advm-10q_20160630.htm

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

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 x No o

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 (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

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

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

As of July 29, 2016 there were 41,348,194 shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, outstanding.

	June 30,			December 31,
	2016			2015
	(Unaudited)
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	241,302		$	221,348
Marketable securities		—			37,732
Receivable from collaborative partner		1,029			449
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		1,239			1,463
Total current assets		243,570			260,992
Property and equipment, net		3,985			3,187
Intangible assets		16,650			—
Deposit and other long-term assets		140			140
Total assets	$	264,345		$	264,319
Liabilities and stockholders’ equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	2,419		$	605
Restructuring liabilities		25			1,013
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		4,144			4,007
Deferred rent, current portion		81			66
Deferred revenue, current portion		1,228			883
Total current liabilities		7,897			6,574
Long-term liabilities:
Deferred rent, net of current portion		404			447
Deferred revenue, net of current portion		5,936			4,706
Deferred tax liability		2,081			—
Other noncurrent liabilities		373			—
Total liabilities		16,691			11,727
Commitments and contingencies (Note 8)
Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value, 5,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued and outstanding		—			—
Common stock, $0.0001 par value, 300,000,000 shares authorized at June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015; 41,322,357 and 25,858,722 shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively		4			3
Additional paid-in capital		408,866			336,768
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		4			(11	)
Accumulated deficit		(161,220	)		(84,168	)
Total stockholders’ equity		247,654			252,592
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	264,345		$	264,319

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015
	(Unaudited)						(Unaudited)
Collaboration revenue	$	307		$	203		$	572		$	406
Operating expenses:
Research and development		7,955			5,126			15,410			10,747
General and administrative		5,114			4,959			13,432			9,102
Goodwill impairment charge		49,120			–			49,120			-
Total operating expenses		62,189			10,085			77,962			19,849
Operating loss		(61,882	)		(9,882	)		(77,390	)		(19,443	)
Other income
Other income, net		222			116			338			168
Total other income, net		222			116			338			168
Net loss	$	(61,660	)	$	(9,766	)	$	(77,052	)	$	(19,275	)
Other comprehensive loss:
Net unrealized gain on marketable securities		—			45			6			10
Foreign currency translation adjustment		(4	)		—			10			(8	)
Comprehensive loss	$	(61,664	)	$	(9,721	)	$	(77,036	)	$	(19,273	)
Net loss per share attributable to common stockholders-basic and diluted	$	(1.76	)	$	(0.38	)	$	(2.50	)	$	(0.76	)
Weighted-average common shares outstanding-basic and diluted		35,044			25,555			30,825			25,223

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2016			2015
	(Unaudited)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$	(77,052	)	$	(19,275	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		663			265
Stock-based compensation expense		6,903			1,332
Goodwill impairment charge		49,120			—
Amortization of premium on marketable securities		—			317
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Receivable from collaborative partner		(580	)		—
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		1,069			(47	)
Deposit and other long-term assets		—			(1	)
Accounts payable		646			534
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		(1,706	)		59
Restructuring liabilities		(988	)		—
Deferred revenue		1,575			(406	)
Deferred rent		(27	)		230
Net cash used in operating activities		(20,377	)		(16,992	)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchases of marketable securities		—			(88,429	)
Maturities of marketable securities		37,738			8,960
Purchases of property and equipment		(1,126	)		(1,485	)
Cash acquired in business acquisition		3,449			—
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		40,061			(80,954	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from sales of common stock, net of offering cost		—			138,954
Proceeds from issuance of common stock pursuant to option exercises		349			131
Net cash provided by financing activities		349			139,085
Effect of foreign currency exchange rate on cash and cash equivalents		(79	)		(6	)
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		19,954			41,133
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		221,348			159,404
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	241,302		$	200,537

Supplemental schedule of noncash investing and financing information
Issuance of common stock and exchange of stock options for business acquisition	$	64,845			—
Fixed assets in accounts payable and accrued expenses and other current liabilities	$	153		$	875

Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”, “we” or “us”) was incorporated in Delaware on July 17, 2006 as Avalanche Biotechnologies, Inc. and changed its name to Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc. on May 11, 2016. The Company is headquartered in Menlo Park, California. The Company is a gene therapy company committed to discovering and developing novel medicines that can offer potentially life-changing therapeutic benefit to patients suffering from chronic or debilitating and rare diseases. Since the Company’s inception, it has devoted its efforts principally to performing research and development activities, including conducting preclinical studies, early clinical trials, filing patent applications, obtaining regulatory approvals, hiring personnel, and raising capital to support these activities.

The Company has not generated any revenue from the sale of products since its inception. The Company has experienced net losses since its inception and has an accumulated deficit of $161.2 million as of June 30, 2016. The Company expects to incur losses and have negative net cash flows from operating activities as it expands its portfolio and engages in further research and development activities. The Company believes that it has sufficient funds to continue operations for at least the next 36 months.

On May 11, 2016, the acquisition closing date, the Company completed its previously announced acquisition of all the outstanding shares of Annapurna Therapeutics SAS, a French simplified joint stock company (Annapurna), in accordance with the terms of the acquisition agreement (the Agreement) dated as of January 29, 2016, as amended on April 6, 2016. As a result, Annapurna is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company.

Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Company issued 14,087,246 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, for all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Annapurna. All outstanding options and other rights to purchase capital stock of Annapurna were converted into the Company’s options for common stock. Refer to Note 3 for more details.

Upon completion of the acquisition, the Company changed its name to “Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.”. The Company’s shares of common stock listed on The NASDAQ Global Market, previously trading through the close of business on Wednesday, May 11, 2016 under the ticker symbol “AAVL,” commenced trading on The NASDAQ Global Market under the ticker symbol “ADVM” on Thursday, May 12, 2016.

Follow-on Offerings —In January 2015, the Company completed a public offering of 2,369,375 shares of its common stock, which included 359,918 shares the Company issued pursuant to the underwriters’ exercise of their option to purchase additional shares. The Company received net proceeds of approximately $130.6 million, after underwriting discounts, commissions and offering expenses.

In March 2015, (i) the Company received net proceeds of approximately $8.3 million, after discounts and other issuance costs, which resulted from the sale of 230,000 common shares, and (ii) the Company issued 230,000 common shares to a shareholder that exercised warrants prior to the initial public offering.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) and following the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the Company’s annual consolidated 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 consolidated financial information. The results of operations for the six month period ended June 30, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year or any other future period. The balance sheet as of December 31, 2015 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 consolidated financial statements.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements and related financial information should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 filed with the SEC.

The accounting policies followed in the preparation of the interim condensed consolidated financial statements are consistent in all material respects with those presented in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015. The Company added significant accounting policy below as a result of Annapurna acquisition.

The Company evaluates the carrying value of amortizable long‑lived assets, whenever events, changes in business circumstances or planned use of long‑lived assets indicate that their carrying amounts may not be fully recoverable or that their useful lives are no longer appropriate. If these facts and circumstances exist, the Company assesses for recovery by comparing the carrying values of long‑lived assets with their future undiscounted net cash flows. If the comparison indicates that impairment exists, long‑lived assets are written down to their respective fair value based on discounted cash flows. Significant management judgment is required in the forecast of future operating results that is used in the preparation of expected undiscounted cash flows. No impairment indicators were noted for the Company’s long-lived assets, fixed assets, in the periods presented.

The Company also evaluates the carrying value of intangible assets (not subject to amortization) related to in‑process research and development (“IPR&D”) assets, which are considered to be indefinite‑lived until the completion or abandonment of the associated research and development efforts. Accordingly, amortization of the IPR&D assets will not occur until the product reaches commercialization. During the period the assets are considered indefinite‑lived, they will be tested for impairment on an annual basis, as well as between annual tests if the Company become aware of any events occurring or changes in circumstances that would indicate that the fair values of the IPR&D assets are less than their carrying amounts. If and when development is complete, which generally occurs when regulatory approval to market the product is obtained, the associated IPR&D assets would be deemed definite‑lived and would then be amortized based on their estimated useful lives at that point in time. If the related project is terminated or abandoned, the Company may have an impairment related to the IPR&D asset, calculated as the excess of their carrying value over fair value. The Company estimated fair value of IPR&D assets acquired in Annapurna transaction at the acquisition closing date, May 11, 2016. No impairment was recorded at June 30, 2016, as there were no changes in the fair value of IPR&D assets between May 11 and June 30, 2016.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements — In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standard Update (ASU) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) 605, Revenue Recognition. This ASU is based on the principle that revenue is recognized to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The ASU also requires additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. Companies may adopt ASU 2014-09 using a full retrospective approach or report the cumulative effect as of the date of adoption. In July 2015, the FASB voted to approve a one-year deferral of the effective date to December 15, 2017 for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after that date and permitted early adoption of the standard, but not before the original effective date of December 15, 2016. The Company is evaluating the application of this ASU and method of adoption, but has not yet determined the potential effects it may have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements—Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern, requiring management to evaluate whether events or conditions could impact an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide disclosures if necessary. Management will be required to perform the evaluation within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued. Disclosures will be required if conditions give rise to substantial doubt and the type of disclosure will be determined based on whether management’s plans will be able to alleviate the substantial doubt. The accounting standards update will be effective for the first annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter with early application permitted. The adoption of this ASU is not expected to impact the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-2, Leases. ASU 2016-2 is aimed at making leasing activities more transparent and comparable, and requires substantially all leases be recognized by lessees on their balance sheet as a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease liability, including leases currently accounted for as operating leases. The new standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Company has not yet determined the method of adoption and the potential effect the new standard will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-9, Compensation-Stock Compensation: Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. ASU 2016-9 simplifies several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment award transactions, including: (1) the income tax consequences, (2) classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and (3) classification in the consolidated statement of cash flows. The new standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, with early adoption permitted. The Company has not yet determined the method of adoption and the potential effect the new standard will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

The Company has reviewed other recent accounting pronouncements and concluded they are either not applicable to the business or no material effect is expected on the consolidated financial statements as a result of future adoption.

On May 11, 2016, the Company completed the acquisition of all outstanding equity interests of Annapurna. Annapurna is a privately held French limited liability company and has two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Annapurna, Inc. in the U.S. and Annapurna Therapeutics Limited in Ireland. Annapurna is a biopharmaceutical company focused on discovering and developing new gene therapy products for people living with severe diseases. The primary reasons for the acquisition were to diversify the technology platforms within the Company’s research and development portfolio and to apply the Company’s resources and expertise in gene vectors development to advance Annapurna programs through development and clinical trials. Annapurna’s results of operations and fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed are included in the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements from the date of acquisition.

The purchase price consideration was estimated to be $64.8 million, which was based on the Company’s common stock closing price on NASDAQ on the acquisition closing date of $4.14 per share. A total of 14,087,246 shares of the Company’s common stock were issued to shareholders of Annapurna in exchange for all common and preferred stock outstanding at the closing date. Annapurna stockholders did not receive any fractional shares of the Company’s common stock in connection with the acquisition. Instead of receiving any fractional shares, each Annapurna stockholders were paid an amount in cash (without interest) equal to such fraction amount multiplied by the average 10 business days sale price of the Company’s common stock on NASDAQ from the acquisition date. Annapurna Series O preferred shares issued to founders were canceled prior to the acquisition date and were not included in the purchase price consideration. Vesting of certain of Annapurna’s options and unvested common stock shares was accelerated at the closing date. The fair value of awards related to accelerated vesting of options and shares of $0.9 million was excluded from the purchase price consideration and included in the Company’s operating expenses post acquisition. A portion of the purchase price has been attributed to the exchange of Annapurna’s options and other rights to purchase capital stock outstanding at the acquisition closing date for corresponding common stock options of the Company at an exchange ratio of 9.54655.

The Company reserved 3,673,940 shares for the future exercise of the Company’s stock options. The total fair value of assumed Annapurna’s stock options and stock-based awards was estimated at $14.7 million on the acquisition date, using the Black-Scholes pricing model, assuming no dividends, expected volatilities of 80% and 89%, risk-free interest rates of 1.4% and 1.1%, and expected lives of six and ten years for employees and non-employees awards, respectively. Of the total fair value, $7.4 million has been attributed as pre-combination service and included as part of the total purchase price consideration. The post-combination attribution of $7.2 million will be recognized as compensation expense over the remaining requisite service period. The Company has included $1.1 million in stock-based compensation expense related to the vesting of exchanged stock options and day-one post combination compensation expenses related to accelerated vesting of options and shares in its condensed consolidated statement of operations during the second quarter 2016.

The transaction has been accounted for using the acquisition method based on ASC 805, Business Combinations, with Adverum identified as the acquirer, based on the existence of a controlling financial interest of the combined entities. Under the acquisition method, assets acquired and liabilities assumed were recorded at their estimated fair values as of the May 11, 2016. Goodwill, as well as intangible assets that do not qualify for separate recognition, is measured as of the acquisition date as the excess of consideration transferred, which is also measured at fair value, and the net of the fair values of the assets acquired and the liabilities assumed as of the acquisition closing date. Acquisition costs were expensed as incurred and recorded as general and administrative expenses. The Company recorded $0.6 million and $2.5 million of acquisition costs for the three-months and six-months ended June 30, 2016, respectively.

Valuing certain components of the acquisition, primarily intangible assets acquired, deferred taxes, uncertain tax positions and accrued liabilities required us to make significant estimates that may be adjusted in the future; consequently, the fair value of identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed are considered preliminary. Final determination of these estimates could result in an adjustment to the preliminary purchase price allocation, with an offsetting adjustment to goodwill. Preliminary allocation of total purchase price consideration is as follows (in thousands):

The identifiable intangible assets acquired consist of in-process research and development (IPR&D) assets related to products in development, as summarized in the table below (in thousands):

The fair value of each IPR&D asset is estimated using the income approach and calculated using cash flow projections adjusted for inherent risks regarding regulatory approval, promotion, and distribution, discounted at a rate of approximately 11.0%. The Company acquired two additional intangible assets relating to the Friedreich’s Ataxia (FA) and severe allergy programs but the fair value of each of these assets was determined to be nominal and is not included in the total acquired intangible assets. All IPR&D intangible assets acquired are currently classified as indefinite-lived and are not currently being amortized. IPR&D asset becomes definite-lived upon the completion or abandonment of the associated research and development efforts, and will be amortized from that time over an estimated useful life based on respective patent terms. The fair value of each IPR&D asset will continue to be evaluated for impairment on an annual basis or more often if the Company identifies impairment indicators that would require earlier testing. Based on the preliminary fair values above, an amount of $49.1 million has been allocated to goodwill, which represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair values assigned to the net assets acquired. The full amount of the preliminary value of goodwill has been assigned to the entire Company, since management has determined that the Company has only one reporting unit. The goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes.

The amount of net loss of Annapurna included in the consolidated statements of operations from the acquisition date, through the period ended June 30, 2016 was $1.2 million. Annapurna did not generate any revenues prior or post acquisition.

The following table presents the unaudited pro forma results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015. The pro forma financial information combines the results of operations of Adverum and Annapurna as though the businesses had been combined as of the beginning of fiscal 2015. The pro forma financial information is presented for informational purposes only, and is not indicative of the results of operations that would have been achieved in the current or any future periods.

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015
Pro forma information
Collaboration revenue	$	307		$	203		$	572		$	406
Net loss	$	(62,572	)	$	(10,533	)	$	(80,846	)	$	(21,956	)
Basic and diluted loss per share	$	(1.52	)	$	(0.27	)	$	(1.97	)	$	(0.56	)

The unaudited condensed pro forma information does not include any anticipated synergies that may be achievable subsequent to the date of acquisition.

As the Company recorded goodwill and IPR&D intangible assets upon the acquisition of Annapurna, the Company is required to test goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if indicators of impairment exist. The Company operates as one reporting unit and goodwill was recorded to this reporting unit.

During the second quarter the Company noted a continuing decrease in its stock price that resulted in the market capitalization being less than the carrying value of the Company’s net assets as of June 30, 2016. As the operating losses are expected to increase significantly in the following years due to continuing pre-clinical and expected clinical trials, the Company concluded that it is more likely than not that the fair value of the Company’s one reporting unit is less than its carrying value and as a result performed a step one goodwill impairment analysis.

In performing the step one analysis, the Company determined the fair value of the reporting unit using a market-based approach. The Company multiplied the stock price of $3.16 on June 30, 2016 by the 41.3 million common shares outstanding and applied a control premium to estimate the common equity value on a controlling basis. As the fair value was less than the carrying value of the Company’s net assets, the Company proceeded to step two of the impairment analysis.

The second step of the analysis includes allocating the calculated fair value (determined in the step one analysis) of the reporting unit to its assets and liabilities to determine an implied fair value of goodwill. The implied fair value of goodwill was determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill recognized in an acquisition. That is, the estimated fair value of the reporting unit was

allocated to all of the assets and liabilities as if the Company had been acquired and the estimated fair value was the purchase price paid. As part of this assessment the Company considered preliminary valuation of Annapurna net assets acquired, excluding goodwill, as their fair value from May 11, 2016, the acquisition closing date, to June 30, 2016 did not change. The Company also noted that the fair value of current assets and liabilities approximates their carrying value due to their short-term nature, the Company’s cash and cash equivalent balance is higher than the fair value estimated in the step one analysis, and the fair value of fixed assets approximates their recorded value as most of the Company’s fixed assets are acquired in the last couple of years. Based on this analysis, the implied fair value of the goodwill was zero. Accordingly, the Company recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $49.1 million in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the period ended June 30, 2016.

As the Annapurna purchase price allocation is preliminary and the amount of goodwill might change during the measurement period, the recorded impairment charge reflects the Company’s best estimate as of June 30, 2016.

We did not impair recorded IPR&D intangible assets, as their carrying value at June 30, 2016 approximated their fair value. We noted no significant changes in IPR&D intangible assets fair values from May 11, 2016, the acquisition closing date, to June 30, 2016.

The Company did not hold any marketable securities as of June 30, 2016, all investments were held in money market funds and are treated as cash equivalents. .

The following is a summary of the cash equivalents and marketable securities as of December 31, 2015:

	December 31, 2015
	Amortized Cost Basis			Unrealized Gains		Unrealized Loses			Estimated Fair Value
Money Market Funds	$	208,588		$	—	$	—		$	208,588
Certificates of Deposit		1,680			—		—			1,680
U.S. Treasury Securities		15,046			—		(4	)		15,042
U.S. Government Agency Securities		21,012			—		(2	)		21,010
		246,326			—		(6	)		246,320
Less: Cash Equivalents		(208,588	)		—		—			(208,588	)
Total Marketable Securities	$	37,738		$	—	$	(6	)	$	37,732

As of December 31, 2015, the contractual maturities of the Company’s marketable securities were less than one year. The Company has not sold any securities prior to their maturities and so does not consider any losses on these investment to be other-than-temporarily impaired. There were no sales of available-for-sale securities in any of the periods presented.

The authoritative guidance on fair value measurements establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy for disclosure of fair value measurements as follows:

Level 2: Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices 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 assets or liabilities.

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

Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires management to make judgments and consider factors specific to the asset or liability.

The fair value of Level 1 securities are determined using quoted prices in active markets for identical assets. Level 1 securities consist of highly liquid money market funds. Financial assets and liabilities are considered Level 2 when their fair values are determined using inputs that are observable in the market or can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data such as pricing for similar securities, recently executed transactions, cash flow models with yield curves, and benchmark securities. In

addition, Level 2 financial instruments are valued using comparisons to like-kind financial instruments and models that use readily observable market data as their basis. U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency securities and certificate of deposit are valued primarily using market prices of comparable securities, bid/ask quotes, interest rate yields and prepayment spreads and are included in Level 2.

There were no transfers within the hierarchy during the six months ended June 30, 2016 and the year ended December 31, 2015. As of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the Company had no Level 3 assets or liabilities.

The following table summarizes, for assets recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, the respective fair value and the classification by level of input within the fair value hierarchy as described above (in thousands):

			Quoted Prices		Significant Other		Significant
	Total		In Active Markets		Observable Inputs		Unobservable Inputs
	Carrying Value		(Level 1)		(Level 2)		(Level 3)
June 30, 2016
Assets:
Money Market Funds - cash equivalent	$	236,821	$	236,821	$	—	$	—
Total Cash Equivalents	$	236,821	$	236,821	$	—	$	—
December 31, 2015
Assets:
Money Market Funds - cash equivalent	$	208,588	$	208,588	$	—	$	—
Certificates of Deposit		1,680		—		1,680		—
U.S. Treasury Securities		15,042		—		15,042		—
U.S. Government Agency Securities		21,010		—		21,010		—
Total Cash Equivalents and Marketable Securities	$	246,320	$	208,588	$	37,732	$	—

Non-financial and financial assets such as intangible assets, property, plant, and equipment are evaluated for impairment and adjusted to their fair value using Level 3 inputs, only when impairment is recognized. Fair values are considered Level 3 when management makes significant assumptions in developing a discounted cash flow model based upon a number of considerations including projections of revenues, earnings and a discount rate. In addition, in evaluating the fair value of goodwill impairment, further corroboration is obtained using our market capitalization.

In May 2014, the Company entered into a research collaboration and license agreement with Regeneron to discover, develop and commercialize novel gene therapy products for the treatment of ophthalmologic diseases. The collaboration covers up to eight distinct therapeutic targets (collaboration targets). The Company and Regeneron will collaborate during the initial research period of three years that can be extended by Regeneron for up to an additional five years. During the research period, Regeneron has the option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license for a collaboration target’s further development by giving written notice to the Company and paying $2.0 million per target. If Regeneron exercises its option, it will be responsible for all further development and commercialization of the target. The Company is then eligible to receive contingent payments of up to $80.0 million upon achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones for product candidates directed toward each collaboration target, for a combined total of up to $640.0 million in potential milestone payments for product candidates directed toward all eight collaboration targets, plus a royalty in the low- to mid-single-digits on worldwide net sales of collaboration products.

For any two collaboration targets, the Company has an option to share up to 35% of the worldwide product candidate development costs and profits. If the Company exercises this option, the Company will not be eligible for milestone and royalty payments discussed above but rather the Company will share development costs and profits with Regeneron.

The agreement will expire with respect to each collaboration target upon the earlier of the (a) expiration of the research term if the option right has not been triggered by the end of the research term or (b) expiration of the option right if the option right has not been exercised by Regeneron. If the option right has been exercised, the agreement in connection with each collaboration target will expire upon expiration of all payment obligations by Regeneron. In addition, the agreement, or Regeneron’s rights to any target development under the agreement, may terminate early under the following situations:

In May 2010, the Company entered into a license agreement, as amended, with the Regents of the University of California (Regents) for exclusive rights in the U.S. to certain patents owned by the Regents. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid an upfront license fee of $100,000 and agreed to reimburse the Regents for patent-related expenses. The Company is obligated to pay the Regents royalties on net sales, if any, as well as an annual maintenance fee of $50,000 beginning in the calendar year after the first commercial sale of a licensed product and milestone payments related to the achievement of certain clinical and regulatory goals totaling up to $900,000 for the first indication and $500,000 for each additional indication for up to two additional indications. Through June 30, 2016, none of these goals had been achieved, and no milestones were payable.

In August 2014, as amended in December 2015, Annapurna entered into a master service agreement with Cornell University for assistance in regulatory affairs, overall project management and parameter development. Per the amended agreement, Annapurna will pay Cornell $13.3 million ratably over 4 years for these services, as services will be performed.

In December 2015, Annapurna Therapeutics Limited entered into three licensing agreements with Cornell University, pursuant to which Annapurna will advance its ANN-001, ANN-002 and ANN-004 programs, which were each based on gene-therapy programs initiated at the Department of Genetic Medicine at Weill Cornell.

A1AT Deficiency License Agreement: Under this agreement, Annapurna Therapeutics Limited holds an exclusive license to certain technology related to alpha-1 antitrypsin (“A1AT”) deficiency and rights to an IND application to initiate clinical studies of gene therapy for A1AT.

HAE License Agreement: Under this agreement, Annapurna Therapeutics Limited holds an exclusive license to certain technology related to hereditary angioedema (“HAE”) and a non-exclusive license to certain other intellectual property related to the HAE program.

Allergy License Agreement: Under this agreement, Annapurna Therapeutics Limited holds an exclusive license to certain patents related to allergens and a non-exclusive license to certain other technology related to allergens.

The Company may terminate any of these license agreements for convenience upon ninety days written notice.

Across these three license agreements, Cornell University is entitled to receive aggregate annual maintenance fees ranging from $30,000 to $300,000 per year, up to $16.0 million in aggregate milestone payments and royalties on sales in the low single-digits, subject to adjustments and minimum thresholds. In addition, under a master services agreement with Cornell University, Annapurna will utilize the university to scale production of gene therapies by manufacturing processes that the institution has already used to produce Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) material for other gene-therapy trials. The Company accrued $0.5 million as of June 30, 2016 and recorded expenses of $0.5 million (post Annapurna’s acquisition) for the period from May 11, 2016 through June 30, 2016, related to Cornell agreements. No milestone payments were probable to achieve and none were recorded as of June 30, 2016.

Dr. Crystal, Chairman of Genetic Medicine, the Bruce Webster Professor of Internal Medicine and a Professor of Genetic Medicine and of Medicine at Weill Cornell, served as a consultant to Annapurna since inception and will continue to provide services to the Company for the annual compensation of $0.3 million. Dr. Crystal also owns common shares of the Company and he does not have significant influence on the Company’s operations.

A1AT Deficiency/Allergy License Agreement: In October 2015, Annapurna Therapeutics Limited entered into an exclusive worldwide license to certain intellectual property in order to make, have made, use, import, sell and offer for sale certain licensed products for the treatment of A1AT deficiency. Additionally under this agreement, the Company has an option to be granted an exclusive worldwide license to certain intellectual property related to the treatment of severe allergies. Under this license agreement, REGENXBIO is eligible to receive annual maintenance fees, up to approximately $20.0 million in combined milestone payments and royalties in the mid-to-high single digits.

Friedreich’s Ataxia License Agreement: In April 2014, Annapurna entered into an exclusive worldwide license to certain intellectual property related to the Friedreich’s Ataxia (“FA”) program to make, have made, use, import, sell and offer for sale licensed products using AAVrh10 for FA where the vector is administered by any route except directly to the central nervous system (FA Systemic). Under the terms of this license agreement, Annapurna also has an option to obtain a non-exclusive worldwide license to make, have made, use, import, sell and offer for sale licensed products using a single vector for each of FA where the vector is administered directly to the central nervous system and FA Systemic. Under this license agreement, REGENXBIO is eligible to receive annual maintenance fees, up to $13.85 million in combined milestone fees and royalties in the mid-to-high single digits.

The Company accrued $46,000 as of June 30, 2016 and recorded expenses of $20,000 (post Annapurna’s acquisition) for the period May 11, 2016 through June 30, 2016, related to REGENXBIO agreements. No milestone payments were probable to achieve and none were recorded as of June 30, 2016.

In July 2014, Annapurna entered into an agreement with Inserm Transfert whereby Annapurna holds an exclusive license to certain patents to develop, make, have made, use, import, offer for sale and sell or otherwise distribute products for the treatment of Friedreich’s ataxia and a non-exclusive license to certain other intellectual property related to the FA program. The Agreement was amended in October 2015 to increase the scope of the intellectual property under the licenses. Under this agreement, Inserm Transfert is entitled to receive certain de minimis license payments, certain development milestone payments of up to approximately €2 million in the aggregate and royalties on sales in the low single-digits, subject to adjustments. The Company did not have any accruals relating to Inserim as of June 30, 2016 and nor did the Company record any expenses (post Annapurna’s acquisition) for the period from May 11, 2016 through June 30, 2016, related to this agreement. No milestone payments were probable to achieve and none were recorded as of June 30, 2016.

	June 30, 2016			December 31, 2015
Computer equipment and software	$	259		$	234
Laboratory equipment		3,688			3,041
Furniture and fixtures		552			552
Leasehold improvements		939			351
Construction in progress		201			—
Total property and equipment		5,639			4,178
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization		(1,654	)		(991	)
Property and equipment, net	$	3,985		$	3,187

Depreciation and amortization expense related to property and equipment for the three months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 was $343,000 and $147,000, respectively. Depreciation and amortization expense related to property and equipment for the six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 was $663,000 and $265,000, respectively.

Accrued expenses and other current liabilities consist of the following (in thousands):

	June 30, 2016		December 31, 2015
Employees’ compensation expenses	$	1,608	$	2,047
Accrued professional services		608		1,177
Accrued preclinical costs	$	1,844	$	642
Accrued clinical and process development costs		—		101
Other		84		40
Total accrued expenses and other current liabilities	$	4,144	$	4,007

Due to the innovative nature of Annapurna’s product candidate development programs, Annapurna has benefited from certain sources of financial assistance from Banque Publique d’Investissement (“BPI France”). BPI France provides financial assistance and support to emerging French enterprises to facilitate the development and commercialization of innovative technologies. The funds received by the Company are intended to finance its research and development efforts and the recruitment of specific personnel. The Company has received such funding in the form of conditional advances.

In August 2015, BPI France granted Annapurna a €750,000 interest free conditional advance, of which €500,000 was drawn down as of December 31, 2015. The remaining €250,000 advance was not and is not expected to be drawn down on. Payments are scheduled in equal quarterly amounts of €25,000 from September 30, 2017 to June 30, 2022. This payment schedule will be modified if the Company will receive revenue from license or product sales before advances are paid in full. The Company calculated 7% imputed interest expense on these advances that recorded it as a discount at the issuance date. The discount is amortized as an interest expense over the life of advances. As of June 30, 2016 the carrying value of the conditional advance was $373,000 and the Company recorded $15,000 interest expense from the acquisition closing date to June 30, 2016.

In August 2014, as amended December 2015, Annapurna entered into a master service agreement with Cornell University for assistance in regulatory affairs, overall project management and parameter development. Per the amended agreement, Annapurna will pay Cornell $13.3 million ratably over 4 years for these services.

The Company is a party to various agreements, principally relating to licensed technology that requires payment of annual maintenance fees and future payments relating to milestones or royalties on future sales of specified products. Refer to Note 6 for further details. The Company expenses the annual maintenance fees on a straight-line basis and accrues the aggregate balances until invoiced or paid. Through June 30, 2016, none of the goals had been achieved under the license agreements and no cash milestones were accrued or payable. Because the achievement of these milestones is not fixed and determinable, such commitments have not been included in the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheets.

In the normal course of business, the Company enters into contracts and agreements that contain a variety of representations and warranties and provide for indemnification for certain liabilities. The exposure under these agreements is unknown because it involves claims that may be made against the Company in the future but have not yet been made. To date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to defend any action related to its indemnification obligations. However, the Company may record charges in the future as a result of these indemnification obligations. The Company also has indemnification obligations to its directors and executive officers for specified events or occurrences, subject to some limits, while they are serving at the Company’s request in such capacities. There have been no claims to date and the Company believes the fair value of these indemnification agreements is minimal. Accordingly, the Company has not recorded any liabilities for these agreements as of June 30, 2016.

From time to time, the Company may become involved in litigation and other legal actions. The Company estimates the range of liability related to any pending litigation where the amount and range of loss can be estimated. The Company records its best estimate

of a loss when the loss is considered probable. Where a liability is probable and there is a range of estimated loss with no best estimate in the range, the Company records a charge equal to at least the minimum estimated liability for a loss contingency when both of the following conditions are met: (i) information available prior to issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability had been incurred at the date of the financial statements and (ii) the range of loss can be reasonably estimated.

In July 2015, three putative securities class action lawsuits were filed against the Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, each on behalf of a purported class of persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired its publicly traded securities between July 31, 2014 and June 15, 2015. The lawsuits assert claims under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act) and allege that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements and omitted allegedly material information related to, among other things, the Phase 2a clinical trial for AVA-101 and the prospects of AVA-101. The complaints seek unspecified damages, attorneys’ fees and other costs. An amended consolidated complaint was filed in February 2016, and the Company’s motion to dismiss that consolidated complaint is pending.

In December 2015, a putative securities class action lawsuit was filed against us, our board of directors, underwriters of our January 13, 2015, follow-on public stock offering, and two of our institutional stockholders, in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The complaint alleges that, in connection with our follow-on stock offering, the defendants violated the Securities Act in essentially the same manner alleged by the consolidated federal action: by allegedly making materially false and misleading statements and by allegedly omitting material information related to the Phase 2a clinical trial for AVA-101 and the prospects of AVA-101. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory and rescissory damages, attorneys’ fees and other costs. The plaintiff has dismissed the two institutional stockholder defendants, and the Company’s motion to stay or to dismiss this action is pending.

The Company believes that the claims in the asserted actions are without merit and intend to defend the lawsuits vigorously. The Company expects to incur costs associated with defending the actions. While the Company has various insurance policies related to the risks associated with its business, including directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies, there is no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense of the actions, that its insurance coverage, which contains a self-insured retention, will be sufficient, or that its insurance carriers will cover all claims or litigation costs. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company cannot reasonably predict at this time the timing or outcomes of these matters or estimate the amount of losses, or range of losses, if any, or their effect, if any, on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

The Company’s 2014 Equity Incentive Award Plan (2014 Plan) permits the issuance of stock options (options), restricted stock units (RSUs) and other types of awards to employees, directors, and consultants.

As of June 30, 2016, a total of 13,162,656 shares of common stock were authorized for issuance and 2,241,693 shares were available for future grants under the 2014 Plan.

In July 2014, the Company’s board of directors and its stockholders approved the establishment of the 2014 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (2014 ESPP). During the six months ended June 30, 2016 32,425 shares were issued under the 2014 ESPP and no shares were issued in the same period for 2015. A total of 675,383 shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance under the 2014 ESPP and 623,381 were available for issuance under the 2014 ESPP as of June 30, 2016.

The following table summarizes option activity under our stock plans and related information:

						WEIGHTED-
	NUMBER OF			WEIGHTED-		AVERAGE REMAINING		AGGREGATE
	SHARE			AVERAGE EXERCISE		CONTRACTUAL LIFE		INTRINSIC VALUE ^(a)
	(IN THOUSANDS)			PRICE		(IN YEARS)		(IN THOUSANDS)
Balance at January 1, 2016		5,494		$	8.75
Options granted		4,975		$	1.25
Options exercised		(1,233	)	$	0.40
Options cancelled		(511	)	$	23.83
Balance at June 30, 2016		8,725		$	4.77		8.9		15,473
Vested and expected to vest as of June 30, 2016		8,622		$	4.72		8.9		15,471
Exercisable as of June 30, 2016		3,760		$	3.62		8.2		8,997

Options granted number includes the Company’s stock options for 3,673,940 common stock shares issued in exchange for Annapurna stock options at $0.21 exercise price per share. The weighted-average fair values of options granted and exchanged during the six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 were $1.62 and $27.90, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015 were $6.3 million and $10.6 million, respectively.

The Company has recorded aggregate stock-based compensation expense related to the issuance of stock option awards to employees and nonemployees in the condensed consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss as follows (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended					Six Months Ended
	June 30,					June 30,
	2016		2015			2016		2015
Research and development	$	1,912	$	(445	)	$	4,140	$	(161	)
General and administrative		914		1,004			2,770		1,493
Total share-based compensation	$	2,826	$	559		$	6,910	$	1,332

Stock-based compensation expense included additional charges of $0.3 million and $1.1 million, recorded in general and administrative expense, and zero and $1.4 million, recorded in research and development expense, related to stock modifications in connection with separation agreements three Company’s executives for the three-months and six-months ended June 30, 2016, respectively.

Restricted stock units, or RSUs, are share awards that entitle the holder to receive freely tradable shares of our common stock upon vesting. The fair value of RSUs is based upon the closing sales price of our common stock on the grant date. During the six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, the Company granted a total of 1,066,283 and 97,000 RSUs, respectively. RSUs granted to employees generally vest over a two-to-four year period.

The following table summarizes the RSUs activity under our stock plans and related information:

	Number of			Weighted-Average
	Shares			Grant-Date
	(in thousands)			Fair Value (in dollars)
Outstanding at December 31, 2015		632		$	13.07
Granted		1,066		$	4.63
Vested and released		(165	)	$	11.60
Forfeited		(342	)	$	7.85
Outstanding at June 30, 2016		1,191		$	6.50

The total fair value of RSUs that vested for the six months ended June 30, 2016 was $2.2 million and no shares were vested for the six months ended June 30, 2015. As of June 30, 2016, there was $5.3 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested RSUs that we expect to recognize over a weighted-average period of 2.8 years.

The fair value of each option issued to employees was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes valuation model with the following weighted-average assumptions:

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 30,						June 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015
Option grants:
Expected volatility		81	%		76	%		81	%		77	%
Expected term (in years)		5.9			6.0			5.9			6.1
Expected dividend yield		—			—			—			—
Risk-free interest rate		1.3	%		1.6	%		1.3	%		1.6	%

As of June 30, 2016, there was $18.4 million of unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related to employees’ awards that is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 3.0 years.

Stock-based compensation related to stock options granted to non-employees is measured and recognized as the stock options are earned. 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 following weighted-average assumptions were used in estimating non-employees’ stock-based compensation expenses:

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 30,						June 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015
Option grants:
Expected volatility		84	%		80	%		83	%		80	%
Expected term (in years)		8.0			8.0			7.5			7.8
Expected dividend yield		—			—			—			—
Risk-free interest rate		1.6	%		2.0	%		1.6	%		1.9	%

As of June 30, 2016, there was $2.5 million of unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related to non-employees’ awards that is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.3 years.

The Company established a defined-contribution savings plan under Section 401(k) of the Code (the 401(k) Plan). The 401(k) Plan covers all employees who meet defined minimum age and service requirements, and allows participants to defer a portion of their annual compensation on a pretax basis. For the three months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, the Company contributed $0.1 million and $0 to the 401(k) Plan, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, the Company contributed $0.2 million and $0.1 million to the 401(k) Plan, respectively

Basic net loss per share is calculated by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period. Diluted net loss per share attributable is computed by giving effect to all potential dilutive common stock equivalents outstanding for the period. Diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net loss per share for all periods presented, since the effects of potentially dilutive securities are antidilutive.

We have excluded stock options and RSUs to purchase approximately 9.9 million and 5.2 million shares of our common stock that were outstanding as of June 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, in the computation of diluted net loss per share attributable to common stockholders because their effect was antidilutive.

In August 2016, the Company entered into a collaboration, option and license agreement with Editas Medicine, Inc. (“Editas”) pursuant to which the Company and Editas will collaborate on certain studies using adeno-associated viral vectors in connection with Editas’ genome editing technology and the Company will grant to Editas an exclusive option to obtain certain exclusive rights to use the Company’s proprietary vectors in up to five ophthalmic indications. The Company will receive a $1.0 million non-refundable upfront payment, with a portion of such payment to be credited against Editas’ obligation to fund research costs. Under the terms of the agreement, both the Company and Editas will be subject to exclusivity obligations.

Editas may exercise the option, with respect to a designated initial indication, until the first anniversary of the effective date of the agreement. With respect to the four other Indications, Editas may exercise the option until the third anniversary of the effective date, provided that the option will expire on the second anniversary of the effective date if Editas has not exercised the option with respect to the initial indication or any other indication by such date. Upon each exercise of the option, Editas will pay the Company a $1.0 million fee. If Editas elects to develop a product using certain of the Company’s proprietary vectors, the Company will be eligible to receive additional payments relating to development and commercialization milestone payments for such product, and tiered royalties on net sales of such product, subject to certain adjustments.

The interim financial statements included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2015, and the related Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on March 4, 2016. In addition to historical information, this discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act). These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including those discussed in the section titled “Risk Factors,” set forth in Part II – Other Information, Item 1A below and elsewhere in this report that could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or anticipated results.

We are a publicly traded gene therapy company committed to discovering and developing novel medicines that can offer potentially life-changing therapeutic benefit to patients who currently have limited or burdensome treatment options. We have leveraged our next-generation adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based directed evolution platform to generate product candidates designed to provide durable efficacy by inducing sustained expression of a therapeutic protein. We have also acquired certain other gene therapy product candidates through our previously announced transaction with Annapurna Therapeutics SAS, a privately-held French gene therapy company (Annapurna), which closed on May 11, 2016. Our core capabilities include clinical development expertise, vector optimization, process development, manufacturing, and assay development.

Prior to the Annapurna transaction, our primary focus had been the development of AVA-101 for the treatment of wet AMD. We conducted a Phase 2a trial for AVA-101 with 32 wet AMD subjects, for which we announced top-line results in June 2015. Overall, we did not observe evidence of a complete and/or durable anti-VEGF response in the majority of subjects treated with AVA-101 as administered in the Phase 2a study. We decided not to move forward with the Phase 2b clinical trial for AVA-101 with the dose and administration procedure that we had planned to initiate in the second half of 2015. Instead, we conducted additional preclinical studies to inform further development of our wet AMD program.

After analyzing promising preclinical data evaluating different anti-VEGF compounds in non-human primate studies, we decided to discontinue development of AVA-101 and AVA-201. Instead, we will move forward with preclinical development of new, anti-VEGF gene therapy candidates focused on intravitreal delivery and utilizing a proprietary vector. The company will provide additional details on its anti-VEGF program at a scientific meeting in the fall of 2016.

In addition to our anti-VEGF program, we are working on developing product candidates targeting diseases with unmet medical need in ophthalmology, rare disease and allergy. Our most advanced program, ANN-001, is for the treatment of alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency (A1AT). ANN-001 is designed to deliver A1AT protein to patients with A1AT deficiency and will be evaluated using an intraplueral and intravenous route of administration. ANN-001 has an open IND with the FDA, and we expect to initiate clinical studies in the second half of 2016. Our gene therapy program, ANN-002 to treat hereditary angioedema (HAE), is also in preclinical studies, and we expect to initiate clinical studies in 2017. We have a preclinical program targeting cardiomyopathy associated with Friedreich’s ataxia for which we plan to provide a development update in 2017. In addition, we have a program targeting severe allergy which is in early preclinical development.

We also are developing other product candidates for the treatment of ophthalmic diseases, including AVA-311 for the treatment of juvenile X-linked retinoschisis (XLRS) as part of our research collaboration with Regeneron and AVA-322 and AVA-323 for the treatment of color vision deficiency (CVD) commonly known as red-green color blindness.

On May 11, 2016, we completed our previously announced acquisition of all of the outstanding shares of Annapurna and, as a result, Annapurna is now our wholly owned subsidiary. At the closing of the acquisition, we issued 14,087,246 shares of our common stock to the shareholders of Annapurna, and the outstanding options or other rights to purchase capital stock of Annapurna were exchanged for options relating to shares of our common stock.

Upon completion of the Annapurna transaction, we changed our name to “Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc.”.

We have not generated positive cash flow or net income from operations since our inception and, at June 30, 2016, we had an accumulated deficit of $161.2 million, primarily as a result of research and development, general and administrative expenses and the goodwill impairment charge.

While we may in the future generate revenue from a variety of sources, including license fees, milestone and research and development payments in connection with strategic partnerships, and potentially revenue from approved product sales, we have not yet generated any revenue from approved therapeutic product candidates.

We entered into our first license and development revenue generating agreement with Regeneron in May 2014. We entered into the collaboration, option and license agreement with Editas in August 2016, that also will be a revenue agreement. Editas agreement is disclosed in Note 14, Subsequent Events, in the condensed consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-Q.We have no manufacturing facilities, and all of our manufacturing activities are contracted out to third parties. Additionally, we have used third-party clinical research organizations (CROs) to carry out our clinical development and we do not yet have a sales organization.

We expect to incur substantial expenditures in the foreseeable future for the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. We will need substantial additional funding in the future to support our operating activities as we advance our product candidates through preclinical and clinical development, seek regulatory approval and prepare for and, if approved, proceed to commercialization. Adequate funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise capital, or to do so on acceptable terms, when needed, or to form additional collaboration partnerships to support our efforts, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or potential commercialization efforts.

As of June 30, 2016, we had $241.3 million in cash and cash equivalents. We believe that we have sufficient funds to continue operations for at least the next 36 months.

To date we have not generated any revenue from the sale of our products. In May 2014, we entered into a multi-year license and development agreement with Regeneron. Under the terms of the agreement, we received initial payments of $8.0 million that included payment for research license fees, prepaid collaboration research costs and the right of first negotiation for a potential license to develop and commercialize AVA-101. As the agreement provides for multiple deliverables, we account for this agreement as a multiple elements revenue arrangement. If deliverables do not appear to have a standalone fair value, they were combined with other deliverables into a unit of accounting with standalone fair value. We allocated the $8.0 million received to the fair values of the two units of accounting identified in the arrangement. We expect to recognize $6.5 million for research licenses and related research and development services ratably over the associated period of performance, which is the maximum research period of eight years. As there is no discernible pattern of performance and/or objectively measurable performance measures do not exist, we will recognize revenue on a straight-line basis over the eight-year performance period. The remaining $1.5 million allocated to the second unit of accounting for the time-limited right of first negotiation for AVA-101 was deferred. On November 2, 2015, Regeneron notified the management that it was not exercising this right of first negotiation and we recognized the entire $1.5 million as revenue in 2015.

The portion of the upfront payment that was applied to the original research budget was fully used in the fourth quarter of 2015, and the Company and Regeneron, through a joint review committee, agree annually on an updated research and development services budget through the research period. The Company invoices Regeneron quarterly for services performed in each prior. These additional research fees are added to the research licenses and related research and development services unit of accounting, recorded as deferred revenue and recognized to revenue over the remaining maximum research term. The Company recognized $307,000 and $203,000 as revenue related to this unit of accounting during the three months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and $572,000 and $406,000 as revenue related to this unit of accounting during the six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The Company recorded $7.2 million of deferred revenue, including $1.2 million as current deferred revenue, and $1.0 million as a receivable from collaboration partner as of June 30, 2016.

Our ability to generate product revenue and become profitable depends upon our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development, we are unable to predict the amount or timing of product revenue. Even if we are able to generate revenue from the sale of our products, we may be unable to continue our operations at planned levels and be forced to reduce our operations.

Conducting a significant amount of research and development is central to our business model. Research and development expenses include certain payroll and personnel expenses, stock-based compensation expense, laboratory supplies, consulting costs, external contract research and development expenses, including expenses incurred under agreements with CROs, the cost of acquiring, developing and manufacturing clinical study materials and overhead expenses, including rent, equipment depreciation, insurance and utilities.

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Advance payments for goods or services for future research and development activities are deferred and expensed as the goods are delivered or the related services are performed.

We estimate preclinical study and clinical trial expenses based on the services performed pursuant to contracts with research institutions and CROs that have conducted and managed preclinical studies and clinical trials on our behalf. In accruing service fees, we estimate the time period over which services will be performed and the level of effort to be expended in each period. We estimate the amounts incurred through communications with third party service providers and our estimates of accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date are based on information available at the time. If the actual timing of the performance of services or the level of effort varies from the estimate, we will adjust the accrual accordingly.

At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the nature, timing or aggregate costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the development of any of our product candidates. The successful development and commercialization of a product candidate is highly uncertain, and clinical development timelines, the probability of success and development and commercialization costs can differ materially from expectations.

We received refundable tax credits from the Australian and French tax authorities in connection with certain research costs incurred by our subsidiaries conducting research in Australia and France. These refunds do not depend on our taxable income or tax position and therefore we do not account for them under an income tax accounting model. We recognize such refunds as government grants in the period when qualified expenses are incurred as a reduction of research expenses. We have recorded the reimbursement from the Australian and French tax authorities as a reduction of research and development expense in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the applicable period. The Company recorded tax credits of $20,000 and $65,000 for the three and six-month periods ending June 30, 2016, respectively, and $67,000 and 119,000 for the three and six-month periods ending June 30, 2015, respectively.

General and administrative expenses consist principally of personnel-related costs, stock-based compensation, professional fees for legal, consulting, audit and tax services, rent and other general operating expenses not otherwise included in research and development expenses. Our general and administrative expenses may increase in future periods if and to the extent we elect to increase our investment in infrastructure to support continued research and development activities and potential commercialization of our product candidates. We will continue to evaluate the need for such investment in conjunction with ongoing consideration of our pipeline of product candidates. We anticipate increased expenses related to audit, legal and regulatory functions, as well as director and officer insurance premiums and investor relations costs associated with being a public reporting company.

As the Company recorded goodwill and IPR&D intangible assets upon the acquisition of Annapurna, the Company is required to test goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if indicators of impairment exist. The Company operates as one reporting unit and goodwill was recorded to this reporting unit. The Company recorded goodwill impairment charge of $49.1 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2016.

Our management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations are based upon our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP). The preparation of these condensed consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our critical accounting policies and estimates. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable in the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions. Our significant accounting policies are more fully described in Note 2 of the accompanying unaudited

condensed consolidated financial statements and in Note 2 to our audited consolidated financial statements contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K (Annual Report) as filed with the SEC, on March 4, 2016.

The Company added critical accounting policy below as a result of Annapurna acquisition.

The Company also evaluates the carrying value of intangible assets (not subject to amortization) related to in‑process research and development (“IPR&D”) assets, which are considered to be indefinite‑lived until the completion or abandonment of the associated research and development efforts. Accordingly, amortization of the IPR&D assets will not occur until the product reaches commercialization. During the period the assets are considered indefinite‑lived, they will be tested for impairment on an annual basis, as well as between annual tests if the Company becomes aware of any events occurring or changes in circumstances that would indicate that the fair values of the IPR&D assets are less than their carrying amounts. If and when development is complete, which generally occurs when regulatory approval to market the product is obtained, the associated IPR&D assets would be deemed definite‑lived and would then be amortized based on their estimated useful lives at that point in time. If the related project is terminated or abandoned, the Company may have an impairment related to the IPR&D asset, calculated as the excess of their carrying value over fair value. The Company estimated fair value of IPR&D assets acquired in Annapurna transaction at the acquisition closing date, May 11, 2016. No impairment was recorded at June 30, 2016, as there were no changes in the fair value of IPR&D assets between May 11 and June 30, 2016.

Comparison of the Three and Six Month Periods Ended June30, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands)

	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2016			2015			Change			2016			2015			Change
Collaboration revenue	$	307		$	203		$	104		$	572		$	406		$	166
Operating expenses:
Research and development		7,955			5,126			2,829			15,410			10,747			4,663
General and administrative		5,114			4,959			155			13,432			9,102			4,330
Goodwill impairment charge		49,120			–			49,120			49,120			–			49,120
Total operating expenses		62,189			10,085			52,104			77,962			19,849			58,113
Operating loss		(61,882	)		(9,882	)		(52,000	)		(77,390	)		(19,443	)		(57,947	)
Other income, net		222			116			106			338			168			170
Total other income, net		222			116			106			338			168			170
Net loss	$	(61,660	)	$	(9,766	)	$	(51,894	)	$	(77,052	)	$	(19,275	)	$	(57,777	)

Collaboration revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2016 increased by $0.1 million and $0.2 million over the prior year period, respectively. Recorded revenue relates to the revenue contract with Regeneron and represents license and research fees that we recognized over the research term.

Research and development expense increased to $8.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2016 from $5.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2015, primarily due to a $2.4 million increase in stock-based compensation expenses, including $0.9 million relating to the accelerated vesting of Annapurna option and shares recorded after the acquisition closing, the addition of $1.2 million in incremental expenses relating to Annapurna’s operations incurred since the date of acquisition and $0.3 million increase in facility and deprecation charges relating to build out of the laboratory space, partially offset by a $0.5 million decrease in payroll related expenses and a $0.5 million decrease in material production and clinical expenses.

Research and development expense increased to $15.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2016 from $10.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2015, primarily due to a $4.3 million increase in stock-based compensation expenses, including $0.9 million relating to the accelerated vesting of Annapurna options and shares recorded after the acquisition closing, the addition of $1.2 million in incremental expenses relating to Annapurna’s operations incurred since date of acquisition , $0.8 million increase for outside services expense relating to toxicology, $0.6 million increase in facility and deprecation charges relating to build out of the laboratory space, partially offset by $1.7 million decrease in material production and clinical expenses and $0.5 million decrease in payroll related expenses.

For the periods presented, substantially all of our research and development expense related to Adverum development activities for AVA-101, for the treatment of wet AMD, and our other potential product candidates in our development program. Upon completion of the Annapurna acquisition in May 2016, we began incurring expenses related to Annapurna’s four development programs. We expect research and development expenses may increase in future periods as we continue to invest in our pipeline products and preclinical studies relating to our gene therapies program.

General and administrative expense increased to $5.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2016 from $5.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2015. The increase in general and administrative expense was primarily due to $0.6 million increase in professional service fees relating to Annapurna acquisition and $0.2 million increase in facility charges relating to office expansion, off-set by $0.3 million decrease in recruiting and travel expenses, $0.2 million decrease in marketing and investor relations and $0.1 million decrease in stock-based compensation expense relating to the timing of the annual employee and director equity awards in the second quarter of 2015 versus the first quarter of 2016.

General and administrative expense increased to $13.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2016 from $9.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2015. The increase in general and administrative expense was primarily due to increases of $2.5 million in consulting and professional service expenses relating to Annapurna acquisition, $1.7 million in compensation and benefits, including $1.3 million in related stock-based compensation expense and $0.4 million increase in payroll-related expense, and $0.3 million in facilities allocation relating to new office space, off-set by $0.2 decrease in travel expenses.

We expect general and administrative expenses may increase in future periods if and to the extent we elect to increase our investment in infrastructure to support continued research and development activities and potential commercialization of our product candidates. We will continue to assess such expenses in conjunction with ongoing consideration of our pipeline of product candidates. We anticipate increased costs in connection with increased professional fees associated with being a public company.

During the quarter ended June 30, 2016, we noted a continuing decrease in our stock price that resulted in our market capitalization being less than the carrying value of our net assets as of June 30, 2016. As our operating losses are expected to increase in the following years due to continuing pre-clinical and expected clinical trials, we concluded that it is more likely than not that the fair value of the Company’s one reporting unit is less than its’ carrying value and concluded to perform a goodwill impairment analysis. We performed a two-step goodwill impairment analysis and recorded a $49.1 million goodwill impairment charge in our condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the period ended June 30, 2016.

Other income, net is comprised mainly of interest income on our cash and investment in marketable securities in 2016 and 2015.

We have not generated positive cash flow or net income from operations since our inception and at June 30, 2016, we had an accumulated deficit of $161.2 million, primarily as a result of research and development and general and administration expenses and the goodwill impairment charge. As of June 30, 2016, we had $241.3 million in cash and cash equivalents and no marketable securities. We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2016 will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 36 months.

We expect to incur substantial expenditures in the foreseeable future for the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates and ongoing internal research and development programs. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the nature, timing or aggregate amount of such costs. However, in order to complete our planned preclinical trials and any future clinical trials, and to complete the process of obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates, as well as to build the sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure that we believe will be necessary to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, we will require substantial additional funding in the future.

If and when we seek additional funding, we will do so through equity or debt financings, collaborative or other arrangements with corporate sources or through other sources of financing. Adequate additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. Our failure to raise capital in the future could have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategies. In order to complete development and commercialization of any of our product candidates, we anticipate that we will need to raise substantial additional capital, the requirements of which will depend on many factors, including:

If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, reduce or terminate some or all of our development programs and any clinical trials. We may also be required to sell or license other technologies or clinical product candidates or programs that we would prefer to develop and commercialize ourselves.

During the six months ended June 30, 2016, net cash used in operating activities was $20.4 million, primarily as a result of the net loss of $77.1 million offset by the following non-cash charges: $49.1 million goodwill impairment charge, $6.9 million stock-based compensation expense and $0.6 million depreciation and amortization expense. During the six months ended June 30, 2015, net cash used in operating activities was $17.0 million, primarily as a result of the net loss of $19.3 million offset by the following non-cash charges: $1.3 million stock-based compensation expense, $0.3 million amortization of premium on marketable securities and $0.3 million depreciation and amortization expense.

Net cash provided by investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2016 was $40.1 million and primarily relates to the maturities of marketable securities of $37.7 million, $3.5 million of cash acquired in the acquisition of Annapurna, offset by $1.1 million purchases of property and equipment. Net cash used in investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2015 was $81.0 million and primarily relates to the purchases marketable securities of $88.4 million and the purchases of property and equipment of $1.5 million, offset by cash received from maturities of marketable securities of $9.0 million. The purchases of property and equipment consisted primarily of acquisition of laboratory equipment to support our research and development activities.

The net cash provided by financing activities during the six month period ended June 30, 2016 of $0.3 million relates to the exercise of options for common shares. The net cash provided by financing activities during the six month period ended June 30, 2015 of $139.1 million was primarily related to $130.6 million net proceeds from our follow-on offering and $8.3 million from sale of common shares.

In August 2015, BPI France granted Annapurna a €750,000 interest free conditional advance, of which €500,000 was received as of December 31, 2015. The remaining €250,000 advance was not and is not expected to be drawn down on. Payments are scheduled in equal quarterly amounts of €25,000 from September 30, 2017 to June 30, 2022. This payment schedule will be modified if the Company will receive revenue from license or product sales before advances are paid in full. The Company calculated 7% imputed interest expense on these advances that was recorded as a discount at the issuance date and is amortized as an interest expense over the life of. As of June 30, 2016 the carrying value of the conditional advance was $373,000.

There have not been any material changes to our exposure to market risk during the three-month period ended June 30, 2016. For additional information regarding market risk, refer to the Qualitative and Quantitative Disclosures About Market Risk section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures. Management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act, as of June 30, 2016. The evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures included a review of our processes and implementation and the effect on the information generated for use in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. In the course of this evaluation, we sought to identify any material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures to determine whether we had identified any acts of fraud involving personnel who have a significant role in our disclosure controls and procedures, and to confirm that necessary corrective action, including process improvements, was taken. This type of evaluation is done quarterly so that our conclusions concerning the effectiveness of these controls can be reported in our periodic reports filed with the SEC. The overall goals of these evaluation activities are to monitor our disclosure controls and procedures and to make modifications as necessary. We intend to maintain these disclosure controls and procedures, modifying them as circumstances warrant.

Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that as of June 30, 2016, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in

the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is (i) recorded, processed, summarized and reported as and when required and (ii) accumulated and communicated to our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely discussion regarding required disclosure.

Changes in internal control over financial reporting. There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the three months ended June 30, 2016 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal controls will prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can only provide reasonable assurances that the objectives of the control system are met. The design of a control system reflects resource constraints; the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because there are inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been or will be detected. As these inherent limitations are known features of the financial reporting process, it is possible to design into the process safeguards to reduce, though not eliminate, these risks. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events. While our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives, there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

We intend to review and evaluate the design and effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures on an ongoing basis and to improve our controls and procedures over time and to correct any deficiencies that we may discover in the future. While our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that, as of June 30, 2016, the design of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Exchange Act, was effective, future events affecting our business may cause us to significantly modify our disclosure controls and procedures.

In July 2015, three putative securities class action lawsuits were filed against us and certain of our officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, each on behalf of a purported class of persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired our publicly traded securities between July 31, 2014 and June 15, 2015. The lawsuits assert claims under the Exchange Act and Securities Act and allege that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements and omitted allegedly material information related to, among other things, the Phase 2a clinical trial for AVA-101 and the prospects of AVA-101. The complaints seek unspecified damages, attorneys’ fees and other costs. An amended consolidated complaint was filed in February 2016, and the Company’s motion to dismiss that consolidated complaint is pending.

We believe that the claims in the asserted actions are without merit and intend to defend the lawsuits vigorously. We expect to incur costs associated with defending the actions. While we have various insurance policies related to the risks associated with our business, including directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies, there is no assurance that we will be successful in our defense of the actions, that our insurance coverage, which contains a self-insured retention, will be sufficient, or that our insurance carriers will cover all claims or litigation costs. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot reasonably predict at this time the timing or outcomes of these matters or estimate the amount of losses, or range of losses, if any, or their effect, if any, on our financial statements.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before deciding to invest in our common stock, you should carefully consider each of the risk factors described in “Part I - Item 1A. Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 and all information set forth in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Those risks and the risks described in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including in the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” could materially harm our business, financial condition, operating results, cash flow and prospects. If that occurs, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

There have been no material changes to the Risk Factors described under “Part I - Item 1A. Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, other than as set forth below. The risk factors below, some of which are new and some of which originally appear in our Annual Report on Form 10-K or our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2016 and have been updated, reflect additional information regarding the transaction with Annapurna and our anti-VEGF program, among other things.

We have incurred significant operating losses since inception, and we expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We may never become profitable or, if achieved, be able to sustain profitability.

We have incurred significant operating losses since we were founded in 2006 and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future as we continue development of our product candidates. Annapurna has also incurred significant operating losses since inception. As of June 30, 2016 on a pro forma basis, the combined company had an accumulated deficit of $161.2 million. Our losses have resulted primarily from costs incurred in our clinical trials, research and development programs and from our general and administrative expenses.

In the future, we intend to continue to conduct research and development, clinical testing, regulatory compliance activities and, if any of our product candidates is approved, sales and marketing activities that, together with anticipated general and administrative expenses, will likely result in us incurring significant losses for the next several years.

We currently generate no revenue from sales, and we may never be able to commercialize any of our product candidates. We do not currently have the required approvals to market any of our other product candidates, and we may never receive such approvals. We may not be profitable even if we or any of our future development partners succeed in commercializing any of our product candidates. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing and commercializing our product candidates, we are unable to predict the extent of any future losses or when we will become profitable, if at all.

While we expect that our cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least 36 months, we will need to obtain additional capital to fund our operations. Failure to obtain capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations and we will be unable to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates.

Developing gene therapy products is expensive, and we expect our research and development expenses to increase substantially, particularly if we advance ANN-001, ANN-002, an anti-VEGF candidate or other product candidates into clinical studies.

We expect that our cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operations through at least 36 months. However, this estimate is based on a number of assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and changing circumstances beyond our control may cause capital to be consumed more rapidly than currently anticipated. As a result, our operating plan may change due to factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through collaboration agreements and public or private financings.

We will require substantial future capital in order to complete the preclinical and clinical development for our product candidates and to potentially commercialize these product candidates. Any future clinical trials of our product candidates would cause an increase in our spending levels, as would other corporate activities. The amount and timing of any expenditure needed to implement our development and commercialization programs will depend on numerous factors, including:

Some of these factors are outside of our control. We do not expect our existing capital resources to be sufficient to enable us to fund the completion of our clinical trials and remaining development program through commercial introduction. We expect that we will need to raise additional funds in the future.

We have not sold any products, and we do not expect to sell or derive revenue from any product sales for the foreseeable future. We may seek additional funding through collaboration agreements and public or private financings. Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all, and given our decision to discontinue development of AVA-101, our ability to obtain funding in the future on favorable terms, or at all, may be substantially impaired. In addition, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our stockholders, and the issuance of additional shares by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our shares to decline.

If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we will be unable to complete any future clinical trials for our product candidates and we may be required to significantly curtail some or all of our activities. We also could be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise that may require us to relinquish rights to our product candidates or some of our technologies or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us.

As a result of the transaction with Annapurna, we are transforming from a company developing product candidates for the treatment of eye diseases into a gene therapy company with a diverse pipeline of gene therapy product candidates. We may encounter challenges in implementing this transformation and the integration of Annapurna that could adversely impact our business and operations.

Prior to completion of the transaction with Annapurna, all of our development efforts were focused on developing product candidates for the treatment of eye diseases. The pipeline acquired through the Annapurna transaction includes gene therapy product candidates designed to treat a range of diseases. The most advanced product candidate from the Annapurna pipeline is ANN-001, which is designed to deliver alpha-1 antitrypsin protein, or A1AT, in patients with A1AT, a rare genetic disorder which may result in serious respiratory disease in adults and, less commonly, liver disease at any age. Other product candidates from the Annapurna pipeline are designed to treat patients with hereditary angioedema, Friedreich’s ataxia and severe allergies. We intend to continue to advance both our development programs for the treatment of eye diseases and Annapurna’s development programs. As a result, we are transforming from a company focused solely on gene therapy treatments for eye diseases to a gene therapy company with a diverse pipeline of product candidates.

This transformation into a diversified gene therapy company poses risks relating to implementing a new business and operational strategy, including the following:

Additionally, there can be no guarantee that we and Annapurna will operate successfully as a combined company. Integration of Annapurna and consolidation of its operations into our organization will require considerable time and attention from management, which could result in the diversion of management resources from other important matters. Moreover, Dr. Salzman is based in Philadelphia and certain Annapurna operations will continue to be based in Paris. Their location outside of our Menlo Park headquarters may make their integration into our organization more challenging.

If we are unable to successfully manage these or other risks and uncertainties relating to the integration of Annapurna’s business into our organization, there will likely be adverse impacts on our business and operations.

Our business to date has depended substantially on the success of AVA-101. In the second quarter of 2016, we decided to discontinue development of AVA-101. As a result, commercialization of our first product candidate may be delayed, and our business may be materially harmed.

We previously focused our advanced development efforts on one product candidate: AVA-101, a recombinant adeno-associated vector type 2 (AAV2) encoding the anti-VEGF protein sFlt-1, and considered successful continued development and ultimate regulatory approval of AVA-101 critical for our future business success.

We expect to initiate clinical studies for our most advanced product candidate, ANN-001, in the second half of 2016. Our other product candidates are in the early stage of development and will require additional preclinical studies, substantial clinical

development and testing, manufacturing bridging studies and process validation and regulatory approval prior to commercialization. As a result of our decision to discontinue AVA-101 and focus on our other, preclinical stage product candidates, commercialization of our first product candidate may be delayed, and we may not be able obtain funding in the future on favorable terms, or at all, that will be necessary to continue our business, or generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

Our decision to discontinue development of AVA-101 and instead focus on development of new, anti-VEGF candidates may delay our commercialization of an anti-VEGF product. As a result, our business may be materially harmed.

In the second quarter of 2016, following analysis of the data generated in our Phase 2a clinical study of AVA-101, additional preclinical studies, and analysis of promising preclinical data evaluating different anti-VEGF compounds in non-human primate studies, we decided to discontinue development of AVA-101 and instead continue pre-clinical development of new anti-VEGF candidates focused on intravitreal delivery and utilizing a proprietary vector. We may conduct additional pre-clinical studies on these product candidates, and, if we decide to pursue clinical development of any of these product candidates, we expect we will be required to restart the clinical development process and conduct a Phase 1 or Phase 2a clinical trial to demonstrate safety and tolerability. This restart could result in a significant development delay for an anti-VEGF product candidate. If our development of an anti-VEGF product candidate is delayed, our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our anti-VEGF product candidate could be significantly reduced.

Our business will depend substantially on the success of one or more of our product candidates, which are still in preclinical development. If we are unable to commercialize our product candidates or if we experience significant delays in obtaining regulatory approval for, or commercializing, any or all of our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.

Our product candidates are in the early stage of development and will require additional preclinical studies, substantial clinical development and testing, manufacturing bridging studies and process validation and regulatory approval prior to commercialization. In the second quarter of 2016, we decided to discontinue development of our one product candidate that had been the focus of advanced development efforts, AVA-101. We expect to initiate clinical studies for our most advanced product candidate, ANN-001, in the second half of 2016, and we are continuing pre-clinical development of our other product candidates. It is critical to our business to successfully develop and obtain ultimate regulatory approval for one or more of these product candidates. Our ability to commercialize our product candidates effectively will depend on several factors, including the following:

If we, or our collaborators, do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to commercialize our product candidates, which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Moreover, of the large number of biologics and drugs in development in the pharmaceutical industry, only a small percentage result in the submission of a Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA and even fewer are approved for commercialization. Furthermore, even if we do receive regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, any such approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which we may market the product. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the requisite financing to continue to fund our development programs, we cannot assure you that any of our product candidates will be successfully developed or commercialized. If we decide to invest in the continued development and potential commercialization of any or all of our product candidates and we or any

of our future development partners are unable to develop, or obtain regulatory approval for, or, if approved, successfully commercialize, such product candidates, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

We have conducted, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials for product candidates in sites outside the United States and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations.

We have conducted, and may in the future choose to conduct, one or more of our clinical trials outside the United States. For example, we conducted a Phase 1/2a trial for AVA-101 with LEI in Australia.

Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. For example, the clinical trial must be well designed and conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with ethical principles. The study population must also adequately represent the U.S. population, and the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. Generally, the patient population for any clinical studies conducted outside of the United States must be representative of the population for whom we intend to label the product in the United States. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will be dependent upon its determination that the studies also complied with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. There can be no assurance the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from our clinical trials for our product candidates, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of our product candidates.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover additional product candidates.

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize products based on our platform. Our research programs, including those subject to our collaboration with Regeneron, may fail to identify other potential product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons. Our research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates or our potential product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval.

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. 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.

We have not tested any of our internally-developed viral vectors, or product candidates derived from these viral vectors, in clinical trials.

Drug development has inherent risk. None of our current product candidates has ever been evaluated in human clinical studies, and we may experience unexpected results in the future. We or any of our future development partners will be required to demonstrate through adequate and well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates containing our proprietary vectors are safe and effective, with a favorable benefit-risk profile, for use in their target indications before we can seek regulatory approvals for their commercial sale. Drug development is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage of development, including after commencement of any of our clinical trials.

The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials are not always predictive of future results. Any product candidate we or any of our future development partners advance into clinical trials may not have favorable results in later clinical trials, if any, or receive regulatory approval.

If our proprietary vectors are not shown to be safe and effective in targeting retinal tissue, we may not realize the value of our investment in directed evolution technology. In addition, success in early clinical trials does not mean that later clinical trials will be successful, because product candidates in later-stage clinical trials may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety or efficacy despite having progressed through initial clinical testing. Furthermore, any future trials will need to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy for approval by regulatory authorities in larger patient populations. Companies frequently suffer significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after earlier clinical trials have shown promising results. For example, following analysis of the data generated in our Phase 2a clinical trial of AVA-101, we concluded that, overall, we did not observe evidence of a complete and/or durable anti-VEGF response in the majority of subjects treated with AVA-101 as administered in the Phase 2a study, and we have discontinued development of AVA-101. In addition, only a small percentage of products under development result in the submission of a BLA to the FDA and even fewer are approved for commercialization.

We cannot be certain that any clinical trials that we plan will be successful, and any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications.

If we encounter difficulties enrolling subjects in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We intend to initiate clinical trials for Annapurna’s most advanced product candidate, ANN-001, in the second half of 2016 and accordingly we expect ANN-001 to be our next product candidate to enter clinical development. Identifying and qualifying subjects to participate in clinical studies of ANN-001 and our other product candidates will be critical to our success. The timing of future clinical studies will depend on the speed at which we can recruit subjects to participate in future testing of these product candidates.

Subject enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating. We will be required to identify and enroll a sufficient number of subjects with the relevant disease we are targeting for any future clinical trials for our product candidates. Potential subjects may not be adequately diagnosed or identified with the diseases which we are targeting or may not meet the entry criteria for our studies. We also may encounter difficulties in identifying and enrolling subjects with a stage of disease appropriate for such future clinical trials. We may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of subjects, or those with required or desired characteristics to achieve diversity in a study.

In particular, each of the conditions for which we plan to evaluate product candidates acquired in the Annapurna transaction are rare genetic disorders with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical studies. ANN-001 is focused on the treatment of patients with A1AT deficiency. It is estimated that A1AT deficiency affects approximately 100,000 patients in the United States. ANN-002 is focused on the treatment of patients with hereditary angioedema (HAE). The prevalence of HAE is estimated to be 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 50,000, with approximately 10,000 patients diagnosed across major markets. ANN-003 is focused on the treatment of patients with Friedreich’s Ataxia (FA). It is estimated that FA affects approximately 5,000 people in the United States and approximately 5,000 to 10,000 people in Europe. In addition, we and our collaboration partner, Regeneron, are developing AVA-311 for the treatment of X-linked retinoschisis (XLRS), an orphan indication. Enrollment of eligible subjects with orphan diseases may be limited or slower than we anticipate in light of the small subject populations involved. We plan to seek initial marketing approval of these product candidates in the United States and Europe and we may not be able to initiate clinical studies if we cannot enroll a sufficient number of eligible subjects to participate in the clinical studies required by the FDA or the EMA or other regulatory agencies. In addition, the process of finding and diagnosing subjects may prove costly.

Further, if patients are unwilling to participate in our gene therapy studies because of negative publicity from adverse events in the biotechnology or gene therapy industries or inadequate results in our preclinical or clinical studies or for other reasons, including competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations or available approved therapies, our recruitment of subjects, conduct of studies and ability to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates may be hindered.

Trials using early versions of retroviral vectors, which integrate with, and thereby alter, the host cell’s DNA, have led to several well-publicized adverse events. For example, generalized public backlash developed against gene therapy following the death in September 1999 of an 18-year-old who had volunteered for a gene therapy experiment at the University of Pennsylvania. Researchers at the university had infused the volunteer’s liver with a gene aimed at reversing a rare metabolic disease of the liver. The procedure triggered an extreme immune-system reaction that caused multiple-organ failure in a very short time, leading to the first death to occur as a direct result of a gene therapy experiment. In addition, in 2003, 20 subjects treated for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency in two gene therapy studies using a murine gamma-retroviral vector showed correction of the disease, but the studies were terminated after five subjects developed leukemia (four of whom were subsequently cured). The cause of these adverse events was shown to be insertional oncogenesis, which is the process whereby the corrected gene inserts near a gene that is important in a critical cellular process like growth or division, and this insertion results in the development of a cancer (often leukemia). Using molecular diagnostic techniques, it was determined that clones from these subjects showed retrovirus insertion in proximity to the promoter of the LMO2 proto-oncogene. Earlier generation retroviruses like the one used in these two studies have been shown to preferentially integrate in regulatory regions of genes that control cell growth.

If we have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of subjects to conduct clinical studies on our product candidates as planned, we may need to delay, limit or terminate future clinical studies, any of which would have an adverse effect on our business.

We believe we have appropriately accounted for the above factors in our trials when determining expected clinical trial timelines, but we cannot assure you that our assumptions are correct or that we will not experience delays in enrollment, which would result in the delay of completion of such trials beyond our expected timelines.

The occurrence of serious complications or side effects in connection with use of our product candidates, either in clinical trials or post-approval, could lead to discontinuation of our clinical development program, refusal of regulatory authorities to approve our product candidates or, post-approval, revocation of marketing authorizations or refusal to approve new indications, which could severely harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.

During the conduct of clinical trials, patients report changes in their health, including illnesses, injuries and discomforts, to their study doctor. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not the product candidate being studied caused these conditions. Various illnesses, injuries, and discomforts have been reported from time-to-time during clinical trials of our product candidates. It is possible that as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical programs, or as use of these product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other adverse events that were observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, will be reported by subjects. Many times, side effects are only detectable after investigational products are tested in large-scale, Phase 3 clinical trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. If additional clinical experience indicates that any of our product candidates has side effects or causes serious or life-threatening side effects, the development of the product candidate may fail or be delayed, or, if the product candidate has received regulatory approval, such approval may be revoked, which would severely harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.

Patients given infusions of any protein may develop severe hypersensitivity reactions or infusion reactions. In particular, there are many potential safety concerns associated with significant blockade of VEGF that may limit our ability to successfully develop and/or commercialize our anti-VEGF product candidates. These serious and potentially life-threatening risks, based on clinical and preclinical experience of VEGF inhibitors, include bleeding, intestinal perforation, hypertension, proteinuria, congestive heart failure, heart attack, stroke and geographic atrophy.

In addition, there are risks in treating patients with gene therapy vectors, including adeno-associated virus (AAV), such as inflammation, cytotoxic T-cell response, anti-AAV antibodies and immune response to the AAV capsid, T-cell responses and/or auto-antibodies against the expressed protein.

Furthermore, there are risks inherent in the administration of drugs like our product candidates. For example, we may elect to pursue intravenous or intrapleural administration of ANN-001, and there are known risks associated with both routes of administration. For intravenous administration, such risks include bleeding and swelling at the site of administration, and, for intrapleural administration, such risks include pneumothorax (collapsed lung) and/or bleeding at the site of administration.

There are also risks inherent in the intravitreal administration of drugs like our anti-VEGF product candidates, which can cause injury to the eye and other complications. Such risks include pain, subconjunctival hemorrhage, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal tear, retinal, detachment, cataracts, endophthalmitis and other side effects.

Serious complications or serious, unexpected side effects in connection with the use of our product candidates could materially harm our business, prospects’ operating results and financial condition.

We and our contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing our products. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not continue to meet regulatory requirements and may have limited capacity.

We currently have relationships with limited number of suppliers for the manufacturing of our viral vectors and product candidates. These suppliers may require licenses to manufacture such components if such processes are not owned by the suppliers or in the public domain and we may be unable to transfer or sublicense the intellectual property rights we may have with respect to such activities. All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical studies or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturer for our product candidates, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP). These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We or

our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a BLA on a timely basis and must adhere to the FDA’s current Good Laboratory Practice regulations and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. Our contract manufacturers have not produced a commercially-approved product and therefore have not obtained the requisite FDA approvals to do so. Our facilities and quality systems and the facilities and quality systems of some or all of our third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of our product candidates or any of our other potential products. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect our manufacturing facilities or those of our third-party contractors involved with the preparation of our product candidates or our other potential products or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. If the facility does not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, FDA approval of the products will not be granted.

The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit our manufacturing facilities or those of our third-party contractors. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical study or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Such violations could also result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Any such remedial measures or other civil and/or criminal penalties imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.

If we or our third-party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a new drug product or biologic product, revocation of a pre-existing approval, other civil or criminal penalties or closing one or more manufacturing facilities. As a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed.

Additionally, if supply from an approved manufacturer is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply. An alternative manufacturer would need to be qualified through a BLA supplement which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines.

These factors could cause the delay of clinical studies, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of our product candidates, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing our products successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements, and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our clinical studies may be delayed or we could lose potential revenue.

Annapurna’s collaboration with Weill Cornell Medicine is crucial to our business. If we are unable to maintain this collaboration, or if this collaboration is not successful, our business could be adversely affected.

Our most advanced product candidate, ANN-001, and two other product candidates acquired in the Annapurna transaction, ANN-002, and ANN-004, are licensed from Weill Cornell Medicine (Weill Cornell). In addition, Annapurna and we rely on Weill Cornell to conduct preclinical development for these product candidates pursuant to a master services agreement. If Annapurna were to fail to comply with its obligations under any of these agreements and Weill Cornell were to terminate these licenses and/or its preclinical development services, then our pipeline of product candidates would be adversely affected.

Furthermore, Weill Cornell may fail to properly maintain or defend the intellectual property Annapurna has licensed from them, leading to the potential invalidation of Annapurna’s intellectual property or subjecting Annapurna or us to litigation or arbitration, any of which would be time-consuming and expensive. Additionally, in the event that Weill Cornell commits a material breach of any of these license or master service agreements, Annapurna’s only recourse is to terminate the agreement. If Annapurna terminates its collaboration with Weill Cornell, especially during its preclinical development phase, the development of the product candidates subject to the Weill Cornell collaboration would be materially delayed or harmed.

If disputes with Weill Cornell prevent or impair Annapurna’s ability to maintain its current licensing and preclinical development arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, and our business could be materially harmed.

Any termination or suspension of, or delays in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials for our product candidates could result in increased costs to us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.

Before we can initiate clinical trials in the United States for our product candidates, we need to submit the results of preclinical testing to the FDA, along with other information including information about product candidate chemistry, manufacturing and controls and our proposed clinical trial protocol, as part of an IND. We may rely in part on preclinical, clinical and quality data generated by CROs and other third parties for regulatory submissions for our product candidates. If these third parties do not make timely regulatory submissions for our product candidates, it will delay our plans for our clinical trials. If those third parties do not make this data available to us, we will likely have to develop all necessary preclinical and clinical data on our own, which will lead to significant delays and increase development costs of the product candidate. In addition, the FDA may require us to conduct additional preclinical testing for any product candidate before it allows us to initiate clinical testing under any IND, which may lead to additional delays and increase the costs of our preclinical development. Delays in the commencement or completion of any clinical trials that we plan for our product candidates could significantly affect our product development costs. We do not know whether any trials that we plan will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including delays related to:

Product development costs will increase if we have delays in testing or approval of any of our product candidates, or if we need to perform more or larger clinical trials than planned. Additionally, changes in regulatory requirements and policies may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to IRBs for reexamination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial. If we experience delays in completion of our clinical trials, or if we, the FDA or other regulatory authorities, the IRB, other reviewing entities, or any of our clinical trial sites suspend or terminate any of our clinical trials, the commercial prospects for a product candidate may be harmed and our ability to generate product revenue will be delayed. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, termination or suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. For example, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Further, if one or more clinical trials are delayed, our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our product candidates could be significantly reduced.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our future revenues may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer.

If the size of the markets for our target diseases are smaller than we anticipate, we may not be able to achieve profitability and growth. Our projections of 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 estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations and 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. The effort to identify patients with diseases we seek to treat is in early stages, and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient populations 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. Further, even if we obtain significant market share for our product candidates, because the potential target populations are very small, we may never achieve profitability despite obtaining such significant market share.

Because the target patient populations of the product candidates acquired in the Annapurna transaction are relatively small, we must be able to successfully identify patients and achieve a significant market share to maintain profitability and growth. If the market opportunities for these product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our future revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer.

ANN-001 and the other product candidates acquired in the Annapurna transaction are designed to treat rare genetic and orphan diseases. 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 these product candidates, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients in the United States, Europe and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with these products, or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

Additionally, because the target patient populations for these product candidates are relatively small, the pricing and reimbursement of these product candidates, if approved, must be adequate to support commercial infrastructure. If we are unable to obtain adequate levels of reimbursement, our ability to successfully market and sell these product candidates will be adversely affected. The manner and level at which reimbursement is provided for services related to these product candidates (e.g., for administration of such product to patients) is also important. Inadequate reimbursement for such services may lead to physician resistance and adversely affect our ability to market or sell these products.

Coverage and reimbursement may be limited or unavailable in certain market segments for our product candidates, which could make it difficult for us to sell our product candidates profitably.

Market acceptance and sales of our product candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payers for any of our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future health care reform measures. Government authorities and third-party payers, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which drugs they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement by a third-party payer may depend upon a number of factors including the third-party payer’s determination that use of a product candidate is:

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product candidate from a government or other third-party payer is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost effectiveness data for the use of the applicable product candidate to the payer. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement. We cannot be sure that coverage or adequate reimbursement will be available for any of our product candidates. Further, reimbursement amounts may reduce the demand for, or the price of, our product candidates. If reimbursement is not available or is available only in limited levels, we may not be able to commercialize certain of our product candidates profitably, or at all, even if approved.

As a result of legislative proposals and the trend toward managed health care in the United States, third-party payers are increasingly attempting to contain health care costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement of new drugs. By way of example, the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) changed the way Medicare covers and pays for pharmaceutical products. The legislation expanded Medicare coverage for outpatient drug purchases by those covered by Medicare under a new Part D and introduced a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for Medicare Part B physician-administered drugs, including anti-VEGF therapies currently on the market used by physicians and likely our anti-VEGF product candidate, if approved. As a result of this legislation and the expansion of federal coverage of drug products, there is additional pressure to contain and reduce costs. While the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, and any reduction in reimbursement that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers. These cost reduction initiatives and other provisions of the MMA could decrease the coverage and reimbursement that we receive for any approved products, and could seriously harm our business.

In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, collectively referred to as the Affordable Care Act, was enacted with a goal of reducing the cost of healthcare and substantially changing the way healthcare is financed by both government and private insurers. The Affordable Care Act, among other things, addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations and established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain prescription drugs.

Other legislative changes have also been proposed and adopted in the U.S. since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2024 unless additional Congressional action is taken.

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

The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payers of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of health care may adversely affect:

We are subject to many manufacturing risks, any of which could substantially increase our costs and limit supply of our products.

The process of manufacturing our products is complex, highly regulated and subject to several risks, including:

If our competitors develop treatments for the target indications of our product candidates that are approved more quickly than ours, marketed more successfully or demonstrated to be safer or more effective than our product candidates, our commercial opportunity will be reduced or eliminated.

We operate in highly competitive segments of the biopharmaceutical markets. We face competition from many different sources, including larger and better-funded pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as from academic institutions, government agencies and private and public research institutions. Our product candidates, if successfully developed and approved, will compete with established therapies as well as with new treatments that may be introduced by our competitors. There are a variety of drug candidates in development for the indications that we intend to test. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, product candidate development, manufacturing and marketing resources than we do. Large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have extensive experience in clinical testing and obtaining regulatory approval for drugs. In addition, universities and private and public research institutes may be active in our target disease areas, and some could be in direct competition with us. We also may compete with these organizations to recruit management, scientists and clinical development personnel. We will also face competition from these third parties in establishing clinical trial sites, registering subjects for clinical trials and in identifying and in-licensing new product candidates. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

New developments, including the development of other pharmaceutical technologies and methods of treating disease, occur in the pharmaceutical and life sciences industries at a rapid pace. Developments by competitors may render our product candidates obsolete or noncompetitive. Competition in drug development is intense. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new treatments enter the market and advanced technologies become available.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, the availability and price of our competitors’ products could limit the demand, and the price we are able to charge, for our product candidates. For example, EYLEA® is currently available in the United States for treatment of wet AMD and macular edema following central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO), and in the United Kingdom, Germany, Switzerland, Australia, Japan and certain other countries for the treatment of wet AMD. Additionally, marketing approval has been obtained in the EU for EYLEA® for the treatment of visual impairment due to macular edema secondary to CRVO. We will not achieve our business plan if the acceptance of our product candidates is inhibited by price competition or the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing methods of treatment to our product candidates, or if physicians switch to other new drug products or choose to reserve our product candidates for use in limited circumstances. Our inability to compete with existing or subsequently introduced drug products would have a material adverse impact on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Our potential competitors in these diseases may be developing novel immune modulating therapies that may be safer or more effective than our product candidates. For example, if we seek to commercialize an anti-VEGF product candidate, it will compete with a variety of anti-VEGF therapies currently marketed and in development, using therapeutic modalities such as biologics, small molecules and gene therapy. Lucentis®, EYLEA® and Avastin® are anti-VEGF therapies that are well established and widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payers. There are also several other companies with marketed anti products or products in development for the treatment of wet AMD, including Allergan, Iconic Therapeutics, Inc., Novartis AG, Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., Ophthotech Corporation, Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Neurotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Regeneron, Santen Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Valeant Pharmaceuticals North America LLC, R Biosciences LLC, Applied Genetic Technologies Corporation, Oxford Biomedica plc, Ohr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Mesoblast Limited.

Our preclinical product candidates are being developed for the treatment of diseases with unmet medical need in ophthalmology, rare disease and allergy, such as the prevention of wet AMD and the treatment of alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency (A1AT).. However, there are multiple companies developing gene therapies for ophthalmic diseases, including Applied Genetic Technologies Corporation, Asklepios BioPharmaceutical Inc., Eos Neuroscience, Inc., ReGenX Biosciences LLC, GenSight Biologics, Genzyme Corporation, Hemera Biosciences, Inc., RetroSense Therapeutics, LLC, Spark Therapeutics, Inc., Oxford Biomedica plc, Sanofi-Aventis S.A., NightStaRx Limited and 4D Molecular Therapeutics, LLC and Benitec Biopharma Limited.

We are dependent on the services of our key executives and scientific staff, and if we are not able to retain these members of our management or recruit additional management, clinical and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.

We are dependent on the principal members of our management and scientific staff. The loss of service of any of our management could harm our business. In addition, we are dependent on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified additional management, clinical and scientific personnel. If we are not able to retain our management, and to attract, on acceptable terms, additional qualified personnel necessary for the continued development of our business, we may not be able to sustain our operations or grow. Although we have executed employment agreements with each member of our current executive management team, these agreements are terminable at will with or without notice and, therefore, we may not be able to retain their services as expected.

We will need to expand and effectively manage our managerial, operational, financial, and other resources in order to successfully pursue our development and commercialization efforts. Our success also depends on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management and scientific personnel. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified management and scientific and clinical personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses, particularly in the San Francisco Bay Area. Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management and scientific personnel in recent years. If we are not able to attract, retain and motivate necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will significantly impede the achievement of our development objectives, our ability to raise additional capital and our ability to implement our business strategy.

Paul B. Cleveland joined as our President and Chief Executive Officer in December 2015. Upon the completion of the transaction with Annapurna in May 2016, Amber Salzman, Ph.D. joined us as our President, with Mr. Cleveland continuing to serve as our Chief Executive Officer. In addition, Leone Patterson joined us as our Chief Financial Officer in June 2016. Our future performance will depend, in part, on our ability to successfully integrate newly hired executive officers, including Mr. Cleveland, Dr. Salzman and Ms. Patterson, into our management team and our ability to develop an effective working relationship among senior management. Our failure to integrate these individuals and create effective working relationships among them and other members of management could result in inefficiencies in the development and commercialization of our product candidates, harming future regulatory approvals, sales of our product candidates and our results of operations. Moreover, Dr. Salzman is based in Philadelphia, and her location outside of our Menlo Park headquarters may make her integration into our organization more challenging.

Additionally, we do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of these individuals.

If we fail to effectively integrate our new executive officers into our organization, the future development and commercialization of our product candidates may suffer, harming future regulatory approvals, sales of our product candidates or our results of operations.

Our current management team has only been working together for a relatively short period of time and some of our current management team, including Chief Executive Officer Paul B. Cleveland, President Amber Salzman, Ph.D., and Chief Financial Officer Leone Patterson, have been employed by us for less than a year. In addition, we may continue to expand our management team in the future. Our future performance will depend, in part, on our ability to successfully integrate recently and subsequently hired executive officers into our management team and their ability to develop and maintain an effective working relationship. Our failure to integrate these individuals with other members of management could result in inefficiencies in the development and commercialization of our product candidates, harming future regulatory approvals, sales of our product candidates and our results of operations. Moreover, Dr. Salzman is based in Philadelphia, and her location outside of our Menlo Park headquarters may make her integration into our organization more challenging. In addition to the competition for personnel, the San Francisco Bay Area in particular is characterized by a high cost of living. As such, we could have difficulty attracting experienced personnel to our company and may be required to expend significant financial resources in our employee recruitment and retention efforts.

Our rights to develop and commercialize our product candidates are subject in part to the terms and conditions of licenses granted to us by other companies and universities.

We currently are heavily reliant upon licenses of certain patent rights and proprietary technology from third parties that is important or necessary to the development of our technology and products, including technology related to our manufacturing process and our gene therapy product candidates. These and other licenses may not provide adequate rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology and products in the future. For example, the license granted to us by the Regents to make, have made, use, offer for sale, import, export and sell products covered by certain patent rights licensed to us under our agreement with the Regents is limited to the United States. The license is also limited to the Regents’ interest in the licensed patent rights which are co-owned by Chiron Corporation (Chiron). As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive products in territories not included in our licenses to patents.

Licenses to additional third-party technology that may be required for our development programs may not be available in the future or may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

In some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from third parties. In addition, we must obtain consent from the Regents before we can enforce patent rights licensed to us by the Regents. While such consent may not be unreasonably withheld, the Regents may withhold such consent or may not provide it on a timely basis. Therefore, we cannot be certain that these patents and applications will be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. In addition, if third parties who license patents to us fail to maintain such patents, or lose rights to those patents, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated.

Our success depends on our ability to protect our intellectual property and our proprietary technologies.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection for our product candidates, proprietary technologies, and their uses as well as our ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others. There can be no assurance that our patent applications or those of our licensors will result in additional patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection against competitors with similar technology, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around or invalidated by third parties. Even issued patents may later be found unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. This failure to properly protect the intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Composition-of-matter patents on the biological or chemical active pharmaceutical ingredient are generally considered to be the strongest form of intellectual property protection for pharmaceutical products, as such patents provide protection without regard to any method of use. We cannot be certain that the claims in our patent applications covering composition-of-matter of any of our product candidates will be considered patentable by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and courts in the United States or by the patent offices and courts in foreign countries, nor can we be certain that the claims in our issued composition-of-matter patents will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged.

Method-of-use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method or for treatment of a particular indication. However, this type of patent does not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method. Moreover, even if competitors do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications, physicians may prescribe these products “off-label.” Although off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method-of-use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our future development partners will be successful in protecting our product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

In addition, we rely on the protection of our trade secrets and proprietary know-how. Although we have taken steps to protect our trade secrets and unpatented know-how, including entering into confidentiality agreements with third parties, and confidential information and inventions agreements with employees, consultants and advisors, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and third parties may still obtain this information or may come upon this or similar information independently.

Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating our trade secrets. If any of these events occurs or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets or proprietary know-how, the value of this information may be greatly reduced.

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

While we have pending patent applications directed at certain of our product candidates in the United States and other countries, filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our 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. 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. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise 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 product candidates, 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 and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, 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 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.

Known third party patent rights could delay or otherwise adversely affect our planned development and sale of a new anti-VEGF product candidate.

We are aware of patent rights held by third parties that may cover certain compositions within our new anti-VEGF product candidates. A patent holder has the right to prevent others from making, using, or selling a drug that incorporates the patented compositions while the patent remains in force. While we believe that third party patent rights will not affect our planned development, regulatory clearance, and eventual marketing, commercial production, and sale of an anti-VEGF product candidate, there can be no assurance that this will be the case. In each case, the relevant patent expires before we expect to commercially introduce an anti-VEGF product candidate. In addition, the Hatch-Waxman exemption to U.S. patent law permits all uses of compounds in clinical trials and for other purposes reasonably related to obtaining FDA clearance of drugs that will be sold only after patent expiration, so our use of our product candidates in those FDA-related activities does not infringe any patent holder’s rights. However, were a patent holder to assert its rights against us before expiration of such patent holder’s patent for activities unrelated to FDA clearance, the development and ultimate sale of our anti-VEGF product could be significantly delayed, and we could incur the expense of defending a patent infringement suit and potential liability for damages for periods prior to the patent’s expiration.

We recognized an impairment in the carrying value of goodwill booked in connection with the Annapurna transaction. Any impairment of our intangible assets in the future could negatively affect our operating results and financial condition.

We recorded goodwill and intangible assets, consisting of in-process research and development (IPR&D) assets related to Annapurna products in development, upon the acquisition of Annapurna. During the second quarter, we noted a continuing decrease in our stock price that resulted in our market capitalization being less than the carrying value of our net assets and less than our cash and cash equivalents balance as of June 30, 2016. As a result, we are conducting a two-step impairment analysis and, based on the work performed as of the filing date, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $49.1 million in our condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the period ended June 30, 2016.

We will continue to conduct impairment analyses of the IPR&D assets on a regular basis, and we would be required to take impairment charges in the future if any assessments thereof reflect estimated fair values which are less than our recorded values, and such charges could be significant. Any impairment charges with respect to the IPR&D assets could negatively affect our operating results and financial condition.

The purchase price allocation for the Annapurna transaction has not been finalized, and any final adjustment to the valuation could have a material change on what is reported as the fair value assigned to the assets and liabilities.

The final purchase price allocation for the Annapurna transaction depends upon the finalization of asset and liability valuations, among other things. Valuing certain components of the acquisition, primarily intangible assets acquired, deferred taxes and accrued liabilities required us to make significant estimates that may be adjusted in the future; consequently, the fair value of identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed are considered preliminary. Final determination of these estimates could result in an adjustment to the preliminary purchase price allocation, with an offsetting adjustment to goodwill. Any resulting change to our condensed consolidated financial statements could be material.

The trading price of the shares of our common stock has been and could continue to be highly volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.

Our stock price has been and is likely to continue to be volatile. The stock market in general and the market for biotechnology companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including those discussed in this “Risk Factors” section of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and others such as:

In addition, in the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock, and similar litigation has been instituted against us. Such litigation could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We expect our operating results to be subject to quarterly fluctuations. Our net loss and other operating results will be affected by numerous factors, including:

If our quarterly operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Furthermore, any quarterly fluctuations in our operating results may, in turn, cause the price of our stock to fluctuate substantially.

If we sell shares of our common stock in future financings or acquisitions, stockholders may experience immediate dilution and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

We may from time to time issue additional shares of common stock at a discount from the current trading price of our common stock. As a result, our stockholders would experience immediate dilution upon the purchase of any shares of our common stock sold at such discount. In addition, as opportunities present themselves, we may enter into financing or similar arrangements in the future, including the issuance of debt securities, preferred stock or common stock. Furthermore, we may issue common stock as consideration in acquisitions. For example, in May 2016, we issued 14,087,246 shares of our common stock to Annapurna’s shareholders as consideration for all of the outstanding shares of Annapurna. If we issue common stock or securities convertible into common stock, our common stockholders would experience additional dilution and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

Our ability to use Annapurna’s net operating loss carryforwards may be limited.

Annapurna has incurred net operating losses in France every year since its inception in 2014, has never generated revenue from product sales, and may never be profitable. To the extent that Annapurna continues to generate taxable losses, unused losses will carry forward to offset future taxable income in France, if any, unless such losses expire. Such losses may expire under certain conditions if, in particular, Annapurna’s activity, assets, revenues or staff change substantially, or if Annapurna becomes a party to certain forms of reorganizations. In any event, Annapurna’s ability to use these losses to offset future income in any given year is limited under current French tax law.

On May 11, 2016, in connection with the closing of our transaction with Annapurna, we issued 14,087,246 shares of our common stock (the New Shares) to Annapurna’s shareholders in consideration for all of the outstanding shares of Annapurna’s capital stock. The sale and issuance of the New Shares were not registered under the Securities Act in reliance upon the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act, since, among other things, the sale and issuance of the New Shares did not involve a public offering and were acquired by the Annapurna shareholders not with a view to the distribution thereof. The Annapurna shareholders have certain demand and “piggyback” registration rights under the Securities Act with respect to these shares, subject to certain limitations, pursuant to our Amended and Restated Investor Rights Agreement.

On August 5, 2014, we closed our IPO and issued 6,900,000 shares of our common stock at an initial offering price of $17.00 per share. The offer and sale of all of the shares in the IPO were registered under the Securities Act pursuant to a registration statement on Form S-1, as amended (File Nos. 333-197133 and 333-197739), which was declared effective by the SEC on July 30, 2014. The joint book-running managers for the IPO were Jefferies LLC, Cowen and Company, LLC and Piper Jaffray & Co. The aggregate offering price to the public for the shares sold in the IPO was $117.3 million. We received net proceeds from the IPO of approximately $106.5 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions of approximately $8.2 million and expenses of approximately $2.6 million payable by us. None of the expenses associated with the IPO were paid to directors, officers, persons owning 10% or more of any class of equity securities, or to their associates, or to our affiliates.

We invested the funds received in short-term, interest-bearing investment-grade securities and government securities.

We have discontinued development of AVA-101, and so we will not use approximately $20 million of our net proceeds from the IPO to fund Phase 3 research and development startup activities for our AVA-101 study, as we had described in our final prospectus filed with the SEC on July 31, 2014 pursuant to Rule 424(b) of the Securities Act. Instead, we plan to reallocate such proceeds to fund research and development expenses for other product candidates in our pipeline.

On August 4, 2016, our Board of Directors appointed Leone Patterson, our Chief Financial Officer, to also serve as our Principal Accounting Officer. In connection with Ms. Patterson’s appointment, Michael Swartzburg will no longer serve as our Principal Accounting Officer.

See the Exhibit Index on the page immediately preceding the exhibits for a list of exhibits filed as part of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, which Exhibit Index is incorporated herein by reference.

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

EXHIBIT NUMBER		DESCRIPTION

2.2		Amendment No. 1 to Acquisition Agreement, dated as of April 6, 2016, by and among Avalanche Biotechnologies, Inc., Annapurna Therapeutics SAS and the Contributors (filed as Exhibit 2.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on April 7, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).

3.1		Certificate of Amendment to Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Avalanche Biotechnologies, Inc., filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on May 11, 2016 (filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 12, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).

3.2		Amended and Restated Bylaws of Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc. (filed as Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 12, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).

4.1		Second Amended and Restated Investor Rights Agreement, dated as of May 11, 2016, by and among Avalanche Biotechnologies, Inc. and certain of its stockholders (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 12, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).

10.1		Offer Letter, dated June 10, 2016, by and between Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc. and Leone Patterson (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 13, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).

10.2		Change in Control and Severance Agreement, dated June 10, 2016, by and between Adverum Biotechnologies, Inc. and Leone Patterson (filed as Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 13, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).

10.3‡		Amended and Restated Master Service Agreement by and between Annapurna Therapeutics SAS and Cornell University, effective July 15, 2014.

10.4‡		A1AT Deficiency License Agreement between Annapurna Therapeutics Limited and Cornell University, dated December 15, 2015.

10.5‡		HAE License Agreement between Annapurna Therapeutics Limited and Cornell University, dated December 15, 2015.

10.6‡		Allergy License Agreement between Annapurna Therapeutics Limited and Cornell University, dated December 15, 2015.

10.7‡		License Agreement between Annapurna Therapeutics Limited and REGENXBIO Inc., dated October 20, 2015.

10.8‡		License Agreement between AAVLife and REGENXBIO Inc., dated April 10, 2014.

10.9‡		License Agreement between AAVLife and Inserm Transfert, dated July 4, 2014.

10.10‡		Amendment No. 1 to License Agreement between AAVLife and Inserm Transfert, dated October 5, 2015.

31.1		Certification of Chief Executive Officer, as required Under Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

31.2		Certification of Chief Financial Officer, as required Under Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

32.1		Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as required Under Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and 18 U.S.C. §1350.

101		The following materials from Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2016, formatted in eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) includes: (i) Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at June 30, 2016 (unaudited) and December 31, 2015, (ii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss (unaudited) for the three months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, (iii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (unaudited) for the three months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015, and (iv) Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

‡Portions of the exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment. The omitted information has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Delaware		20-5258327
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

		Page

PART I—FINANCIAL INFORMATION		3

Item 1. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements		3
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015		3
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss for the three and six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015		4
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for six months ended June 30, 2016 and 2015		5
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements		6
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation		20
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk		26
Item 4. Controls and Procedures		26

PART II—OTHER INFORMATION		28

Item 1. Legal Proceedings		28
Item 1A. Risk Factors		28
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds		45
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities		46
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures		46
Item 5. Other Information		46
Item 6. Exhibits		46

SIGNATURES		47

EXHIBIT INDEX		48

Fair value of common shares issued	$	58,321
Fair value of the Company's common share options exchanged for Annapurna stock options and other awards attributable to pre-combination services		7,422
Less: value of common stock and options accelerated vesting at the closing date		(898	)
Total purchase price consideration	$	64,845

Cash	$	3,449
Prepaid expenses and other assets		865
Property and equipment		185
Acquired intangible assets		16,650
Goodwill		49,120
Accounts payable		(1,118	)
Accrued liabilities		(1,848	)
Other noncurrent liabilities		(377	)
Deferred tax liabilities		(2,081	)
Total purchase price allocation	$	64,845

IPR&D - Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency	$	12,150
IPR&D - Hereditary angioedema		4,500
Total acquired intangible assets	$	16,650

	Six Month Periods Ended
	June 30,
	2016			2015
	(in thousands)
Net cash used in operating activities	$	(20,377	)	$	(16,992	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		40,061			(80,954	)
Net cash provided by financing activities		349			139,085
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	$	19,954		$	41,133

Date: August 09, 2016	ADVERUM BIOTECHNOLOGIES, INC.

	By:	/s/ Paul B. Cleveland
		Paul B. Cleveland
		Chief Executive Officer