eigr-10q_20170930.htm

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 and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, 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. (Check one):

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

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

As of November 3, 2017, the number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, was 10,516,406.

In this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, “we,” “our,” “us,” “Eiger,” and “the Company” refer to Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. Eiger, Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, the Eiger logo and other trade names, trademarks or service marks of Eiger are the property of Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains references to our trademarks and to trademarks belonging to other entities. Trade names, trademarks and service marks of other companies appearing in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are the property of their respective holders. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names or trademarks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

	September 30,			December 31,
	2017			2016
	(Unaudited)
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	13,078		$	27,756
Marketable securities		19,264			32,180
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		783			581
Total current assets		33,125			60,517
Property and equipment, net		90			76
Other assets		66			143
Total assets	$	33,281		$	60,736
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	4,167		$	2,639
Accrued liabilities		1,566			2,649
Total current liabilities		5,733			5,288
Long term debt, net		14,993			14,727
Total liabilities		20,726			20,015
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock		8			8
Additional paid-in capital		120,462			117,086
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(2	)		(15	)
Accumulated deficit		(107,913	)		(76,358	)
Total stockholders’ equity		12,555			40,721
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	33,281		$	60,736

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2017			2016			2017			2016
Operating expenses:
Research and development	$	6,145		$	8,072		$	21,740		$	23,637
General and administrative		2,727			3,264			9,195			9,574
Total operating expenses		8,872			11,336			30,935			33,211
Loss from operations		(8,872	)		(11,336	)		(30,935	)		(33,211	)
Interest expense		(388	)		—			(1,129	)		(685	)
Interest income		98			—			321			—
Other income (expense), net		(8	)		(34	)		188			(423	)
Net loss	$	(9,170	)	$	(11,370	)	$	(31,555	)	$	(34,319	)
Net loss per common share, basic and diluted	$	(1.10	)	$	(1.49	)	$	(3.77	)	$	(6.58	)
Weighted-average common shares outstanding, basic and diluted		8,372,934			7,622,963			8,366,880			5,218,099

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2017			2016			2017			2016
Net loss	$	(9,170	)	$	(11,370	)	$	(31,555	)	$	(34,319	)
Other comprehensive loss:
Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net		4			—			13			—
Comprehensive loss	$	(9,166	)	$	(11,370	)	$	(31,542	)	$	(34,319	)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

	Nine Months Ended
	September 30,
	2017			2016
Operating activities
Net loss	$	(31,555	)	$	(34,319	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		30			15
Amortization of premiums on marketable securities		(63	)		—
Non-cash interest expense		266			685
Stock-based compensation		3,223			1,751
Gain on intellectual property sale		(200	)		—
Change in fair value of obligation to issue shares to Eiccose		—			204
Change in fair value of warrant liability		—			165
Issuance of common stock in connection with a license agreement		—			3,172
Change in operating assets and liabilities:
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		(202	)		(5	)
Other non-current assets		77			(88	)
Accounts payable		1,528			2,135
Accrued and other liabilities		(1,083	)		(547	)
Net cash used in operating activities		(27,979	)		(26,832	)
Investing activities
Purchase of marketable securities		(22,533	)		—
Proceeds from maturities of marketable securities		35,525			—
Proceeds from intellectual property sale		200			—
Proceeds from merger transaction		—			28,018
Purchase of property and equipment		(44	)		(53	)
Net cash provided by investing activities		13,148			27,965
Financing activities
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon private placement, net of issuance cost		—			32,108
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon public offering, net of issuance cost		—			18,229
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon ESPP purchase		142			—
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon options exercises		11			39
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon warrants exercises		—			7
Net cash provided by financing activities		153			50,383
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents		(14,678	)		51,516
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		27,756			4,778
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	13,078		$	56,294
Supplemental disclosures of non-cash investing and financing information:
Non-cash activities:
Conversion of warrant liability to common stock upon private placement	$	—		$	1,050
Issuance of common stock in connection with a license agreement	$	—		$	3,172
Issuance of common stock to Eiccose upon private placement	$	—		$	1,661
Non-cash net liabilities assumed in reverse merger	$	—		$	671
Conversion of convertible promissory note to common stock upon private placement	$	—		$	6,129
Conversion of preferred stock to common stock upon reverse merger	$	—		$	22,567

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company committed to bringing to market novel products for the treatment of orphan diseases. The Company has built a diverse portfolio of well-characterized product candidates with the potential to address diseases for which the unmet medical need is high, the biology for treatment is clear, and for which an effective therapy is urgently needed. The Company’s principal operations are based in Palo Alto, California and it operates in one segment.

As of September 30, 2017, the Company had $13.1 million of cash and cash equivalents, $19.3 million of short-term marketable securities, an accumulated deficit of $107.9 million and negative cash flows from operating activities. The Company expects to continue to incur losses for the next several years.

On October 31, 2017, the Company issued 2,132,961 shares of common stock pursuant to an underwriting agreement with BTIG, LLC at a public offering price of $10.00 per share, for gross proceeds of $21,329,610, which resulted in approximately $19.5 million of net proceeds to the Company after deducting underwriting fees and offering expenses. See Note11.

Management believes that the currently available resources will be sufficient to fund its operations for at least the next 12 months following the issuance date of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, EBPI Merger Inc., EB Pharma LLC and Eiger BioPharmaceuticals Europe Limited, and have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, (“U.S. GAAP”) and following the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) for interim reporting. As permitted under those rules, certain footnotes or other financial information that are normally required by U.S. GAAP can be condensed or omitted. These financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the Company’s annual financial statements and, in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, which are necessary for a fair statement of the Company’s financial information. These interim results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the year ending December 31, 2017 or for any other interim period or for any other future year. The balance sheet as of December 31, 2016, has been derived from audited consolidated financial statements at that date but does not include all of the information required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statements. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and related financial information should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 23, 2017.

The preparation of unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. On an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates its estimates, including those related to clinical trial accrued liabilities, stock-based compensation and income taxes. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other market-specific and relevant assumptions that the Company believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Short-term marketable securities consist of debt securities classified as available-for-sale and have maturities greater than 90 days, but less than 365 days from the date of acquisition. All short-term marketable securities are carried at fair value based upon quoted market prices. Unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities are excluded from earnings and are reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss. The cost of available-for-sale securities sold is based on the specific-identification method. Realized gains and losses on the sale of marketable securities are determined using the specific-identification method and recorded in other expense, net on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

The Company accrues for estimated costs of research and development activities conducted by third-party service providers, which include the conduct of preclinical and clinical studies, and contract manufacturing activities. The Company records the estimated costs of research and development activities based upon the estimated amount of services provided but not yet invoiced, and includes these costs in accrued liabilities in the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets and within research and development expense in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations. The Company accrues for these costs based on factors such as estimates of the work completed and in accordance with agreements established with its third-party service providers. The Company makes judgments and estimates in determining the accrued liabilities balance in each reporting period. As actual costs become known, the Company adjusts its accrued liabilities.

Basic net loss per share of common stock is calculated by dividing the net loss by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period, without consideration for potentially dilutive securities. Since the Company was in a loss position for all periods presented, diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net loss per share for all periods as the inclusion of all potential common shares outstanding would have been anti-dilutive.

The Weighted-average common shares outstanding for the three and nine months periods ended September 30, 2016, are impacted by the weighted effect of the conversion or issuance of 6,668,045 common shares in conjunction with the closing of the Merger Agreement on March 22, 2016.

The following table sets forth the outstanding potentially dilutive securities which have been excluded in the calculation of diluted net loss per share because including such securities would be anti-dilutive (in common stock equivalent shares):

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which requires lessees to recognize most leases on their balance sheet. The standard requires use of the modified retrospective transition method, with elective relief, which requires application of the guidance for all periods presented. The new standard will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact that the standard will have on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, which is intended to simplify several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions, including the accounting and reporting of income taxes, the determination of forfeiture rates, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-09 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2016 and early adoption is permitted. The Company has adopted this ASU in in the first quarter of 2017. As a result of adopting this standard, the Company made an accounting policy election to account for forfeitures as they occur. This change did not have a material impact to the consolidated financial statements.

Fair value accounting is applied for all financial assets and liabilities that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). At September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the carrying amount of prepaid expenses, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximated their estimate fair value due to their relatively short maturities. Management believes the terms of long term debt reflect current market conditions for an instrument with similar terms and maturity, therefore the carrying value of the Company’s debt approximated its fair value.

Assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring basis in the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their fair values. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or an exit price that would be paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The authoritative guidance on fair value measurements establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy for disclosure of fair value measurements as follows:

Level 1: Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities at the measurement date;

Level 2: Inputs are observable, unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities, unadjusted quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the related assets or liabilities; and

Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are significant to the measurement of the fair value of the assets or liabilities that are supported by little or no market data.

The Company’s money market funds are classified as Level 1 because they are valued using quoted market prices. The Company’s marketable securities consist of available-for-sale securities and are classified as Level 2 because their value is based on valuations using significant inputs derived from or corroborated by observable market data. There were no assets or liabilities classified as Level 3 as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

There were no transfers between Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy during the periods presented.

The following tables present the fair value hierarchy for assets and liabilities measured at fair value (in thousands):

	September 30, 2017
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Financial assets:
Money market fund	$	8,016	$	—	$	—	$	8,016
Corporate debt securities		—		13,031		—		13,031
Commercial paper		—		8,233		—		8,233
Total	$	8,016	$	21,264	$	—	$	29,280

	December 31, 2016
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Financial assets:
Money market fund	$	9,657	$	—	$	—	$	9,657
Corporate debt securities		—		11,469		—		11,469
Commercial paper		—		22,891		—		22,891
Total	$	9,657	$	34,360	$	—	$	44,017

There were no financial liabilities as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

The following table summarizes the estimated value of the Company’s cash equivalents and marketable securities and the gross unrealized holding gains and losses (in thousands):

	September 30, 2017
	Amortized cost		Unrealized gain		Unrealized loss			Estimated Fair Value
Cash equivalents:
Money market fund	$	8,016	$	—	$	—		$	8,016
Commercial paper		2,000		—		—			2,000
Total cash equivalents	$	10,016	$	—	$	—		$	10,016
Marketable securities:
Corporate debt securities	$	13,033	$	—	$	(2	)	$	13,031
Commercial paper		6,233		—		—			6,233
Total marketable securities	$	19,266	$	—	$	(2	)	$	19,264

	December 31, 2016
	Amortized cost		Unrealized gain		Unrealized loss			Estimated Fair Value
Cash equivalents:
Money market fund	$	9,657	$	—	$	—		$	9,657
Corporate debt securities		2,180		—		—			2,180
Total cash equivalents	$	11,837	$	—	$	—		$	11,837
Marketable securities:
Corporate debt securities	$	9,294	$	—	$	(5	)	$	9,289
Commercial paper		22,901		3		(13	)		22,891
Total marketable securities	$	32,195	$	3	$	(18	)	$	32,180

As of September 30, 2017, and December 31, 2016, the contractual maturity of the available-for-sale marketable securities is less than one year. The Company periodically reviews the available-for-sale investments for other-than-temporary impairment loss. The Company considers factors such as the duration, severity and the reason for the decline in value, the potential recovery period and its intent to sell. For debt securities, it also considers whether (i) it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the debt securities before recovery of their amortized cost basis, and (ii) the amortized cost basis cannot be recovered as a result of credit losses. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, the Company did not recognize any other-than-temporary impairment losses. All marketable securities with unrealized losses have been in a loss position for less than twelve months.

In December 2016, the Company entered into an aggregate $25.0 million loan with Oxford Finance LLC (the “Oxford Loan”). The loan matures on July 1, 2021. The Company borrowed $15.0 million in December 2016 (“Tranche A”). The remaining $10.0 million (“Tranche B”) will be available to the Company upon achievement of positive top line data from the lonafarnib Phase 2 trial in HDV, which was achieved in the fourth quarter of 2016, plus positive top line Phase 2 data from at least one of the following programs: (i) Lambda in HDV, (ii) Exendin 9-39 in PBH based on the Company’s own IND, (iii) ubenimex in PAH, or (iv) ubenimex in Lymphedema.

The Oxford Loan bears interest at a floating rate per annum equal to the greater of either the 30-day U.S. Dollar LIBOR reported in the Wall Street Journal plus 6.41% or 6.95%. The Company is required to repay the Tranche A in 18 monthly interest only payments followed by 36 equal monthly payments of principal and interest commencing on the first day of the month following the funding of Tranche A. If the Company receives the Tranche B funds, then the interest only period is extended by six months followed by 30 equal monthly payments of principal plus accrued interest. At the time of final payment, the Company is required to pay an exit fee of 7.5% of the original principal balance of each tranche, which will be $1.1 million for Tranche A. The Company recorded as a liability and debt discount the exit fee at the origination of the term loan. In addition, the Company incurred loan origination fees and debt issuance costs of $0.3 million which were recorded as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability. The Company is also required to pay a 5.0% success fee within 30 days following the FDA’s approval of the Company’s first product. This fee is enforceable within 10 years from the funding of Tranche A. In connection with the execution of the Loan Agreement, the Company agreed to certain customary representations and warranties.

The loan is secured by the perfected first priority liens on the Company's assets, including a commitment by the Company to not allow any liens to be placed upon the Company’s intellectual property. The Oxford Loan includes customary events of default, including failure to pay amounts due, breaches of covenants and warranties, material adverse effect events, certain cross defaults and judgments, and insolvency. If the Company is unable to comply with these covenants or if the Company defaults on any portion of the outstanding borrowings, the lenders can also impose a 5.0% penalty and restrict access to additional borrowings under the loan and security agreement. The Company was in compliance with the terms under the Oxford Loan as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

The Company is permitted to make voluntary prepayments of the Oxford Loan with a prepayment fee, calculated as of the loan origination date, equal to (i) 3.0% of the loan prepaid during the first 12 months, (ii) 2.0% of the loan prepaid in months 13-24 and (iii) 1.0% of the loan prepaid thereafter. The Company is required to make mandatory prepayments of the outstanding loan upon the acceleration by lender following the occurrence of an event of default, along with a payment of the final payment, the prepayment fee and any other obligations that are due and payable at the time of prepayment.

The Company accounts for the amortization of the debt discount utilizing the effective interest method. The Company recorded interest expense of $0.3 million and $0.8 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017. Long-term debt and unamortized discount balances are as follows (in thousands):

In May 2017, the Company and Theragene Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Theragene”) entered into an asset purchase agreement (“Theragene APA”), whereby the Company sold all of the assets related to MYDICAR including any related intellectual property for a cash payment of $0.2 million and 475,000 shares of common stock of Theragene. At any time after the Theragene APA execution date and until Theragene has received cumulative gross proceeds of $4.0 million (“Proceeds Date”) from all equity financing transactions occurring after the Theragene APA execution date, if Theragene issues additional shares of its common stock without consideration or for a consideration per share less than $6.00 per share then Theragene will issue additional shares of its common stock to the Company concurrently with such issue, in an amount such that the per share consideration multiplied by the aggregate number of common stock shares issued to the Company will equal $2.85 million. Additionally, the Company may exercise a put option at any time after the Proceeds Date, where upon written notice from the Company, Theragene will repurchase the 225,000 shares of its common stock held by the Company (“Option Shares”) at an aggregate purchase price equal to the greater of $1.35 million or the aggregate fair market value of the Option Shares as of the date of the receipt notice. The Company is also eligible to receive contingent consideration up to a maximum $45.0 million in cash, based upon Theragene achieving certain specified future milestones. In addition, the Company is also eligible to receive up to 8% royalties on net sales of any future Theragene products covered by or involving the related patents or know-how until the 20^th anniversary of the Theragene APA.

The Company has determined that the sale of the MYDICAR assets qualify as an asset sale and not a business.

As of September 30, 2017, the Company received a cash payment of $0.2 million, which was recognized as other income. Concurrently with the execution of the Theragene APA, the Company became an owner of 475,000 shares of common stock of Theragene and a put option for 225,000 shares of common stock of Theragene, which were recognized as a cost method investment with carrying value of zero.

The following table summarizes stock option activity under the Company’s stock based compensation plan during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 (in thousands, except option and share data):

	Shares Available for Grant			Number of Options			Weighted- Average Exercise Price		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in Years)		Aggregate Intrinsic Value
Outstanding as of December 31, 2016		646,778			1,212,044		$	14.06			$	2,414
Additional options authorized		417,883
Granted		(652,200	)		652,200		$	10.91
Exercised					(5,688	)	$	2.06
Canceled and forfeited		328,162			(328,162	)	$	13.89
Outstanding as of September 30, 2017		740,623			1,530,394		$	12.80		8.31	$	2,529
Vested and exercisable as of September 30, 2017					601,330		$	14.28		7.32	$	1,286

During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, the Company granted employees stock options for 56,000 and 579,700 shares, respectively. The weighted-average grant date fair value of these options was $7.45 and $7.66 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, respectively. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, the Company granted employees stock options for 814,028 shares and the weighted-average grant date fair value of these options was $10.58.

The Company records stock-based compensation of stock options granted to employees by estimating the fair value of stock-based awards using the Black-Scholes option pricing model and amortizes the fair value of the stock-based awards granted over the applicable vesting period of the awards on a straight-line basis. The fair value of employee stock options was estimated using the following weighted-average assumptions:

The Company grants stock options to non-employees in exchange for services rendered. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, the Company granted to non-employees stock options for 20,000 and 72,500 shares, respectively. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, the Company granted to non-employees stock options for zero and 48,544 shares, respectively. Stock-based compensation expense related to stock options granted to non-employees is recognized as the stock options are earned and will fluctuate as the estimated fair value of the common stock fluctuates until the awards vest. The Company believes that the estimated fair value of the stock options is more readily measurable than the fair value of the services rendered.

The fair value of the stock options granted to non-employees is estimated at each reporting date using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model using similar assumptions as for employees except that the expected term is based on the options’ remaining contractual term instead of the simplified method:

Total stock-based compensation expense recognized for options granted to employees and non-employees was as follows (in thousands):

As of September 30, 2017, the total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested employee options was $7.5 million, which the Company expects to recognize over an estimated weighted average period of 2.9 years.

The tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 was zero due to the Company’s loss position and full valuation allowance. This is consistent with the zero-tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016.

In July 2015, following Celladon’s announcements of the negative CUPID 2 data and the suspension of further research and development activities and the subsequent declines of the price of its common stock, three putative class actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against Celladon and certain of its current and former officers. The complaints generally alleged that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), by making materially false and misleading statements regarding the clinical trial program for MYDICAR, thereby artificially inflating the price of Celladon’s common stock. The complaints sought unspecified monetary damages and other relief, including attorneys’ fees. On December 9, 2015, the district court consolidated the three putative securities class actions and appointed a lead plaintiff to represent the putative class. The lead plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint on February 29, 2016.

On October 7, 2016, the district court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint and granted leave to amend within 60 days from the date of the district court’s order. The lead plaintiff subsequently filed a notice of intent not to amend the consolidated amended complaint and instead indicated that it intended to appeal the district court’s decision. On December 9, 2016, the district court closed the case.

On December 28, 2016, the lead plaintiff filed a notice to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit appealing the district court’s order dismissing the consolidated amended complaint. On May 5, 2017, the lead plaintiff and appellant filed his opening appellate brief. On July 5, 2017, defendants filed their answering appellate brief.

It is possible that additional suits will be filed, or allegations made by stockholders, with respect to these same or other matters and also naming the Company and/or Celladon’s former officers and directors as defendants. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses and intends to defend these lawsuits vigorously. Due to the early stage of these proceedings, the Company is not able to predict or reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or possible losses relating to these claims.

In March 2017, the Company entered into a non-cancelable facility lease agreement for an office facility in Palo Alto, California. The lease commenced on April 1, 2017 and expires 12 months after the commencement date. The lease has one twelve-month renewal option prior to expiration and includes rent escalation clauses through the lease term. In April 2017, the Company provided a security deposit of $27,000 as collateral for the lease. The future minimum rent payable under the new lease agreement is approximately $0.3 million during the next year.

There were no other changes in commitments and contingencies during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017.

On October 27, 2017, the Company entered into an underwriting agreement (the “Underwriting Agreement”) with BTIG, LLC (the “Underwriter”) relating to the offering, issuance and sale (the “Offering”) of 1,854,749 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share. The price in the Offering was $10.00 per share. The Underwriter had a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 278,212 shares of common stock, which was exercised on October 27, 2017. On October 31, 2017, pursuant to the Underwriting Agreement, the Underwriters purchased shares of common stock from the Company at a price of $9.40 per share, which resulted in approximately $19.5 million of net proceeds to the Company after deducting the underwriting discount and offering expenses payable by the Company. The shares of common stock are listed on The NASDAQ Global Market. All of the shares in the Offering were sold by the Company. Pursuant to the terms of the Underwriting Agreement, each of the Company’s directors and officers have entered into “lock-up” agreements with Underwriter that generally prohibit, without prior written consent of BTIG, LLC, the sale, transfer or other disposition of securities of the Company for a period ending 75 days after October 27, 2017. The Offering was made pursuant to the Company’s effective shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-212114) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on June 17, 2016 and declared effective on August 4, 2016.

You should read the following discussion and analysis of Eiger’s financial condition and results of operations together with our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, Eiger’s consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2016, included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on March 23, 2017. This discussion and other parts of this report contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, such as our plans, objectives, expectations, intentions and beliefs. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those identified below and those discussed in the section entitled “Risk Factors” included elsewhere in this report.

This Quarterly Report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performances or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements In some cases, forward-looking statements are identified by words such as “believe,” “will,” “may,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “should,” “plan,” “expect,” “predict,” “could,” “potentially” or the negative of these terms or similar expressions. You should read these statements carefully because they discuss future expectations, contain projections of future results of operations or financial condition, or state other “forward-looking” information. These statements relate to, among other thing, our future plans, objectives, expectations, intentions, the potential for our programs, the timing of our clinical trials and financial performance and the assumptions that underlie these statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, those discussed in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q in Part II, Item 1A — “Risk Factors,” and elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Forward-looking statements are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to our management. These statements, like all statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, speak only as of their date, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise these statements in light of future developments. We caution investors that our business and financial performance are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties.

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company focused on bringing to market novel product candidates for the treatment of orphan diseases. Since our founding in 2008, we have worked with investigators at Stanford University and evaluated a number of potential development candidates from pharmaceutical companies to comprise a pipeline of novel product candidates. Our resulting pipeline includes four Phase 2 candidates addressing four distinct orphan diseases. The programs have several aspects in common: the disease targets represent conditions of high medical need which are inadequately treated by current standard of care; the therapeutic approaches are supported by an understanding of disease biology and mechanism as elucidated by our academic research relationships; prior clinical experience with the product candidates guides an understanding of safety; and the development paths leverage the experience and capabilities of our experienced, commercially-focused management team. The pipeline includes lonafarnib for Hepatitis Delta Virus, or HDV, lambda for HDV, exendin 9-39 for Post-Bariatric Hypoglycemia, or PBH, and ubenimex for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension, or PAH, and lymphedema. We plan to deliver data from all ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials over the course of the next fifteen months.

We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. We have never been profitable and have incurred operating losses in each year since inception and we do not anticipate that we will achieve profitability in the near term. Our net losses were $31.6 million and $34.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. As of September 30, 2017, we had an accumulated deficit of $107.9 million. Substantially all of our operating losses resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations.

We expect to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years as we initiate and continue the clinical development of, and seek regulatory approval for, our product candidates and add personnel necessary to operate as a public company with an advanced clinical candidate pipeline of products. In addition, we are now operating as a publicly traded company following the merger with Celladon in 2016, and we have and will be hiring additional financial and other personnel, upgrading our financial information systems and incurring costs associated with operating as a public company. We expect that our operating losses will fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year due to timing of clinical development programs and efforts to achieve regulatory approval.

On March 22, 2016, we completed the merger between Private Eiger and Celladon in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of November 18, 2015, by and among Private Eiger, Celladon and Celladon Merger Sub, Inc., or the Merger. Also on March 22, 2016, in connection with, and prior to the completion of the Merger, we effected a fifteen for one reverse stock split of our common stock, or the Reverse Stock Split, and changed our name to “Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.”

On November 18, 2015, in connection with the Merger, we entered into a subscription agreement, or the “Subscription Agreement” with investors for the sale of shares of our common stock, or the “Private Placement”, which closed on March 22, 2016.

Immediately prior to and in connection with the Merger, each share of Private Eiger’s preferred stock outstanding was converted into shares of Private Eiger’s common stock at an exchange ratio of one share of common stock for each share of preferred stock.

Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger, Celladon issued shares of common stock to Private Eiger stockholders, at an exchange ratio of approximately 0.09 shares of common stock, after taking into account the Reverse Stock Split, in exchange for each share of Private Eiger’s common stock outstanding immediately prior to the Merger. The exchange ratio was calculated by a formula that was determined through arms-length negotiations between Celladon and Private Eiger. Immediately after the Merger, the former Private Eiger equity holders beneficially owned approximately 78% of post-merger Eiger’s common stock. The Merger was accounted for as a reverse asset acquisition.

Research and development expenses represent costs incurred to conduct research and development, such as the development of our product candidates. We recognize all research and development costs as they are incurred. Research and development expenses consist primarily of the following:

The largest component of our operating expenses has historically been the investment in manufacturing capabilities, and research and development activities. However, we do not allocate internal research and development costs, such as salaries, benefits, stock-based compensation expense and indirect costs to product candidates on a program-specific basis. The following table shows our research and development expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017		2016		2017		2016
Product candidates:
Lonafarnib HDV	$	715	$	1,020	$	3,105	$	3,771
Lambda HDV		719		648		2,141		6,103
Exendin 9-39 PBH		721		1,104		2,540		1,919
Ubenimex PAH		1,994		3,189		7,633		7,299
Ubenimex Lymphedema		500		1,164		1,359		1,787
Internal research and development costs		1,496		947		4,962		2,758
Total research and development expense	$	6,145	$	8,072	$	21,740	$	23,637

We expect research and development expenses will increase in the future as we advance our product candidates into and through later stage clinical trials and pursue regulatory approvals, which will require a significant investment in regulatory support and contract manufacturing and clinical trial material related costs. In addition, we continue to evaluate opportunities to acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies, which may result in higher research and development expenses due to license fee and/or milestone payments.

The process of conducting clinical trials necessary to obtain regulatory approval is costly and time consuming. We may never succeed in timely developing and achieving regulatory approval for our product candidates. The probability of success of our product candidates may be affected by numerous factors, including clinical data, competition, intellectual property rights, manufacturing capability and commercial viability. As a result, we are unable to determine the duration and completion costs of our development projects or when and to what extent we will generate revenue from the commercialization and sale of any of our product candidates.

General and administrative expenses consist of personnel costs, allocated expenses and expenses for outside professional services, including legal, audit, accounting services, insurance costs and costs associated with being a public company. Personnel costs consist of salaries, benefits and stock-based compensation. Allocated expenses consist of facilities and other expenses, which include direct and allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities, depreciation expense and other supplies. During the nine months ended September 30, 2016, we incurred incremental expenses as a result of the Merger. As a result of becoming a public company following completion of the Merger, expenses include costs related to compliance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and NASDAQ, additional insurance, investor relations, banking fees and other administrative expenses and professional services.

Interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, consists of interest and amortization of the debt discount related to the Oxford Loan borrowing in December 2016. Interest expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2016, consists of interest and amortization of the debt discount related to the outstanding convertible promissory notes issued in November 2015 and then converted into common stock in March 2016, or “the Notes”.

Interest income consists of interests earned on our investments in marketable securities and cash equivalents.

Other income, net for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, primarily consists of the payment received for MYDICAR sale.

Other expense, net for the nine months ended September 30, 2016, consists of the change in fair value of the obligation to issue common stock to Eiccose and the change in fair value of warrant liability.

The change in fair value of the obligation to issue common stock to Eiccose was related to our obligation to issue shares to Eiccose upon the closing of the next round of financing that resulted in at least $25.0 million in gross proceeds to us. Upon the closing of the Private Placement on March 22, 2016, we issued to Eiccose 96,300 fully vested shares of our common stock in settlement of this obligation. In connection with this transaction we remeasured the fair value of the obligation to issue common stock at the settlement date and the change in fair value of $0.2 million was recognized within other expense, net during the nine months ended September 30, 2016. Upon the settlement of the obligation with the issuance of shares on March 22, 2016, the liability was reclassified to common stock and additional paid-in capital within stockholders’ equity.

In connection with our issuance of the Notes, we issued warrants to the noteholders to purchase shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.11 per share, on a post-Merger and post-Reverse Stock Split basis, or the Warrants. The number of shares into which the Warrants could be exercised was equal to the warrant coverage amount divided by the per share price of the equity securities sold in a qualified financing and thus was accounted for as a liability. Upon the closing of the Private Placement on March 22, 2016, the number of shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the Warrants was fixed and the fair value remeasured at that date, and the warrants were automatically exercised. During the nine months ended September 30, 2016, we recognized a loss related to the change in fair value of the warrant liability of $0.2 million. The warrant liability was reclassified to common stock and additional paid-in capital within stockholders’ equity, upon the exercise of the Warrants and issuance of shares on March 22, 2016.

Our management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The preparation of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and expenses. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate these estimates and judgments. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. These estimates and assumptions form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities and the recording of expenses that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates.

There have been no material changes to our critical accounting policies during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 as compared to the critical accounting policies disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.

	Three Months Ended September 30,						$			%
	2017			2016			Change			Change
Operating expenses:
Research and development	$	6,145		$	8,072		$	(1,927	)		24	%
General and administrative		2,727			3,264			(537	)		16	%
Total operating expenses		8,872			11,336			(2,464	)
Loss from operations		(8,872	)		(11,336	)		2,464
Interest expense		(388	)		—			(388	)		100	%
Interest income		98			—			98			100	%
Other income (expense), net		(8	)		(34	)		26		*%
Net loss	$	(9,170	)	$	(11,370	)	$	2,200			19	%

Research and development expenses decreased by $2.0 million to $6.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2017, from $8.1 million for the same period in 2016. The decrease was primarily due to a $2.6 million decrease in clinical and drug supply expenditures due to decreased program activity. The decrease was partially offset by a $0.3 million increase in compensation and personnel related expenses due to an increase in headcount and severance payments, $0.2 million in milestone payments to two Stanford University inventors, and a $0.1 million increase in facility and insurance expenses related to increase in operating activity.

General and administrative expenses decreased by $0.6 million to $2.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2017 from $3.3 million for the same period in 2016. The decrease was primarily due to a $0.4 million decrease in stock-based compensation expense due to changes in headcount and a higher level of stock-based compensation expense in the comparative third quarter 2016, and a $0.2 million decrease in legal, consulting, advisory and accounting services due to the incremental expenses incurred as a result of the Merger in the first quarter 2016.

Interest expense increased by $0.4 million for the three months ended September 30, 2017, and consisted of interest and amortization of the debt discount related to the Oxford Loan borrowings in December 2016. There was no interest expense for the three months ended September 30, 2016.

Interest income decreased by $0.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2017, due to the interest earned on our investments in marketable securities and cash equivalents. There was no interest income earned for the three months ended September 30, 2016, as funds were not invested until the fourth quarter in 2016.

	Nine Months Ended September 30,						$			%
	2017			2016			Change			Change
Operating expenses:
Research and development	$	21,740		$	23,637		$	(1,897	)		8	%
General and administrative		9,195			9,574			(379	)		4	%
Total operating expenses		30,935			33,211			(2,276	)
Loss from operations		(30,935	)		(33,211	)		2,276
Interest expense		(1,129	)		(685	)		(444	)		65	%
Interest income		321			—			321			100	%
Other income (expense), net		188			(423	)		611			144	%
Net loss	$	(31,555	)	$	(34,319	)	$	2,764			8	%

Research and development expenses decreased by $1.9 million to $21.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from $23.6 million for the same period in 2016. The decrease was primarily due to a $5.2 million upfront payment under our License Agreement with Bristol Myers Squibb Company that was recognized in the second quarter 2016. There were no similar payments during the same period in 2017. The decrease was offset by a $1.6 million increase in compensation and personnel related expenses due to an increase in headcount, a $0.9 million increase in clinical expenditures due to increased program activity, a $0.4 million increase in stock-based compensation expense due to an increase in headcount, $0.2 million in milestone payments to two Stanford University inventors, and a $0.2 million increase in facility and insurance expenses related to increase in operating activity.

General and administrative expenses decreased by $0.4 million to $9.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from $9.6 million for the same period in 2016. The decrease was primarily due to a $2.4 million decrease in legal, consulting, advisory and accounting services due to the incremental expenses incurred as a result of the Merger in the first quarter 2016. The decrease was partially offset by $1.1 million increase in stock-based compensation expense and a $0.6 million increase in compensation and personnel related expenses due to an increase in headcount, a $0.2 million increase in facility and insurance expenses and a $0.1 million increase in franchise tax expense due to increased operating activity.

Interest expense increased by $0.4 million to $1.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from $0.7 million for the same period in 2016. Interest expense in 2017 consisted of interest and amortization of the debt discount related to the Oxford Loan borrowings in December 2016. Interest expense in 2016 consisted of interest and amortization of the debt discount related to the Notes outstanding prior to their conversion into common stock in March 2016.

Interest income increased by $0.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017, due to the interest earned on our investments in marketable securities and cash equivalents. There was no interest income earned for the nine months ended September 30, 2016, as funds were not invested until the fourth quarter in 2016.

Other income (expense), net increased by $0.6 million to $0.2 million of other income, net for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 from $0.4 million of other expense, net for the same period in 2016. Other income in 2017 primarily consisted of the payment received from Theragene for MYDICAR sale. Other expense in 2016 primarily consisted of the change in fair value of the obligation to issue common stock to Eiccose and the change in fair value of warrant liability, that were settled upon the Merger.

As of September 30, 2017, we had $13.1 million of cash and cash equivalents, $19.3 million of marketable securities and an accumulated deficit of $107.9 million. On October 31, 2017, we issued 2,132,961 shares of common stock pursuant to an underwriting agreement with BTIG, LLC at a public offering price of $10.00 per share, for gross proceeds of $21,329,610, which resulted in approximately $19.5 million of net proceeds to the Company after deducting underwriting fees and offering expenses. We believe that the currently available resources will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months following the issuance date of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. However, if our anticipated operating results are not achieved in future periods, we believe that planned expenditures may need to be reduced in order to extend the time period over which the then-available resources would be able to fund our operations.

Our primary uses of cash are to fund operating expenses, including research and development expenditures and general and administrative expenditures. Cash used to fund operating expenses is impacted by the timing of when we pay these expenses, as reflected in the change in outstanding accounts payable and accrued expenses.

We have not generated any revenue from product sales. We do not know when, or if, we will generate any revenue from product sales. We do not expect to generate any revenue from product sales unless and until we obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize any of our product candidates. At the same time, we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing development and manufacturing activities, particularly as we continue the research, development, manufacture and clinical trials of, and seek regulatory approval for, our product candidates.

Our primary uses of capital are, and we expect will continue to be, funding research efforts and the development of our product candidates, compensation and related expenses, hiring additional staff, including clinical, scientific, operational, financial, and management personnel, and costs associated with operating as a public company. We expect to incur substantial expenditures in the foreseeable future for the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates.

We plan to continue to fund losses from operations and capital funding needs through future equity and/or debt financings, as well as potential additional collaborations or strategic partnerships with other companies. The sale of additional equity or convertible debt could result in additional dilution to our stockholders. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in debt service obligations and could result in operating and financing covenants that would restrict our operations. We can provide no assurance that financing will be available in the amounts we need or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. If we are not able to secure adequate additional funding we may be forced to delay, make reductions in spending, extend payment terms with suppliers, liquidate assets where possible, and/or suspend or curtail planned programs. Any of these actions could materially harm our business.

The following table summarizes our cash flows for the periods indicated (in thousands):

Cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 was $28.0 million, consisting of a net loss of $31.6 million, which was partially offset by stock-based compensation expense of $3.2 million. Additionally, cash used in operating activities reflected changes in operating assets and liabilities primarily due to an increase of $1.5 million in accounts payable. The increase was partially offset by $1.1 million decrease in accrued and other liabilities associated with the timing of payments.

Cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 was $26.8 million, primarily consisting of a net loss of $34.3 million, offset by $3.2 million expense related to a non-cash issuance of common stock to Bristol-Meyers Squibb in connection with the BMS License Agreement, $1.8 million of stock-based compensation expense, $0.7 million of non-cash interest expense related to the convertible promissory notes outstanding prior to their conversion into common stock in March 2016 and $0.4 million change in fair value of warrant liability and obligation to issue shares to Eiccose. Additionally, cash used in operating activities reflected changes in operating assets and liabilities primarily due to an increase of $1.6 million in accounts payable and accrued and other liabilities primarily associated with increase in business activity.

Cash provided by investing activities was $13.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017, and primarily consisted of $35.5 million proceeds from maturities of marketable securities and $0.2 million proceeds from MYDICAR sale, which was partially offset by $22.5 million purchase of marketable securities.

Cash provided by investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 primarily resulted from the $28.0 million of cash received upon the consummation of the Merger.

Cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 primarily consisted of proceeds from the purchase of common stock under our ESPP.

Cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 primarily consisted of $32.1 million of proceeds from the issuance of common stock in the private placement, net of issuance costs, and net proceeds of $18.2 million from the issuance of common stock in the underwritten public offering on August 23, 2016, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and expenses payable by us.

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations at December 31, 2016 (in thousands):

	Payments due by period
	Total		Less than 1 year		1 – 3 Years		3 – 5 Years		More than 5 years
Operating lease obligations (1)	$	401	$	330	$	71	$	—	$	—
Term loan debt (2)	$	15,000	$	—	$	12,083	$	2,917	$	—
Interest on term loan debt (3)	$	4,378	$	979	$	2,205	$	1,194	$	—
Total	$	19,779	$	1,309	$	14,359	$	4,111	$	—

In March 2017, we entered into a non-cancelable facility lease agreement for an office facility in Palo Alto, California. The lease commenced on April 1, 2017 and expires 12 months after the commencement date. The lease has one 12-month renewal option prior to expiration and includes rent escalation clauses through the lease term. In April 2017, we provided a security deposit of $27,000 as collateral for the lease. The operating lease obligation amounts above do not reflect our future minimum rent payable under the new lease agreement of approximately $0.3 million during the next year.

We are obligated to make future payments to third parties under asset purchase and license agreements, including royalties and payments that become due and payable on the achievement of certain development and commercialization milestones. We have not included these potential payment obligations in the table above as the amount and timing of such payments are not known.

During the periods presented, we did not have, nor do we currently have, any off-balance sheet arrangements as defined under the rules of the SEC and do not have any holdings in variable interest entities.

As of September 30, 2017, we had market risk exposure related to our cash and cash equivalents. We had cash and cash equivalents of $13.1 million and $19.3 million of short-term marketable securities. Such interest-earning instruments carry a degree of interest rate risk; however, historical fluctuations of interest income have not been significant. We have not been exposed nor do we anticipate being exposed to material risks due to changes in interest rates. A hypothetical 10% change in interest rates during any of the periods presented would not have had a material impact on our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentration of credit risk consist of cash and cash equivalents. We place our cash and cash equivalents with high credit quality financial institutions and pursuant to our investment policy, we limit the amount of credit exposure with any one financial institution. Deposits held with banks may exceed the amount of insurance provided on such deposits. We have not experienced any losses on our deposits of cash and cash equivalents.

We carry out some of our clinical development and supportive activities in foreign countries and payments may be due in foreign currencies. We do not participate in any foreign currency hedging activities and we do not have any other derivative financial instruments. We did not recognize any significant exchange rate losses during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017.

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended), as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Based on such evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report, our disclosure controls and procedures were, in design and operation, effective.

There were no material changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that occurred during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In addition, the design of disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and that management is required to apply judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to their costs.

See Note 9 of the Notes to the unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements contained within this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for a further discussion of our legal proceedings.

You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and in our other public filings. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and those we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described when evaluating our business. We have marked with an asterisk (*) those risk factors below that reflect significant changes from the risk factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.

We have incurred losses since our inception, have a limited operating history on which to assess our business, and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.*

We are a clinical development-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception. For the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, we reported a net loss of $31.6 million and $34.3 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2017, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $107.9 million. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and may continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

We believe that the currently available resources will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months following the issuance date of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. We will continue to require substantial additional capital to continue our clinical development, manufacturing efforts and potential commercialization activities. Accordingly, we will need to raise substantial additional capital to continue to fund our operations. The amount and timing of our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including the pace and results of our clinical development efforts. Failure to raise capital as and when needed, on favorable terms or at all, would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our product candidates.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our product candidates, including manufacturing of clinical supplies, conducting clinical studies and providing general and administrative support for our operations. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities and debt facilities. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of our future expenditures and our ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations, or grants. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We expect losses to increase as we advance five Phase 2 clinical development programs for potentially four indications. While we have not yet commenced pivotal clinical studies for any product candidate and it may be several years, if ever, before we complete pivotal clinical studies and have a product candidate approved for commercialization, we expect to invest significant funds into these clinical candidates to determine the potential to advance these compounds to regulatory approval.

If we obtain regulatory approval to market a product candidate, our future revenue will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates may receive approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, pricing, reimbursement from third-party payors, and adequate market share for our product candidates in those markets. Even if we obtain adequate market share for our product candidates, because the potential markets in which our product candidates may ultimately receive regulatory approval could be very small, we may never become profitable despite obtaining such market share and acceptance of our products.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future and our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

Further, the net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a representative indication of our future performance.

We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory and marketing approvals necessary to commercialize, one or more of our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales depends heavily on our success in many areas, including but not limited to:

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Our current pipeline of product candidates has been in-licensed from third parties and we will have to develop or acquire manufacturing capabilities in order to continue development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. Additionally, if we are not able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may never become profitable.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights.

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity, debt or other securities convertible into equity, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these new securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder such as the debt facility we entered into with Oxford Finance in December 2016. This was a $25.0 million debt financing arrangement with Oxford Finance wherein we borrowed the first tranche of $15.0 million upon closing in December 2016. Our ability to access the final $10.0 million under the loan and security agreement is subject to our ability to achieve certain clinical development milestones, which we may not be able to meet and which and could adversely affect our liquidity. The loan is secured by the perfected first priority liens on the Company's assets, including a commitment by the Company to not allow any liens to be placed upon the Company’s intellectual property. The Oxford Loan includes customary events of default, including failure to pay amounts due, breaches of covenants and warranties, material adverse effect events, certain cross defaults and judgments, and insolvency. If the Company is unable to comply with these covenants or if the Company default on any portion of the outstanding borrowings, the lenders can also impose a 5.0% penalty and restrict access to additional borrowings under the loan and security agreement.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or future revenue streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. We cannot assure you that we will we will be able to obtain additional funding if and when necessary to fund our entire portfolio of product candidates to meet our projected plans. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to delay or discontinue one or more of our development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on potential business opportunities, which could materially affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Covenants in our loan and security agreement restrict our business and operations in many ways and if we do not effectively manage our covenants, our financial conditions and results of operations could be adversely affected. In addition, we may not meet the milestones required to access the final loan available under the agreement and may also not provide sufficient cash to meet the repayment obligations of our debt incurred under the loan and security agreement.

Our loan and security agreement with Oxford Finance LLC provides for up to $25.0 million in term loans due on July 1, 2021, of which $15.0 million in term loans has been borrowed to date. All of our current and future assets, except for intellectual property, are secured for our borrowings under the loan and security agreement. The loan and security agreement requires that we comply with certain covenants applicable to us, including among other things, covenants restricting dispositions, changes in business, management, ownership or business locations, mergers or acquisitions, indebtedness, encumbrances, distributions, investments, transactions with affiliates and subordinated debt, any of which could restrict our business and operations, particularly our ability to respond to changes in our business or to take specified actions to take advantage of certain business opportunities that may be presented to us. Our failure to comply with any of the covenants could result in a default under the loan and security agreement, which could permit the lenders to declare all or part of any outstanding borrowings to be immediately due and payable, or to refuse to permit additional borrowings under the loan and security agreement. If we are unable to repay those amounts, the lenders under the loan and security agreement could proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure that debt, which would seriously harm our business. In addition, should we be unable to comply with these covenants or if we default on any portion of our outstanding borrowings, the lenders can also impose a 5.0% penalty and restrict access to additional borrowings under the loan and security agreement. Moreover, our ability to access the final $10.0 million under the loan and security agreement is subject to our ability to achieve certain clinical development milestones, which we may not be able to meet and which and could adversely affect our liquidity. In addition, although we expect to borrow additional funds under the loan and security agreement, before we do so, we must first satisfy ourselves that we will have access to future alternate sources of capital, including cash flow from our own operations, equity capital markets or debt capital markets in order to repay any principal borrowed, which we may be unable to do, in which case, our liquidity and ability to fund our operations may be substantially impaired.

We are heavily dependent on the success of our product candidates, which are in the early stages of clinical development. Certain of our product candidates have produced results in academic settings to date or for other indications than those that we contemplate and we cannot give any assurance that we will generate data for any of our product candidates sufficient to receive regulatory approval in our planned indications, which will be required before they can be commercialized.*

To date, we have invested substantially all of our efforts and financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our portfolio of product candidates. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully further develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize one or more of these product candidates. We currently generate no revenue from sales of any drugs, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a product candidate.

We currently have five Phase 2 development programs focused on four separate indications. For one of our product candidates, ubenimex, data to date has been developed for use in indications other than those that we have rights to or in which we plan to develop the product candidate and most of the data has been developed for a dose lower than in our current studies. Similarly, some of our lonafarnib results to date rely on an assay that has not been validated or accepted by the FDA to assess the potential efficacy of the product. While we have undertaken confirmation with an European Medical Agency approved assay, there can be no assurance that the data we have seen to date may be replicated in a FDA validated assay, if available.

We provide our geographically diverse clinical sites with good clinical practice protocols. We review and monitor the execution of our protocols at our various sites in an effort to understand those protocols are being followed. There can be no assurance that the data we develop for our product candidates in our planned indications will be sufficient or complete enough to obtain regulatory approval.

In addition, none of our product candidates have advanced into a pivotal study for our proposed indications and it may be years before such study is initiated and completed, if at all. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. We cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will be successful in clinical studies or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval even if they are successful in clinical studies. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations.

Our business strategy is based upon obtaining orphan drug designation for our product candidates, which is an uncertain process. The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming, and inherently unpredictable. If we are unable to obtain orphan drug designation or regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.*

Our approach to identifying and developing product candidates depends, in large part, on our ability to obtain orphan drug designation from regulatory authorities in major markets. Without the potential protection of this regulatory exclusivity upon approval, many of our product candidates would otherwise not justify investment. In addition, the Company actively pursues new patents on all product candidates, such as the patent already issued covering PAH, that could potentially extend the market exclusivity beyond the available exclusivity provided by the orphan indication. While we assess the potential for obtaining orphan drug designation at the time that we contemplate the acquisition of product candidates and we intend to timely file for such designation, there can be no assurance that we will obtain orphan drug designation or be able to successfully meet the regulatory requirements to maintain that designation with the planned clinical trials for our product candidates. Failure to obtain orphan drug designation would make our product candidates significantly less competitive and potentially not viable investments for further development. Although we already obtained orphan drug designation for four of our product candidates in three targeted indications, failure to demonstrate significant benefit over existing approved drugs in pivotal clinical trials may lead to marketing approval but without qualifying for orphan drug protection in some regions, such as in Europe.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable, typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical studies, and depends upon numerous factors. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or the decision not to approve an application. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Applications for our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:

The lengthy and uncertain regulatory approval process, as well as the unpredictability of the results of clinical studies, may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates or to be significantly delayed from our expectations for potential approval, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations, and prospects. In addition, although we have obtained orphan drug designation for four of our product candidates in our planned indications to date, there can be no assurance that the FDA will grant our similar status for our other proposed development indications or other product candidates in the future.

Drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies may not be predictive of future study results.*

Clinical testing is expensive and generally takes many years to complete, and the outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical study process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical studies of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of larger, later-stage controlled clinical studies. Product candidates that have shown promising results in early-stage clinical studies may still suffer significant setbacks in subsequent clinical studies. Our clinical studies to date have been conducted on a small number of patients in limited numbers of clinical sites and in academic settings or for other indications. We will have to conduct larger, well-controlled studies in our proposed indications to verify the results obtained to date and to support any regulatory submissions for further clinical development. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical studies due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles despite promising results in earlier, smaller clinical studies. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. We do not know whether any Phase 2, Phase 3, or other clinical studies we have conducted or may conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety with respect to the proposed indication for use sufficient to obtain regulatory approval to receive regulatory approval or market our drug candidates. For example, we identified significant GCP violations in the LOWR HDV – 1 and LOWR HDV – 2 studies. We alerted the FDA to the discovery of GCP violations. These findings may call into question the validity of the data set and may require repeat clinical studies to confirm the observations in question. Further studies may be needed to confirm the rigor, robustness and validity of any problematic safety and efficacy data identified.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical studies given the limited number of patients who have the diseases for which our product candidates are being studied. Difficulty in enrolling patients could delay or prevent clinical studies of our product candidates.

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

The eligibility criteria of our planned clinical studies may further limit the available eligible study participants as we expect to require that patients have specific characteristics that we can measure or meet the criteria to assure their conditions are appropriate for inclusion in our clinical studies. We may not be able to identify, recruit, and enroll a sufficient number of patients to complete our clinical studies in a timely manner because of the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, the availability and efficacy of competing therapies and clinical studies, and the willingness of physicians to participate in our planned clinical studies. If patients are unwilling to participate in our clinical studies for any reason, the timeline for conducting studies and obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates may be delayed.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical study of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates could 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 studies would likely increase our overall costs, impair product candidate development and jeopardize our ability to obtain regulatory approval relative to our current plans. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly.

Clinical studies are costly, time consuming and inherently risky, and we may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities.

Clinical development is expensive, time consuming and involves significant risk. We cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical studies can occur at any stage of development. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include but are not limited to:

Any inability to successfully complete clinical development and obtain regulatory approval could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue. Clinical study delays could also shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow competitors to develop and bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to obtain orphan drug designation exclusivity and to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.*

Undesirable side effects, or unforeseen side effects due to incomplete or inadequate safety data collection from LOWR HDV – 1 and LOWR HDV – 2 clinical studies, caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay, or terminate or conduct additional or larger clinical studies or even if approved, result in a restrictive label or delay regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities.

For example, our lonafarnib product candidate has been studied in thousands of oncology patients and the most common non-hematologic adverse events of any grade were gastrointestinal system disorders (nausea, anorexia, diarrhea and vomiting), weight loss, fatigue and rash. There is no guarantee that additional or more severe side effects will not be identified through ongoing clinical studies by other uses of lonafarnib for other indications or our own clinical trials. Additionally, while we have a license to another farnesyltransferase inhibitor compound, tipifarnib, from Janssen Pharmaceutica, N.V., or Janssen, Janssen has granted rights to tipifarnib to Kura Oncology, Inc., or Kura, in oncology and negative results or undesirable side effects from Kura’s clinical trials for a compound with a similar mechanism of action may negatively impact the perception of lonafarnib for anti-viral indications. Merck may also grant rights to other anti-viral or potentially other indications to other third parties. Undesirable side effects and negative results for other indications may negatively impact the development and potential for approval of our product candidates for our proposed indications.

Additionally, even if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of a product candidate, even if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations, and prospects.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, we will remain subject to ongoing regulatory requirements.

If our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements with respect to manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies, and submission of safety, efficacy and other post-approval information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and requirements of comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to continuously comply with FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, regulations and corresponding foreign regulatory manufacturing requirements. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any NDA or marketing authorization application, or MAA.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product candidate may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase IV clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. We will be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

Any new legislation addressing drug safety issues could result in delays in product development or commercialization, or increased costs to assure compliance. If our original marketing approval for a product candidate was obtained through an accelerated approval pathway, we could be required to conduct a successful post-marketing clinical study in order to confirm the clinical benefit for our products. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.

If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing, or labeling of a product, the regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency or enforcement authority may, among other things:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law would be expected to require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate adverse publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our products and the value of us and our operating results would be adversely affected.

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical studies, manufacture our product candidates and perform other services. If these third parties do not successfully perform and comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.*

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon investigators and third-party CROs to conduct, monitor and manage our ongoing clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of clinical studies and manage and control only certain aspects of their activities. We remain responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We, our investigators, and our CROs and other vendors are required to comply all applicable laws, regulations and guidelines, including those required by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in clinical development. If we or any of our investigators, CROs or vendors fail to comply with applicable laws, regulations and guidelines, the results generated in our clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional studies before approving our marketing applications. For example, we identified significant GCP violations in the LOWR HDV – 1 and LOWR HDV – 2 studies. We alerted the FDA to the discovery or GCP violations. These findings may call into question the validity of the data set and may require repeat clinical studies to confirm the observations in question. Further studies may be needed to confirm the rigor, robustness and validity of any problematic safety and efficacy data identified. We cannot assure you that our CROs and other vendors will meet these requirements, or that upon inspection by any regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that efforts, including any of our clinical studies, comply with applicable requirements. Our failure to comply with these laws, regulations and guidelines may require us to repeat clinical studies or conduct larger additional studies, which would be costly and delay the regulatory approval process.

If any of our relationships with investigators or third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs in a timely manner or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs may not prioritize our clinical studies relative to those of other customers and any turnover in personnel or delays in the allocation of CRO employees by the CRO may negatively affect our clinical studies. If investigators or CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, our clinical studies may be delayed or terminated and we may not be able to meet our current plans with respect to our product candidates. CROs may also involve higher costs than anticipated, which could negatively affect our financial condition and operations.

In addition, we do not currently have, nor do we plan to establish the capability to manufacture product candidates for use in the conduct of our clinical studies, and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale without the use of third-party manufacturers. We plan to rely on third-party manufacturers and their responsibilities will include purchasing from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical studies and regulatory approval. There are expected to be a limited number of suppliers for the active ingredients and other materials that we expect to use to manufacture our product candidates, and we may not be able to identify alternative suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of our product candidates for our clinical studies, and, if approved, ultimately for commercial sale. Although we generally do not expect to begin a clinical study unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete the study, any significant delay or discontinuity in the supply of a product candidate, or the active ingredient or other material components in the manufacture of the product candidate, could delay completion of our clinical studies and potential timing for regulatory approval of our product candidates, which would harm our business and results of operations.

With respect to our lonafarnib program, we procured an inventory of product from Merck to supply our initial clinical study needs. In 2016, we transferred the manufacturing of drug substance and drug product to our third-party contractors. These vendors have successfully made GMP batches for our future clinical studies. With respect to our lambda program, as part of the license agreement, we obtained a substantial inventory of product from BMS sufficient to initiate our clinical trials. During 2017 we transferred the manufacturing technology to our third-party vendors. With respect to our ubenimex programs we have relied on Nippon Kayaku to provide us with product to conduct our trials in 2016 and 2017 and have now completed the process of transferring the manufacturing of ubenimex to our third-party vendors in the United States and such drug product will be adequate to complete ongoing and future clinical studies.

We rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties to manufacture our clinical product supplies, and if those third parties fail to obtain approval of government regulators, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of drug product, or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices our product candidates could be stopped, delayed, or made less profitable.

We do not currently have nor do we plan to acquire the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture our clinical supplies for use in the conduct of our clinical trials, and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. We currently rely on outside vendors to source raw materials and manufacture our clinical supplies of our product candidates and plan to continue relying on third parties to manufacture our product candidates on a commercial scale, if approved.

The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by the FDA pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit our marketing applications to the FDA. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the regulatory requirements, known as cGMPs, for manufacture of our product candidates. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved.

We do not yet have sufficient information to reliably estimate the cost of the commercial manufacturing of our product candidates, and the actual cost to manufacture our product candidates could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of our product candidates. As a result, we may never be able to develop a commercially viable product.

In addition, our reliance on third-party manufacturers exposes us to the following additional risks:

Each of these risks could delay our clinical trials, the approval, if any of our product candidates by the FDA or the commercialization of our product candidates or result in higher costs or deprive us of potential product revenue. In addition, we rely on third parties to perform release testing on our product candidates prior to delivery to patients. If these tests are not appropriately conducted and test data are not reliable, patients could be put at risk of serious harm and could result in product liability suits.

The manufacture of medical products is complex and requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of biologic 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 supply of our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. We cannot assure you that any stability or other issues relating to the manufacture of our product candidates will not occur in the future. Additionally, our manufacturers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If our manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to comply with their contractual obligations, our ability to provide our product candidates to patients in clinical trials would be jeopardized. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, we may not meet our revenue expectations and, even assuming approval of a product candidate, our business may suffer. Because the patient populations in the market for our product candidates may be small, we must be able to successfully identify patients and acquire a significant market share to achieve profitability and growth.

We focus our product development principally on treatments for orphan diseases. Given the small number of patients who have the diseases that we are targeting, our eligible patient population and pricing estimates may differ significantly from the actual market addressable by our product candidate. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, patient foundations, or market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients may turn out to be lower than expected. For example, for lonafarnib and lambda, HDV is associated with hepatitis B virus infection, which is a pre-requisite for the replication of HDV. Although we believe that the data are supportive of the increased severity of hepatitis in the presence of hepatitis D and hepatitis B virus co-infection compared to hepatitis B alone, there can be no assurance that our clinical trials will successfully address this condition. Likewise, the potentially addressable patient population for each of our product candidates may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates, and new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

We face intense competition and rapid technological change and the possibility that our competitors may develop therapies that are similar, more advanced, or more effective than ours, which may adversely affect our financial condition and our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. We are currently aware of various existing therapies that may compete with our product candidates. For example, we have competitors both in the United States and internationally, including multinational pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. Some of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies we expect to compete with include Gilead, Merck, Roche, Actelion/Johnson and Johnson, Replicor, Arrowhead, Novartis, Xoma, Reata and Arena as well as other smaller companies or biotechnology startups and large multinational pharmaceutical companies. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Additional mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. As a result, these companies may obtain regulatory approval more rapidly than we are able to and may be more effective in selling and marketing their products as well. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of

capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring, or licensing on an exclusive basis, products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidate that we may develop, or achieve earlier patent protection, regulatory approval, product commercialization, and market penetration than we do. Additionally, technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing our product candidates against competitors.

We currently have limited marketing and sales experience. If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may be unable to generate any revenue.

Although certain of our employees may have marketed, launched and sold other pharmaceutical products in the past while employed at other companies, we have no recent experience selling and marketing our product candidates and we currently have no marketing or sales organization. To successfully commercialize any products that may result from our development programs, we will need to invest in and develop these capabilities, either on our own or with others, which would be expensive, difficult and time consuming. Any failure or delay in the timely development of our internal commercialization capabilities could adversely impact the potential for success of our products.

Further, given our lack of prior experience in marketing and selling biopharmaceutical products, we may rely on future collaborators to commercialize our products. If collaborators do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize our future products and we are unable to develop the necessary marketing and sales capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain or grow our business. We may be competing with companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations, in particular in the markets our product candidates are intended to address. Without appropriate capabilities, whether directly or through third-party collaborators, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

The commercial success of any of our current or future product candidate will depend upon the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and others in the medical community.

Even with the approvals from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the commercial success of our products will depend in part on the health care providers, patients, and third-party payors accepting our product candidates as medically useful, cost-effective, and safe. Any product that we bring to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and other health care providers. The degree of market acceptance of any of our products will depend on a number of factors, including without limitation:

Even if a product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile upon approval, market acceptance of the product remains uncertain. Efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the products may require significant investment and resources and may never be successful. If our products fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and other health care providers, we will not be able to generate sufficient revenue to become or remain profitable.

Failure to obtain or maintain adequate reimbursement or insurance coverage for new or current products could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

The pricing, coverage and reimbursement of our products must be sufficient to support our commercial efforts and other development programs and the availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement by governmental and private payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments, particularly in orphan drug designated indications where the eligible patient population is small. 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 for or reimbursed by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations, or government authorities, private health insurers, and other third-party payors. If coverage and reimbursement are not available, or are available only in limited amounts, we may have to subsidize or provide products for free or we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products.

In addition, there is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement for newly approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about coverage and reimbursement for new drugs are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as CMS decides whether and to what extent a new drug will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payors tend to follow the coverage reimbursement policies established by CMS to a substantial degree. It is difficult to predict what CMS will decide with respect to reimbursement for products such as ours and what reimbursement codes our products may receive.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other price-restrictive 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 products. In many countries, the prices of products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our products. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the potential revenue may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to limit or reduce healthcare costs may result in restrictions on coverage and the level of reimbursement for new products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with products due to the increasing trend toward managed healthcare, including the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs has and is expected to continue to increase in the future. As a result, profitability of our products may be more difficult to achieve even if they receive regulatory approval.

We intend to rely on a combination of exclusivity from orphan drug designation as well as patent rights for our product candidates and any future product candidates. If we are unable to obtain or maintain exclusivity from the combination of these approaches, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

Our business strategy is to focus on product candidates for which orphan drug designation may be obtained in the major markets of the world. In addition, we rely or will rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection, and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies and product candidates. For example, the portfolio of patents licensed from Merck expires before the anticipated launch date of the lonafarnib product candidate. Our success depends in large part on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain regulatory exclusivity and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and in other countries with respect to our proprietary technology and products.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the European Union, the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, or COMP, grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biological product or where there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment, or, if such a method exists, the medicine must be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.

In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages, and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan drug designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity. In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug or biological product approval. This period may be reduced to six years if the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity.

Because the extent and scope of patent protection for our products may in some cases be limited, orphan drug designation is especially important for our products for which orphan drug designation may be available. For eligible drugs, we plan to rely on the exclusivity period under the Orphan Drug Act to maintain a competitive position. If we do not obtain orphan drug exclusivity for our drug products and biologic products that do not have broad patent protection, our competitors may then sell the same drug to treat the same condition sooner than if we had obtained orphan drug exclusivity and our revenue will be reduced.

Even though we have orphan drug designation for lonafarnib in the United States and Europe, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or EMA can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA or EMA concludes that the later drug is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a product candidate nor gives the product candidate any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

We have sought to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our product candidates that are important to our business. This process is expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions for which legal principles remain unsolved. The patent applications that we own or in-licenses may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries. There is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue, and even if such patents cover our product candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability, or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, found unenforceable or invalidated. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product candidates, or prevent others from designing around our claims. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

We, independently or together with our licensors, have filed several patent applications covering various aspects of our product candidates. We cannot offer any assurances about which, if any, patents will issue, the breadth of any such patent or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened by third parties. Any successful opposition to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us after patent issuance could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced.

Although we have licensed a number of patents covering methods of use and certain compositions of matter, we do not have complete patent protection for our product candidates. For example, the patent coverage for lonafarnib expires before the anticipated launch date. Likewise, most of the patents covering products that we have licensed in from Stanford have limited protection outside of the United States. Therefore, a competitor could develop the same or similar product that may compete with our product candidate.

Certain of our product licenses are limited to specified indications or therapeutic areas which may result in the same compound being developed and commercialized by a third party whom we have no control over or rights against. This may result in safety data, pricing or off label uses from that third party’s product that may negatively affect the development and commercialization of our product candidates. For example, Kura has an exclusive license to tipifarnib for use in cancer indications while we have a license for anti-viral indications. As a result of Kura’s right to use the same compound in a different indication, it is possible that development and sales may impact our product development and commercialization efforts. If we cannot obtain and maintain effective protection of exclusivity from our regulatory efforts and intellectual property rights, including patent protection, for our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business and results of operations would be harmed.

We may not have sufficient patent term protections for our products to effectively protect our business.

Patents have a limited term. In the United States, the statutory expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product, we may be open to competition from generic medications. In addition, upon issuance in the United States any patent term can be adjusted based on certain delays caused by the applicant(s) or the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO. For example, a patent term can be reduced based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution.

Patent term extensions under the Hatch-Waxman Act in the United States and under supplementary protection certificates in Europe may be available to extend the patent or data exclusivity terms of products. With respect to ubenimex, lonafarnib, lambda and exendin 9-39, a substantial portion of the potential commercial opportunity will likely rely on patent term extensions, and we cannot provide any assurances that any such patent term extensions will be obtained and, if so, for how long. As a result, we may not be able to maintain exclusivity for our products for an extended period after regulatory approval, which would negatively impact our business and results of operations. If we do not have sufficient patent terms or regulatory exclusivity to protect our products, our business and results of operations will be adversely affected.

Patent laws and rule changes could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

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. The laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. 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. We therefore cannot be certain that it or our licensors were the first to make the invention claimed in our owned and licensed patents or pending applications, or that we or our licensor were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. Assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, in the United States prior to March 15, 2013, the first to make the claimed invention is entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application is entitled to the patent. After March 15, 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, enacted on September 16, 2011, the United States has moved to a first to file system. The Leahy-Smith Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The effects of these changes are currently unclear as the USPTO must still implement various regulations, the courts have yet to address any of these provisions and the applicability of the act and new regulations on specific patents discussed herein have not been determined and would need to be reviewed. In general, 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.

If we are unable to maintain effective proprietary rights for our product candidates or any future product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors.

Although we expect all of our employees and consultants to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors, and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There have been many lawsuits and other proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions, and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO and corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture, or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. We have conducted freedom to operate analyses with respect to only certain of our product candidates, and therefore we do not know whether there are any third-party patents that would impair our ability to commercialize these product candidates. We also cannot guarantee that any of our analyses are complete and thorough, nor can we be sure that we have identified each and every patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant or necessary to the commercialization of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe.

In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, methods of use, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be invalid or unenforceable. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

We may not be successful in meeting our diligence obligations under our existing license agreements necessary to maintain our product candidate licenses in effect. In addition, if required in order to commercialize our product candidates, we may be unsuccessful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses.

We currently have rights to the intellectual property, through licenses from third parties and under patents that we do not own, to develop and commercialize our product candidates. Because our programs may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to maintain in effect these proprietary rights. For example, we have certain specified diligence obligations under our Stanford license agreements for our ubenimex and lonafarnib product candidates. We may not be able to achieve the required diligence milestones in a timely manner, which may result in a right of termination by Stanford, and we may be unable to successfully negotiate an extension or waiver of those termination rights. Any termination of license agreements with third parties with respect to our product candidates would be expected to negatively impact our business prospects.

We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates. 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. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. Even if we are able to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that are necessary for our product candidates, there can be no assurance that they will be available on favorable terms.

We collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to identify product candidates, accelerate our research and conduct development. Typically, these institutions have provided us with an option to negotiate an exclusive license to any of the institution’s rights in the patents or other intellectual property resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe 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 a program of interest to us.

If we are unable to successfully obtain and maintain rights to required third-party intellectual property, we may have to abandon development of that product candidate or pay additional amounts to the third party, and our business and financial condition could suffer.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, seeking approval of a generic copy of an approved innovator product. Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a manufacturer may also submit an NDA under section 505(b)(2) that references the FDA’s finding of safety and effectiveness of a previously approved drug. A 505(b)(2) NDA product may be for a new or improved version of the original innovator product. Innovative small molecule drugs may be eligible for certain periods of regulatory exclusivity (e.g., five years for new chemical entities, three years for changes to an approved drug requiring a new clinical study, seven years for orphan drugs), which preclude FDA approval (or in some circumstances, FDA filing and review of) an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA relying on the FDA’s finding of safety and effectiveness for the innovative drug. In addition to the benefits of regulatory exclusivity, an innovator NDA holder may have patents claiming the active ingredient, product formulation or an approved use of the drug, which would be listed with the product in the FDA publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” known as the “Orange Book.” If there are patents listed in the Orange Book, a generic applicant that seeks to market its product before expiration of the patents must include in the ANDA or 505(b)(2) what is known as a “Paragraph IV certification,” challenging the validity or enforceability of, or claiming non-infringement of, the listed patent or patents. Notice of the certification must be given to the innovator, too, and if within 45 days of receiving notice the innovator sues to protect its patents, approval of the ANDA is stayed for 30 months, or as lengthened or shortened by the court.

If there are patents listed for our product candidates in the Orange Book, ANDAs and 505(b)(2) NDAs with respect to those product candidates would be required to include a certification as to each listed patent indicating whether the ANDA applicant does or does not intend to challenge the patent. We cannot predict whether any patents issuing from our pending patent applications will be eligible for listing in the Orange Book, how any generic competitor would address such patents, whether we would sue on any such patents, or the outcome of any such suit.

We may not be successful in securing or maintaining proprietary patent protection in the United States and/or in other countries for products and technologies we develop or license. Moreover, if any patents that are granted and listed in the Orange Book are successfully challenged by way of a Paragraph IV certification and subsequent litigation, the affected product could more immediately face generic competition and its sales would likely decline materially. Should sales decline, we may have to write off a portion or all of the intangible assets associated with the affected product and our results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

The patent protection and patent prosecution for some of our product candidates is dependent on third parties.

While we normally seek and gain the right to fully prosecute the patents relating to our product candidates, there may be times when patents relating to our product candidates are controlled by our licensors. This is the case with our agreements with Stanford and Nippon Kayaku, each of whom is primarily responsible for the prosecution of patents and patent applications licensed to us under the applicable collaboration agreements. If they or any of our future licensors fail to appropriately and broadly prosecute and maintain patent protection for patents covering any of our product candidates, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, importing, and selling competing products. In addition, even where we now have the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensors in effect from actions prior to us assuming control over patent prosecution.

If we fail to comply with obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property and other rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are a party to a number of intellectual property license and supply agreements that are important to our business and expects to enter into additional license agreements in the future. Our existing agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, purchasing, and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, our agreements may be subject to termination by the licensor, in which event we would not be able to develop, manufacture or market products covered by the license or subject to supply commitments.

Although we are not currently involved in any intellectual property litigation, we may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time consuming, and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. Although we are not currently involved in any intellectual property litigation, if we or one of our licensing partners were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties, or enter into development partnerships that would help us bring our product candidates to market.

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 during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we have written agreements and make every effort to ensure that our employees, consultants and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or intellectual property rights of others in their work forums, and we are not currently subject to any claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties, we may in the future be subject to such claims. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. Likewise, certain of our license agreements, for example for ubenimex, do not include patents or patent applications outside of the United States as our licensor elected not to file in foreign jurisdictions. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and may also export infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

We have previously identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting and our current management team may fail to maintain an effective system of internal control, which may result in material misstatements of our financial statements or cause us to fail to meet our periodic reporting obligations as a public company.

In connection with the audit of our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 as a private company, we and our independent auditors identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the subject company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Our lack of sufficient accounting personnel resulted in the identification of a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. Specifically, the material weakness that was identified related to a lack of sufficient accounting resources and personnel that had limited our ability to adequately segregate duties, perform sufficient review and approval of manual journal entries posted to the general ledger, establish defined accounting policies and procedures or perform timely reviews of account reconciliations or accounting estimates.

During 2016, we implemented measures to improve our internal control over financing reporting to address the underlying causes of the previously identified material weakness, including (i) the hiring of our Controller and other accounting personnel, (ii) establishing segregation of duties for review and approval of manual journal entries, (iii) establishing accounting policies and procedures, (iv) performing timely reviews of account reconciliations and accounting estimates, and (v) implementing appropriate disclosure controls and procedures. We believe the remediation steps outlined above were sufficient to remediate the previously identified material weakness in internal control over financial reporting as discussed above.

Our failure to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could result in errors in our financial statements that could result in a restatement of our financial statements or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, although we are not currently required to formally test our internal controls for attestation, we are required as an “emerging growth company” to report on our internal controls. After we are no longer an emerging growth company, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or the subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our consolidated financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inadequate internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our common stock.

Our future success depends in part on our ability to retain our President and Chief Executive Officer and to attract, retain, and motivate other qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on David Cory, our President and Chief Executive Officer, the loss of whose services may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. Mr. Cory could leave our employment at any time, as he is an “at will” employee. Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees, consultants, and advisors for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will also be critical to our success. There is currently a shortage of highly qualified personnel in our industry, which is likely to continue. As a result, competition for personnel is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in development and commercialization of our product candidates may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel, or the loss of the services of Mr. Cory may impede the progress of our research, development, and commercialization objectives and would negatively impact our ability to succeed in our in-licensing strategy.

We will need to expand our organization and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.*

As of September 30, 2017, we had 17 full-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we expect to need additional managerial, operational, manufacturing, sales, marketing, financial, legal, and other resources. Our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of their attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees, and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of additional product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenue could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Failure in our information technology and storage systems could significantly disrupt the operation of our business.

Our ability to execute our business plan and maintain operations depends on the continued and uninterrupted performance of our information technology, or IT, systems. IT systems are vulnerable to risks and damages from a variety of sources, including telecommunications or network failures, malicious human acts and natural disasters. Moreover, despite network security and back-up measures, some of our and our vendors’ servers are potentially vulnerable to physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses and similar disruptive problems. Despite precautionary measures to prevent unanticipated problems that could affect our IT systems, sustained or repeated system failures that interrupt our ability to generate and maintain data could adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

We may not be successful in any efforts to identify, license, discover, develop or commercialize additional product candidates.

Although a substantial amount of our effort will focus on the continued clinical testing, potential approval, and commercialization of our existing product candidates, the success of our business is also expected to depend in part upon our ability to identify, license, discover, develop, or commercialize additional product candidates. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial, and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. Our research programs or licensing efforts may fail to yield additional product candidates for clinical development and commercialization for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the following:

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, or we may not be able to identify, license, discover, develop, or commercialize additional product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations.

Healthcare legislative reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.*

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or the ACA, was passed, which substantially changes the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act have yet to be fully implemented, and since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to numerous provisions of the ACA, as well as recent efforts by the Trump administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA. Since January 2017, President Trump has signed two Executive Orders designed to delay the implementation of any certain provisions of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. The Trump administration has also announced that it will discontinue the payment of cost-sharing reduction, or CSR, payments to insurance companies until Congress approves the appropriation of funds for the CSR payments. The loss of the CSR payments is expected to increase premiums on certain policies issued by qualified health plans under the ACA. A bipartisan bill to appropriate funds for CSR payments has been introduced in the Senate, but the future of that bill is uncertain. Further, each chamber of Congress has put forth multiple bills designed to repeal or repeal and replace portions of the ACA. Although none of these measures has been enacted by Congress to date, Congress may consider other legislation to repeal and replace elements of the ACA. Any repeal and replace legislation may have the effect of limiting the amounts that government agencies will pay for healthcare products and services. Policy changes, including potential modification or repeal of all or parts of the Affordable Care Act or the implementation of new health care legislation could result in significant changes to the health care system, which may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or

commercialize our drugs. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand or lower pricing for our product candidates, or additional pricing pressures.

In the United States, the European Union and other potentially significant markets for our product candidates, government authorities and third-party payors are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate the price of medical products and services, particularly for new and innovative products and therapies, which has resulted in lower average selling prices. For example, in the United States, there have been several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. Furthermore, the increased emphasis on managed healthcare in the United States and on country and regional pricing and reimbursement controls in the European Union will put additional pressure on product pricing, reimbursement and usage, which may adversely affect our future product sales and results of operations. These pressures can arise from rules and practices of managed care groups, judicial decisions and governmental laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and healthcare reform, pharmaceutical reimbursement policies and pricing in general.

We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, and health information privacy and security laws. If we are unable to comply, or has not fully complied, with such laws, it could face substantial penalties.

If we obtain FDA approval for any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our operations may be subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act, and physician sunshine laws and regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing, and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Our employees, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading.

We are exposed to the risk of fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity by our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, commercial partners and vendors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct that fails to: comply with the regulations of the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, provide accurate information to the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, promotion, sales, marketing and certain business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment or clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics applicable to all of our employees, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

We face potential product liability, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability and costs. If the use or misuse of our product candidates harm patients, or is perceived to harm patients even when such harm is unrelated to our product candidates, our regulatory approvals could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted and we could be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims.

The use or misuse of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. There is a risk that our product candidates may induce adverse events. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

We believe our current product liability insurance coverage is appropriate in light of our clinical programs; however, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for product candidates, we intend to increase our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs or medical treatments that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.

Patients with the diseases targeted by our product candidates are often already in severe and advanced stages of disease and have both known and unknown significant pre-existing and potentially life-threatening health risks. During the course of treatment, patients may suffer adverse events, including death, for reasons that may or may not be related to our product candidates. Such events could subject us to costly litigation, require us to pay substantial amounts of money to injured patients, delay, negatively impact or end our opportunity to receive or maintain regulatory approval to market our products, or require us to suspend or abandon our commercialization efforts. Even in a circumstance in which we do not believe that an adverse event is related to our products, the investigation into the circumstance may be time-consuming or inconclusive. These investigations may interrupt our sales efforts, delay our regulatory approval process in other countries, or impact and limit the type of regulatory approvals our product candidates receive or maintain. As a result of these factors, a product liability claim, even if successfully defended, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

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 have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

Our research and development activities and our third-party manufacturers’ and suppliers’ activities involve the controlled storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, including the components of our product candidates and other hazardous compounds. We and our manufacturers and suppliers are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling, and disposal of these hazardous materials. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at our and our manufacturers’ facilities pending their use and disposal. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination, which could cause an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling, and disposal of these materials and specified waste products. Although we believe that the safety procedures utilized by our licensors and our third-party manufacturers for handling and disposing of these materials generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, we cannot guarantee that this is the case or eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In such an event, we may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed our resources and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and/or interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently, and have tended to become more stringent. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of our future compliance. We do not currently carry biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage.

We are currently conducting and will continue to conduct clinical trials in foreign countries, which could expose us to risks that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business and the delivery of clinical trial data.*

We have and are conducting clinical trials in the United States; Canada; Sydney, Australia; Ankara, Turkey; Hannover, Germany; Karachi, Pakistan; Auckland, New Zealand and Jerusalem and Beersheba, Israel, and accordingly, we are subject to risks associated with doing business globally, including commercial, political, and financial risks. Emerging regions, such as Eastern Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Africa, as well as more developed markets, such as the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Australia, provide clinical study opportunities for us. In addition, we are subject to potential disruption caused by military conflicts; potentially unstable governments or legal systems; civil or political upheaval or unrest; local labor policies and conditions; possible expropriation, nationalization, or confiscation of assets; problems with repatriation of foreign earnings; economic or trade sanctions; closure of markets to imports; anti-American sentiment; terrorism or other types of violence in or outside the United States; health pandemics; and a significant reduction in global travel. For example, both Turkey and Pakistan are key regions for clinical activity relating to Hepatitis Delta, and further outbreaks of violence and political instability in the region could disrupt our clinical operations or otherwise limit our ability to access or conduct clinical studies in those regions. Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to overcome the challenges we encounter with respect to these risks and other factors affecting U.S. companies with global operations. If our global clinical trials were to experience significant disruption due to these risks or for other reasons, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial results.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by earthquakes or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our corporate headquarters are located in the San Francisco Bay Area which has in the past experienced severe earthquakes and other natural disasters. We do not carry earthquake insurance. Earthquakes or other natural disasters could severely disrupt our operations or those of our collaborators, and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects. If a natural disaster, terrorist attack, power outage, or other event occurred that prevented us from using or damaged critical elements of our business and operations (such as the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contract manufacturers) our business may be disrupted for a substantial period of time. We have limited or no disaster recovery and business continuity plans in place currently and our business would be impaired in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses to develop and implement any disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are the subject of securities class action lawsuits that were filed against Celladon in 2015, and additional securities litigation may be brought against us in the future.*

In July 2015, following Celladon’s announcements of the negative CUPID 2 data and the suspension of further research and development activities and the subsequent declines of the price of its common stock, three putative class actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against Celladon and certain of its current and former officers. The complaints generally alleged that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, by making materially false and misleading statements regarding the clinical trial program for MYDICAR, thereby artificially inflating the price of Celladon’s common stock. The complaints sought unspecified monetary damages and other relief, including attorneys’ fees. On December 9, 2015, the district court consolidated the three putative securities class actions and appointed a lead plaintiff to represent the putative class. The lead plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint on February 29, 2016.

On December 28, 2016, the lead plaintiff filed a notice to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit appealing the district court’s order dismissing the consolidated amended complaint. On May 5, 2017, lead plaintiff filed his opening brief. On July 5, 2017, defendants filed their answering appellate brief.

It is possible that additional suits will be filed, or allegations made by stockholders, with respect to these same or other matters and also naming us and/or our former officers and directors as defendants. We believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend these lawsuits vigorously. Due to the early stage of these proceedings, we are not able to predict or reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or possible losses relating to these claims. While we and Celladon’s former directors and officers have a separate liability insurance policy dedicated to any claims that may arise from premerger events, there is no assurance that the coverage will be sufficient. In addition, any such litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile, and you may not be able to resell some or all of your shares at a desired market price.

The market price of our common stock has been and is likely to continue to be volatile. Our stock price could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a variety of factors, including the following:

Moreover, the stock markets in general have experienced substantial volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of individual companies. These broad market fluctuations may also adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders have often instituted class action securities litigation against those companies. Such litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management attention and resources, which could significantly harm our profitability and reputation.

We will incur costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies.

We have incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses associated with public company reporting requirements. We also incur costs associated with corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules implemented by the SEC and The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC. These rules and regulations impose significant legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, our management team consists of certain executive officers who have not previously managed and operated a public company. These executive officers and other personnel will need to devote substantial time to gaining expertise regarding operations as a public company and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. In addition, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our board of directors or as executive officers, which may adversely affect investor confidence and could cause our business or stock price to suffer.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of us more difficult and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our management.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may delay or prevent an acquisition or a change in management. These provisions include a classified board of directors, a prohibition on actions by written consent of our stockholders and the ability of the board of directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval. In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the DGCL, which prohibits stockholders owning in excess of 15% of our voting stock from merging or combining with us. Although we believe these provisions collectively will provide for an opportunity to receive higher bids by requiring potential acquirers to negotiate with our board of directors, they would apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some stockholders. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove then current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of the board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of management.

We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We expect to retain our future earnings to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be the sole source of gain for our stockholders, if any, for the foreseeable future.

Future sales of shares by existing stockholders could cause our stock price to decline.

If existing stockholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market after legal restrictions on resale lapse, the trading price of our common stock could decline. Certain of our existing stockholders, including Vivo Ventures Fund VI, L.P. and Interwest Partners X, L.P., and their respective affiliated entities, own substantial ownership interest in our common stock and any decision to sell a significant number of shares may negatively impact the price of our common stock.

The ownership of our common stock is highly concentrated, and it may prevent stockholders from influencing significant corporate decisions and may result in conflicts of interest that could cause our stock price to decline.

Our executive officers, directors and 5% stockholders and their affiliates beneficially own or control a significant portion of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Accordingly, these executive officers, directors, 5% stockholders and their affiliates, acting as a group, have substantial influence over the outcome of corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors, any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets or any other significant corporate transactions. These stockholders may also delay or prevent a change of control of us, even if such a change of control would benefit our other stockholders. The significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock due to investors’ perception that conflicts of interest may exist or arise.

Because the Merger resulted in an ownership change under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes are now subject to limitations.

If a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” within the meaning of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Section 382, the corporation’s net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes arising from before the ownership change are subject to limitations on use after the ownership change. In general, an ownership change occurs if there is a cumulative change in the corporation’s equity ownership by certain stockholders that exceeds fifty percentage points over a rolling three-year period. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. The recent Merger resulted in an ownership change and, accordingly, both parties’ net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes will be subject to further limitations on their use. We assessed whether Eiger had an ownership change, as defined by Section 382 of the Code, that occurred from our formation through December 31, 2016. Based upon this assessment no reduction was made to the federal and state NOL carryforwards or federal and state tax credit carryforwards under these rules. Additional ownership changes in the future could result in additional limitations on the combined organization’s net operating loss carryforwards. Consequently, even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to utilize a material portion of our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes, which could have a material adverse effect on cash flow and results of operations.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Delaware		33-0971591
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

350 Cambridge Ave, Suite 350 Palo Alto, CA		94306
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

Large accelerated filer	☐	Accelerated filer	☐
Non-accelerated filer	☐ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company	☒
Emerging growth company	☒

		Page No.
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements:		3
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2017 (unaudited) and December 31, 2016		3
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 (unaudited)		4
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 (unaudited)		5
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 (unaudited)		6
Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)		7
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		15
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk		22
Item 4. Controls and Procedures		22

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings		23
Item 1A. Risk Factors		23
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds		47
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities		47
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures		48
Item 5. Other Information		48
Item 6. Exhibits		49
Signatures		50

	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	September 30,				September 30,
	2017		2016		2017		2016
Options to purchase common stock		1,530,394		1,124,044		1,530,394		1,124,044
Warrants to purchase common stock		10,180		10,180		10,180		10,180
Total		1,540,574		1,134,224		1,540,574		1,134,224

	September 30,		December 31,
	2017		2016
Compensation and related benefits	$	1,088	$	1,299
Consulting costs		175		106
Contract research costs		144		834
Contract manufacturing costs		50		122
Franchise tax		27		97
Other		82		191
Total accrued liabilities	$	1,566	$	2,649

Exhibit Number			Description of Document

3.1			Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Celladon Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K of Celladon Corporation, filed with the SEC on February 10, 2014).

3.2			Amended and Restated Bylaws of Celladon Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on February 10, 2014).

3.3			Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Celladon Corporation (incorporated by reference to Annex D to the Registration Statement on Form S-4, as amended (File No. 333-208521), originally filed with the SEC on December 14, 2015).

3.4			Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Celladon Corporation (incorporated by reference to Annex E to the Registration Statement on Form S-4, as amended (File No. 333-208521), originally filed with the SEC on December 14, 2015).

31.1			Certification of Principal Executive Officer required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a)

31.2			Certification of Principal Financial Officer required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a)

32.1+			Certification Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350)

101.INS			XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH			XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

101.CAL			XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

101.DEF			XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document

101.LAB			XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

101.PRE			XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

	Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.

Date: November 9, 2017	By:	/s/ David A. Cory
		David A. Cory
		Director, President and Chief Executive Officer
		(Principal Executive Officer)

	Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.

Date: November 9, 2017	By:	/s/ James Welch
		James Welch
		Chief Financial Officer
		(Principal Financial Officer)