of shareholder participation in the decision.
Pursuant to
Section 48-103-308
of the TCSA, we, at our option, may redeem from an acquiring
person all, but not less than all, control shares acquired in a
control share acquisition, at any time during the period ending
60 days after the last acquisition of control shares by
that person, for the fair value of those shares, if (1) no
control acquisition statement has been filed, or (2) a
control acquisition statement has been filed and the shares are
not accorded voting rights by the shareholders of this
corporation pursuant to
Section 48-103-307.
For these purposes, fair value shall be determined as of the
effective date of the vote of the shareholders denying voting
rights to the acquiring person, if a control acquisition
statement is filed, or if no control acquisition statement is
filed, as of the date of the last acquisition of control shares
by the acquiring person in a control share acquisition.
Pursuant to
Section 48-103-309
of the TCSA, if control shares acquired in a control share
acquisition are accorded voting rights and the acquiring person
has acquired control shares that confer upon that person a
majority or more of all voting power entitled to vote generally
with respect to the election of directors, all this
corporations shareholders of record, other than the
acquiring person, who have not voted in favor of granting those
voting rights to the acquiring person shall be entitled to an
appraisal of the fair market value of their shares in accordance
with Chapter 23 of the Tennessee Business Corporation Act.
Our corporate documents contain provisions that may enable our
board of directors to resist a change in control of our company
even if a change in control were to be considered favorable by
you and other shareholders. These provisions include:
|
|
Ø
|
the authorization of undesignated preferred stock, the terms of
which may be established and shares of which may be issued
without shareholder approval;
|
|
Ø
|
advance notice procedures required for shareholders to nominate
candidates for election as directors or to bring matters before
an annual meeting of shareholders;
|
|
Ø
|
limitations on persons authorized to call a special meeting of
shareholders;
|
|
Ø
|
a staggered board of directors;
|
|
Ø
|
a requirement that vacancies in directorships are to be filled
by a majority of the directors then in office and the number of
directors is to be fixed by the board of directors; and
|
|
Ø
|
no cumulative voting.
|
These and other provisions contained in our second amended and
restated charter and bylaws could delay or discourage
transactions involving an actual or potential change in control
of us or our management, including transactions in which our
shareholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares
over then current prices, and may limit the ability of
shareholders to remove our current management or approve
transactions that our shareholders may deem to be in their best
interests and, therefore, could adversely affect the price of
our common stock.
83
Description of
capital stock
TRANSFER AGENT
AND REGISTRAR
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is Mellon
Investor Services.
NASDAQ GLOBAL
MARKET LISTING
We have applied for our common stock to be quoted on The Nasdaq
Global Market under the trading symbol CPIX.
84
Shares eligible for
future sale
Immediately prior to this offering, there was no public market
for our common stock. Future sales of substantial amounts of
common stock in the public market, or the perception that such
sales may occur, could adversely affect the market price of our
common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital in
the future through the sale of our securities. Although we have
applied to have our common stock approved for quotation on The
Nasdaq Global Market, we cannot assure you that there will be an
active public market for our common stock.
Upon completion of this offering, we will have outstanding an
aggregate
of shares
of common stock, assuming the issuance
of shares
of common stock offered in our initial public offering,
conversion of our outstanding shares of preferred stock and no
exercise of options after December 31, 2006. Of these
shares, the shares sold in this offering will be freely tradable
without restriction or further registration under the Securities
Act, except for any shares purchased by our
affiliates, as that term is defined in Rule 144
under the Securities Act, whose sales would be subject to
certain limitations and restrictions described below. See
Lock-Up
Agreements. Persons who may be deemed affiliates generally
include individuals or entities that control, are controlled by
or are under common control with us and may include our
officers, directors and significant shareholders.
The remaining shares of
common stock held by existing shareholders were issued and sold
by us in reliance on exemptions from the registration
requirements of the Securities Act. Of these shares,
shares
will be subject to
lock-up
agreements described below on the effective date of this
offering. Upon expiration of the
lock-up
agreements 180 days after the effective date of this
offering, shares will become eligible for sale, subject in most
cases to the limitations of Rule 144. In addition, holders
of stock options could exercise such options and sell certain of
the shares issued upon exercise as described below. See
Lock-Up
Agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
Days after date
of
|
|
Shares
eligible
|
|
|
this
prospectus
|
|
for
sale
|
|
Comment
|
|
|
Upon effectiveness
|
|
|
|
Shares sold in the offering
|
Upon effectiveness
|
|
|
|
Freely tradable shares saleable
under Rule 144(k) that are not subject to the
lock-up
|
90 Days
|
|
|
|
Shares saleable under
Rules 144 and 701 that are not subject to a
lock-up
|
180 Days
|
|
|
|
Lock-up
released; shares saleable under Rules 144 and 701
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
Restricted securities held for one
year or less
|
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT
PLANS
As of December 31, 2006, there were a total
of shares
of common stock subject to outstanding options under our 1999
Option Plan,
approximately of
which were vested and exercisable.
Immediately after the completion of this offering, we intend to
file registration statements on
Form S-8
under the Securities Act to register all of the shares of common
stock issued or reserved for future issuance under the 1999
Option Plan and the 2007 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan.
On the date which is 180 days after the effective date of
this offering, a total of
approximately shares of
common stock subject to outstanding options will be vested and
exercisable. After the effective dates of the registration
statements on
Form S-8,
shares purchased under the 1999 Option Plan and the 2007
Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan generally would be
available for resale in the public market.
85