kura-10q_20190331.htm

(Former Name, Former Address or Former Fiscal Year If Changed Since Last Report)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☒

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

As of the close of business on May 3, 2019, the registrant had 38,184,547 shares of Common Stock ($0.0001 par value) outstanding.

	March 31, 2019			December 31, 2018 ⁽¹⁾
	(Unaudited)
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	17,778		$	16,119
Short-term investments		147,747			162,866
Accounts receivable, related party		179			224
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		1,882			1,988
Total current assets		167,586			181,197
Other long-term assets		1,772			1,166
Other long-term assets, related party		259			16
Total assets	$	169,617		$	182,379

Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable and accrued expenses	$	11,782		$	13,385
Accounts payable and accrued expenses, related party		361			230
Total current liabilities		12,143			13,615
Long-term debt, net		7,500			7,500
Other long-term liabilities		385			279
Other long-term liabilities, related party		24			—
Total liabilities		20,052			21,394
Stockholders' equity:
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value; 10,000 shares authorized; no shares issued and outstanding		—			—
Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 200,000 shares authorized; 38,169 and 38,148 shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively		4			4
Additional paid-in capital		313,220			310,849
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		18			(131	)
Accumulated deficit		(163,677	)		(149,737	)
Total stockholders' equity		149,565			160,985
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity	$	169,617		$	182,379

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2019			2018
Operating Expenses:
Research and development	$	10,329		$	11,267
Research and development, related party		53			299
General and administrative		4,482			3,366
General and administrative, related party		87			59
Total operating expenses		14,951			14,991
Other Income (Expense):
Management fee income, related party		126			195
Interest income		1,030			450
Interest expense		(145	)		(258	)
Total other income		1,011			387
Net Loss	$	(13,940	)	$	(14,604	)

Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(0.37	)	$	(0.46	)
Weighted average number of shares used in computing net loss per share, basic and diluted		38,168			31,829

Comprehensive Loss:
Net loss	$	(13,940	)	$	(14,604	)
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities		149			(19	)
Comprehensive Loss	$	(13,791	)	$	(14,623	)

							Accumulated
					Additional		Other						Total
	Common Stock				Paid-In		Comprehensive			Accumulated			Stockholders'
	Shares		Par Value		Capital		Income (Loss)			Deficit			Equity
Balance at December 31, 2018		38,148	$	4	$	310,849	$	(131	)	$	(149,737	)	$	160,985
Share-based compensation expense		—		—		2,269		—			—			2,269
Issuance of common stock from exercise of options		21		—		102		—			—			102
Other comprehensive income		—		—		—		149			—			149
Net loss		—		—		—		—			(13,940	)		(13,940	)
Balance at March 31, 2019		38,169	$	4	$	313,220	$	18		$	(163,677	)	$	149,565

							Accumulated
					Additional		Other						Total
	Common Stock				Paid-In		Comprehensive			Accumulated			Stockholders'
	Shares		Par Value		Capital		Income (Loss)			Deficit			Equity
Balance at December 31, 2017		29,424	$	3	$	169,201	$	(49	)	$	(89,290	)	$	79,865
Issuance of common stock, net of offering costs		3,137		—		57,378		—			—			57,378
Share-based compensation expense		—		—		2,179		—			—			2,179
Restricted stock awards vested		295		—		1		—			—			1
Other comprehensive loss		—		—		—		(19	)		—			(19	)
Net loss		—		—		—		—			(14,604	)		(14,604	)
Balance at March 31, 2018		32,856	$	3	$	228,759	$	(68	)	$	(103,894	)	$	124,800

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2019			2018
Operating Activities
Net loss	$	(13,940	)	$	(14,604	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Share-based compensation expense		2,269			2,179
Non-cash interest expense		—			57
Depreciation expense		—			5
Amortization of premium and accretion of discount on marketable securities, net		(540	)		(275	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable, related party		45			(41	)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		146			(624	)
Other long-term assets		(239	)		(163	)
Other long-term assets, related party		57			—
Accounts payable and accrued expenses		(1,920	)		440
Accounts payable and accrued expenses, related party		(145	)		117
Other long-term liabilities		16			58
Net cash used in operating activities		(14,251	)		(12,851	)

Investing Activities
Maturities and sales of marketable securities		66,656			46,493
Purchases of marketable securities		(50,848	)		(76,207	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		15,808			(29,714	)

Financing Activities
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net		—			57,650
Proceeds from exercise of stock options		102			—
Net cash provided by financing activities		102			57,650
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		1,659			15,085
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		16,119			11,433
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	17,778		$	26,518

Kura Oncology, Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company committed to realizing the promise of precision medicines for the treatment of cancer. Our pipeline consists of small molecule product candidates that target cancer signaling pathways where there is a strong scientific and clinical rationale to improve outcomes, and we intend to pair them with molecular or cellular diagnostics to identify those patients most likely to respond to treatment. We plan to advance our product candidates through a combination of internal development and strategic partnerships and maintain significant development and commercial rights.

References in these Notes to Unaudited Condensed Financial Statements to the “Company,” “we,” “our” or “us,” refer to Kura Oncology, Inc.

The accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes thereto in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 5, 2019, from which we derived our balance sheet as of December 31, 2018. The accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, since they are interim statements, the accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements do not include all of the information and notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements reflect all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, that are, in the opinion of our management, necessary to a fair statement of the results for the interim periods presented. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full year.

The preparation of the unaudited condensed financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires our management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported on our unaudited condensed financial statements and accompanying notes. The amounts reported could differ under different estimates and assumptions. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, which are based on historical and anticipated results and trends and on various other assumptions that management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. By their nature, estimates are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty and, as such, actual results may differ from management’s estimates.

Comprehensive loss is defined as the change in equity during the period from transactions and other events and non-owner sources. For the periods presented, accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) consists of unrealized gains and losses on marketable securities and foreign currency.

Net loss per common share is calculated by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period, without consideration for common stock equivalents. Diluted net loss per share is calculated by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average number of common shares and common stock equivalents outstanding for the period determined using the treasury-stock method. Dilutive common stock equivalents are comprised of outstanding stock options, unvested restricted stock awards, outstanding warrants and employee stock purchase plan rights.

For all periods presented, there is no difference in the number of shares used to calculate basic and diluted shares outstanding due to the antidilutive effect of the securities. Because of our net loss, outstanding stock options, unvested restricted stock awards, outstanding warrants and employee stock purchase plan rights are excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per common share for the periods presented, due to the anti-dilutive effect of the securities.

The following table summarizes the number of potentially dilutive securities that were excluded from our calculation of diluted net loss per share, in thousands:

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which amended prior accounting standards for leases. ASU 2016-02 requires lessees to recognize right-of-use, or ROU, assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and requires expanded disclosures about leasing arrangements. Subsequently, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements. ASU 2018-11 provides entities another option for transition, allowing entities to not apply the new standard in the comparative periods they present in the financial statements in the year of adoption. We adopted the new lease standard on January 1, 2019, using the alternative modified transition method provided by ASU 2018-11 and did not retrospectively apply to prior periods. We elected the “package of practical expedients” permitted under the transition which allows us not to reassess our historical assessment of whether existing contracts are or contain a lease and the classification of existing lease arrangements, and to calculate the present value of the fixed payments without performing an allocation of lease and non-lease components. As a result of the adoption of the new standard, we recognized operating lease ROU assets and operating lease liabilities of $0.6 million on our unaudited condensed balance sheet as of January 1, 2019. ROU assets are recorded in Other Long-Term Assets and Other Long-Term Assets, Related Party on our unaudited condensed balance sheets. Current and non-current lease liabilities are recorded in Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses and Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses, Related Party and Other Long-Term Liabilities and Other Long-Term Liabilities, Related Party, respectively, on our unaudited condensed balance sheets. The adoption of the new lease standard had no impact on our accumulated deficit. The adoption of the new lease standard did not have a material impact on our results of operations and cash flows. See Note 6, Leases, for further details.

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting (Topic 718), which expands the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. The new guidance is intended to simplify aspects of share-based compensation issued to nonemployees by aligning the accounting for share-based payment awards issued to employees and nonemployees as it relates to measurement date and impact of performance conditions. This standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those annual periods. We adopted ASU 2018-07 on January 1, 2019. The adoption of ASU 2018-07 did not have a material impact on our unaudited condensed financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses: Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, which changes the impairment model for most financial assets and certain other instruments. For trade receivables and other instruments, entities will be required to use a new forward-looking expected loss model that generally will result in the earlier recognition of allowances for losses. For available-for-sale debt securities with unrealized losses, the losses will be recognized as allowances rather than as reductions in the amortized cost of the securities. This guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those years, with early adoption permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. We are currently evaluating the timing and impact of the adoption of ASU 2016-13 on our unaudited condensed financial statements or related financial statement disclosures.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The new guidance modifies the disclosure requirements on fair value measurements in Topic 820. The amendments in ASU 2018-13 are effective for all entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. We are currently evaluating the timing and impact of the adoption of ASU 2018-13 on our unaudited condensed financial statements or related financial statement disclosures.

We invest in available-for-sale securities consisting of money market funds, U.S. Treasury securities, corporate debt securities and commercial paper. Available-for-sale securities are classified as part of either cash and cash equivalents or short-term investments on our unaudited condensed balance sheets.

The following tables summarize, by major security type, our investments that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis, in thousands:

		As of March 31, 2019
	Maturities (years)	Amortized Cost		Unrealized Gains		Unrealized Losses			Fair Value
Cash equivalents:
Money market funds	1 or less	$	13,590	$	—	$	—		$	13,590

Short-term investments:
Corporate debt securities	2 or less		84,066		45		(12	)		84,099
U.S. Treasury securities	1 or less		44,763		11		(26	)		44,748
Commercial paper	1 or less		18,900		—		—			18,900
Total short-term investments			147,729		56		(38	)		147,747
Total		$	161,319	$	56	$	(38	)	$	161,337

		As of December 31, 2018
	Maturities (years)	Amortized Cost		Unrealized Gains		Unrealized Losses			Fair Value
Cash equivalents:
Money market funds	1 or less	$	8,508	$	—	$	—		$	8,508

Short-term investments:
Corporate debt securities	1 or less		56,779		6		(77	)		56,708
U.S. Treasury securities	1 or less		39,780		—		(57	)		39,723
Commercial paper	1 or less		66,435		—		—			66,435
Total short-term investments			162,994		6		(134	)		162,866
Total		$	171,502	$	6	$	(134	)	$	171,374

The available-for-sale investments are classified as current assets, even though the stated maturity date may be one year or more beyond the current balance sheet date, which reflects management’s intention to use the proceeds from sales of these securities to fund our operations, as necessary. As of March 31, 2019, $142.8 million of our short-term investments had maturities less than one year, and $5.0 million had maturities between one to two years. Realized gains and losses were de minimus for the three months ended March 31, 2019. As of March 31, 2019, $55.1 million of our marketable securities were in immaterial gross unrealized loss positions.

At each reporting date, we perform an evaluation of our marketable securities to determine if any unrealized losses are other-than-temporary. Factors considered in determining whether a loss is other-than-temporary include (i) the financial strength of the issuing institution, (ii) the length of time and extent for which fair value has been less than the cost basis and (iii) our intent and ability to hold our investments in unrealized loss positions until their amortized cost basis has been recovered. Based on our evaluation, we determined that our unrealized losses were not other-than-temporary at March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018.

As a basis for considering assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability, the guidance establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value as follows:

Available-for-sale marketable securities consist of U.S. Treasury securities, which were measured at fair value using Level 1 inputs, and corporate debt securities and commercial paper, which were measured at fair value using Level 2 inputs. We determine the fair value of Level 2 related securities with the aid of valuations provided by third parties using proprietary valuation models and analytical tools. These valuation models and analytical tools use market pricing or prices for similar instruments that are both objective and publicly available, including matrix pricing or reported trades, benchmark yields, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids and/or offers. We validate the fair values of Level 2 financial instruments by comparing these fair values to a third-party pricing source. No transfers between levels have occurred during the periods presented.

The following tables summarize, by major security type, our cash equivalents and short-term investments that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis and are categorized using the fair value hierarchy, in thousands:

	As of March 31, 2019
	Balance		Level 1		Level 2
Cash equivalents:
Money market funds	$	13,590	$	13,590	$	—

Short-term investments:
Corporate debt securities		84,099	—			84,099
U.S. Treasury securities		44,748		44,748		—
Commercial paper		18,900		—		18,900
Total short-term investments		147,747		44,748		102,999
Total	$	161,337	$	58,338	$	102,999

	As of December 31, 2018
	Balance		Level 1		Level 2
Cash equivalents:
Money market funds	$	8,508	$	8,508	$	—

Short-term investments:
Corporate debt securities		56,708		—		56,708
U.S. Treasury securities		39,723		39,723		—
Commercial paper		66,435		—		66,435
Total short-term investments		162,866		39,723		123,143
Total	$	171,374	$	48,231	$	123,143

We believe that our term loan facility bears interest at a rate that approximates prevailing market rates for instruments with similar characteristics and, accordingly, the carrying value of the term loan facility approximates fair value. The fair value of our term loan facility is determined using Level 2 inputs in the fair value hierarchy.

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities consisted of the following, in thousands:

We determine if an arrangement is a lease at inception. For operating leases with an initial term greater than 12 months, we recognize operating lease ROU assets and operating lease liabilities based on the present value of lease payments over the lease term at commencement date. Operating lease ROU assets are comprised of the lease liability plus any lease payments made and excludes lease incentives. Lease terms may include options to extend or terminate when we are reasonably certain that the option will be exercised. For our operating leases, we generally cannot determine the interest rate implicit in the lease, in which case we use our incremental borrowing rate as the discount rate for the lease. We estimate our incremental borrowing rate for our operating leases based on what we would normally pay to borrow on a collateralized basis over a similar term for an amount equal to the lease payments. Operating lease expense is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

If a lease is modified, the modified contract is evaluated to determine whether it is or contains a lease. If a lease continues to exist, the lease modification is determined to be a separate contract when the modification grants the lessee an additional right of use that is not included in the original lease and the lease payments increase commensurate with the standalone price for the additional ROU. The lease modification that results in a separate contract will be accounted in the same manner as a new lease. For a modification that is not a separate contract, we reassess the lease classification using the modified terms and conditions and the facts and circumstances as of the effective date of the modification and recognize the amount of the remeasurement of the lease liability for the modified lease as an adjustment to the corresponding ROU asset.

We have a sublease with a related party for office space in San Diego, California and a lease for office space in Cambridge, Massachusetts, that existed before January 1, 2019 and were classified as operating leases. In March 2019, the sublease was amended to extend the expiration date from October 31, 2019 to April 30, 2020 with the monthly rent increased from approximately $16,000 to approximately $24,000 per month effective November 1, 2019, see Note 8, Related Party Transactions for further details of the sublease. We determined the sublease amendment did not modify the ROU asset and, therefore, was not a separate contract. Accordingly, we reassessed the lease classification and concluded the operating lease classification remained appropriate. The modified lease terms were included in determining the present value of lease payments for the sublease at the modification date. As such, we recognized an adjustment of approximately $0.1 million as an increase to the sublease liability and ROU asset. We do not have any new operating leases nor any finance leases as of March 31, 2019.

Supplemental cash flow information related to our operating leases was as follows, in thousands:

Supplemental balance sheet information related to our operating leases was as follows, in thousands (except lease term and discount rate):

The following table summarizes share-based compensation expense for all share-based compensation arrangements, in thousands:

As of March 31, 2019, unrecognized compensation costs related to employee stock options was approximately $26.9 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 3.0 years.

Our president and chief executive officer is also the sole managing member of Araxes Pharma LLC, or Araxes, and is a significant stockholder of each of us and Araxes. The following is a summary of related party transactions for the three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018:

We sublease office space in San Diego, California from Wellspring Biosciences, Inc., or Wellspring, a wholly owned subsidiary of Araxes. The sublease commenced in June 2017 and would have expired on October 31, 2019. In March 2019, the sublease was amended to extend until April 30, 2020, and the monthly rent increased to approximately $24,000 per month effective November 1, 2019, corresponding to the increase in Wellspring’s monthly rent. For the three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, rent expense, including operating costs, related to our sublease was approximately $0.1 million in both periods, as further discussed in Note 6, Leases.

We have a management services agreement with Araxes pursuant to which Araxes pays us monthly fees for management services calculated based on costs incurred by us in the provision of services to Araxes, plus a reasonable mark-up. For the three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, we recorded approximately $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively, in management fee income. In addition, the agreement allows for Araxes to reimburse us an amount equal to the number of full-time equivalents, or FTE, performing research and development services for Araxes, at an annual FTE rate of approximately $374,000, plus actual expenses as reasonably incurred. The initial term of this agreement expired on December 31, 2015 but, pursuant to the terms of the agreement, renews automatically for additional consecutive one-year periods. The agreement may be terminated by either party with a notice of at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the then-renewal term. For the three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, we recorded reimbursements of approximately $0.1 million in both periods for research and development services provided to Araxes, which was recorded as a reduction to research and development expenses on our unaudited condensed statements of operations and comprehensive loss. As of March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, approximately $0.2 million in both periods related to management fees and reimbursements of research and development services are included in accounts receivable, related party on our unaudited condensed balance sheets.

We have a services agreement with Wellspring pursuant to which we pay Wellspring for research and development services provided to us in an amount equal to the number of FTE’s performing the services, at an annual FTE rate of $400,000, plus actual expenses as reasonably incurred. The initial term of this services agreement expired on December 31, 2015 but, pursuant to the terms of the agreement, renews automatically for additional consecutive one-year periods. The agreement may be terminated by either party with a notice of at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the then-renewal term. For the three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018, we recognized approximately $0.1 million and $0.3 million, respectively, from research and development services provided to us under this agreement as research and development expense, related party on our unaudited condensed statements of operations and comprehensive loss. As of March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, approximately $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively, related to research and development services under this agreement are included in accounts payable and accrued expenses, related party on our unaudited condensed balance sheets.

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our unaudited condensed financial statements and related notes included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, or Quarterly Report, and the audited financial statements and notes thereto as of and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 and the related Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, both of which are contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, on March 5, 2019.

This Quarterly Report includes forward-looking statements and information within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, which are subject to the “safe harbor” created by those sections, that involve a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. These forward-looking statements can generally be identified as such because the context of the statement will include words such as “may,” “will,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue,” “likely,” or “opportunity,” the negative of these words or other similar words. Similarly, statements that describe our plans, strategies, intentions, expectations, objectives, goals or prospects and other statements that are not historical facts are also forward-looking statements. For such statements, we claim the protection of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Readers of this Quarterly Report are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the time this Quarterly Report was filed with the SEC. These forward-looking statements are based largely on our expectations and projections about future events and future trends affecting our business, and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, without limitation, the risk factors identified in our SEC reports, including this Quarterly Report. In addition, past financial or operating performance is not necessarily a reliable indicator of future performance, and you should not use our historical performance to anticipate results or future period trends. We can give no assurances that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking statements will occur or, if any of them do, what impact they will have on our results of operations and financial condition. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly or revise our forward-looking statements.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company committed to realizing the promise of precision medicines for the treatment of cancer. Our pipeline consists of small molecule product candidates that target cancer signaling pathways where there is a strong scientific and clinical rationale to improve outcomes, and we intend to pair them with molecular or cellular diagnostics to identify those patients most likely to respond to treatment. We plan to advance our product candidates through a combination of internal development and strategic partnerships and maintain significant development and commercial rights.

Our lead product candidate, tipifarnib, is a potent, selective and orally bioavailable inhibitor of farnesyl transferase. Tipifarnib was previously studied in more than 5,000 cancer patients and demonstrated compelling and durable anti-cancer activity in certain patients with a manageable side effect profile. We are currently evaluating tipifarnib in multiple solid tumor and hematologic indications.

Our most advanced solid tumor indication is in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, or HNSCC, that carry mutations in the HRAS gene. In September 2017, we reported that our ongoing proof-of-concept Phase 2 clinical trial of tipifarnib in patients with HRAS mutant relapsed or refractory HNSCC, or RUN-HN, achieved its primary efficacy endpoint. Following feedback from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, and other regulatory authorities, we initiated a global, multi-center, open-label, non-comparative registration-directed clinical trial of tipifarnib in HRAS mutant HNSCC in November 2018. The clinical trial has two cohorts: A treatment cohort, which we call AIM-HN, and a non-interventional screening and outcomes cohort, which we call SEQ-HN. AIM-HN is designed to enroll at least 59 evaluable patients with HRAS mutant HNSCC who have received prior platinum-based therapy and is expected to take approximately two years to fully enroll. Following achievement of the primary efficacy endpoint in RUN-HN, we added a cohort to enroll patients having HRAS mutant squamous cell carcinomas, or SCCs, other than HNSCC. We anticipate having additional data from this clinical trial in the second half of 2019.

In addition to our tipifarnib development program in HRAS mutant solid tumors, we are evaluating the potential utility of tipifarnib using CXCL12 pathway biomarkers in a number of hematologic and solid tumor indications. In December 2018, we reported preliminary data from our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial of tipifarnib in patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphomas, or PTCL. The data showed a significant association between CXCL12 expression and clinical benefit, as well as clinical proof-of-concept in patients with angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma, or AITL, an aggressive form of PTCL often characterized by high levels of CXCL12 expression. Additional data from this clinical trial have been accepted for presentation at the European Hematology Association Annual Congress and the International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma in June 2019.

We are also exploring the utility of CXCL12 pathway biomarkers as a strategy for patient enrichment in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia, or AML, and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, or CMML, in an ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial. We anticipate having additional data from the CMML cohort in 2019.

In April 2019, we reported new findings suggesting that gene expression of the exclusively farnesylated proteins RHOE and PRICKLE2 is strongly associated with CXCL12 expression in bone marrow stroma, which may provide a mechanistic rationale for why the CXCL12 pathway is a therapeutic target of tipifarnib and other farnesyl transferase inhibitors. In addition, an analysis of a subset of patients from a previously conducted Phase 2 clinical trial of tipifarnib in patients with relapsed or refractory lymphomas identified pre-treatment tumor CXCL12 expression as a potential biomarker of clinical benefit in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, or DLBCL, and mycosis fungoides, the most common form of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, or CTCL.

Additionally, in January 2019, we reported the identification of a potential association between CXCL12 expression and clinical benefit from tipifarnib in patients with pancreatic cancer. We believe these findings support the potential use of tipifarnib in a broader set of hematologic and solid tumor indications, including pancreatic cancer, in which the CXCL12 pathway plays a role in tumor initiation and progression, and we are exploring opportunities for further clinical development in these disease settings.

Our second product candidate is KO-947, a potent and selective small molecule inhibitor of extracellular signal related kinase, or ERK, which we are advancing as a potential treatment for patients with tumors that have dysregulated activity due to mutations or other mechanisms in the mitogen-activated protein kinase, or MAPK, pathway. Our preclinical data suggest that KO-947 has anti-tumor activity in KRAS- or BRAF-mutant adenocarcinomas as well as certain subsets of squamous cell carcinomas. Our Phase 1 clinical trial of KO-947 in patients with solid tumors is ongoing, and we anticipate having data from the dose-escalation portion of the clinical trial in 2019.

Our third product candidate is KO-539, a potent and selective small molecule inhibitor of the menin-mixed lineage leukemia, or menin-MLL, protein-protein interaction. We have generated preclinical data that support the potential anti-tumor activity of KO-539 in genetically defined subsets of acute leukemia, including those with rearrangements or partial tandem duplications in the MLL gene as well as those with oncogenic driver mutations in genes such as NPM1. Our investigational new drug, or IND, application for KO-539 has been cleared by the FDA and we anticipate initiating our Phase 1 clinical trial in relapsed or refractory AML in mid-2019.

As of March 31, 2019, we had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $165.5 million. Under the terms of our loan and security agreement, or the SVB Loan Agreement, with Silicon Valley Bank, or the Lender, we may, at our sole discretion, borrow from the Lender up to an additional $12.5 million at any time until May 1, 2020. In March 2019, we entered into an at-the-market issuance sales agreement with SVB Leerink LLC and Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated, or ATM facility, under which we may offer and sell, from time to time, at our sole discretion, shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $75.0 million. We have not yet sold any shares of our common stock under the ATM facility. To date, we have not generated any revenues from product sales, and we do not have any approved products. Since our inception, we have funded our operations primarily through equity and debt financings. We anticipate that we will require significant additional financing in the future to continue to fund our operations as discussed more fully below under the heading “Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

We focus on the research and development of our product programs. Our research and development expenses consist of costs associated with our research and development activities including salaries, benefits, share-based compensation and other personnel costs, clinical trial costs, manufacturing costs for non-commercial products, contract services and research supply, equipment and facility costs. All such costs are charged to research and development expense as incurred. Payments that we make in connection with in-licensed technology for a particular research and development project that have no alternative future uses in other research and development projects or otherwise and therefore, no separate economic values, are expensed as research and development costs at the time such costs are incurred. As of March 31, 2019, we have no in-licensed technologies that have alternative future uses in research and development projects or otherwise.

We cannot determine with certainty the timing of initiation, the duration or the completion costs of current or future preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates. At this time, due to the inherently unpredictable nature of preclinical and clinical development, we are unable to estimate with any certainty the costs we will incur and the timelines we will require in the continued development of our product candidates and our other pipeline programs. Clinical and preclinical development timelines, the probability of success and development costs can differ materially from expectations. Our future research and development expenses will depend on the preclinical and clinical success of each product candidate that we develop, as well as ongoing assessments of the commercial potential of such product candidates. In addition, we cannot forecast which product candidates may be subject to future collaborations, when such arrangements will be secured, if at all, and to what degree such arrangements would affect our development plans and capital requirements.

Completion of clinical trials may take several years or more, and the length of time generally varies according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use of a product candidate. The cost of clinical trials may vary significantly over the life of a project as a result of differences arising during clinical development, including, among others:

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries, benefits, share-based compensation and other personnel costs for employees in executive, finance, business development and support functions. Other significant general and administrative expenses include the costs associated with obtaining and maintaining our patent portfolio, professional services for audit, legal, investor and public relations, corporate activities and allocated facilities.

Other income (expense) consists primarily of management fee income, interest income and interest expense. Management fee income is earned in accordance with the management services agreement, as amended, with Araxes Pharma LLC. Interest expense mainly consists of interest on long-term debt.

We have incurred net losses and have not recorded any U.S. federal or state income tax benefits for the losses as they have been offset by valuation allowances.

The following table sets forth our results of operations for the periods presented, in thousands:

Research and Development Expenses. The following table illustrates the components of our research and development expenses for the periods presented, in thousands:

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2019		2018		Change
Tipifarnib-related costs	$	5,896	$	7,052	$	(1,156	)
KO-947-related costs		980		630		350
KO-539-related costs		353		803		(450	)
Personnel costs and other expenses		2,356		1,642		714
Share-based compensation expense		797		1,439		(642	)
Total research and development expenses	$	10,382	$	11,566	$	(1,184	)

The decrease in tipifarnib-related research and development expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 was primarily due to a decrease of $0.6 million in clinical development costs resulting from a decrease in costs related to our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials, offset in part by an increase in costs related to our registration-directed clinical trial and a decrease of $0.4 million in manufacturing activities. The decrease in KO-539-related research and development expenses was primarily due to the completion of IND-enabling activities in 2018. Our IND for KO-539 has been cleared by the FDA in 2019. Personnel costs and other expenses include employee salaries and related expenses, facilities expense and overhead expenses. The increase in personnel costs and other expenses was to support our registration-directed clinical trial for tipifarnib and the planned Phase 1 clinical trial of KO-539. The decrease in share-based compensation expense was mainly due to restricted stock awards that became fully vested in 2018. We expect our research and development expenses to increase in future periods as we continue clinical development activities for tipifarnib, KO-947 and KO-539.

General and Administrative Expenses. The increase in general and administrative expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 was primarily due to increases of $0.7 million in non-cash share-based compensation expense and $0.5 million in personnel costs. We expect our general and administrative expenses to increase in future periods to support our planned increase in research and development activities.

Other income, net. The increase in other income, net for the three months ended March 31, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 was primarily due to an increase of $0.6 million in interest income.

As of March 31, 2019, we had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $165.5 million. Since our inception, we have funded our operations primarily through equity and debt financings. We have devoted our resources to funding research and development programs, including discovery research, preclinical and clinical development activities.

In March 2019, we entered into the ATM facility under which we may offer and sell, from time to time, at our sole discretion, shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $75.0 million. We have not yet sold any shares of our common stock under the ATM facility.

In November 2018, we entered into the SVB Loan Agreement with the Lender providing for up to $20.0 million in a series of term loans. Upon entering into the SVB Loan Agreement, we borrowed $7.5 million, or Term A Loan, the proceeds of which, in part, were used to pay off the outstanding balance of the debt under the loan and security agreement with Oxford Finance LLC and Silicon Valley Bank dated April 27, 2016, as amended in May 2017 and October 2017, or the SVB-Oxford Term Loan. Net proceeds from the Term A Loan, after payoff of the SVB-Oxford Term Loan, were approximately $0.6 million. Under the terms of the SVB Loan Agreement, we may, at our sole discretion, borrow up to an additional $12.5 million at any time until May 1, 2020, or Term B Loan, and together with Term A Loan, the Term Loans. In addition, each Term B Loan must be in an amount equal to the lesser of $5.0 million or the amount that is remaining under the Term B Loan. All of the Term Loans will be due on the scheduled maturity date of May 1, 2023, or Maturity Date. Repayment of the Term Loans is interest only through November 30, 2020, followed by 30 equal monthly payments of principal plus accrued interest commencing on December 1, 2020. The per annum interest rate for the Term Loans is the greater of (i) 5.50% and (ii) the sum of (a) the prime rate reported in The Wall Street Journal plus (b) 0.25%. In addition, a final payment of 7.75% of the amounts of the Term Loans drawn will be due on the earlier of the Maturity Date, acceleration or prepayment of the Term Loans. If we elect to prepay the Term Loans, a prepayment fee equal to 1%, 2% or 3% of the then outstanding principal balance also will be due, depending upon when the prepayment occurs.

Our obligations under the SVB Loan Agreement are secured by substantially all of our assets other than our intellectual property, but including proceeds from the sale, licensing or other disposition of our intellectual property. Our intellectual property is subject to negative covenants, which, among other things, prohibit us from selling, transferring, assigning, mortgaging, pledging, leasing, granting a security interest in or otherwise encumbering our intellectual property, subject to limited exceptions.

We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, including the proceeds available under our term loan facility, will be sufficient to fund our current operations into 2021. However, we will require significant additional financing in the future to continue to fund our operations. We may need to raise additional funds sooner than expected to pursue other development activities related our pipeline programs. We may seek to obtain additional financing in the future through equity or debt financings or through collaborations, strategic partnerships or licensing arrangements with other companies. If we are unable to obtain additional financing on commercially reasonable terms, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

We have incurred operating losses since inception and negative cash flows from operating activities. As of March 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of $163.7 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect the losses to increase as we continue the development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates and begin to commercialize any approved products. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year. To date, we have not generated any revenues from product sales, and we do not have any approved products. We do not know when, or if, we will generate any revenue from product sales. We do not expect to generate significant revenue from product sales unless and until we obtain regulatory approval of and commercialize one of our current or future product candidates. We are subject to all of the risks incident in the development of new therapeutic products, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. We anticipate that we will need substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of stock offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic partnerships or licensing arrangements. Other than our term loan facility, we do not have any committed external source of funds. Additional capital may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all. Subject to limited exceptions, our term loan facility also prohibits us from incurring indebtedness without the prior written consent of the Lender. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of stock or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our common stockholders. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include increased fixed payment obligations and covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends, selling or licensing intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic partnerships or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates, including our other technologies, future revenue streams or research programs, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be unable to carry out our business plan. As a result, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and commercialize our

product candidates even if we would otherwise prefer to develop and commercialize such product candidates ourselves, and our business, financial condition and results of operations would be materially adversely affected.

The following table provides a summary of our net cash flow activities for the periods presented, in thousands:

Operating Activities – The increase of $1.4 million in net cash used in operating activities for the three months ended March 31, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 was primarily due to an increase of $2.6 million in payments of accounts payable and accrued expenses offset by a decrease of $0.7 million in net loss.

Investing Activities –The increase of $45.5 million in net cash provided by investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 was due to a decrease of $25.3 million in purchases of marketable securities and an increase of $20.2 million in maturities and sales of marketable securities.

Financing Activities – The decrease of $57.5 million in net cash provided by financing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2019 compared to the same period in 2018 was primarily due to proceeds from the sale of common stock in 2018.

As of March 31, 2019, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC.

The SEC defines critical accounting policies as those that are, in management’s view, important to the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations and demanding of management’s judgment. Management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our unaudited condensed financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these unaudited condensed financial statements required estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in the unaudited condensed financial statements. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to accrued expenses and share-based compensation. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events, and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which requires lessees to recognize right-of-use, or ROU, assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and requires expanded disclosures about leasing arrangements. We adopted the new lease standard on January 1, 2019, using the alternative modified transition method provided by ASU 2018-11 and did not retrospectively apply to prior periods. We elected the “package of practical expedients” permitted under the transition which allows us not to reassess our historical assessment of whether existing contracts are or contain a lease and the classification of existing lease arrangements, and to calculate the present value of the fixed payments without performing an allocation of lease and non-lease components. See Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements, and Note 6, Leases, for further details.

There have been no other material changes to our critical accounting policies and estimates from the information provided in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Critical Accounting Policies and Management Estimates,” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports required by the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the timelines specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can only provide reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and in reaching a reasonable level of assurance, management was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.

As required by SEC Rule 13a-15(b), we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the quarter covered by this report. Based on the foregoing, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of the end of the quarter covered by this report.

During the quarter ended March 31, 2019, we implemented certain internal controls in connection with our adoption of the new Accounting Standard Codification 842, Leases. There have been no other changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during our most recent quarter ended March 31, 2019 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

We currently are not a party to any legal proceedings, the adverse outcome of which, in management’s opinion, individually or in the aggregate, would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. In addition to the information included or incorporated by reference in this Quarterly Report and in our other public filings, you should carefully consider the risks described below in evaluating our company. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be harmed by any of these risks. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks not currently known to us or other factors not perceived by us to present significant risks to our business at this time also may impair our business operations. We have marked with an asterisk (*) those risk factors that reflect changes from the risk factors previously disclosed in Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, filed with the SEC on March 5, 2019.

We expect to incur losses over the next several years and may never achieve or maintain profitability.*

To date, we have financed our operations primarily through equity and debt financings. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

To become and remain profitable, we must develop and eventually commercialize a product or products with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing clinical trials of our product candidates, successfully developing companion diagnostics, obtaining marketing approval from the FDA and from comparable foreign authorities for these product candidates and manufacturing, marketing and selling those products for which we may obtain marketing approval. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant or even sufficient to achieve profitability. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable could decrease the value of the company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

We are a clinical-stage company with no approved products and no historical product revenue. Consequently, we expect that our financial and operating results will vary significantly from period to period.

We are a clinical-stage company that has incurred losses since our inception and expect to continue to incur substantial losses in the foreseeable future. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of uncertainty. We expect our actual financial condition and operating results to fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these fluctuations include:

Accordingly, the likelihood of our success must be evaluated in light of many potential challenges and variables associated with a clinical-stage company, many of which are outside of our control, and past operating or financial results should not be relied on as an indication of future results. Fluctuations in our operating and financial results could cause our share price to decline. It is possible that in some future periods, our operating results will be above or below the expectations of securities analysts or investors, which could also cause our share price to decline.

Our limited operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.*

We are a clinical-stage company with a limited operating history. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, identifying and acquiring potential product candidates, undertaking preclinical studies for our product candidates and clinical studies of tipifarnib and KO-947, and preparing for the Phase 1 clinical trial of KO-539. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete clinical trials in support of FDA approval, develop companion diagnostics, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a product at

commercial scale, or arrange for a third-party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Medicines, on average, take 10 to 15 years to be developed from the time they are discovered to the time they are available for treating patients. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability based on our short operating history to date may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history.

In addition, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors. We may in the future need to transition from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

We will need to obtain substantial additional capital in connection with our continuing operations. Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish certain rights to our technologies or product candidates.*

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we will need to raise additional capital in connection with our continuing operations. We expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings and debt financings. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect rights of our stockholders as a common stockholder. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends.

In November 2018, we entered into the SVB Loan Agreement with the Lender providing for up to $20.0 million in term loans. Under the terms of the SVB Loan Agreement, the Lender has initially provided us with a term loan of $7.5 million, with an additional $12.5 million available at any time until May 1, 2020. Other than our term loan facility, we do not have any committed external source of funds. While any amounts are outstanding under our term loan facility, we are subject to affirmative and restrictive covenants, including covenants regarding delivery of financial statements, maintenance of inventory, payment of taxes, maintenance of insurance, dispositions of property, business combinations or acquisitions, incurrence of additional indebtedness and transactions with affiliates, among other customary covenants. If we default under our term loan facility, the Lender may accelerate our repayment obligations and take control of our pledged assets, potentially requiring us to renegotiate our agreement on terms less favorable to us or to immediately cease operations. Further, if we are liquidated, the Lender’s right to repayment would be senior to the rights of the holders of our common stock to receive any proceeds from the liquidation. The Lender could declare a default under our term loan facility upon the occurrence of an event of default, which includes our failure to satisfy our payment obligations under the SVB Loan Agreement, the breach of certain of our other covenants under the SVB Loan Agreement or the occurrence of a material adverse change, thereby requiring us to repay the loan immediately or to attempt to reverse the declaration of default through negotiation or litigation. Any declaration by the Lender of an event of default could significantly harm our business and prospects and could cause the price of our common stock to decline.

We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Subject to limited exceptions, our term loan facility also prohibits us from incurring indebtedness without the prior written consent of the Lender. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts.

We are highly dependent on the success of our lead product candidate, tipifarnib, which is still in clinical development, and we cannot give any assurance that tipifarnib or any other product candidates, will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.*

Our future success is highly dependent on our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize, our lead product candidate, tipifarnib. Our other product candidates are in earlier stages of development. Our business depends entirely on the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates. We have not completed the development of any product candidates; we currently generate no revenues from sales of any product, and we may never be able to develop a marketable product.

Tipifarnib will require additional clinical development, evaluation of clinical, preclinical and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval in one or more jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenues from product sales. The FDA has also informed us that an approved companion diagnostic is required in order to obtain approval of tipifarnib in HRAS mutant HNSCC. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation as medical devices and must be separately approved for marketing by the FDA. We are not permitted to market or promote tipifarnib, or any other product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approvals. Although the scope of regulatory approval is similar in other countries, in some countries there are additional regulatory requirements and potential regulatory risks and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions.

We initiated our registration-directed clinical trial in patients with relapsed or refractory HRAS mutant HNSCC in November 2018. There is no guarantee that this trial will be completed on time or at all. Prior to receiving approval to commercialize tipifarnib or future product candidates, if any, in the United States or internationally, we must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA and other regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. The results from preclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways, and the favorable results from previous trials of a product candidate may not be replicated in subsequent clinical trials. There is no guarantee that the level of clinical activity observed in our ongoing Phase 2 RUN-HN clinical trial will be replicated in our registration-directed clinical trial. We are using a starting dose of 600 mg administered twice daily in AIM-HN, which is lower than the starting dose used in our RUN-HN clinical trial. Although we have observed preliminary evidence of clinical activity in the RUN-HN clinical trial at the 600 mg dose, there is no guarantee that we will see comparable activity in AIM-HN. Even if we believe the preclinical or clinical data are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. We maintain frequent, ongoing dialogue with the FDA and other regulatory bodies regarding our clinical trial design, including the patient selection criteria, dosing plan and statistical analysis plan. There is a risk that the FDA or other regulatory agencies could at any time raise objections to the design or conduct of our clinical trials. Any such objections could delay the initiation or completion of our registration-directed clinical trial. Although we believe from our discussions with the FDA and the minutes from our End of Phase 2 meeting with the FDA, that if AIM-HN is positive, there is the potential for accelerated approval of tipifarnib for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory HNSCC who harbor the HRAS mutation, the FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process and may not grant approval based on data from AIM-HN and RUN-HN. Even if the trial results are positive, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do. There is also no guarantee that data from SEQ-HN will support any potential marketing application for tipifarnib in HRAS mutant HNSCC. If the results of the trial are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of tipifarnib.

We have not previously submitted a new drug application, or NDA, to the FDA, or similar product approval filings to comparable foreign authorities, or received marketing approval for any product candidate, and we cannot be certain that tipifarnib will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval for any indication. We cannot anticipate whether or when we will seek regulatory review of tipifarnib for any other indications. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for and successfully commercialize tipifarnib on a timely basis or at all, we may not be able to continue our operations. Even if we successfully obtain regulatory approvals to market tipifarnib, our revenues will be dependent, in part, on our collaborator’s ability to commercialize the companion diagnostic as well as the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval and have commercial rights. If the market opportunities for the treatment of HRAS mutant HNSCC and other diseases are not as significant as we estimate, our business and prospects may be harmed.

Our discovery, preclinical and clinical development is focused on the development of targeted therapeutics for patients with genetically defined cancers, which is a rapidly evolving area of science, and the approach we are taking to discover and develop drugs may never lead to marketable products.*

The discovery and development of targeted therapeutics for patients with genetically defined cancers, and the scientific discoveries that form the basis for our efforts to discover and develop product candidates, are a relatively new and rapidly evolving area of science. The scientific evidence to support the feasibility of developing product candidates based on these discoveries is both preliminary and limited. The patient populations for our product candidates are not completely defined but are substantially smaller than the general treated cancer population, and patients will need to be screened and identified in order to be eligible for our therapies. Successful identification of patients is dependent on several factors, including screening a sufficient number of patients to identify whether they harbor a particular genetic alteration or expression level, achieving certainty as to how specific genetic alterations or expression levels respond to our product candidates and developing companion diagnostics to identify such genetic alterations or expression levels. Furthermore, even if we are successful in identifying patients, we cannot be certain that the resulting patient populations will be large enough to allow us to

successfully commercialize any products for which we are able to obtain marketing approval and achieve profitability. Therefore, we do not know if our approach of treating patients with genetically defined cancers will be successful. If our approach is unsuccessful, our business will suffer.

In order to execute on our strategy of advancing the clinical development of tipifarnib, we have designed our clinical trials of tipifarnib, and expect to design future clinical trials of tipifarnib and our other product candidates, to include patients who harbor a particular genetic alteration or expression level that we believe contribute to or are associated with particular cancer subsets. Our goal in doing this is to enroll patients who have the highest probability of responding to our product candidate and in our proof of concept Phase 2 clinical trials, to show early and statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy. Potential molecular biomarkers we have identified in retrospective analyses of data from clinical trials of tipifarnib in certain cancer indications may not be prospectively validated as biomarkers of tipifarnib activity in our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials or future clinical trials we may conduct in these indications. If we are unable to identify molecular or genetic alterations, or biomarkers, that are predictive of response to our product candidates, or we are unable to include patients who harbor the applicable genetic alterations or expression levels in our clinical trials, or if our product candidates fail to work as we expect, our ability to assess the therapeutic effect, seek participation in FDA expedited review and approval programs, including Breakthrough Therapy, Fast Track Designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval, or otherwise to seek to accelerate clinical development and regulatory timelines, could be compromised, resulting in longer development times, larger clinical trials and a reduced likelihood of obtaining regulatory approval.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials for tipifarnib. Difficulty in enrolling patients could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates.*

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical studies of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical studies depends in part on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing our product candidates, and we may experience delays in our clinical trials if we encounter difficulties in enrollment.

In addition to the potentially small populations for our clinical trials of tipifarnib, the eligibility criteria of our clinical trials will further limit the pool of available study participants as we will require that patients have specific characteristics that we can measure or to assure their disease is either severe enough or not too advanced to include them in a study. Additionally, the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. For example, many physicians who treat HNSCC patients do not routinely screen their patients for genetic mutations, such as oncogenic mutations present in the HRAS gene. To seek to address these limitations, we have contracted with third-party laboratories to facilitate the genetic screening of patients for our clinical sites. However, there is no guarantee that these efforts will be effective.

We also may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients to complete our clinical studies because of the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study including the number and frequency of study required procedures and tests, the availability and efficacy of competing therapies and clinical trials, the proximity and availability of clinical study sites for prospective patients, and the patient referral practices of physicians. For example, with the approvals of immune therapy agents nivolumab and pembrolizumab, many HNSCC patients are now being treated with one of these agents after failure of first-line treatments such as chemotherapy and/or cetuximab. If patients, or the physicians treating them, are unwilling or unable to participate in our studies for any reason, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting studies, and obtaining regulatory approval of potential products may be delayed.

Additionally, in estimating the frequency of biomarkers, such as the frequency of HRAS mutations in patients with HNSCC, we rely on data published in the scientific literature as well as our experience and that of our collaborators. Initial studies on the frequency of HRAS mutation in HNSCC were conducted in a mostly human papillomavirus, or HPV, negative population that does not reflect the increase in HPV-related HNSCC in the United States. The technologies used to identify mutations in published datasets may be different from the technologies we are using currently, which may make it more difficult to compare results across clinical trials. Moreover, sample quality in academic studies of molecular biomarkers may not reflect standard clinical practice that is focused on pathological diagnosis. We are using a minimum tumor HRAS mutant allele frequency of 20% in our AIM-HN clinical trial. Data from The Cancer Genome Atlas, or TCGA, HNSCC, provisional, indicate that patients with an HRAS mutant allele frequency greater than 20% represent approximately 5% of the overall HNSCC population. If the incidence of tumor HRAS mutant allele frequency equal to or greater than the clinical cutoff as detected in our AIM-HN clinical trial is significantly different from either the TCGA database or our Phase 2 clinical trial experience, we may be required to screen more patients to identify those patients with HRAS mutations who may be candidates for our clinical trial. Even if patients carrying HRAS mutations are identified, interest to participate in clinical trials may be low and potential study subjects may be located at too great a distance to participate at our clinical trial sites. Any delay or failure by us or third-party collaborators to screen patients or identify patients with HRAS mutations for

enrollment in our AIM-HN clinical trial and other ongoing trials could delay or prevent us from completing our clinical trials which could prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval or commercializing tipifarnib on a timely or profitable basis, or at all.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenue from any of these product candidates could be delayed or prevented. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process, and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates, including:

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of subsequent clinical trials, and preliminary or interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

The risk of failure for our product candidates is high. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical development and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Further, the results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of subsequent clinical trials, and preliminary or interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. For example, the preliminary data we have presented from our positive Phase 2 clinical trial of tipifarnib in HRAS mutant HNSCC, may not predict the results of AIM-HN or any other later-stage clinical trials we may conduct. The primary endpoint of AIM-HN is objective response rate as determined using RECIST 1.1 criteria and as determined by independent radiological review. Independent radiological review refers to a formal process whereby third-party radiologists who are not affiliated with the drug development program are engaged to provide an independent assessment of the primary radiological images. All of our patient responses disclosed to date in our ongoing Phase 2 proof-of-concept clinical trial in HRAS mutant HNSCC have been assessed by the trial investigators. In contrast to independent radiology review, investigator assessed response is performed by investigators or their affiliated radiology colleagues who may be aware of the study treatment, patient history or other information that could impact their choices in applying the rules and conventions of RECIST 1.1. Conversely, independent radiology reviewers have limited access to non-radiographic clinical information or other ancillary information, which could have informed their application of RECIST 1.1 response rules. The published literature demonstrates a consistent decrease in response rate when investigator assessed response rates are verified by independent radiology review. Furthermore, HNSCC lesions are difficult to assess due to the complexity of the anatomic locations. For AIM-HN we will be identifying trial subjects with measurable disease that meets criteria for RECIST 1.1 target lesions by local radiology review. This may further reduce the number of subjects eligible to join AIM-HN within the small pool of HRAS mutant HNSCC patients.

Results from clinical trials conducted at a single clinical site or a small number of clinical sites, may not be predictive of results from additional clinical sites or from subsequent clinical trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. For instance, the FDA previously issued a non-approval letter to Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, or Janssen, for tipifarnib as a treatment for elderly, untreated AML in June 2005. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will prove effective or safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval.

We may experience delays in our clinical trials and we do not know whether ongoing or planned clinical trials will begin or enroll patients on time, need to be redesigned or be completed on schedule, if at all. If the FDA or comparable

foreign regulatory authorities, or IRBs have comments on our study plans for our clinical trials of tipifarnib or any of our other product candidates, that we are required to address, such studies may be delayed, or may not start at all. Clinical trials may be delayed, suspended or prematurely terminated at any time by us or by the FDA or other similar regulatory agency if it is determined at any time that patients may be or are being exposed to unacceptable health risks, including risk of death, or if compounds are not manufactured in compliance with current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, regulations or with acceptable quality. There can be no assurance that the FDA or other similar regulatory agency will not put any of our product candidates on clinical hold in the future. We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates. Clinical trials may be delayed, suspended or prematurely terminated because costs are greater than we anticipate or for a variety of reasons, such as:

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these clinical trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we may:

Our product development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals. We do not know whether any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant preclinical or clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

Preclinical and clinical testing of tipifarnib that has been conducted to date may not have been performed in compliance with applicable regulatory standards, which could lead to increased costs or material delays for their further development.

We licensed the rights to develop our lead product candidate, tipifarnib, from Janssen in December 2014, and the development of tipifarnib prior to our license was conducted wholly by Janssen or any third parties with which it had contracted. As a result, we were not involved with nor did we have any control over any of those development activities. Because we had no input on Janssen’s development activities relating to tipifarnib, we may discover that all or certain elements of the clinical trials and studies or tipifarnib manufacturing activities it performed have not been in compliance with applicable regulatory standards or have otherwise been deficient, particularly relative to current requirements as development of tipifarnib began in the 1990s. Any such deficiency in the prior development of tipifarnib may adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval for tipifarnib.

Our product candidates may cause serious adverse events or have unacceptable side effects that could delay, limit or prevent their development.*

If our product candidates are associated with unacceptable side effects in preclinical or clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may need to interrupt, delay or abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective.

Tipifarnib has been studied in more than 5,000 oncology patients and was generally well tolerated and exhibited a manageable side effect profile. The most common hematologic adverse events of any grade were neutropenia, or low white blood cell count, anemia and thrombocytopenia, or low platelet count. The most common non-hematologic adverse events of any grade were gastrointestinal system disorders such as nausea, anorexia, diarrhea and vomiting, fatigue and rash. Treatment discontinuation across the prior tipifarnib clinical studies has been in the range of approximately 20-25%. We are exploring a range of doses and dosing schedules in our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials. The side effects observed so far in our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials of tipifarnib have been generally consistent with the prior observations; however, there is no guarantee that additional or more severe side effects will not be identified through further clinical studies, including our AIM-HN clinical trial. Rights to develop tipifarnib in virology indications have been granted by Janssen to EB Pharma LLC, or EB Pharma, a subsidiary of Eiger BioPharmaceuticals. Undesirable side effects may be identified in clinical trials that EB Pharma may conduct in virology indications, which may negatively impact the development, commercialization or potential value of tipifarnib.

We are currently evaluating KO-947 in a Phase 1 clinical trial in patients with non-hematological malignancies. We anticipate initiating a Phase 1 clinical trial to evaluate KO-539 in relapsed or refractory AML in mid-2019. Any observed, drug-related side effects could affect the ability of patients to tolerate potentially therapeutically effective doses of the drug, which in turn could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the clinical trial or result in

potential product liability claims. Additionally, if results of our ongoing or planned clinical trials for tipifarnib, KO-947 or KO-539 reveal an unacceptable frequency and severity of serious adverse events or side effects, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory agencies could require us to cease further development of, or deny approval of, our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Many compounds developed in the biopharmaceutical industry that initially showed promise in early-stage testing for treating cancer have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of those compounds. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a specific product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we must focus on a limited number of research programs and product candidates and on specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future discovery and preclinical development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products.

Failure to successfully validate, develop and obtain regulatory approval for companion diagnostics for our product candidates could harm our drug development strategy and operational results.*

As one of the central elements of our business strategy and clinical development approach, we seek to screen and identify subsets of patients with molecular or genetic alterations who may derive meaningful clinical benefit from our product candidates. To achieve this, certain of our programs will require the development and commercialization of a companion diagnostic. We rely on third-party collaborators for development of companion diagnostics for use in clinical trials and, if successful, will rely on third-party collaborators for development of companion diagnostics for commercialization of our product candidates. Companion diagnostics are developed in conjunction with clinical programs for the associated product and are subject to regulation as medical devices. For example, for tipifarnib for the treatment of HRAS mutant HNSCC, we and our third-party collaborators have obtained an investigational device exemption, or IDE, for use of a qPCR-based assay to identify patients with HRAS mutant tumors as the companion diagnostic in AIM-HN in this indication. Patients can also be enrolled based on information on the patients’ tumor HRAS mutation status obtained by the clinical sites from next-generation sequencing, or NGS, panels used by the site or third parties to characterize patients’ tumors. Additionally, we have introduced a minimum tumor HRAS mutant allele frequency as an entry criterion for enrollment in AIM-HN. The results of NGS panels used by our clinical sites may not be accurate or consistent across sites and may not be consistent with results obtained from our companion diagnostic, and our development of tipifarnib or a companion diagnostic may be delayed or complicated as a result.

If the results of our other Phase 2 clinical trials of tipifarnib or other clinical trials are positive and we validate our biomarker hypotheses in those clinical trials, we plan to partner development and validation of companion diagnostic tests to aid in the selection of patients in any subsequent clinical trials we decide to pursue for those product candidates and to prepare and submit an application for IDE for use of the companion diagnostic in the clinical trials, when necessary. Any delay or failure by us or our third-party collaborators to develop or obtain IDE approval for use of companion diagnostics in our clinical trials could delay or prevent us from commencing or completing our clinical trials. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities as medical devices and require separate clearance or approval prior to their commercialization. To date, the FDA has required a premarket approval, or PMA, application of all companion diagnostics for cancer therapies. The FDA has informed us that an approved companion diagnostic is required in order to obtain marketing approval of tipifarnib in HRAS mutant HNSCC. We and our third-party collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. Any delay or failure by us or third-party collaborators to develop or obtain regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic could delay or prevent approval of our product candidates. The approval of a companion diagnostic as part of the product label will limit the use of the product candidate to only those patients who express the specific genetic alteration it was developed to detect. We may also experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing process or transferring that process to commercial partners or negotiating insurance reimbursement plans, all of which may prevent us from completing our clinical trials or commercializing our products on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.

Failure by us or our third-party collaborators to successfully commercialize companion diagnostics developed for use with our product candidates could harm our ability to commercialize these product candidates.

Even if we or our companion diagnostic collaborators successfully obtain regulatory approval for the companion diagnostics for our product candidates, our collaborators:

Additionally, we or our collaborators may encounter production difficulties that could constrain the supply of the companion diagnostics, affect the ease of use, affect the price or have difficulties gaining acceptance of the use of the companion diagnostics in the clinical community.

If companion diagnostics for use with our product candidates fail to gain market acceptance, our ability to derive revenues from sales of our product candidates could be harmed. If insurance reimbursement to the laboratories who perform the companion diagnostic tests is inadequate, utilization may be low, and patient tumors may not be comprehensively screened for the presence of the genetic markers that predict response to our product candidates. If we or our collaborators fail to commercialize these companion diagnostics, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with another diagnostic company to obtain supplies of an alternative diagnostic test for use in connection with our product candidates or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could adversely affect and delay the development or commercialization of our product candidates.

We rely on third-party contractors and organizations to conduct our clinical trials, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such clinical trials.*

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third-party contractors, clinical data management organizations, independent contractors, medical institutions and clinical investigators to support our preclinical development activities and conduct our clinical trials, including our registration-directed clinical trial of tipifarnib in HRAS mutant HNSCC, our other ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials of tipifarnib, our Phase 1 clinical trial of KO-947, our planned Phase 1 clinical trial of KO-539 and any other subsequent clinical trials of tipifarnib and our other product candidates. These agreements may terminate for a variety of reasons, including a failure to perform by the third parties. If we are required to enter into alternative arrangements, our product development activities could be delayed.

We compete with many other companies, some of which may be our business competitors, for the resources of these third parties. Large pharmaceutical companies often have significantly more extensive agreements and relationships with such third-party providers, and such third-party providers may prioritize the requirements of such large pharmaceutical companies over ours. The third parties on whom we rely may terminate their engagements with us at any time, which may cause delay in the development and commercialization of our product candidates. If any such third-party terminates its engagement with us or fails to perform as agreed, we may be required to enter into alternative arrangements, which could result in significant cost and delay to our product development program. Moreover, our agreements with such third parties generally do not provide assurances regarding employee turnover and availability, which may cause interruptions in the research on our product candidates by such third parties.

Our reliance on these third parties to conduct our clinical trials reduces our control over these activities but does not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the clinical trial. Moreover, the FDA and other regulatory authorities require us to comply with good clinical practice, or GCP, guidelines for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of clinical trial participants are protected. We are also required to register ongoing clinical trials

and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

Additionally, we rely substantially on third-party data managers for our clinical trial data. There is no assurance that these third parties will not make errors in the design, management or retention of our data or data systems. There is no assurance that these third parties will pass FDA or other regulatory audits, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval.

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates.

We depend on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing and expect to continue to do so for commercialization. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products at an acceptable cost and quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

We do not own or operate facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates, and we do not have any manufacturing personnel. We currently have no plans to build our own clinical or commercial scale manufacturing capabilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of clinical supplies of tipifarnib and our other product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing. We will rely on third parties as well for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products or such quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts. We also expect to rely on other third parties to package and label the drug product as well as to store and distribute drug supplies for our clinical trials.

The manufacture of pharmaceutical products is complex and requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of drug formulation and manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of active pharmaceutical ingredient, or APIs, and pharmaceutical products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up and validating initial production and absence of contamination. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product, quality assurance testing, operator error, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. Furthermore, if contaminants are discovered in our products or in the manufacturing facilities in which our products are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. We have recently developed a modified drug product manufacturing process and a modified tablet formulation of tipifarnib which we plan to use in our AIM-HN clinical trial. Even though our Phase 1 relative bioavailability study indicated pharmacokinetic comparability between the original and the modified tablets, we cannot be certain that in our AIM-HN or other clinical trials we will not observe differences between the tablets which could impact clinical outcomes.

If we are unable to develop formulations of our product candidates with acceptable stability and sterility characteristics, or experience an unexpected delay or loss of supply of any of our product candidates for any reason, whether as a result of manufacturing, supply or storage issues or otherwise, our business may be harmed and we may experience delays, disruptions, suspensions or terminations of, or we may be required to restart or repeat, any pending or ongoing clinical trials. Although we generally do not begin a clinical trial unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete the clinical trial, we may be required to manufacture additional supplies of our product candidates to the extent our estimates of the amounts required prove inaccurate, we suffer unexpected losses of product candidate supplies, or to the extent that we are required to have fresh product candidate supplies manufactured to satisfy regulatory requirements or specifications. Any significant delay or discontinuation in the supply of a product candidate, or the raw material components thereof, due to the need to replace a supplier, contract manufacturer or other third-party manufacturer, could considerably harm our business and delay completion of our clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates. Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers, suppliers or distributors could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates or commercialization of our products, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential product revenue. We do not currently have arrangements in place for redundant supply or a second source for bulk drug substance and drug product. If our current contract manufacturers cannot perform as agreed, we may be required to replace such manufacturers. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture our product candidates, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement.

We may be unable to establish any agreements with third-party manufacturers or to do so on acceptable terms. Even if we are able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by the applicable regulatory authorities, including the FDA, pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after an NDA is submitted to the FDA. We are completely dependent on our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the FDA’s requirements for manufacture of both the active drug substances and finished drug product for tipifarnib and our other product candidates. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the FDA’s regulatory requirements, they will not be able to secure or maintain FDA approval for the manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have limited control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or any other applicable regulatory authorities does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, or if our suppliers or contract manufacturers decide they no longer want to supply or manufacture our products, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, in which case we might not be able to identify manufacturers for clinical or commercial supply on acceptable terms, or at all, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates. Third-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP regulations or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products.

Our product candidates and any products that we may develop may compete with other product candidates and products for access to manufacturing facilities. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that might be capable of manufacturing for us.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates and Other Legal Compliance Matters

If we are not able to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals, we will not be able to commercialize our product candidates, and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

Our product candidates must be approved by the FDA pursuant to an NDA in the United States and by the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, and similar regulatory authorities outside the United States prior to commercialization. The process of obtaining marketing approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is expensive and takes many years, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. Failure to obtain marketing approval for a product candidate will prevent us from commercializing the product candidate. We have not received approval to market any of our product candidates from regulatory authorities in any jurisdiction. We have no experience in filing and supporting the applications necessary to gain marketing approvals and expect to rely on third-party CROs to assist us in this process. Securing marketing approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to regulatory authorities for each therapeutic indication to establish the product candidate’s safety and efficacy. Securing marketing approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the regulatory authorities, among other requirements. Our product candidates may not be effective, may be only moderately effective, may not have an acceptable durability of response, may not have an acceptable risk-benefit profile or may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that may preclude our obtaining marketing approval or prevent or limit commercial use. Regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical or other studies. In addition, varying interpretations of the data obtained from preclinical and clinical testing could delay, limit or prevent marketing approval of a product candidate. Changes in marketing approval policies

during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may also cause delays in or prevent the approval of an application.

If we experience delays in obtaining approval or if we fail to obtain approval of our product candidates, the commercial prospects for our product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenues will be materially impaired.

We may not be able to benefit from available regulatory exclusivity periods if another company obtains regulatory approval for tipifarnib before we do.

As the composition of matter patents covering tipifarnib expired in the United States and in countries in Europe in 2016 and we have only a limited number of issued U.S. and foreign patents directed to our potential tipifarnib indications, our commercial strategy for tipifarnib relies on obtaining other patents related to tipifarnib and on non-patent regulatory exclusivity. In the United States, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may obtain five years of non-patent exclusivity upon FDA approval of an NDA for new chemical entity, or NCE, which is a drug that contains an active moiety that has not been approved by the FDA in any other NDA. An “active moiety” is defined as the molecule or ion responsible for the drug substance’s physiological or pharmacologic action. During the five-year exclusivity period, the FDA cannot accept for filing any abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, seeking approval of a generic version of that drug or any Section 505(b)(2) NDA for the same active moiety and that relies on the FDA’s findings regarding that drug, except that the FDA may accept an application for filing after four years if the follow-on applicant makes a paragraph IV certification. EB Pharma has licensed rights from Janssen to develop tipifarnib in virology indications. If EB Pharma obtains regulatory approval for tipifarnib in a virology indication before we obtain regulatory approval in one of our oncology or other non-virology indications, the five-year exclusivity period would commence on the date upon which EB Pharma obtains regulatory approval, and as a result, the period of regulatory exclusivity to which we may be entitled may be reduced or eliminated and the commercial prospects for tipifarnib could be harmed as a result.

Additionally, if EB Pharma obtains approval of tipifarnib for a virology indication, EB Pharma may sell tipifarnib at a lower price, which could adversely affect the price at which we could sell tipifarnib for oncology or other non-virology indications.

We may not be able to obtain orphan drug exclusivity for the product candidates for which we seek it, which could limit the potential profitability of such product candidates.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and Europe, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. Generally, if a product with an orphan designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it receives the designation, then the product is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity that precludes the applicable regulatory authority from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same indication during the exclusivity period. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and ten years in Europe. The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or EMA determines that the request for designation was materially defective, or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

We intend to pursue an orphan designation for at least some of our product candidates, including tipifarnib. However, obtaining an orphan designation can be difficult, and we may not be successful in doing so for tipifarnib or any of our product candidates. The EMA does not generally recognize for orphan designation, molecular defined subsets of non-orphan disease indications, and as an example, EMA recently rejected orphan designation for a drug product for anaplastic lymphoma kinase, or ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer, or NSCLC. As such, we do not expect to be able to obtain orphan drug designation in Europe for tipifarnib in the subset of HRAS mutant HNSCC at the current time. Even if we were to obtain orphan exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from the competition of different drugs for the same orphan condition, which could be approved during the exclusivity period. Additionally, after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA could subsequently approve another application for the same drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. The failure to obtain an orphan designation for any product candidates we may develop for the treatment of rare cancers, and/or the inability to maintain that designation for the duration of the applicable exclusivity

period, could reduce our ability to make sufficient sales of the applicable product candidate to balance our expenses incurred to develop it, which would have a negative impact on our operational results and financial condition.

If we obtain an orphan designation and FDA approval of tipifarnib for an oncology indication, we would be entitled to seven years of marketing exclusivity for that orphan indication. However, if a competitor obtained approval of a generic form of tipifarnib for another indication, physicians would not be prevented from prescribing the generic drug for the orphan indication during the period of marketing exclusivity. Such prescribing practices could adversely affect the sales of tipifarnib for the orphan indication.

A Fast Track Designation by the FDA, even if granted for any of our product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We do not currently have Fast Track Designation for any of our product candidates but intend to seek Fast Track Designation if our clinical data supports such a designation. If a drug is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the drug demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the drug sponsor may apply to the FDA for Fast Track Designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether to grant this designation. Even if we believe a specific product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure you that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track Designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may withdraw Fast Track Designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Many drugs that have received Fast Track Designation have failed to obtain drug approval.

A Breakthrough Therapy Designation by the FDA, even if granted for any of our product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We do not currently have Breakthrough Therapy Designation for any of our product candidates, but we intend to seek such designation if our clinical data supports such a designation. A Breakthrough Therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For drugs that have been designated as Breakthrough Therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor can help to identify the most efficient path for development.

Designation as a Breakthrough Therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe that one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a Breakthrough Therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. However, the reduced timelines may introduce significant chemistry, manufacturing and controls challenges for product development. In any event, the receipt of a Breakthrough Therapy Designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as Breakthrough Therapies, the FDA may later decide that such product candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification and rescind such designations.

Failure to obtain marketing approval in international jurisdictions would prevent our product candidates from being marketed abroad.

In order to market and sell our products in the European Union and many other jurisdictions, we or our third-party collaborators must obtain separate marketing approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. The approval procedure varies among countries and can involve additional testing and different criteria for approval. The time required to obtain approval may differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The regulatory approval process outside the United States generally includes all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. In addition, in many countries outside the United States, it is required that the product be approved for reimbursement before the product can be approved for sale in that country. We or our third-party collaborators may not obtain approvals from regulatory authorities outside the United States on a timely basis, if at all. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one regulatory authority outside the United States does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions or by the FDA. However, failure to obtain

marketing approval in some countries or jurisdictions may compromise our ability to obtain approval elsewhere. We may not be able to file for marketing approvals and may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize our products in any market.

Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval will be subject to extensive post-approval regulatory requirements and could be subject to post-approval restrictions or withdrawal from the market, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with our products, when and if any of them are approved.

Our product candidates and the activities associated with their development and commercialization, including their testing, manufacture, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale and distribution, are subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. These requirements include, without limitation, submissions of safety and other post-approval information and reports, registration and listing requirements, cGMP requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, including periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities, restrictions or requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians, tracking and reporting of payments to physicians and other healthcare providers, and recordkeeping requirements.

The FDA may also impose requirements for costly post-approval studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product. The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs to ensure drugs are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding use of their products and if we promote our products beyond their approved indications, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label promotion. Violations of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act relating to the promotion of prescription drugs may lead to investigations alleging violations of federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws.

In addition, later discovery of previously unknown adverse events or other problems with our products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may yield various results, including:

Non-compliance with European Union requirements regarding safety monitoring or pharmacovigilance, and with requirements related to the development of products for the pediatric population, can also result in significant financial penalties. Similarly, failure to comply with the European Union’s requirements regarding the protection of personal information can also lead to significant penalties and sanctions.

Our relationships with customers and third-party payors and our general business operations may be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, privacy and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings, among other penalties.

Healthcare providers and third-party payors will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:

Some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government and may require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, marketing expenditures, or drug pricing. Some state and local laws also require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices

may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Recently enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and affect the prices we may obtain.*

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

For example, in March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the ACA, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, improve quality, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to our potential product candidates and our business are the following:

Some of the provisions of the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, while certain provisions have been subject to judicial and Congressional challenges, as well as efforts by the Trump administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA. Certain changes to the ACA, such as the removal of the ACA’s individual health insurance mandate by federal tax legislation, a delay in the implementation of certain ACA-mandated fees, and other changes to the ACA to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”, were recently enacted or implemented, and the effect of these changes is unknown. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in Texas ruled that ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (as defined below). While such U.S. District Court Judge, as well as the Trump administration and CMS, have stated that the ruling will have no immediate effect pending appeal of the decision, it is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals,

and other efforts to repeal and replace ACA will impact ACA and our business. We cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or effect of healthcare reform legislation or regulation or the impact of potential legislation or regulation on us.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, starting in 2013, that due to subsequent legislative amendments, will stay in effect through 2027 unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to certain providers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws and other potential legislation may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our drugs, if approved, and accordingly, our financial operations.

Further, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. As a result, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. At the federal level, the Trump administration released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase drug manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products, and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. The Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, has already started the process of soliciting feedback on some of these measures and, at the same, is immediately implementing others under its existing authority. For example, in September 2018, CMS announced that it will allow Medicare Advantage plans the option to use step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2019. On January 31, 2019, the HHS Office of Inspector General, proposed modifications to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute discount safe harbor for the purpose of reducing the cost of drug products to consumers which, among other things, if finalized, will affect discounts paid by manufacturers to Medicare Part D plans, Medicaid managed care organizations and pharmacy benefit managers working with these organizations. Although a number of the proposed drug price control measures at the federal level, and other potential proposals, may require additional authorization to become effective, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Future legislation could potentially change drug pricing dynamics. We cannot predict all of the ways in which future healthcare reform legislation or regulation could affect our business.

Additionally, on May 30, 2018, the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017, or the Right to Try Act, was signed into law. The Right to Try Act, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase I clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a drug manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.

We expect that healthcare reform measures that have been adopted and may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our products.

Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-approval testing and other requirements. Foreign legislative changes may also affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

Additionally, California recently enacted legislation that has been dubbed the first “GDPR-like” law in the United States. Known as the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, it creates new individual privacy rights for consumers (as that word is broadly defined in the law) and places increased privacy and security obligations on entities handling personal data of consumers or households. When it goes into effect on January 1, 2020, the CCPA will require covered companies to provide new disclosures to California consumers, provide such consumers new ways to opt-out of certain sales of personal information, and allow for a new cause of action for data breaches. Legislators have stated that amendments will be proposed to the CCPA before it goes into effect, but it remains unclear what, if any, modifications will be made to this legislation or how it will be interpreted. As currently written, the CCPA will likely impact (possibly significantly) our business activities and exemplifies the vulnerability of our business to not only cyber threats but also the evolving regulatory environment related to personal data.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenues, if any.

In some countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. If reimbursement for our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be harmed, possibly materially.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could harm our business.

We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with such laws and regulations.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our discovery, preclinical development or production efforts. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection for our product candidates, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates may be impaired.

We intend to rely upon a combination of regulatory exclusivity periods, patents, trade secret protection, confidentiality agreements, and license agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our current product candidates and development programs. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by any patents, patent applications or future patents we may own, license, or pursue with respect to any of our current or future product candidates or products is threatened, it could threaten our ability to commercialize any of our current or future product candidates or products. Further, if we encounter delays in our development efforts, the period of time during which we could market any of our current or future product candidates or products under any patent protection we obtain would be reduced. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates or products, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates or products are commercialized.

Our patent rights may not protect our patent protected products and product candidates if competitors devise ways of making products that compete with us without legally infringing our patent rights. For example, our patent rights in tipifarnib are limited in ways that affect our ability to exclude third parties from competing against us. In particular, the patent term for the composition of matter patents covering the API of tipifarnib expired in the United States and countries in Europe in 2016. Composition of matter patents on APIs are generally considered to be the strongest form of intellectual property protection because such patents provide protection without regard to any particular method of use or manufacture or formulation of the API used. In July 2017 and July 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or U.S. PTO, issued us patents directed to the method of treatment of HRAS mutant HNSCC with tipifarnib and corresponding patents have been issued in a number of foreign jurisdictions. In 2018 the U.S. PTO issued us patents directed to the method of treatment of AITL with tipifarnib and the method of treatment of CXCL12-expressing PTCL or AML with tipifarnib. Although these patents are currently in force, there is no guarantee that a court would agree that any of the patents are valid or enforceable. Further, if a competitor were to develop tipifarnib for use in an indication other than that claimed by the patents, we would not be able to prevent them from marketing tipifarnib in the United States or other jurisdictions based on the patent. A limited number of patents directed to the use of tipifarnib in certain patients with HRAS mutant HNSCC have been granted in foreign jurisdictions. We are pursuing additional United States and foreign method of treatment patents for tipifarnib, however there is no guarantee that any such patents will be granted. We have issued patents in the United States and Europe covering the composition of matter of KO-947 and certain structurally related compounds, and methods of using the compounds for the treatment of cancers. We also have issued patents in the United States covering the composition of matter of KO-539 and certain structurally related compounds and methods of using the compounds for treating cancers. Although these patents are currently in force, there is no guarantee that a court would agree that any of the patents are valid or enforceable. We are pursuing additional U.S. and foreign patents for KO-947 and KO-539, however there is no guarantee that any such patents will be granted. Patent term extension may be available in the United States to account for regulatory delays in obtaining human marketing approval for a product candidate; however, only one patent may be extended per marketed compound. Under our license agreement with Janssen for tipifarnib, we and Janssen agree to cooperate in obtaining available patent term extensions. We and Janssen may not reach agreement and no patent term extension may be obtained. Additionally, the applicable authorities, including the U.S. PTO and the FDA, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to patents, or may grant more limited extensions than requested. If this occurs, our competitors who obtain the requisite regulatory approval can offer products with the same API as tipifarnib so long as the competitors do not infringe any method of use patents that we may hold. Competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case.

We expect that following expiration of patents and any regulatory exclusivity we are able to obtain, competitors may manufacture and sell generic versions of tipifarnib, at a lower price, which would reduce tipifarnib’s revenues. In certain jurisdictions, legislation mandates generic substitution for brand name drugs.

We depend on our licensors to prosecute and maintain patents and patent applications that are material to our business. Any failure by our licensors to effectively protect these intellectual property rights could adversely impact our business and operations.

We have licensed patent rights from third parties for some of our development programs, including tipifarnib from Janssen and compounds in our menin-MLL program from the University of Michigan. As a licensee of third parties, we rely on these third parties to file and prosecute patent applications and maintain patents and otherwise protect the licensed intellectual property under some of our license agreements. We have not had and do not have primary control over these activities for certain of our patents or patent applications and other intellectual property rights. We cannot be certain that such activities by third parties have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents or other intellectual property rights. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreements with some of our licensors, the licensors may have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents and even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we will require the cooperation of our licensors. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license intellectual property that we may need to operate our business.

With respect to the patent portfolio for tipifarnib, which is in-licensed from Janssen, Janssen maintains rights to prosecute and maintain patents and patent applications within the portfolio as well as to assert such patents against infringers within and outside the scope of our license, and to defend such patents against claims of invalidity and unenforceability. Although we have rights to consult with Janssen on actions taken as well as back-up rights of prosecution and enforcement, rights to tipifarnib granted to another licensee, such as EB Pharma, could potentially influence Janssen’s interests in the exercise of its prosecution, maintenance and enforcement rights in a manner that may favor the interests of such other licensee as compared with us.

If we breach any of the agreements under which we license from third parties the commercialization rights to our product candidates, we could lose license rights that are important to our business and our operations could be materially harmed.

We have in-licensed from Janssen the use, development and commercialization rights in all indications other than virology, for our lead product candidate, tipifarnib. We have also in-licensed rights to KO-539 and other compounds in our menin-MLL program from the University of Michigan. Additionally, we have an exclusive worldwide license from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center to a patent family pertaining to a method of use of tipifarnib. As a result, our current business plans are dependent upon our satisfaction of certain conditions to the maintenance of the Janssen agreement and the rights we license under it and our other in-license agreements. The Janssen license agreement and the University of Michigan license agreement each provide that we are subject to diligence obligations relating to the commercialization and development of the respective product candidates, milestone payments, royalty payments and other obligations. If we fail to comply with any of the conditions or obligations or otherwise breach the terms of our license agreement with Janssen, or any of our other license agreements or license agreements we may enter into on which our business or product candidates are dependent, Janssen or other licensors may have the right to terminate the applicable agreement in whole or in part and thereby extinguish our rights to the licensed technology and intellectual property and/or any rights we have acquired to develop and commercialize certain product candidates, including, with respect to our license agreement with Janssen, tipifarnib. The loss of the rights licensed to us under our license agreement with Janssen, or our other license agreements or any future license agreement that we may enter granting us rights on which our business or product candidates are dependent, would eliminate our ability to further develop the applicable product candidates and would materially harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The patent applications of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies involve highly complex legal and factual questions, which, if determined adversely to us, could negatively impact our patent position.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. For example, India and China do not allow patents for methods of treating the human body. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we or our licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications, or that we or our licensors were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or products, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The U.S. PTO developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, became effective on March 16, 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Moreover, we may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. PTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.

Even if our owned and licensed patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Even if our owned and licensed patents might provide such protection or competitive advantage, we may not have the resources to effectively enforce our rights under such patents, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Further, our competitors may be able to circumvent our owned or licensed patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our owned and licensed patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the U.S. PTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we employ an outside firm and rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to non-U.S. patent agencies. The U.S. PTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Because competition in our industry is intense, competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our issued patents, patents of our licensors or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or 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 proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly. We may also elect to enter into license agreements in order to settle patent infringement claims or to resolve disputes prior to litigation, and any such license agreements may require us to pay royalties and other fees that could be significant. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

Our commercial success depends upon our ability, and the ability of our collaborators, to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may become party to, or threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products and technology, including interference or derivation proceedings before the U.S. PTO. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future.

If we are found to infringe a third-party’s intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third-party to continue developing and marketing our products and technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing technology or product. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights for our development pipeline through acquisitions and in-licenses.

Presently we have rights to intellectual property under an exclusive license from Janssen, to develop tipifarnib in all fields other than virology, and an exclusive worldwide license from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center to a patent family pertaining to a method of use of tipifarnib, as well as an exclusive worldwide license from the University of Michigan for all therapeutic indications for KO-539 and other compounds in our menin-MLL program. Because our programs may involve additional product candidates that may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights. Additionally, a companion diagnostic may require that we or a third-party collaborator developing the diagnostic acquire proprietary rights held by third parties, which may not be available. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we may collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to accelerate our discovery and preclinical development work under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such right of first negotiation for intellectual property, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program.

In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights, our business, financial condition and prospects for growth could suffer.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to seeking patents for some of our technology and product candidates, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect these trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We seek to protect our confidential proprietary information, in part, by entering into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants, however, we cannot be certain that such agreements have been entered into with all relevant parties. Moreover, to the extent we enter into such agreements, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade

secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

Even if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, it may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, it may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. For example, current cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation therapy are well established in the medical community, and doctors may continue to rely on these treatments to the exclusion of our product candidates. In addition, physicians, patients and third-party payors may prefer other novel products to ours, such as the recently approved immune-oncology therapies, in which there is increasing awareness and interest. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenues and we may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

We currently have no marketing and sales force. If we are unable to establish effective sales or marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell or market our product candidates if they obtain regulatory approval, we may not be able to effectively sell or market our product candidates, if approved, or generate product revenues.

We currently do not have a marketing or sales team for the marketing, sales and distribution of any of our product candidates that are able to obtain regulatory approval. In order to commercialize any product candidates, we must build on a territory-by-territory basis marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services, and we may not be successful in doing so. If our product candidates receive regulatory approval, we intend to establish an internal sales or marketing team with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize our product candidates, which will be expensive and time consuming and will require significant attention of our executive officers to manage. Capable managers with commercial experience may need to be identified and successfully recruited to our company. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of any of our products that we obtain approval to market. With respect to the commercialization of all or certain of our product candidates, we may choose to collaborate, either globally or on a territory-by-territory basis, with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements when needed on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval or any such commercialization may experience delays or limitations. If we are not successful in commercializing our product candidates, either on our own or through collaborations with one or more third parties, our future product revenue will suffer and we may incur significant additional losses.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing competing products before or more successfully than we do.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We face competition with respect to our current product candidates, and we will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide. There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the disease indications for which we are developing our product candidates. Some of these competitive products and therapies are based on scientific approaches that are the same as or similar to our approach, and others are based on entirely different approaches. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization.

Specifically, there are a large number of companies developing or marketing treatments for cancer, including many major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, which may directly compete with tipifarnib, KO-947, KO-539 and any other future product candidates.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market or slow our regulatory approval. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of generic products. Generic products are currently on the market for the indications that we are pursuing, and additional products are expected to become available on a generic basis over the coming years. If our product candidates achieve marketing approval, we expect that they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products.

Many of the companies against which we are competing or against which we may compete in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly-approved products is uncertain. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for new or current products could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

The availability and extent of coverage and reimbursement by governmental and private payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments. Sales of our product candidates will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our product candidates will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers and other third-party payors. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by CMS, an agency within the HHS, as CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payors often, but not always, follow CMS’s decisions regarding coverage and reimbursement. It is difficult to predict what CMS will decide with respect to coverage and reimbursement for fundamentally novel products such as ours, as there is no body of established practices and precedents for these new products. One payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the drug product. Further, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. We or our collaborators may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the

medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Nonetheless, our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective.

Reimbursement agencies in countries other than the United States may be more conservative than CMS. For example, a number of cancer drugs have been approved for reimbursement in the United States and have not been approved for reimbursement in certain European countries. Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe, Canada, and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. In general, the prices of medicines under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenues and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors, in the United States and abroad, to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. In addition, drug-pricing by pharmaceutical companies has come under increased scrutiny. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing by requiring drug companies to notify insurers and government regulators of price increases and provide an explanation of the reasons for the increase, reduce the out-of-pocket cost of prescription drugs, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates, due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products into the healthcare market.

In addition to CMS and private payors, professional organizations such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society of Clinical Oncology can influence decisions about reimbursement for new medicines by determining standards for care. In addition, many private payors contract with commercial vendors who sell software that provide guidelines that attempt to limit utilization of, and therefore reimbursement for, certain products deemed to provide limited benefit to existing alternatives. Such organizations may set guidelines that limit reimbursement or utilization of our products.

Further, we or our collaborators will be required to obtain coverage and reimbursement for companion diagnostic tests separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement we seek for our product candidates, once approved. There is significant uncertainty regarding our and our collaborators ability to obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement for any companion diagnostic test for the same reasons applicable to our product candidates. If insurance coverage and reimbursement for companion diagnostic tests for our product candidates is inadequate, utilization may be low, and patient tumors may not be comprehensively screened for the presence of the genetic markers that predict response to our product candidates.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and to limit commercialization of any products that we may develop.

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell any products that we may develop. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we will incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Our current product liability insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We may need to increase our insurance coverage as we expand our clinical trials or if we commence commercialization of our product candidates. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.

We currently have a limited number of employees, are highly dependent on our Chief Executive Officer and our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.*

We are a clinical-stage company with a limited operating history, and, as of March 31, 2019, we had only 43 full-time employees and three part-time employees. We are highly dependent on the expertise of Troy E. Wilson, Ph.D., J.D., our President and Chief Executive Officer and Antonio Gualberto, M.D., Ph.D., our Head of Development and Chief Medical Officer, as well as the other principal members of our management, scientific and clinical teams. Although we have entered into employment letter agreements with our executive officers, each of them may terminate their employment with us at any time. We do not maintain “key person” insurance for any of our executives or other employees.

Recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, clinical, manufacturing and sales and marketing personnel will also be critical to our success. The loss of the services of our executive officers or other key employees could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. Furthermore, replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to successfully develop, gain regulatory approval of and commercialize products. Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our discovery and preclinical development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed by employers other than us and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, our ability to pursue our growth strategy will be limited.

We expect to expand our development and regulatory capabilities and potentially implement sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

We expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of regulatory affairs and commercial, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, sales, marketing and distribution. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our business plans or disrupt our operations.

Unfavorable global economic conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy and in the global financial markets. The recent global financial crisis caused extreme volatility and disruptions in the capital and credit markets. A severe or prolonged economic downturn, such as the recent global financial crisis, could result in a variety of risks to our business, including our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. This is

particularly true in Europe, which is undergoing a continued severe economic crisis. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

The United Kingdom’s referendum to leave the European Union or “Brexit,” has and may continue to cause disruptions to capital and currency markets worldwide. The full impact of the Brexit decision, however, remains uncertain. A process of negotiation will determine the future terms of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union. During this period of negotiation, our results of operations and access to capital may be negatively affected by interest rate, exchange rate and other market and economic volatility, as well as regulatory and political uncertainty. Brexit may also have a detrimental effect on our customers, distributors and suppliers, which would, in turn, adversely affect our financial condition.

In the ordinary course of our business, we use our data centers and our networks to store and access our proprietary business information. We face various cyber security threats, including cyber security attacks to our information technology infrastructure and attempts by others to gain access to our proprietary or sensitive information. The procedures and controls we use to monitor these threats and mitigate our exposure may not be sufficient to prevent cyber security incidents. The result of these incidents could include disrupted operations, lost opportunities, misstated financial data, liability for stolen assets or information, increased costs arising from the implementation of additional security protective measures, litigation and reputational damage. Any remedial costs or other liabilities related to cyber security incidents may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our CROs, collaborators and third-parties on whom we rely are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. While we have not experienced any such system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our drug development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and we may incur substantial costs to attempt to recover or reproduce the data. If any disruption or security breach resulted in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and/or the further development of our product candidates could be delayed.

Our operations are vulnerable to interruption by natural disasters, power loss, terrorist activity and other events beyond our control, the occurrence of which could materially harm our business.

Businesses located in California have, in the past, been subject to electrical blackouts as a result of a shortage of available electrical power, and any future blackouts could disrupt our operations. We are vulnerable to a major earthquake, wildfire and other natural disasters, and we have not undertaken a systematic analysis of the potential consequences to our business as a result of any such natural disaster and do not have an applicable recovery plan in place. We do not carry any business interruption insurance that would compensate us for actual losses from interruption of our business that may occur, and any losses or damages incurred by us could cause our business to materially suffer.

Our stock price may fluctuate significantly and you may have difficulty selling your shares based on current trading volumes of our stock.*

Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market, or Nasdaq, under the symbol “KURA” since November 5, 2015. The high and low price per share of our common stock as reported by Nasdaq during the period from November 5, 2015 until March 31, 2019, were $24.03 and $2.50, respectively. We cannot predict the extent to which investor interest in our company will sustain an active trading market on Nasdaq or any other exchange in the future. We have several stockholders, including affiliated stockholders, who hold substantial blocks of our stock. Sales of large numbers of shares by any of our large stockholders could adversely affect our trading price, particularly given our small historic trading volumes. If stockholders holding shares of our common stock sell, indicate an intention to sell, or if it is perceived that they will sell, substantial amounts of their common stock in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Moreover, if an active trading market is not sustained or if the volume of trading is limited, holders of our common stock may have difficulty selling their shares.

The price of our common stock may be volatile and may be influenced by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control.

The market for our common stock could fluctuate substantially due to a variety of factors, some of which may be beyond our control. In addition to the factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report, these factors include:

In addition, the stock market in general, and the stocks of small-cap biotechnology companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. These events may also lead to securities litigation, which can be expensive and time-consuming to defend, regardless of the merit or outcome. The realization of any of the above risks or any of a broad range of other risks, including those described in these “Risk Factors,” could have a dramatic and material adverse impact on the market price of our common stock.

We have broad discretion in the use of our cash and may not use our cash effectively, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

Our management has broad discretion in the application of our cash resources. Because of the number and variability of factors that will determine our use of our cash resources, our management might not apply our cash in ways that ultimately increase the value of our common stock. The failure by our management to apply our cash effectively could harm our business. Pending their use, we may invest our cash in short-term, investment-grade, interest-bearing securities. These investments may not yield a favorable return to our stockholders. If we do not invest or apply our cash in ways that enhance stockholder value, we may fail to achieve expected financial results, which could cause our stock price to decline.

FINRA sales practice requirements may limit a stockholder’s ability to buy and sell our stock.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA, has adopted rules requiring that, in recommending an investment to a customer, a broker-dealer must have reasonable grounds for believing that the investment is suitable for that customer. Prior to recommending speculative or low-priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the customer’s financial status, tax status, investment objectives and other information. Under interpretations of these rules, FINRA has indicated its belief that there is a high probability that speculative or low-priced securities will not be suitable for at least some customers. If these FINRA requirements are applicable to us or our securities, they may make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that at least some of their customers buy our common stock, which may limit the ability of our stockholders to buy and sell our common stock and could have an adverse effect on the market for and price of our common stock.

The resale of shares covered by our effective shelf registration statement could adversely affect the market price of our common stock in the public market, should one develop, which result would in turn negatively affect our ability to raise additional equity capital.

The sale, or availability for sale, of our common stock in the public market may adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common stock and may impair our ability to raise additional capital by selling equity or equity-linked securities. We filed a shelf registration statement with the SEC, which has been declared effective, to register the resale of 13,947,599 shares of our common stock, which represents a substantial portion of the shares of our common stock issued in connection with our reverse merger transaction. The shelf registration statement permits the resale of these shares at any time, subject to restrictions under applicable law. The resale of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could adversely affect the market price for our common stock and make it more difficult for you to sell shares of our common stock at times and prices that you feel are appropriate. Furthermore, we expect that, because there are a large number of shares registered pursuant to the shelf registration statement, the selling stockholders named in such registration statement will continue to offer shares covered by the shelf registration statement for a significant period of time, the precise duration of which cannot be predicted. Accordingly, the adverse market and price pressures resulting from an offering pursuant to the shelf registration statement may continue for an extended period of time and continued negative pressure on the market price of our common stock could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise additional equity capital.

We will incur increased costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies, which could harm our operating results.

As a public company, we have incurred and will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with public company reporting requirements. We also have incurred and will incur costs associated with current corporate governance requirements, including requirements under Section 404 and other provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules implemented by the SEC or Nasdaq or any other stock exchange or inter-dealer quotations system on which our common stock may be listed in the future. The expenses incurred by public companies for reporting and corporate governance purposes have increased dramatically in recent years.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired, which could harm our operating results, our ability to operate our business and investors’ views of us.

We are required to comply with certain aspects of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires public companies to, among other things, conduct an annual review and evaluation of their internal controls over financial reporting. Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that will require frequent evaluation. Our failure to maintain the effectiveness of our internal controls in accordance with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could have a material adverse effect on our business. We could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock. In addition, if our efforts to comply with new or changed laws, regulations and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.

We are an emerging growth company, which will allow us to take advantage of certain reduced disclosure obligations as a public reporting company that may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act and a “smaller reporting company” as defined in applicable rules under the Exchange Act. As an emerging growth company and a smaller reporting company, we are eligible to take advantage of certain extended accounting standards and exemptions from various reporting requirements that are not available to public reporting companies that do not qualify for those classifications. For instance, we are exempt from any requirement that may be adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and financial statements, commonly known as an “auditor discussion and analysis”; we are not required to hold a nonbinding advisory stockholder vote on executive compensation or any golden parachute payments not previously approved by stockholders; we are not required to comply with the requirement of auditor attestation of management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting, which is required for some other public reporting companies by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act; we are eligible for reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic and annual reports; and we are eligible for reduced financial statement disclosure in any registration statements under the Securities Act or reports under the Exchange Act that we may file. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company and/or a smaller reporting company, which we anticipate will be for the foreseeable future, we expect that we will take advantage of the reduced disclosure obligations available to us as a result of those respective classifications. As a result, our publicly available disclosure may not be as robust or comprehensive as that of other public reporting companies that do not qualify for those classifications.

Further, as an emerging growth company, we can elect to delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to take advantage of this extended transition period and, therefore, will be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. As a result, changes in rules of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles or their interpretation, the adoption of new guidance or the application of existing guidance to changes in our business could significantly affect our financial position and results of operations.

Future sales and issuances of our common stock or rights to purchase common stock, including pursuant to our equity incentive plans, outstanding stock options, warrants, or otherwise, could result in dilution to the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our stock price to fall.*

We expect that significant additional capital will be needed in the future to continue our planned operations. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time.

If we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in more than one transaction, investors in a prior transaction may be materially diluted by subsequent sales. Additionally, any such sales may result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. Further, any future sales of our common stock by us or resales of our common stock by our existing stockholders or the perception that such sales could occur could cause the market price of our common stock to decline. In March 2019, we entered into the ATM facility under which we may offer and sell, from time to time, at our sole discretion, shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $75.0 million. We have not yet sold any shares of our common stock under the ATM facility.

Pursuant to our Amended and Restated 2014 Equity Incentive Plan, or 2014 Plan, we are authorized to grant equity awards consisting of shares of our common stock to our employees, directors and consultants. As of March 31, 2019, we had 943,926 shares of common stock reserved for future issuance under the 2014 Plan and options to purchase up to an aggregate of 4,333,000 shares of common stock outstanding. The number of shares available for future grant under the 2014 Plan will automatically increase on January 1 of each year through January 1, 2025 by 4% of the total number of shares of our common stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding calendar year, subject to the ability of our board of directors to take action to reduce the size of the increase in any given year. On January 1, 2019, an automatic increase pursuant to the 2014 Plan occurred, resulting in 1,525,906 additional shares available for future grant under the 2014 Plan.

In addition, we may grant or provide for the grant of rights to purchase shares of our common stock pursuant to our 2015 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, or ESPP. As of March 31, 2019, we had 233,094 shares of common stock reserved for future issuance under the ESPP. The number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under the ESPP will automatically increase on January 1 of each calendar year through January 1, 2025 by the lesser of 1% of the total number of shares of our common stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding calendar year and 2,000,000 shares, subject to the ability of our board of directors to take action to reduce the size of the increase in any given year. In November 2018, the board of directors elected not to automatically increase the number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under the ESPP in 2019. In addition, a warrant to purchase up to 33,988 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $3.31 per share was outstanding as of March 31, 2019.

Any future grants of options, warrants or other securities exercisable or convertible into our common stock, or the exercise or conversion of such shares, and any sales of such shares in the market, could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Anti-takeover provisions under our charter documents and Delaware law could delay or prevent a change of control which could limit the market price of our common stock and may prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change of control of our company or changes in our board of directors that our stockholders might consider favorable. Some of these provisions include:

In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law, which may prohibit certain business combinations with stockholders owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock. These anti-takeover provisions and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, and amended and restated bylaws could make it more difficult for stockholders or potential acquirers to obtain control of our board of directors or initiate actions that are opposed by the then-current board of directors and could also delay or impede a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving our company. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for you and other stockholders to elect directors of your choosing or cause us to take other corporate actions you desire. Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our board of directors could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Comprehensive tax reform could adversely affect our business and financial condition.*

On December 22, 2017, U.S. federal income tax legislation was signed into law (H.R. 1, “An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018”), informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, that significantly revises the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, among other things, contains significant changes to corporate taxation, including reduction of the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21%, limitation of the tax deduction for interest expense to 30% of adjusted taxable income, except for certain small businesses, limitation of the deduction for net operating losses generated in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 to 80% of current year taxable income, elimination of most carrybacks of net operating losses arising in taxable years ending after December 31, 2017, one-time taxation of offshore earnings at reduced rates regardless of whether they are repatriated, elimination of U.S. tax on foreign earnings, subject to certain important exceptions, immediate deductions for certain new investments instead of deductions for depreciation expense over time and modifying or repealing many business deductions and credits, including reducing the business tax credit for certain clinical testing expenses incurred in the testing of certain drugs for rare diseases or conditions. Notwithstanding the reduction in the corporate income tax rate, the overall impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is uncertain, and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected. In addition, it is unknown if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on holders of our common stock is likewise uncertain and could be adverse. We urge our stockholders to consult with their legal and tax advisors with respect to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and the potential tax consequences of investing in or holding our common stock.

Our ability to use net operating losses to offset future taxable income may be subject to limitations.*

Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, federal net operating losses incurred in 2018 and in future years may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal net operating losses is limited. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change in its equity ownership value over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. We have experienced an ownership change in the past and we may also experience additional ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. If an ownership change occurs and our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards is materially limited, it would harm our future operating results by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating loss carryforwards is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us and adversely affect our future cash flows.

We do not intend to pay cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future.

We have never declared or paid any dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying any dividends in the foreseeable future. Any payment of cash dividends in the future would depend on our financial condition, contractual restrictions, including under our term loan facility, solvency tests imposed by applicable corporate laws, results of operations, anticipated cash requirements and other factors and will be at the discretion of our board of directors. Our stockholders should not expect that we will ever pay cash or other dividends on our outstanding capital stock.

Because we have an even number of members of our board of directors, deadlocks may occur in our board of directors’ decision-making process, which may delay or prevent critical decisions from being made.

Since we have an even number of directors, deadlocks may occur when such directors disagree on a particular decision or course of action. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws do not contain any mechanisms for resolving potential deadlocks. While our directors are under a duty to act in the best interest of our company, any deadlocks may impede the further development of our business in that such deadlocks may delay or prevent critical decisions regarding our business.

Exhibit Number	Description	Filed Herewith	Incorporated by Reference herein from Form or Schedule	Filing Date	SEC File/Reg. Number

2.1	Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated March 6, 2015, by and among the Registrant, Kura Operations, Inc. and Kura Oncology, Inc.		8-K (Exhibit 2.1)	3/12/2015	000-53058

2.2	Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated March 6, 2015, by and between the Registrant and Kura Oncology, Inc., relating to the name change of the Registrant.		8-K (Exhibit 2.2)	3/12/2015	000-53058

3.1	Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, as amended.		8-K (Exhibit 3.1)	6/14/2017	001-37620

3.2	Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant.		8-K (Exhibit 3.2)	6/14/2017	001-37620

4.1	Form of Common Stock certificate.		8-K (Exhibit 4.1)	3/12/2015	000-53058

4.2	Warrant to Purchase Stock by Registrant on April 27, 2016 to Oxford Finance LLC.		10-Q (Exhibit 4.3)	8/10/2016	001-37620

31.1	Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.	X

31.2	Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.	X

32.1	Certifications of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. 1350.	X

101.INS	XBRL Instance Document.	X

101.SCH	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.	X

101.CAL	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.	X

101.DEF	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.	X

101.LAB	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.	X

101.PRE	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document	X

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Delaware		61-1547851
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

3033 Science Park Road, Suite 220, San Diego, CA		92121
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)


Title of each class	Trading Symbol(s)	Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share	KURA	The Nasdaq Global Select Market

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

	Item 1. Financial Statements

	Condensed Balance Sheets − As of March 31, 2019 (unaudited) and December 31, 2018	1

	Condensed Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss – Three months ended March 31, 2019 and 2018 (unaudited)	2

	Condensed Statements of Stockholders’ Equity – Three Months Ended March 31, 2019 and 2018 (unaudited)	3

	Condensed Statements of Cash Flows – Three Months Ended March 31, 2019 and 2018 (unaudited)	4

	Notes to Condensed Financial Statements (unaudited)	5

	Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	12

	Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk	18

	Item 4. Controls and Procedures	18

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

	Item 1. Legal Proceedings	19

	Item 1A. Risk Factors	19

	Item 6. Exhibits	52

Signatures		53

	March 31, 2019		December 31, 2018
Accounts payable	$	3,074	$	3,890
Accrued research and development expenses		5,943		5,550
Accrued compensation and benefits		1,574		3,437
Other accrued expenses		1,191		508
Total accounts payable and accrued expenses	$	11,782	$	13,385

	Three Months Ended
	March 31, 2019
Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities:
Operating cash flows from operating leases	$	67
Operating cash flows from operating leases, related party		49
Total cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities	$	116

ROU assets obtained in exchange for operating lease liabilities	$	61
ROU assets obtained in exchange for operating lease liabilities, related party		57
Total ROU assets obtained in exchange for operating lease liabilities	$	118


Large accelerated filer	☐	Accelerated filer	☒

Non-accelerated filer	☐	Smaller reporting company	☒

		Emerging growth company	☒

	Three Months Ended
	March 31, 2019
Operating lease cost	$	68
Operating lease cost, related party		58
Total operating lease costs	$	126

	March 31, 2019
Operating lease ROU assets	$	345
Operating lease ROU assets, related party		243
Total operating lease ROU assets	$	588

Current lease liabilities	$	256
Current lease liabilities, related party		228
Non-current lease liabilities		90
Non-current lease liabilities, related party		24
Total operating lease liabilities	$	598

Weighted-average remaining lease term (in years)	1.2
Weighted-average discount rate		6.5	%

Year Ending December 31,
2019 (remaining)	$	369
2020		256
Total lease payments		625
Less: imputed interest		(27	)
Total operating lease liabilities	$	598

	Kura Oncology, Inc.
	A Delaware corporation

Date: May 7, 2019	By:	/s/ Troy E. Wilson, Ph.D., J.D.
		Troy E. Wilson, Ph.D., J.D.
		President and Chief Executive Officer
		(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: May 7, 2019	By:	/s/ Marc Grasso, M.D.
		Marc Grasso, M.D.
		Chief Financial Officer and Chief Business Officer
		(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)