Exhibit 99.1

Risk Factors

The risks described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks we are not presently aware of or that we currently believe are immaterial may also impair our business operations. Our business could be harmed by any of these risks. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information contained in our periodic reports and other filings we make from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, before deciding whether to purchase, hold or sell shares of our common stock.

Risks Associated With Our Business

We have operated at a loss and will likely continue to operate at a loss for the foreseeable future.

We have operated at a loss due to our ongoing expenditures for research and development of our product candidates and for general and administrative purposes, and lack of significant recurring revenues. We incurred a net loss of $30.1 million and $17.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 and the three months ended March 31, 2015, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit as of March 31, 2015 of $324.0 million. We are likely to continue to incur losses unless and until we are able to commercialize aldoxorubicin or one or more future product candidates that we may develop or acquire. These losses, among other things, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. We may never become profitable. If we become profitable, we may be unable to maintain our profitability, which could have a material adverse effect on the market value of our common stock.

Because we have no source of significant recurring revenue, we must depend on financing to sustain our operations.

Developing products and conducting clinical trials require substantial amounts of capital. To date, we have relied primarily upon proceeds from sales of our equity securities and proceeds from the exercise of options and warrants to generate funds needed to finance our business and operations. We will need to raise additional capital to, among other things:

• fund our clinical trials and pursue regulatory approval of aldoxorubicin and fund development of product candidates based on our LADR™ technology;

• expand our research and development activities;

• finance our general and administrative expenses;

• acquire or license new technologies;

• prepare, file, prosecute, maintain, enforce and defend our patent and other proprietary rights; and

• develop and implement sales, marketing and distribution capabilities to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval and choose to market ourselves.

Our revenue was $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, and we realized no revenue in the three months ended March 31, 2015. We will have no significant recurring revenue unless we are able to commercialize aldoxorubicin, our lead product candidate, or one or more product candidates that we may develop or acquire, which commercialization may require us to first enter into license or other strategic arrangements with third parties.

1

At March 31, 2015, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $28.1 million and short-term investments of $37.1 million. Management believes that our current resources will be sufficient to fund our operations for the foreseeable future. The belief is based, in part, upon our currently projected expenditures for 2015 of approximately $56.3 million, which includes approximately $41.7 million for our clinical programs for aldoxorubicin, approximately $2.0 million for pre-clinical development of new albumin-binding cancer drugs, approximately $3.7 million for operation of our clinical programs and approximately $8.9 million for other general and administrative expenses. These projected expenditures are based upon numerous assumptions and subject to many uncertainties, and our actual expenditures may be significantly different from these projections.

If we obtain marketing approval and successfully commercialize aldoxorubicin, or other product candidate, we anticipate it will take a minimum of two years, and likely longer, for us to generate significant recurring revenue, and we will be dependent on future financing until such time, if ever, as we can generate significant recurring revenue. We have no commitments from third parties to provide us with any additional financing, and we may not be able to obtain future financing on favorable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain adequate financing would adversely affect our ability to operate as a going concern. If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, dilution to stockholders may result and new investors could have rights superior to existing stockholders. In addition, debt financing, if available, may include restrictive covenants. If adequate funds are not available to us, we may have to liquidate some or all of our assets or to delay or reduce the scope of or eliminate some portion or all of our development programs or clinical trials. We also may have to license to other companies our product candidates or technologies that we would prefer to develop and commercialize ourselves.

If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the time frames we estimate, the commercialization of our products may be delayed and our business prospects may suffer. Our financial projections also may prove to be materially inaccurate.

From time to time, we estimate the timing of the accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development goals, which we sometimes refer to as milestones. These milestones may include the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials and the submission of regulatory filings, among others.

We also may disclose projected expenditures or other forecasts for future periods. These and other financial projections are based on management’s current estimates and do not contain any margin of error or cushion for any specific uncertainties, or for the uncertainties inherent in all financial forecasting.

The actual timing of milestones and actual expenditures or other financial results can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. If we do not meet milestones or financial projections as announced from time to time, the development and commercialization of our products may be delayed and our business prospects may suffer. The assumptions management has used to produce these projections may significantly change or prove to be inaccurate. Accordingly, you should not unduly rely on any of these financial projections.

2

The regulatory approval process is lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if our products are not successfully developed and approved by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, we may be forced to reduce or curtail our operations.

All of our product candidates in development must be approved by the FDA or corresponding foreign governmental agencies before they can be marketed. The process for obtaining FDA and foreign government approvals is both time-consuming and costly, with no certainty of a successful outcome. This process typically includes the conduct of extensive pre-clinical and clinical testing, including post-approval testing, which may take longer or cost more than we or our licensees, if any, anticipate, and may prove unsuccessful due to numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate.

Numerous factors could affect the timing, cost or outcome of our product development efforts, including the following:

• difficulty in enrolling patients in conformity with required protocols or projected timelines;

• requirements for clinical trial design imposed by the FDA;

• unexpected adverse reactions by patients in trials;

• difficulty in obtaining clinical supplies of the product;

• changes in or our inability to comply with FDA or foreign governmental product testing, manufacturing or marketing requirements;

• regulatory inspections of clinical trials or manufacturing facilities, which may, among other things, require us or our manufacturers or licensees to undertake corrective action or suspend or terminate the affected clinical trials if investigators find them not to be in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements;

• inability to generate statistically significant data confirming the safety and efficacy of the product being tested;

• modification of the product during testing; and

• reallocation of our limited financial and other resources to other clinical programs.

It is possible that none of the product candidates we develop will obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for us to begin selling them. The time required to obtain FDA and foreign governmental approvals is unpredictable, but often can take years following the commencement of clinical trials, depending upon the complexity of the product candidate. Any analysis we perform on data from clinical activities is subject to confirmation and interpretation by regulatory authorities, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our products, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.

3

Furthermore, even if we obtain regulatory approvals, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, import, export, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with current good manufacturing practices, or cGMPs, and good clinical practices, or GCPs, for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

• restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market, or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;

• fines, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;

• refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or our strategic partners, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;

• product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and

• injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA’s policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business. We will also be subject to periodic inspections and the potential for mandatory post- approval clinical trials required by the FDA and other U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities. Any delay or failure in obtaining required approvals or to comply with post-approval regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue from the particular product candidate. The failure to comply with any post-approval regulatory requirements also could result in the rescission of the related regulatory approvals or the suspension of sales of the offending product.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. Our current and planned clinical trials of our lead product candidate may fail to show that it is clinically safe and effective, or that it is better than alternative treatments.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical development may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. For example, aldoxorubicin has shown encouraging preliminary clinical results in our Phase 2b clinical trial as a 1^st-line treatment for STS; however, these conclusions may not be reproduced in future clinical trial results, including the ongoing Phase 3 clinical trial testing aldoxorubicin as a 2^nd-line treatment for STS. Accordingly, we, or any development partners, may ultimately be unable to provide the FDA with satisfactory data on clinical safety and efficacy sufficient to obtain FDA approval of aldoxorubicin for any indication.

4

Further, we may experience delays in clinical trials of our product candidates. We do not know whether ongoing clinical trials will be completed on schedule or at all, or whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays related to:

• obtaining regulatory approval to commence a trial;

• reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations, or CROs, and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites;

• obtaining institutional review board approval at each clinical trial site;

• recruiting suitable patients to participate in a trial;

• having patients complete a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up;

• clinical trial sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;

• adding new clinical trial sites; or

• manufacturing sufficient quantities of product candidate for use in clinical trials.

Patient 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 drug being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating. Furthermore, we rely on third parties such as CROs and clinical trial sites, to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance.

We could encounter delays if prescribing physicians encounter unresolved ethical issues associated with enrolling patients in clinical trials of our product candidates in lieu of prescribing existing treatments that have established safety and efficacy profiles. Further, a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, our collaborators, the institutional review boards, or IRBs, if the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, the Data Safety Monitoring Board, or DSMB, for such trial, or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. For example, the FDA placed a clinical hold on our clinical trials of aldoxorubicin in November 2014 following the death of an individual who was not enrolled in any of our clinical trials but who received aldoxorubicin pursuant to our compassionate use policy under a single-patient IND held by one of the clinical sites participating in our Phase 3 trial of aldoxorubicin in STS. The clinical hold resulted in our inability to enroll new patients in our aldoxorubicin studies until the hold was removed in February 2015. Although we have resumed enrollment in our studies, enrollment in our clinical trials and our projected development timelines may be adversely affected by residual effects of the former clinical hold or possible future clinical holds. For example, certain foreign regulatory authorities have not yet provided approval for enrollment to recommence in our Phase 3 trial of aldoxorubicin as a 2^nd-line treatment for STS with the changes made to our protocol as a result of the clinical hold.

5

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

Our SPA with the FDA for our pivotal study of aldoxorubicin does not guarantee marketing approval in the United States.

We have an SPA with the FDA for the pivotal trial of aldoxorubicin for the treatment of STS. The SPA means that the FDA agrees that the design and analyses proposed in a protocol are acceptable to support regulatory approval of the product candidate with respect to effectiveness of the indication studied. However, an SPA agreement does not guarantee approval of a product candidate, and even if the FDA agrees to the design, execution, and analysis proposed in protocols reviewed under the SPA process, the FDA may revoke or alter its agreement in certain circumstances. In particular, an SPA agreement is not binding on the FDA if public health concerns emerge that were unrecognized at the time of the SPA agreement, other new scientific concerns regarding product safety or efficacy arise, the sponsor fails to comply with the agreed upon trial protocols, or the relevant data, assumptions or information provided by the sponsor in a request for the SPA change or are found to be false or omit relevant facts. In addition, even after an SPA agreement is finalized, the SPA agreement may be modified, and such modification will be deemed binding on the FDA review division, except under the circumstances described above, if the FDA and the sponsor agree in writing to modify the protocol and such modification is intended to improve the study. The FDA retains significant latitude and discretion in interpreting the terms of the SPA agreement and the data and results from any study that is the subject of the SPA agreement. Moreover, a final determination that the agreed-upon protocol satisfies a specific objective, such as the demonstration of efficacy and safety (positive benefit-risk ratio), or supports an approval decision, will be based on a complete review of all the data submitted to the FDA.

Adverse side effects or other safety risks associated with our product candidates could delay or preclude approval, cause us to suspend or discontinue clinical trials, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could result in the delay, suspension or termination of our clinical trials by us, our collaborators, IRBs, the FDA or other regulatory authorities. If we elect or are required to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial of any product candidates that we develop, the commercial prospects of such product candidates will be harmed and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

To date, patients treated with aldoxorubicin have experienced some of the same drug-related side effects associated with doxorubicin, including myelosuppression (decreased production of blood cells by bone marrow), gastrointestinal disorders (nausea and vomiting), mucositis (inflammation of the mucous membranes lining the digestive tract, including the mouth), stomatitis (inflammation of the mouth’s soft tissue), fatigue, fever and other signs of infection associated with neutropenia (an abnormally low count of a type of white blood cells) and alopecia (hair loss). Results of our trials could reveal an unacceptable incidence of these or other side effects. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. In addition, the drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

6

Furthermore, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by the product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

• if our product candidates receive marketing approval, the FDA could require us to adopt a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy to ensure that the benefits of any approved product candidate outweigh its risks;

• regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product;

• regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label;

• we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients;

• we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients; and

• our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of aldoxorubicin or the particular product candidate at issue, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

We rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we and our collaborators may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have agreements with third-party CROs to monitor and manage data for our preclinical and clinical programs. We rely heavily on these parties for execution of our preclinical and clinical trials, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of these CROs fails to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, such regulatory authorities will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with the GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations, and will require a large number of test subjects. Our or our CROs’ failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing preclinical and clinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the

7

clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for aldoxorubicin would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves substantial cost and requires extensive management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays can occur that can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these challenges or delays will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We rely upon third parties for the manufacture of our clinical product supplies, and we intend to rely on third parties to produce commercial supplies of any approved product candidate, and our commercialization of any product candidates, including aldoxorubicin, could be stopped, delayed or made less profitable if those third parties fail to obtain approval of the FDA, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of drug product or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.

We do not have the facilities or expertise to manufacture supplies of aldoxorubicin or any future product candidate, and we lack the resources and capability to manufacture product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. Accordingly, we are dependent upon third-party manufacturers, or potential future strategic alliance partners, to manufacture these supplies. We have manufacturing supply arrangements in place with respect to a portion of the clinical supplies needed for our current clinical programs for aldoxorubicin. However, we have no supply arrangements for the commercial manufacture of aldoxorubicin or manufacturing supply arrangements for any other product candidate, and we may not be able to secure needed supply arrangements on attractive terms, or at all. Our failure to secure these arrangements as needed could have a materially adverse effect on our ability to complete the development of our product candidates or to commercialize them.

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

If aldoxorubicin or any future product candidate cannot be manufactured in suitable quantities and in accordance with regulatory standards, our clinical trials, regulatory approvals and marketing efforts for such products may be delayed. Such delays could adversely affect our competitive position and our chances of generating significant recurring revenues. If any product candidate is approved for marketing cannot be manufactured at an acceptable cost, the commercial success of such product candidate may be adversely affected.

8

We may rely upon third parties in connection with the commercialization of our products.

The marketing and commercialization of aldoxorubicin may require us to enter into strategic alliances or other collaborative arrangements with other pharmaceutical companies under which those companies will be responsible for one or more aspects of the eventual marketing and commercialization of aldoxorubicin, if it is approved for marketing.

Any future product candidate, if approved for marketing, may not have sufficient potential commercial value to enable us to secure strategic arrangements with suitable companies on attractive terms, or at all. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements, we may not have the financial or other resources to commercialize our products and may have to sell our rights in them to a third party or abandon their commercialization altogether.

To the extent we enter into collaborative arrangements, we will be dependent upon the timeliness and effectiveness of the development and marketing efforts of our contractual partners. If these companies do not allocate sufficient personnel and resources to these efforts or encounter difficulties in complying with applicable FDA and other regulatory requirements, we may not obtain regulatory approvals as planned, if at all, and the timing of receipt or the amount of revenue from these arrangements may be materially and adversely affected. By entering into these arrangements, the potential profitability to us of these products may be less than if we were to complete the development and commercialization of these products on our own.

We may be unable to protect our intellectual property rights, which could adversely affect our ability to compete effectively.

We will be able to protect our technologies from unauthorized use by third parties only to the extent that we have rights to valid and enforceable patents or other proprietary rights that cover them. Although we have rights to patents and patent applications directed to aldoxorubicin and our LADR™ technology platform, these patents and applications may not prevent third parties from developing or commercializing similar or identical technologies. There is no assurance that any of our patent applications will issue, or that any of the patents will be enforceable or will cover a product or other commercially significant technology or method, or that the patents will be held to be valid for their expected terms.

The procedures for obtaining a patent in the United States and in most foreign countries are complex. These procedures require an analysis of sophisticated scientific and legal issues. Our patent position is very uncertain and we do not know when, or if, we will obtain additional patents for our products and technologies, or if the scope of the patents obtained will be sufficient to protect our products and technologies, or be considered sufficient by parties reviewing our patent positions pursuant to a potential marketing, licensing or financing transaction.

In addition, other entities may challenge the validity or enforceability of our patents and patent applications in litigation or administrative proceedings. Even the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its validity or enforceability. We cannot make assurances as to how much protection, if any, will be given to our patents if we attempt to enforce them or they are challenged. It is possible that a competitor or a generic pharmaceutical provider may successfully challenge our patents and those challenges may result in reduction or elimination of our patents’ coverage.

The patent positions of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in biotechnology and pharmaceutical patents

9

has emerged to date in the United States and in many foreign countries. The application and enforcement of patent laws and regulations in foreign countries is even more uncertain. Accordingly, we may not be able to effectively file, protect or defend our proprietary rights on a consistent basis. Many of the patents and patent applications on which we rely were issued or filed by third parties prior to the time we acquired rights to them. The validity, enforceability and ownership of those patents and patent applications may be challenged, and if a court decides that our patents are not valid, we will not have the right to stop others from using our inventions. There is also the risk that, even if the validity of our patents is upheld, a court may refuse to stop others on the ground that their activities do not infringe our patents.

Any litigation brought by us to protect our intellectual property rights could be costly and have a material adverse effect on our operating results or financial condition, make it more difficult for us to enter into strategic alliances with third parties to develop our products or technologies, or discourage our existing licensees from continuing their development work on our potential products or technologies. If our patent coverage is insufficient to prevent third parties from developing or commercializing similar or identical products or technologies, the value of our assets is likely to be materially and adversely affected.

We also rely on certain proprietary trade secrets and know-how, especially where we believe patent protection is not appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets and know-how are difficult to protect. Although we have taken measures to protect our unpatented trade secrets and know-how, including the use of confidentiality and invention assignment agreements with our employees, consultants and some of our contractors, it is possible that these persons may disclose our trade secrets or know-how or that our competitors may independently develop or otherwise discover our trade secrets and know-how.

If our product candidates or technologies infringe the rights of others, we could be subject to expensive litigation or be required to obtain licenses from others to develop or market them.

Our competitors or others may have patent rights that they choose to assert against us or our licensees, suppliers, customers or potential collaborators. There exists numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by others, including our licensor KTB Tumorforschungs GmbH, that relate to aldoxorubicin. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by others also exist in the therapeutic areas in which we are developing products. There are also numerous issued patents and patent applications to chemical compounds or synthetic processes that may be necessary or useful to use in our research, development, manufacturing or commercialization activities. These could materially affect our ability to develop our products or technologies or manufacture, import or sell products, and our activities, or those of our licensors or collaborators, could be determined to infringe these patents. Moreover, we may not know about patents or patent applications that our products or technologies might infringe. For example, because patent applications do not publish for at least 18 months, if at all, and can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications unknown to us that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates or technologies might infringe. In addition, if third parties file patent applications or obtain patents claiming technology also claimed by us or our licensors in issued patents or pending applications, we may have to participate in interference or derivation proceedings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to determine priority of invention. If third parties file post grant challenges (such as Post Grant Review (PGR), Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Ex Parte Reexamination) in the U.S., we may have to participate in defending the patentability of our U.S. patents in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. If third parties file oppositions in foreign countries, we may also have to participate in opposition proceedings in foreign tribunals to defend the patentability of our foreign patents or patent applications.

If a third party claims that we infringe its proprietary rights:

10

• we may become involved in time-consuming and expensive litigation, even if the claim is without merit;

• we may become liable for substantial damages for past infringement if a court decides that our product or technology infringes a competitor’s patent;

• a court may prohibit us from selling or licensing our product or technology without a license from the patent holder, which may not be available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all, or which may require us to pay substantial royalties or grant cross licenses to our patents; and

• we may have to redesign our product candidates or technology so that it does not infringe patent rights of others, which may not be possible or commercially feasible.

If any of these events occurs, our business and prospects will suffer and the market price of our common stock will likely decline substantially.

Any products we develop may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations or third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We currently intend to sell our products that may be approved for marketing primarily to hospitals, which generally receive reimbursement for the health care services they provide to their patients from third-party payors, such as Medicare, Medicaid and other domestic and international government programs, private insurance plans and managed care programs.

We currently expect that any drugs we develop may need to be administered under the supervision of a physician. Under currently applicable law, drugs that are not usually self-administered may be eligible for coverage by the Medicare program if:

• they are “incidental” to a physician’s services;

• they are “reasonable and necessary” for the diagnosis or treatment of the illness or injury for which they are administered according to accepted standard of medical practice;

• they are not excluded as immunizations; and

• they have been approved by the FDA.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payor, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs will be covered and reimbursed. The Medicare program covers certain individuals aged 65 or older, disabled or suffering from end-stage renal disease. The Medicaid program, which varies from state-to-state, covers certain individuals and families who have limited financial means. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates.

Most third-party payors may deny coverage or reimbursement if they determine that a medical product was not used in accordance with cost-effective treatment methods, as determined by the third-party payor, or was used for an unapproved indication. Third-party payors also may refuse to cover and reimburse for experimental procedures and devices. Furthermore, because our programs are in the early stages of development, we are unable at this time to determine their cost-effectiveness and the level or method of reimbursement. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide

11

them with predetermined discounts from list prices, and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. If the price we are able to charge for any products we develop is inadequate in light of our development and other costs, our profitability could be adversely affected.

Healthcare legislative reform measures could hinder or prevent the commercial success of our products and product candidates.

In the United States, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future revenues and profitability. Federal and state lawmakers regularly propose and, at times, enact legislation that results in significant changes to the healthcare system, some of which are intended to contain or reduce the costs of medical products and services. For example, in March 2010, President Obama signed one of the most significant healthcare reform measures in decades, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act. It contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement changes and fraud and abuse measures, all of which will impact existing government healthcare programs and will result in the development of new programs. The Affordable Care Act, among other things: (i) increases the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, and addresses new methodologies by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, and for drugs that are line extension products; (ii) establishes annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs: and (iii) enacts a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 among other things, 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 includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will remain in effect through 2024 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our products once approved or additional pricing pressures.

We may also be subject to healthcare laws, regulation and enforcement and our failure to comply with those laws could adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition.

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

12

• the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, any person from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce either the referral of an individual, for an item or service or the purchasing or ordering of a good or service, for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs;

• the federal False Claims Act, which prohibits, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, false claims, or knowingly using false statements, to obtain payment from the federal government, and which may apply to entities that provide coding and billing advice to customers;

• federal criminal laws that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters;

• the federal physician sunshine requirements under the Affordable Care Act, which requires manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics, and medical supplies to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians, other healthcare providers, and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians and other healthcare providers and their immediate family members;

• the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, which governs the conduct of certain electronic healthcare transactions and protects the security and privacy of protected health information; and

• state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, the recently enacted Affordable Care Act, among other things, amends the intent requirement of the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute and criminal healthcare fraud statutes. A person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it. In addition, the Affordable Care Act provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act.

Achieving and sustaining compliance with these laws may prove costly. In addition, any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If

13

our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, imprisonment, or the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

We are subject to intense competition, and we may not compete successfully.

Aldoxorubicin is a conjugate of doxorubicin, a widely used anti-cancer drug. Doxorubicin is part of the anthracycline class of chemotherapy agents. Anthracyclines, many of which, including doxorubicin are generic, have been used throughout the world to treat various cancers for several decades. Due to their track record of broad anti-cancer activity, new types of anthracyclines and modified or reformulated versions continue to be developed to overcome toxicities which limit the use of these drugs.

Aldoxorubicin is a chemically modified version of doxorubicin that incorporates an acid sensitive linker technology to improve concentration in the tumor. We believe that the albumin-binding ability of aldoxorubicin will allow the compound to overcome many of the side effect issues typically associated with anthracyclines. We also believe that using albumin as a targeted carrier will allow for higher dosing, greater concentration of the drug in tumors and greater efficacy.

STS patients are typically treated with surgery followed by radiation therapy. For patients ineligible for surgery, radiation or chemotherapy, or both, is the only option. Doxorubicin is the only approved first-line drug for treating STS patients who are ineligible for surgery and is often used in combination with radiation. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network also includes the use of ifosfamide, epirubicin, gemcitabine, gemcitabine with docetaxel, dacarbazine and liposomal doxorubicin marketed in the United States as Doxil^® by Johnson & Johnson. GlaxoSmithKline’s pazopanib (Votrient^®) was approved in the United States and Europe in 2012 for the treatment of certain types of advanced STS following prior chemotherapy. There are other approaches to treating STS in clinical development, including Threshold Pharmaceuticals’ TH-302 currently in a Phase 3 clinical trial and Tracon Pharmaceuticals’ TRC-105 in combination with pazopanib. In November 2014, the Janssen unit of Johnson & Johnson submitted an NDA to the FDA for trabectedin (Yondelis^®) for the treatment of patients with advanced STS, including leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma, that have previously received an anthracycline and ifosfamide or an anthracycline followed by another chemotherapy. The FDA granted a priority review for the trabectedin NDA in February 2015. Trabectedin is being co-developed by Johnson & Johnson and PharmaMar. In February 2015, Eisai announced that eribulin (Halaven^®) met the primary endpoint of overall survival in patients with either adipocytic or leiomyosarcoma following prior treatment with an anthracycline and at least one additional regimen.

Patients with glioblastoma multiforme, or GBM, generally undergo invasive brain surgery, although disease progression following surgery is nearly 100%. The front-line therapy for GBM following surgery is radiation in combination with temozolomide (Temodar^®). Bevacizumab (Avastin^®) has been approved for the treatment of GBM in patients progressing after prior therapy. Drugs in development to treat GBM include rindopepimut by Celldex Therapeutics, nivolumab by Bristol-Myers Squibb, DCVax by Northwest Biotherapeutics, TRC105 from Tracon Pharmaceuticals, veliparib by AstraZeneca and buparlisib by Novartis.

Treatment for newly diagnosed SCLC, typically consists of cisplatin or carboplatin in combination with etoposide. Radiation may also be given for extensive-stage disease. While first-line treatment can yield overall response rates of 50%-80%, the duration of response is often less than 90 days. For recurrent SCLC, topotecan (Hycamtin^®) is standard therapy. SCLC patients who are sensitive to first-line treatment may receive topotecan or the generic chemotherapeutic drugs irinotecan, taxanes, gemcitabine or vinorelbine. Drugs in development for second-line SCLC include Bristol-Myers Squibb’s ipilumimab (Yervoy^®) and SC16LD6.5 by Stem CentRx, Inc.

14

Kaposi’s sarcoma is generally treated with radiation, surgery or liposomal doxorubicin, or both. Liposomal daunorubicin (DaunoXome^®, Galen US), with or without paclitaxel, is also recommended as treatment for advanced Kaposi’s sarcoma. Other drugs in development for Kaposi’s sarcoma include selumetinib by AstraZeneca and pomalidamide by Celgene.

Many companies, including large pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms with financial resources, research and development staffs, and facilities that may be substantially greater than those of ours or our strategic partners or licensees, are engaged in the research and development of pharmaceutical products that could compete with our potential products. To the extent that we seek to acquire, through license or otherwise, existing or potential new products, we will be competing with numerous other companies, many of which will have substantially greater financial resources, large acquisition and research and development staffs that may give those companies a competitive advantage over us in identifying and evaluating these drug acquisition opportunities. Any products that we acquire will be competing with products marketed by companies that in many cases will have substantially greater marketing resources than we have. The industry is characterized by rapid technological advances and competitors may develop their products more rapidly and such products may be more effective than those currently under development or that may be developed in the future by our strategic partners or licensees. Competitive products for a number of the disease indications that we have targeted are currently being marketed by other parties, and additional competitive products are under development and may also include products currently under development that we are not aware of or products that may be developed in the future.

As a result, these competitors may:

• succeed in developing competitive products sooner than us or our strategic partners or licensees;

• obtain FDA or foreign governmental approvals for their products before we can obtain approval of any of our products;

• obtain patents that block or otherwise inhibit the development and commercialization of our product candidate candidates;

• develop products that are safer or more effective than our products;

• devote greater resources than us to marketing or selling products;

• introduce or adapt more quickly than us to new technologies and other scientific advances;

• introduce products that render our products obsolete;

• withstand price competition more successfully than us or our strategic partners or licensees;

• negotiate third-party strategic alliances or licensing arrangements more effectively than us; and

• take better advantage than us of other opportunities.

15

We will be required to pay substantial milestone and other payments relating to the commercialization of our products.

The agreement relating to our worldwide rights to aldoxorubicin provides for our payment of up to an aggregate of $7.5 million upon meeting specified clinical and regulatory milestones up to and including the product’s second, final marketing approval. We also will be obliged to pay:

• commercially reasonable royalties based on a percentage of net sales (as defined in the agreement);

• a percentage of any non-royalty sub-licensing income (as defined in the agreement); and

• milestones of $1,000,000 for each additional final marketing approval that we obtain.

Under the merger agreement by which we acquired Innovive, we agreed to pay the former Innovive stockholders a total of up to approximately $18.3 million of future earnout merger consideration, subject to our achievement of specified net sales under the Innovive license agreements. The earnout merger consideration, if any, will be payable in shares of our common stock, subject to specified conditions, or, at our election, in cash or by a combination of shares of our common stock and cash. Our common stock will be valued for purposes of any future earnout merger consideration based upon the trading price of our common stock at the time the earnout merger consideration is paid.

We are subject to potential liabilities from clinical testing and future product liability claims.

If any of our products are alleged to be defective, they may expose us to claims for personal injury by patients in clinical trials of our products or, if we obtain marketing approval and commercialize our products, by patients using our commercially marketed products. Even if one or more of our products is approved by the FDA, users may claim that such products caused unintended adverse effects. We maintain clinical trial insurance for our ongoing clinical trials, and we plan to seek to obtain similar insurance for any other clinical trials that we conduct. We also would seek to obtain product liability insurance covering the commercial marketing of our product candidates. We may not be able to obtain additional insurance, however, and any insurance obtained by us may prove inadequate in the event of a claim against us. Any claims asserted against us also may divert management’s attention from our operations, and we may have to incur substantial costs to defend such claims even if they are unsuccessful.

We are conducting certain of our clinical trials in foreign countries, which exposes us to additional risks.

We are conducting international clinical development of aldoxorubicin. The conduct of clinical trials outside the United States could have a significant impact on us. Risks inherent in conducting international clinical trials include:

• foreign regulatory requirements that could restrict or limit our ability to conduct our clinical trials;

• administrative burdens of conducting clinical trials under multiple foreign regulatory schema;

• foreign exchange fluctuations;

• diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries; and

• possible nationalization and expropriation.

16

In addition, there may be changes to our business and political position if there is instability, disruption or destruction in a significant geographic region, regardless of cause, including war, terrorism, riot, civil insurrection or social unrest, and natural or man-made disasters, including famine, flood, fire, earthquake, storm or disease, which could harm our product development efforts.

In the event of a dispute regarding our international clinical trials, it may be necessary for us to resolve the dispute in the foreign country of dispute, where we would be faced with unfamiliar laws and procedures.

The resolution of disputes in foreign countries can be costly and time consuming, similar to the situation in the United States. However, in a foreign country, we face the additional burden of understanding unfamiliar laws and procedures. We may not be entitled to a jury trial, as we might be in the United States. Further, to litigate in any foreign country, we would be faced with the necessity of hiring lawyers and other professionals who are familiar with the foreign laws. For these reasons, we may incur unforeseen expenses if we are forced to resolve a dispute in a foreign country.

Drug discovery is a complex, time-consuming and expensive process, and we may not succeed in creating new product candidates.

Conducting drug discovery and pre-clinical development of our albumin-binding technology is a complex and expensive process that will take many years. Accordingly, we cannot be sure whether or when our drug discovery and pre-clinical development activities will succeed in developing any new product candidates. In addition, any product candidates that we develop in pre-clinical testing may not demonstrate success in clinical trials required for marketing approval.

Any deficiency in the design, implementation or oversight of our drug discovery and pre-clinical testing programs could cause us to incur significant additional costs, experience significant delays, prevent us from obtaining marketing approval for any product candidate that may result from these programs or abandon development of certain product candidates. If any of these risks materializes, it could harm our business and cause our stock price to decline.

We have a limited operating history in drug discovery, which is inherently risky, and we may not succeed in addressing these risks.

We have operated our drug discovery laboratory in Freiberg, Germany, and LADR™ development program only since October 2014. Accordingly, we have a limited operating history in conducting our own drug discovery programs. We have not yet demonstrated the ability to successfully create new product candidates. Consequently, there is limited information for investors to use as basis for assessing the viability of our drug discovery efforts based on our LADR™ technology. Investors must consider the risks and difficulties inherent in drug discovery and pre-clinical activities, including the following:

• difficulties, complications, delays and other unanticipated factors in connection with the development of new drugs;

• competition from companies that have substantially greater assets and financial resources than we have;

• our ability to anticipate and adapt to a competitive market and rapid technological developments;

17

• our need to rely on multiple levels of complex financing agreements with outside funding due to the length of drug development cycles and governmental approved protocols associated with the pharmaceutical industry; and

• our dependence upon key scientific personnel, including Felix Kratz, Ph.D., our Vice President of Drug Discovery, and Andre Warnecke, Ph.D., our Senior Director of Drug Discovery.

We cannot be certain that we will successfully address these risks or that our drug discovery efforts will be successful. In the event that we do not successfully address these risks, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. We also may be required to reduce or discontinue altogether our drug discovery and pre-clinical programs.

We may be unable to successfully acquire additional technologies or products. If we require additional technologies or products, our product development plans may change and the ownership interests of our shareholders could be diluted.

We may seek to acquire additional technologies by licensing or purchasing such technologies, or through a merger or acquisition of one or more companies that own such technologies. We have no current understanding or agreement to acquire any technologies, however, and we may not be able to identify or successfully acquire any additional technologies. We also may seek to acquire products from third parties that already are being marketed or have been approved for marketing, although we have not currently identified any of these products. We do not have any prior experience in acquiring or marketing products approved for marketing and may need to find third parties to market any products that we might acquire.

We have focused our product development efforts on our oncology drug candidates, which we believe have the greatest revenue potential. If we acquire additional technologies or product candidates, we may determine to make further changes to our product development plans and business strategy to capitalize on opportunities presented by the new technologies and product candidates.

We may determine to issue shares of our common stock to acquire additional technologies or products or in connection with a merger or acquisition of another company. To the extent we do so, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be diluted accordingly.

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development tax credits) to offset its post-change income and taxes may be limited. In general, an “ownership change” occurs if there is a cumulative change in our ownership by “5% shareholders” that exceeds 50 percentage points over a rolling three-year period. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. As a result of a previous ownership change, our annual utilization of approximately $62.3 million in federal net operating loss carryforwards will be substantially limited. If we experience one or more ownership changes as a result of future transactions in our stock, we may be further limited in our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax assets. Any such limitations on the ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax assets could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us on any net income that we may earn in the future.

18

Risks Associated With Our Common Stock

We may experience volatility in our stock price, which may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

The market price of our common stock has ranged from a low of $2.51 to a high of $5.42 per share during the period January 1, 2015 through July 17, 2015, and it may continue to experience significant volatility from time to time. Factors that may affect the market price of our common stock include the following:

• announcements of interim or final results of our clinical trials or our drug discovery activities;

• announcements of regulatory developments or technological innovations by us or our competitors;

• changes in our relationship with our licensors and other strategic partners;

• our quarterly operating results;

• litigation involving or affecting us;

• shortfalls in our actual financial results compared to our guidance or the forecasts of stock market analysts;

• developments in patent or other technology ownership rights;

• acquisitions or strategic alliances by us or our competitors;

• public concern regarding the safety of our products; and

• government regulation of drug pricing.

Our outstanding options and warrants and the availability for resale of the underlying shares may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

As of March 31,2015, we had outstanding stock options to purchase 10,164,306 shares of our common stock at a weighted-average exercise price of $2.84 per share and outstanding warrants to purchase 7,292,617 shares of common stock at a weighted-average exercise price of $4.29 per share. At the annual meeting of stockholders held on June 23, 2015, our stockholders approved an amendment to our 2008 Stock Incentive Plan to increase the number of shares of our common stock available for issuance under the Plan by 10,000,000 shares. Our outstanding options and warrants and any options and warrants that we may grant or issue in the future could adversely affect our ability to obtain future financing or engage in certain mergers or other transactions, since the holders of options and warrants can be expected to exercise them at a time when we may be able to obtain additional capital through a new offering of securities on terms more favorable to us than the terms of outstanding options and warrants. For the life of the options and warrants, the holders have the opportunity to profit from a rise in the market price of our common stock without assuming the risk of ownership. The issuance of shares upon the exercise of outstanding options and warrants will also dilute the ownership interests of our existing stockholders.

We have registered with the SEC the resale by the holders of all or substantially all shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise of our outstanding options and warrants. The availability of these shares for public resale, as well as any actual resales of these shares, could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

19

We are subject to pending legal claims that could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations and our business or result in changes in our corporate governance. We recently entered into a settlement of a stockholder derivative lawsuit against a number of our current and former directors and officers that is subject to Court approval.

On June 13, 2014, three purported securities class action lawsuits pending against us and certain of our officers and directors in the United States District Court for the Central District of California were consolidated in the matter of In re CytRx Corporation Securities Litigation, 2:14-CV-01956-GHK (PJWx), and lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed. On October 1, 2014, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired our publicly traded securities between November 20, 2013 and March 13, 2014, against us, certain of our officers and directors, a freelance writer, and certain underwriters, including Jefferies LLC, Oppenheimer & Co., LLC, Aegis Corp., and H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC. The complaint alleges that certain of the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making materially false and misleading statements in press releases, promotional articles, SEC filings and other public statements. The complaint further alleges that certain of the defendants violated the Securities Act of 1933 by making materially misleading statements and omitting material information in our shelf Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed with the SEC on December 6, 2012 and Prospectus Supplement under Rule 424(b)(2) filed with the SEC on January 31, 2014. These allegations arise out of our alleged retention of The DreamTeam Group and MissionIR, external investor and public relations firms unaffiliated with us, as well as our December 9, 2013 grant of stock options to certain board members and officers. The consolidated amended complaint seeks damages, including interest, in an unspecified amount, reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees, and any equitable, injunctive, or other relief that the court may deem just and proper. On December 5, 2014, we and the individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The Court was scheduled to hear argument on this motion on March 2, 2015. On February 25, 2015, the Court took this motion under submission and took the hearing off calendar. On July 13, 2015, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part the motions to dismiss filed by us, the individual defendants and the underwriters. The Court afforded the plaintiffs 30 days to amend their complaint, if they elect to do so.

On April 3, 2014, a purported class action lawsuit was filed against us and certain of our officers and each of our directors, as well as certain underwriters, in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, captioned Rajasekaran v. CytRx Corporation, et al., BC541426. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of all shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired our common stock pursuant or traceable to our public offering that closed on February 5, 2014. The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by making materially false and misleading statements in our filings with the SEC. The complaint seeks compensatory damages in an unspecified amount, rescission, and attorney’s fees and costs. On October 14, 2014, the Court granted the parties’ joint ex parte motion to stay this proceeding pending resolution of motions to dismiss in the related federal action, In re CytRx Corporation Securities Litigation, 2:14-CV-01956-GHK (PJWx).

On July 3, 2014, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, captioned Fishman v. Kriegsman, et al., 2:14-cv-05169, purportedly on our behalf against certain of our officers and each of our directors. The complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties, corporate waste, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment in connection with our alleged retention of DreamTeamGroup and MissionIR. The complaint seeks damages, restitution, corporate governance reforms, and attorney’s fees and costs. On September 3, 2014, plaintiff filed a notice to voluntarily dismiss this action against all parties without prejudice, which the Court granted on September 9, 2014.

On September 10, 2014, the Delaware Court of Chancery consolidated Schwartz v. Ignarro, et al., Case No. 9864, Johnson v. Ignarro, et al., Case No. 9884, and Silverberg v. Kriegsman, et al., Case No. 9919, three shareholder derivative lawsuits described in our Quarterly Report filed with the SEC on August 6, 2014. The allegations in the Schwartz and Johnson complaints relate to our December 9, 2013

20

grant of stock options to certain board members and officers. The allegations in the Silverberg complaint relate to our December 9, 2013 grant of stock options to certain board members and officers, as well as our alleged retention of DreamTeamGroup and MissionIR. A consolidated complaint concentrated on the stock-option grant claims was filed on October 9, 2014. The consolidated lawsuit is captioned In re CytRx Corp. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, C.A. No. 9864-VCL. On November 10, 2014, we and the individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint or, in the alternative, to stay the action. The Court heard argument on the motions on January 8, 2015. The Court denied the motion to dismiss and granted in part and denied in part the motion to stay.

On June 2, 2015, we announced that we had reached an agreement to settle the Delaware stockholder derivative action. Under the settlement, we have agreed to re-price stock options to purchase a total of 2,095,000 shares of our common stock that were granted on December 10, 2013 to certain of our directors and officers from the original exercise price of $2.39 to an exercise price of $4.66 (the share price at market closing on December 20, 2013). The settlement also provides that we will implement certain corporate governance changes and modify our governance practices regarding the granting of stock options. The parties have not yet reached an agreement on an amount of any award of fees and expenses to plaintiffs’ attorneys, which award must be approved by the Court regardless of whether there is an agreement between the parties. The settlement is subject to the drafting of definitive documentation, notice to stockholders, and Court approval.

On August 14, 2014, a shareholder derivative lawsuit, captioned Pankratz v. Kriegsman, et al., 2:14-cv-06414-PA-JPR, was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California purportedly on our behalf against certain of our officers and each of our directors. The complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, gross mismanagement, abuse of control, insider selling and misappropriation of information in connection with our alleged retention of DreamTeamGroup and MissionIR, as well as our December 9, 2013 grant of stock options to certain board members and officers. The complaint seeks unspecified damages, corporate governance and internal procedures reforms, restitution, disgorgement of all profits, benefits, and other compensation obtained by the individual defendants, and the costs and disbursements of the action.

On August 15, 2014, a shareholder derivative complaint, captioned Taylor v. Kriegsman, et al., 2:14-cv-06451, was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California purportedly on our behalf against certain of our officers and each of our directors. The complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, gross mismanagement, abuse of control, unjust enrichment, insider selling and misappropriation of information in connection with our alleged retention of DreamTeamGroup and MissionIR, as well as our December 9, 2013 grant of stock options to certain board members and officers. The complaint seeks unspecified damages, corporate governance and internal procedures reforms, restitution, disgorgement of all profits, benefits, and other compensation obtained by the individual defendants, and the costs and disbursements of the action.

On October 8, 2014, the Court in Pankratz and Taylor consolidated the cases and appointed lead plaintiffs and co-lead counsel. On October 20, 2014, we and the individual defendants filed motions to dismiss the consolidated Pankratz and Taylor cases or, in the alternative, to stay the cases. On January 9, 2015, the Court stayed the action pending the resolution of the consolidated Delaware derivative action. On February 27, 2015, the Pankratz and Taylor plaintiffs filed a motion to vacate the stay. On June 24, 2015, the Court granted the motion to lift the stay in light of the pending settlement of the Delaware derivative litigation discussed above. The Court further denied the motion to dismiss without prejudice and invited us to move to dismiss the case within 30 days pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens based on our forum-selection bylaw, which mandates that derivative actions be filed in Delaware. The Court advised that it would consider any forum non conveniens motion before considering a subsequent motion to dismiss under Rule 12.

21

Adverse outcomes with respect to some or all of the foregoing claims may result in an award of monetary damages against us that could exceed our available insurance coverage and that could have a material adverse effect on our working capital and results of operations. These claims also may divert the time and attention of our management and harm our business or result in changes in the composition of our board of directors or other corporate governance that we cannot predict. These claims are subject to inherent uncertainties, and management’s view of these matters may change in the future. If an unfavorable outcome becomes probable and reasonably estimable, we could incur charges that could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations for the period in which the outcome becomes probably and reasonably estimable.

Our anti-takeover measures may make it more difficult to change our management, or may discourage others from acquiring us, and thereby adversely affect stockholder value.

We have a stockholder rights plan and provisions in our restated by-laws, as amended, that are intended to protect our stockholders’ interests by encouraging anyone seeking control of our company to negotiate with our board of directors. These provisions may discourage or prevent a person or group from acquiring us without the approval of our board of directors, even if the acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders.

We have a classified board of directors, which means that at least two stockholder meetings, instead of one, will be required to effect a change in the majority control of our board of directors. This applies to every election of directors, not just an election occurring after a change in control. The classification of our board increases the amount of time it takes to change majority control of our board of directors and may cause potential acquirers to lose interest in a potential purchase of us, regardless of whether our purchase would be beneficial to us or our stockholders. The additional time and cost to change a majority of the members of our board of directors makes it more difficult and may discourage our existing stockholders from seeking to change our existing management in order to change the strategic direction or operational performance of our company.

Our by-laws provide that directors may only be removed for cause by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the outstanding shares of our capital stock then entitled to vote at an election of directors. This provision prevents stockholders from removing any incumbent director without cause. Our by-laws also provide that a stockholder must give us at least 120 days’ notice of a proposal or director nomination that such stockholder desires to present at any annual meeting or special meeting of stockholders. Such provision prevents a stockholder from making a proposal or director nomination at a stockholder meeting without us having advance notice of that proposal or director nomination. This could make a change in control more difficult by providing our directors with more time to prepare an opposition to a proposed change in control. By making it more difficult to remove or install new directors, these by-law provisions may also make our existing management less responsive to the views of our stockholders with respect to our operations and other issues such as management selection and management compensation.

We are subject to the anti-takeover provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which may also prevent or delay a takeover of us that may be beneficial to our stockholders.

22

Our restated by-laws, as amended, designate the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees.

Our restated by-laws, as amended, provide that, unless we consent in writing to an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee to us or our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or (iv) any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. Any person purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in any shares of our capital stock shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to this provision of our by-laws. This choice-of-forum provision may limit our stockholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits. Alternatively, if a court were to find this provision of our by-laws inapplicable or unenforceable with respect to one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

We may issue preferred stock in the future, and the terms of the preferred stock may reduce the value of our common stock.

We are authorized to issue shares of preferred stock in one or more series. Our board of directors may determine the terms of future preferred stock offerings without further action by our stockholders. If we issue preferred stock, it could affect your rights or reduce the value of our outstanding common stock. In particular, specific rights granted to future holders of preferred stock may include voting rights, preferences as to dividends and liquidation, conversion and redemption rights, sinking fund provisions, and restrictions on our ability to merge with or sell our assets to a third party.

We do not expect to pay any cash dividends on our common stock.

We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock or other securities, and we currently do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Because we do not anticipate paying cash dividends for the foreseeable future, our stockholders will not realize a return on their investment in our common stock except to the extent of any appreciation in the value of our common stock. Our common stock may not appreciate in value, or may decline in value.

23