10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended: March 31, 2009
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number: 001-31533
DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
New Jersey
|
|
22-3103129 |
(State of Other Jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
Incorporation or Organization) |
|
|
|
|
|
25 Upton Drive, Wilmington, MA
|
|
01887 |
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(978) 657-7500
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
(Former Name, Former Address and Former Fiscal Year,
if Changed Since Last Report)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ 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
o 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 the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer o | Non-accelerated filer þ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
As of May 11, 2009, the registrant had 24,112,202 shares of Common Stock, no par value per share,
outstanding.
DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS TO FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EX 2(A.3) THIRD AMENDMENT TO MERGER AGREEMENT |
|
|
|
|
EX 10(A) LETTER AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 3, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
EX 10(B) LETTER AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 21, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
EX 10(C) AMENDMENT TO LICENSE AGREEMENT |
|
|
|
|
EX-31(A) SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF THE C.E.O. |
|
|
|
|
EX-31(B) SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF THE C.F.O. |
|
|
|
|
EX-32(A) SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF THE C.E.O. |
|
|
|
|
EX-32(B) SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF THE C.F.O. |
|
|
|
|
EX-99.1 PRESS RELEASE |
|
|
|
|
EX-2.A.3 |
EX-10.A |
EX-10.B |
EX-10.C |
EX-31.A |
EX-31.B |
EX-32.A |
EX-32.B |
EX-99.1 |
2
PART I.
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
3,670,824 |
|
|
$ |
3,880,673 |
|
Marketable securities, at fair value |
|
|
14,240,337 |
|
|
|
15,002,830 |
|
Accrued interest receivable |
|
|
97,217 |
|
|
|
155,728 |
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for
doubtful accounts of $111,000 and $98,000
in 2009 and 2008, respectively |
|
|
2,124,394 |
|
|
|
2,367,803 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
2,536,328 |
|
|
|
2,812,825 |
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
1,285,129 |
|
|
|
1,718,073 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS |
|
|
23,954,229 |
|
|
|
25,937,932 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
173,976 |
|
|
|
173,844 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
1,835,397 |
|
|
|
1,937,978 |
|
Deferred charges and other assets |
|
|
149,856 |
|
|
|
160,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS |
|
$ |
26,113,458 |
|
|
$ |
28,210,454 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
386,471 |
|
|
$ |
305,734 |
|
Accrued compensation |
|
|
554,262 |
|
|
|
1,515,912 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
3,604,287 |
|
|
|
3,226,571 |
|
Deferred revenues |
|
|
944,775 |
|
|
|
611,602 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES |
|
|
5,489,795 |
|
|
|
5,659,819 |
|
Deferred revenues |
|
|
3,586,780 |
|
|
|
4,157,305 |
|
Warrant liability |
|
|
571,370 |
|
|
|
436,458 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
230,661 |
|
|
|
244,673 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES |
|
|
9,878,606 |
|
|
|
10,498,255 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (NOTE 15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Stock Authorized: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000,000 shares; 40,000,000 shares
designated as common stock, no par, and
60,000,000 shares issuable in Series or
classes; and 40,000 junior Series A
preferred shares. Issued and
outstanding: 24,089,452 shares of
common shares, no
par, at March 31, 2009 and December 31,
2008 |
|
|
151,663,943 |
|
|
|
151,663,943 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
7,714,027 |
|
|
|
7,514,900 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(143,457,856 |
) |
|
|
(141,850,925 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
314,738 |
|
|
|
384,281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
16,234,852 |
|
|
|
17,712,199 |
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
$ |
26,113,458 |
|
|
$ |
28,210,454 |
|
|
|
|
See the accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
3
DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
Product revenues |
|
$ |
7,138,269 |
|
|
$ |
7,929,500 |
|
Cost of product revenues |
|
|
1,938,226 |
|
|
|
1,700,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GROSS MARGIN |
|
|
5,200,043 |
|
|
|
6,229,183 |
|
Operating costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development |
|
|
1,185,095 |
|
|
|
2,186,209 |
|
Marketing and sales |
|
|
3,410,104 |
|
|
|
3,057,201 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
2,141,450 |
|
|
|
2,367,824 |
|
Net gain from settlement of litigation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(235,600 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS |
|
|
6,736,649 |
|
|
|
7,375,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS FROM OPERATIONS |
|
|
(1,536,606 |
) |
|
|
(1,146,451 |
) |
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
64,587 |
|
|
|
206,852 |
|
Loss on change in fair value of warrants |
|
|
(134,912 |
) |
|
|
(344,542 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS |
|
$ |
(1,606,931 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,284,141 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BASIC AND DILUTED NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMON SHARES
OUTSTANDING, BASIC AND DILUTED |
|
|
24,089,452 |
|
|
|
24,078,418 |
|
|
|
|
See the accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(1,606,931 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,284,141 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization (accretion) of premiums and discounts on marketable securities |
|
|
2,189 |
|
|
|
(77,362 |
) |
Realized loss (gain) on sales of marketable securities |
|
|
36,822 |
|
|
|
(2,364 |
) |
Share-based compensation |
|
|
199,127 |
|
|
|
331,638 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
125,393 |
|
|
|
154,241 |
|
Loss on change in fair value of warrants |
|
|
134,912 |
|
|
|
344,542 |
|
Deferred revenues recognized |
|
|
(234,905 |
) |
|
|
(401,575 |
) |
Changes in other assets and liabilities impacting cash flows from operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
243,409 |
|
|
|
(499,961 |
) |
Inventory |
|
|
276,497 |
|
|
|
(223,312 |
) |
Accrued interest receivable, prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
491,455 |
|
|
|
(26,874 |
) |
Deferred charges and other assets |
|
|
10,844 |
|
|
|
14,218 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued compensation and other accrued expenses |
|
|
(503,197 |
) |
|
|
23,839 |
|
Deferred revenues |
|
|
(2,447 |
) |
|
|
1,650,937 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
(14,012 |
) |
|
|
1,649 |
|
|
|
|
|
NET CASH (USED IN) PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
(840,844 |
) |
|
|
5,475 |
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for contingent consideration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(250,000 |
) |
Purchases of marketable securities |
|
|
(5,994,220 |
) |
|
|
(7,936,363 |
) |
Proceeds from maturities and sales of marketable securities |
|
|
6,648,159 |
|
|
|
7,973,061 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
(1,077 |
) |
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(22,812 |
) |
|
|
(122,945 |
) |
|
|
|
|
NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
630,995 |
|
|
|
(337,324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS PROVIDED BY FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
NET CASH PROVIDED BY FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
(209,849 |
) |
|
|
(327,849 |
) |
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF PERIOD |
|
|
3,880,673 |
|
|
|
4,713,619 |
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD |
|
$ |
3,670,824 |
|
|
$ |
4,385,770 |
|
|
|
|
See the accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
5
DUSA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)
1) BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2009, and the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 of DUSA
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company or DUSA) have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP). These condensed
consolidated financial statements are unaudited but include all normal recurring adjustments, which
management of the Company believes to be necessary for fair presentation of the periods presented.
The results of the Companys operations for any interim period are not necessarily indicative of
the results of the Companys operations for any other interim period or for a full year.
Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with U.S. GAAP have been condensed or omitted. These condensed consolidated financial
statements should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to
the Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The balance sheet as of
December 31, 2008 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does not
include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial
statements.
2) NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In April 2009, the FASB issued the following new accounting standards:
FASB Staff Position FAS 157-4, Determining Whether a Market Is Not Active and a
Transaction Is Not Distressed, or FSP FAS 157-4. FSP FAS 157-4 provides
guidelines for making fair value measurements more consistent with the
principles presented in SFAS 157. FSP FAS 157-4 provides additional
authoritative guidance in determining whether a market is active or inactive
and whether a transaction is distressed, is applicable to all assets and
liabilities (i.e. financial and nonfinancial) and will require enhanced
disclosures.
FASB Staff Position FAS 115-2, FAS 124-2, and EITF 99-20-2, Recognition and
Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment, provides additional guidance
to provide greater clarity about the credit and noncredit component of an
other-than-temporary impairment event and to more effectively communicate when
an other-than-temporary impairment event has occurred. This FSP applies to debt
securities.
FASB Staff Position FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair
Value of Financial Instruments, or FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, amends FASB
Statement No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, to
require disclosures about fair value of financial instruments in interim as
well as in annual financial statements. This FSP also amends APB Opinion No.
28, Interim Financial Reporting, to require those disclosures in all interim
financial statements.
These standards are effective for the Company for the quarter ending June 30, 2009. The Company is
evaluating the impact that these standards will have on its financial statements.
Recently adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In March 2008, the FASB issued Statement No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities, as an amendment to SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities (SFAS 161). SFAS 161 requires that objectives for using derivative
instruments be disclosed in terms of underlying risk and accounting designation. The fair value of
derivative instruments and their gains and losses will need to be presented in tabular format in
order to present a more complete picture of the effects of using derivative instruments. SFAS 161
is effective for financial statements issued for periods beginning after November 15, 2008. The
adoption of this pronouncement did not have a material impact on the Companys financial
statements.
3) FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
Effective January 1, 2008, the Company implemented FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(SFAS 157), for its financial assets and liabilities that are re-measured and reported at fair
value at each reporting period, and non-financial assets and liabilities that are re-measured and
reported at fair value at least annually. The adoption of SFAS 157 did not have an impact on the
Companys financial results. As defined in SFAS 157, fair value is the price that would be
received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market
participants at the measurement date. Financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value are
classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
Level 1: Quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2: Observable market based inputs or unobservable inputs that are corroborated
by market data.
Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data.
Level 1 primarily consists of financial instruments whose value is based on quoted market prices
such as exchange-traded instruments and listed equities.
6
Level 2 includes financial instruments that are valued using models or other valuation
methodologies. These models are primarily industry-standard models that consider various
assumptions, including time value, yield curve, prepayment speeds, default rates, loss severity,
current market and contractual prices for the underlying financial instruments, as well as other
relevant economic measures. Substantially all of these assumptions are observable in the
marketplace, can be derived from observable data or are supported by observable levels at which
transactions are executed in the marketplace. Financial instruments in this category include
corporate debt and government-backed securities.
Level 3 is comprised of financial instruments whose fair value is estimated based on internally
developed models or methodologies utilizing significant inputs that are generally less readily
observable. The following table presents information about the Companys assets and liabilities
that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of March 31, 2009, and indicates the fair
value hierarchy of the valuation techniques the Company utilized to determine such fair value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
United States government-backed securities |
|
$ |
12,762,000 |
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
1,478,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
14,240,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
Warrant liability |
|
$ |
571,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
571,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Level 3 Recurring Fair Value Measurements:
The table below includes a rollforward of the balance sheet amounts for the three-month period
ended March 31, 2009 for the warrant liability, which is classified as Level 3. When a
determination is made to classify a financial instrument within Level 3, the determination is
based upon the significance of the unobservable parameters to the overall fair value measurement.
However, Level 3 financial instruments typically include, in addition to the unobservable
components, observable components (that is, components that are actively quoted and can be
validated to external sources). Accordingly, the gains and losses in the table below include
changes in fair value due in part to observable factors that are part of the methodology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) |
|
|
|
Three-month period ended March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales, |
|
|
Transfers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instruments |
|
|
|
Fair Value at |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Issuances, |
|
|
In and/or |
|
|
Fair Value at |
|
|
Held at |
|
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Settlements, |
|
|
Out of |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
(Gains)/Losses |
|
|
net |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrant Liability |
|
$ |
436,000 |
|
|
$ |
135,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
571,000 |
|
|
$ |
135,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
4) WARRANTS
On October 29, 2007, the Company sold, through a private placement, 4,581,043 shares of its common
stock and warrants to purchase 1,145,259 shares of common stock with an exercise price of $2.85.
The warrants have a 5.5 year term and became exercisable on April 30, 2008. The warrants are
recorded as a derivative liability at fair value. At March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the
aggregate fair value of these warrants was $571,000 and $436,000, respectively. Assumptions used
for the Black-Scholes option-pricing models as of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
Expected volatility |
|
|
78.9 |
% |
|
|
75.0 |
% |
Remaining contractual term (years) |
|
|
4.08 |
|
|
|
4.33 |
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
1.67 |
% |
|
|
1.55 |
% |
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Common stock price |
|
$ |
1.23 |
|
|
$ |
1.05 |
|
5) MARKETABLE SECURITIES
The Companys investment securities consist of securities of the U.S. government and its agencies,
and investment grade corporate bonds. The Company has historically classified all investment
securities as available-for-sale and recorded such investments at fair market value. Since the
Companys investments are managed by a third-party investment advisor pursuant to a discretionary
arrangement, for securities with unrealized losses at March 31, 2009 and 2008, which totaled
$41,000 and $6,000, respectively, an other-than-temporary impairment was considered to have
occurred and the cost basis of such securities were written down to their fair values with the
amount of the write-down included in earnings as realized losses and which are included in other
income in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. As of March 31, 2009,
current yields range from 0.35% to 7.37% and maturity dates range from May 2009 to January 2013.
The estimated fair value and cost of marketable securities at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
Unrealized |
|
Fair |
|
|
Cost |
|
Gains |
|
Value |
|
|
|
United States government-backed securities |
|
$ |
12,477,000 |
|
|
$ |
285,000 |
|
|
$ |
12,762,000 |
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
1,448,000 |
|
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
1,478,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities available-for-sale |
|
$ |
13,925,000 |
|
|
$ |
315,000 |
|
|
$ |
14,240,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
Unrealized |
|
Fair |
|
|
Cost |
|
Gains |
|
Value |
|
|
|
United States government-backed securities |
|
$ |
11,956,000 |
|
|
$ |
357,000 |
|
|
$ |
12,313,000 |
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
2,662,000 |
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
|
|
2,690,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities available-for-sale |
|
$ |
14,618,000 |
|
|
$ |
385,000 |
|
|
$ |
15,003,000 |
|
|
|
|
The change in gross unrealized gains on such securities for the three month periods ended March 31,
2009 and 2008 were $(70,000) and $167,000, respectively, and have been recorded in accumulated
other comprehensive income, which is reported as part of shareholders equity in the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets. Realized (losses)/gains on sales of marketable securities were
$(37,000) and $2,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
6) CONCENTRATIONS
The Company invests cash in accordance with a policy objective that seeks to preserve both
liquidity and safety of principal. The Company manages the credit risk associated with its
investments in marketable securities by investing in U.S. government securities and investment
grade corporate bonds. The Company is also exposed to concentration of credit risk related to
accounts receivable that are generated from its distributors and customers. To manage credit risk,
the Company performs regular credit evaluations of its customers and provides allowances for
potential credit losses, when applicable. Concentrations in the Companys total revenues for
8
the
three-months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, and accounts receivable as of March 31, 2009 and
December 31, 2008 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of revenue |
|
|
|
|
three months ended |
|
% of accounts receivable |
|
|
March 31, |
|
March 31, |
|
March 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
Customer A |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
Customer B |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Customer C |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer E |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
Customer F |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
Other Customers |
|
|
90 |
% |
|
|
68 |
% |
|
|
80 |
% |
|
|
79 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
The Company is dependent upon sole-source suppliers for a number of its products. There can be no
assurance that these suppliers will be able to meet the Companys future requirements for such
products or parts or that they will be available at favorable terms. Any extended interruption in
the supply of any such products or parts or any significant price increase could have a material
adverse effect on the Companys operating results in any given period.
7) INVENTORY
Inventory consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
Finished goods |
|
$ |
1,324,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,348,000 |
|
BLU-U® evaluation units |
|
|
83,000 |
|
|
|
166,000 |
|
Work in process |
|
|
525,000 |
|
|
|
698,000 |
|
Raw materials |
|
|
604,000 |
|
|
|
601,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,536,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,813,000 |
|
|
|
|
BLU-U® commercial light sources placed in physicians offices for an initial evaluation
period are included in inventory until all revenue recognition criteria are met. The Company
amortizes the cost of the evaluation units during the evaluation period of three years to cost of
product revenues to approximate its net realizable value.
8) OTHER ACCRUED EXPENSES
Other accrued expenses consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
Research and development costs |
|
$ |
233,000 |
|
|
$ |
190,000 |
|
Marketing and sales costs |
|
|
376,000 |
|
|
|
191,000 |
|
Reserve for sales returns and allowances |
|
|
430,000 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
Accrued FDA fees |
|
|
589,000 |
|
|
|
589,000 |
|
Reserve for chargebacks and rebates |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
30,000 |
|
Other product related costs |
|
|
938,000 |
|
|
|
824,000 |
|
Legal and other professional fees |
|
|
637,000 |
|
|
|
467,000 |
|
Employee benefits |
|
|
311,000 |
|
|
|
278,000 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
158,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,604,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,227,000 |
|
|
|
|
9
9) SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION
Total share-based compensation expense, related to all of the Companys share-based awards,
recognized for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 included the following line
items:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three-months ended |
|
Three-months ended |
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
March 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Cost of product revenues |
|
$ |
20,000 |
|
|
$ |
24,000 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
121,000 |
|
Selling and marketing |
|
|
(15,000 |
) |
|
|
(60,000 |
) |
General and administrative |
|
|
144,000 |
|
|
|
247,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
199,000 |
|
|
$ |
332,000 |
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average estimated fair value of employee stock options granted during the three-month
period ended March 31, 2009 was $0.81 per share, using the Black-Scholes option valuation model
with the following weighted-average assumptions (annualized percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
Volatility |
|
|
73.4 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
1.87 |
% |
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
Expected life-directors and officers |
|
6.5 years |
Expected life-non-officer employees |
|
5.7 years |
A summary of stock option activity for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Term |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price |
|
|
(Years) |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, beginning of period |
|
|
3,011,063 |
|
|
$ |
9.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Options granted |
|
|
686,650 |
|
|
$ |
1.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeited |
|
|
(4,175 |
) |
|
$ |
4.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options expired |
|
|
(104,563 |
) |
|
$ |
9.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, end of period |
|
|
3,588,975 |
|
|
$ |
8.28 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
$ |
6,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable, end of period |
|
|
2,461,125 |
|
|
$ |
11.12 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options vested and expected to vest, end of period |
|
|
3,403,966 |
|
|
$ |
8.65 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
$ |
5,541 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the first quarter of 2009 and the second quarter of 2008, respectively, the Company issued
280,000 and 102,000 unvested shares of common stock to its officers. The Company also issued
45,000 shares of unvested common stock to its Board of Directors during the first quarter of 2009.
The unvested shares of common stock vest over 4 years at a rate of 25% per year. The fair value
on the date of grant was $1.22 and $2.20 per share in 2009 and 2008, respectively. At March 31,
2009 the total amount of unrecognized compensation expense related to grants of options and
unvested common stock was $1,355,000 and $511,000, respectively. The unrecognized compensation
related to unvested common stock will be recognized over a weighted-average period of 3.7 years.
10) BASIC AND DILUTED NET LOSS PER SHARE
Basic net loss per common share is based upon the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding during each period. Stock options, unvested common stock grants and warrants are not
included in the computation of the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for
dilutive net loss per common share during each of the periods presented in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations, as the effect would be antidilutive. For the three-month period ended
March 31, 2009, and 2008, stock options, unvested common stock grants, warrants and rights totaling
approximately 5,400,000 and 4,214,000 shares, respectively, have been excluded from the computation
of diluted net loss per share as the effect would be antidilutive.
10
11) SEGMENT REPORTING
The Company has two reportable operating segments: Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) Drug and Device
Products and Non-Photodynamic Therapy (Non-PDT) Drug Products. Operating segments are defined as
components of the Company for which separate financial information is available to manage resources
and evaluate performance regularly by the chief operating decision maker. The table below presents
the revenues, costs of revenues and gross margins attributable to these reportable segments for the
periods presented. The Company does not allocate research and development, selling and marketing
and general and administrative expenses to its reportable segments, because these activities are
managed at a corporate level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three-month period ended |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PDT drug and device product revenues |
|
$ |
6,719,000 |
|
|
$ |
5,830,000 |
|
Non-PDT drug product revenues |
|
|
419,000 |
|
|
|
2,100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
7,138,000 |
|
|
|
7,930,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COSTS OF PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PDT drug and device cost of product revenues |
|
|
1,715,000 |
|
|
|
1,274,000 |
|
Non-PDT drug cost of product revenues |
|
|
223,000 |
|
|
|
427,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs of product revenues |
|
|
1,938,000 |
|
|
|
1,701,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GROSS MARGIN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PDT drug and device product gross margins |
|
|
5,004,000 |
|
|
|
4,556,000 |
|
Non-PDT drug product gross margins |
|
|
196,000 |
|
|
|
1,673,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross margins |
|
$ |
5,200,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,229,000 |
|
|
|
|
During the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company derived revenues from the
following geographies based on the location of the customer (as a percentage of product revenues):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
United States |
|
|
95 |
% |
|
|
92 |
% |
Canada |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Korea |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
Other |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
12) COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
For the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, comprehensive loss consisted of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
March 31, |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS |
|
$ |
(1,607,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,284,000 |
) |
Change in net unrealized gains on marketable securities available-for-sale |
|
|
(70,000 |
) |
|
|
167,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMPREHENSIVE LOSS |
|
$ |
(1,677,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,117,000 |
) |
|
|
|
13) STIEFEL AGREEMENT
In January 2006, as amended in September 2007, the Company licensed to Stiefel Laboratories, Inc.
the exclusive Latin American rights to market Levulan® PDT for payments by Stiefel of up
to $2,250,000. The Company also manufactures and supplies finished product for Stiefel, which the
Company began shipping in September 2007. In consideration for the transaction Stiefel agreed to
pay the Company as follows: (i) $375,000 upon launch of the product in either Mexico or Argentina;
(ii) $375,000 upon receipt of acceptable pricing approval in Brazil; (iii) two installments of
$375,000 each for cumulative end-user sales in Brazil totaling 150,000 units and 300,000 units, and
(iv) two installments of $375,000 each for cumulative sales in countries excluding Brazil totaling
150,000 units and 300,000 units. Stiefel launched the product in October 2007 in Mexico and
Argentina and in April 2008 in Brazil. The Company is deferring and recognizing approval and sales
milestones as license revenues on a straight-line basis, beginning on the date the milestone is
achieved through the fourth quarter of 2015, which is the term of the Stiefel Agreement. Stiefel
pays a fixed price per unit for the inventory as well as a royalty based on a percentage of the net
sales price to end-users. During the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, the
Companys sales of Levulan® Kerastick® to Stiefel were $0 and $202,000,
respectively. At
11
March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 the total revenues deferred associated with shipments to
Stiefel were $351,000 and $389,000, respectively, in accordance with the Companys policy of
deferring revenues during a products launch phase and recognizing revenues based on end-user
demand. Deferred revenues at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 associated with milestone
payments received from Stiefel were $599,000 and $621,000, respectively.
The agreement with Stiefel also establishes minimum purchase quantities over the first five years
following regulatory approval. The first contract year for all countries other than Brazil began
in October 2007, and for Brazil began in April 2008. For the contract year ended in October 2008
Stiefel did not meet its minimum purchase obligations under the agreement. The agreement provides
that within 60 days of the year end, Stiefel is required to pay the Company the difference between
its actual purchases and the contractual minimums (a gross up payment). If Stiefel fails to make
the gross up payment, the Companys remedies include, without limitation, appointing one or more
distributors in the territory or terminating the agreement. Stiefel did not make the gross up
payment within the contractual time period, and the parties are presently discussing actions to be
taken, if any, due to the first year shortfall. Also, since Stiefels sales to third parties
during the contract year ended October 2008 were below its minimum purchase obligations, Stiefel
has the unilateral right to cancel the contract. Stiefel has not exercised this right.
14) DAEWOONG AGREEMENT
In January 2007 the Company licensed to Daewoong the exclusive rights to market Levulan®
PDT in Korea and other Asia Pacific countries for payments by Daewoong of up to $3,500,000. The
Company also manufactures and supplies finished product for Daewoong, which the Company began
shipping in October 2007. In consideration for the transaction Daewoong agreed to pay the Company
as follows: (i) $1,000,000 upon contract signing; (ii) $1,000,000 upon achieving regulatory
approval in Korea; and (iii) two installments of $750,000 each for cumulative end-user sales
totaling 200,000 units and 500,000 units. Daewoong launched the product in November 2007 in Korea.
The Company is deferring and recognizing the up-front and regulatory approval milestones as license
revenues on a straight-line basis, beginning with product launch in the territory through the
fourth quarter of 2016, which is the term of the Daewoong Agreement. Daewoong pays a fixed price
per unit for the inventory and an Excess Purchase Price, as defined in the Agreement, if the
Average Selling Price to end-users during any calendar quarter exceeds a certain threshold. During
the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, the Companys sales of Levulan®
Kerastick® to Daewoong were $0 and $998,000, respectively. At March 31, 2009 and
December 31, 2008 the total revenues deferred associated with shipments to Daewoong were $1,026,000
and $1,144,000, respectively, in accordance with the Companys policy of deferring revenues during
a products launch phase and recognizing revenues based on end-user demand. Deferred revenues at
March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 associated with milestone payments received from Daewoong were
$1,592,000 and $1,643,000, respectively. The agreement with Daewoong also establishes minimum
purchase quantities over the first five years following regulatory approval.
15) COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Business Acquisition
On March 10, 2006, the Company acquired all of the outstanding common stock of Sirius Laboratories,
Inc (Sirius). The Company agreed to pay additional consideration in future periods to the former
Sirius shareholders based upon the achievement of total cumulative sales milestones for the Sirius
products over the period ending 50 months from the date of close. The first cumulative sales
milestone was achieved during 2008, and accordingly a cash payment in the amount of $1.5 million
was paid to the former Sirius shareholders in that year. The payment made during 2008 was recorded
initially as goodwill and then subsequently deemed impaired and expensed during the same period as
described below.
If the remaining sales milestones are attained, they will be paid in either common stock or cash,
at the Companys sole discretion. The remaining cumulative sales milestones and related
consideration are, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
Cumulative Sales Milestone: |
|
Consideration: |
|
$35.0 million |
|
$1.0 million |
$45.0 million |
|
$1.0 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$2.0 million |
|
|
|
|
Legal Matters
Rivers Edge Litigation Settlement
As part of the settlement of litigation between DUSA and Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC in
October 2007, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release (the Settlement
Agreement) to dismiss the lawsuit brought by DUSA against Rivers Edge asserting a number of
claims arising out of Rivers Edges alleged infringement of the Companys Nicomide®
patent,
U.S. Patent No. 6,979,468, under which DUSA formerly marketed, distributed and sold
Nicomide®. As part of the terms of this agreement, Rivers Edge agreed to pay to DUSA
$25.00 for every bottle of Rivers Edge product above 5,000 bottles that was substituted for
Nicomide® after September 30, 2007. The net gain from settlement of litigation for the
three-month periods ended
12
March 31, 2009 and 2008 was $0 and $236,000, respectively, and is
recorded in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations as a separate
component of operating expenses.
On August 12, 2008, the Company entered into a worldwide non-exclusive patent License Agreement to
its patent covering Nicomide® with Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC and an amendment
to its Settlement Agreement with Rivers Edge. The amendment to the Settlement Agreement, which
has been further amended as described in Note 16 Subsequent Events, had allowed Rivers Edge to
manufacture and market a prescription product that could be substitutable for Nicomide®
pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement and changed certain payment obligations of Rivers
Edge for sales of its substitutable product. In consideration for granting the license, the
Company is being paid a share of the net revenues, as defined in the License Agreement, of Rivers
Edges licensed product sales under the License Agreement. Royalty revenues recorded pursuant to
the License Agreement are recorded in Product Revenues in the accompanying Consolidated Statements
of Operations.
WINSTON LABORATORIES ARBITRATION
In October 2008, the Company was notified that Winston Laboratories, Inc. had filed a demand for
arbitration against the Company. The demand for arbitration arises out of the 2006 Micanol License
Agreement and subsequent 2006 Micanol Transition License Agreement (together, the Agreement) and
claims that DUSA breached the Agreement. Winston Laboratories is claiming damages in excess of
$2,000,000. The Company plans to defend itself vigorously and has not recorded any liability
pursuant to the claim at March 31, 2009.
The Company has not accrued any amounts for potential contingencies as of March 31, 2009.
16) SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Rivers Edge Amendment to License Agreement
In April 2009, the Company and Rivers Edge entered into an Amendment to the License Agreement
(the License Amendment) originally entered into in August 2008. The License Amendment grants
Rivers Edge an exclusive license to U.S. Patent, No. 6,979,468, and a license to use all know-how
and the trademark associated with the Licensed Products worldwide. Under the License Amendment,
DUSA is required to transfer all of its rights, title and interest in and to the DUSAs patent,
know-how and trademark relating to the Licensed Products (but not the copyright registration
relating to product labeling) to Rivers Edge upon the Companys receipt of $5,000,000. Of the
$5,000,000, Rivers Edge is required to make a minimum guaranteed payment to the Company of
$2,600,000, in thirteen monthly installments of $200,000, subject to reduction under certain
conditions, and pay additional consideration of $2,400,000 payable over time based on a share of
Rivers Edges net revenues as defined in the License Amendment. The License Agreement, as
amended, has a term of 30 months, subject to a further extension under certain circumstances to 48
months, and may be terminated early by Rivers Edge on 30 days prior written notice to the
Company. Under the License Agreement, Rivers Edge has assumed all regulatory responsibilities
for the Licensed Products. If Rivers Edge terminates the License Agreement prior to the payment
of the $5,000,000, all of the rights and licenses granted by the Company to Rivers Edge will
revert to the Company.
Third Amendment to Merger Agreement
In April 2009, the Company and the former shareholders of Sirius Laboratories, Inc., some of
whom were acting through their shareholder representatives, entered into a letter agreement
providing for the consent of the former Sirius shareholders to the Amendment to the License
Agreement with Rivers Edge mentioned above, a release, and the Third Amendment to the Merger
Agreement, dated as of December 30, 2005, by and among the DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sirius
Laboratories, Inc. and the shareholders of Sirius. Pursuant to the Merger Agreement prior to this
amendment, the Company agreed to pay additional consideration after the closing of the merger to
the former shareholders of Sirius based upon the attainment of pre-determined total cumulative
sales milestones for the products acquired from Sirius over the period ending 50 months from the
date of the March 2006 closing of the original Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the documents entered
into in April 2009, the Company has agreed to extend the Milestone Termination Date from 50 months
from the date of the closing of the original Merger Agreement until December 31, 2011 and to
include in the definition of Net Sales, in the Merger Agreement, payments which the Company may
receive from the divestiture of Sirius products. The Third Amendment to the Merger Agreement also
deletes the Companys obligation to market the Sirius products according to certain previously
required standards and allows the Company to manage all business activities relating to the
products acquired from Sirius without further approval from the former Sirius shareholders.
In April 2009 the Company paid to the former Sirius shareholders, on a pro rata basis,
$100,000. In addition, in the event that the $1,000,000 milestone payment that would become due
to the former Sirius shareholders under the Merger Agreement if cumulative
Net Sales of the Sirius products reach $35,000,000 is not, in fact, triggered by the new
Milestone Termination Date, then the Company has agreed to pay $250,000 to the former Sirius
shareholders on a pro rata basis on or before January 6, 2012.
13
Nicomide Recall
In April 2009, the Company initiated a Class III recall on 3 lots of its product,
Nicomide®, due to a failure of the annual stability lot. The Company believes that there
is no health risk associated with this product. The recall is being conducted with the knowledge of
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Since the Company had stopped shipping Nicomide®
at the end of June 2008, the Company believes there is minimal inventory at the wholesale level,
and as a result this action is not expected to have a material impact to the Companys financial
condition or results of its operations.
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
We are a vertically integrated dermatology company that is developing and marketing
Levulan® photodynamic therapy, or PDT, and other products for common skin conditions.
Our marketed products include, among others, Levulan® Kerastick® 20% Topical
Solution with PDT, the BLU-U® brand light source, and ClindaReach®, which we
acquired.
Historically, we devoted most of our resources to advancing the development and marketing of our
Levulan® PDT/PD technology platform. In addition to our marketed products, our drug,
Levulan® brand of aminolevulinic acid HCl, or ALA, in combination with light, has been
studied in a broad range of medical conditions. When Levulan® is used and followed with
exposure to light to treat a medical condition, it is known as Levulan® PDT. When
Levulan® is used and followed with exposure to light to detect medical conditions, it
is known as Levulan® photodetection, or Levulan® PD. The
Kerastick® is our proprietary applicator that delivers Levulan®. The
BLU-U® is our patented light device.
The Levulan® Kerastick® 20% Topical Solution with PDT and the
BLU-U® were launched in the United States, or U.S., in September 2000 for the treatment
of non-hyperkeratotic actinic keratoses, or AKs, of the face or scalp under a former dermatology
collaboration. AKs are precancerous skin lesions caused by chronic sun exposure that can develop
over time into a form of skin cancer called squamous cell carcinoma. In addition, in September
2003 we received clearance from the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, to market
the BLU-U® without Levulan® PDT for the treatment of moderate inflammatory
acne vulgaris and general dermatological conditions.
Sirius Laboratories, Inc., or Sirius, a dermatology specialty pharmaceuticals company, was founded
in 2000 with a primary focus on the treatment of acne vulgaris and acne rosacea.
Nicomide®, its key product, is a vitamin-mineral product formerly prescribed by
dermatologists. In April 2008, we were notified by Actavis Totowa, LLC, the manufacturer of
Nicomide®, that Actavis would cease manufacturing several prescription vitamins,
including Nicomide®, due to continuing discussions with the FDA. As we previously
disclosed, Actavis Totowa had received notice that the FDA considers prescription dietary
supplements to be unapproved new drugs. In response to this notification and subsequent
discussions with the FDA, we stopped the sale and distribution of Nicomide® as a
prescription product in June 2008.
On August 12, 2008, we entered into a worldwide non-exclusive patent License Agreement to our
patent covering Nicomide®, or License Agreement, with Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals,
LLC, or Rivers Edge, and an amendment to our Settlement Agreement with Rivers Edge regarding
earlier litigation. See Note 15 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
The amendment to the Settlement Agreement allowed Rivers Edge to manufacture and market a
prescription product that could be substitutable for Nicomide® pursuant to the terms of
the License Agreement and changes certain payment obligations of Rivers Edge for sales of its
substitutable product. In consideration for granting the license, we were paid a share of the net
revenues, as defined in the License Agreement, of Rivers Edges licensed product
sales.® In April 2009, we and Rivers Edge entered into an Amendment to the License
Agreement, or License Amendment. The License Amendment grants Rivers Edge an exclusive license
to U.S. Patent, No. 6,979,468, and a license to use all know-how and the trademark associated with
the Licensed Products worldwide. Under the License Amendment, we are required to transfer all of
our rights, title and interest in and to DUSAs patent, know-how and trademark relating to the
Licensed Products (but not the copyright registration relating to product labeling) to Rivers
Edge upon our receipt of $5,000,000. Of the $5,000,000, Rivers Edge is required to make a
minimum guaranteed payment to us of $2,600,000, in thirteen monthly installments of $200,000,
subject to reduction under certain conditions, and pay additional consideration of $2,400,000
payable over time based on a share of Rivers Edges net revenues as defined in the License
Amendment. The License Agreement, as amended, has a term of 30 months, subject to a further
extension under certain circumstances to 48 months, and may be terminated early by Rivers Edge on
30 days prior written notice. Under the License Agreement, Rivers Edge has assumed all
regulatory responsibilities for the Licensed Products. If Rivers Edge terminates the License
Agreement prior to the payment of the $5,000,000, all of the rights and licenses granted by us to
Rivers Edge will revert to us.
We are developing Levulan® PDT and PD under an exclusive worldwide license of
patents and technology from PARTEQ Research and Development Innovations, the licensing arm
of Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. In January, 2009, we filed a request for
reexamination with the USPTO of one of the Queens patents that cover our approved
indication for AK. We also own or license certain other patents relating to our BLU-U
device and methods for using pharmaceutical formulations which contain our drug and related
processes and improvements. In the United States, DUSA®, DUSA Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.®, Levulan®, Kerastick®, BLU-U®,
Nicomide®, Nicomide-T®, ClindaReach®, Meted®,
and Psoriacap®
14
are registered trademarks. Several of these trademarks are also
registered in Europe, Australia, Canada, and in other parts of the world. Numerous other
trademark applications are pending.
As of March 31, 2009, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $143,458,000. We cannot
predict whether any of our products will achieve significant enough market acceptance or generate
sufficient revenues to enable us to become profitable on a sustainable basis. If our domestic PDT
revenue growth rates for the remainder of 2009 are comparable to prior year levels, we expect to
become cash flow positive and profitable on a quarterly basis sometime late in 2009. We recorded
significant impairment changes of goodwill during the fourth quarter of 2007 and the third quarter
of 2008. Achieving our goal of becoming a profitable operating company is dependent upon greater
acceptance of our PDT therapy by the medical and consumer constituencies, increased sales of our
products and other factors contained in this report.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Our accounting policies are disclosed in Note 2 to the Notes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. Since all of
these accounting policies do not require management to make difficult, subjective or complex
judgments or estimates, they are not all considered critical accounting policies. We have discussed
these policies and the underlying estimates used in applying these accounting policies with our
Audit Committee. There have been no changes to our critical accounting policies in the three months
ended March 31, 2009.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS THREE MONTHS ENDING MARCH 31, 2009 VERSUS MARCH 31, 2008
REVENUES Total revenues for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 were $7,138,000, as
compared to $7,930,000 in 2008 and were comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
Increase/(Decrease) |
|
|
|
PDT PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LEVULAN® KERASTICK® PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
5,685,000 |
|
|
$ |
4,774,000 |
|
|
$ |
911,000 |
|
Canada |
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
159,000 |
|
|
|
(24,000 |
) |
Korea |
|
|
170,000 |
|
|
|
365,000 |
|
|
|
(195,000 |
) |
Rest of world |
|
|
87,000 |
|
|
|
56,000 |
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal Levulan® Kerastick® product revenues |
|
|
6,077,000 |
|
|
|
5,354,000 |
|
|
|
723,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BLU-U® PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
|
642,000 |
|
|
|
476,000 |
|
|
|
166,000 |
|
|
|
|
Subtotal BLU-U® product revenues |
|
|
642,000 |
|
|
|
476,000 |
|
|
|
166,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL PDT PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
|
6,719,000 |
|
|
|
5,830,000 |
|
|
|
889,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL NON-PDT DRUG PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
|
419,000 |
|
|
|
2,100,000 |
|
|
|
(1,681,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL PRODUCT REVENUES |
|
$ |
7,138,000 |
|
|
$ |
7,930,000 |
|
|
$ |
(792,000 |
) |
|
|
|
For the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, total PDT Drug and Device Products revenues,
comprised of revenues from our Kerastick® and BLU-U® products, were
$6,719,000. This represents an increase of $889,000 or 15%, over the comparable 2008 total of
$5,830,000. The increase in revenues was driven primarily by increased Kerastick® and
BLU-U® revenues in the United States.
For the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, Kerastick® revenues were $6,077,000,
representing an increase of $723,000 or 13%, over the comparable 2008 total of $5,354,000.
Kerastick® unit sales to end-users for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 were
51,947, including 46,662 sold in the United States, 1,500 sold in Canada and 2,274 sold in Korea.
Kerastick® units sold in the three-month period ended March 31, 2008 were 52,110,
including 43,296 sold in the United States, 2,100 sold in Canada and 6,036 sold in Korea. Our
average net selling price for the Kerastick® increased to $115.36 per unit for the
three-month period ended March 31, 2009 from $101.33 per unit in 2008. Our average net selling
price for the Kerastick® in the US increased from $110.26 per unit in 2008 to $121.83
per unit in 2009. The increase in 2009 Kerastick® revenues was driven mainly by an
increase in both sales volumes and average net selling price in the United States, partially offset
by a decrease in international Kerastick® revenues. The decrease in Korea is
attributable to the purchase of launch quantities in the 2008 period.
For the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, BLU-U® revenues were $642,000,
representing a $166,000 or a 35% increase, over the comparable 2008 total of $476,000. The increase
in 2009 BLU-U® revenues was driven by increased overall sales volumes, offset in part by
a decrease in our average selling price. In the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, there were
81 units sold, versus 56 units in 2008. All of the units sold in both years were sold in the United
States. Our average net selling price for the BLU-U® decreased to $7,589 for the
three-month period ended March 31, 2009 from $8,245 for 2008. Our BLU-U® evaluation
program allows customers to take delivery for a limited number of BLU-U® units for a
period of up to four months for private practitioners and up to
15
one year for hospital clinics,
before a purchase decision is required. At March 31, 2009, there were approximately 31 units in the
field pursuant to this evaluation program, compared to 58 units in the field at December 31, 2008.
The units are classified as inventory in the financial statements and are being amortized during
the evaluation period to cost of goods sold using an estimated life for the equipment of three
years.
Non-PDT Drug Product Revenues reflect the revenues generated by the products acquired as part of
our acquisition of Sirius. Total Non-PDT drug product revenues for the three-month period ended
March 31, 2009 were $419,000, compared to $2,100,000 for the comparable 2008 period. The
substantial majority of the Non-PDT product revenues were from Nicomide® related
royalties and sales of ClindaReach®. In April 2008, we were notified by Actavis
Totowa, LLC, the manufacturer of Nicomide®, that Actavis would cease manufacturing
several prescription vitamins, including Nicomide®, due to continuing discussions with
the FDA. As we previously disclosed, Actavis Totowa had received notice that the FDA considers
prescription dietary supplements to be unapproved new drugs. In response to this notification and
subsequent discussions with the FDA, we stopped the sale and distribution of Nicomide®
as a prescription product in June 2008.
On August 12, 2008, we entered into a worldwide non-exclusive patent License Agreement to our
patent covering Nicomide® with Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC and an amendment to
our Settlement Agreement with Rivers Edge. The amendment to the Settlement Agreement, which has
been further amended as described further in Note 16 Subsequent Events to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements, allowed Rivers Edge to manufacture and market a product
that could be substitutable for Nicomide® pursuant to the terms of the License
Agreement and changed certain payment obligations of Rivers Edge for sales of its substitutable
product. In consideration for granting the license, we were paid a share of the net revenues, as
defined in the License Agreement, of Rivers Edges licensed product sales under the License
Agreement. The Settlement Agreement and the subsequent amendment are described in Notes 15 and 16
to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
The decrease in our total revenues for the three month period ended March 31, 2009 compared with
the comparable period in 2008 results from decreases in Non-PDT revenues and international
Kerastick® revenues, partially offset by increased PDT segment revenues in the United
States. We must continue to increase sales from these levels in order for us to become profitable.
PhotoCure received FDA approval to market Metvixia® for treatment of AKs in July 2004,
and this product, which is directly competitive with our Levulan®
Kerastick®
product, is now commercially available. While we are entitled to royalties
from PhotoCure on its net sales of Metvixia®, a large dermatology company has the
marketing rights in the U.S., which may adversely affect our ability to maintain or increase our
Levulan® market. Nonetheless, we remain confident that PDT revenues in the United States
should continue to increase through increased consumption of our PDT products by our existing
customers, as well as the addition of new customers. We expect to be able to grow our PDT segment
revenues in the United States during 2009, due in part to the 6% increase in reimbursement of our
PDT-related procedure fee, which became effective January 1, 2009, as well as our price increases,
which were effective October 1, 2008 and January 1, 2009. We also believe that these two price increases may have impacted the purchasing patterns of our larger customers during this quarter. Although we expect growth in our PDT
segment revenues, a portion of our customer base, i.e., those focusing on the cosmetic market, are
more susceptible to the uncertain economic conditions facing our markets, and reduced sales to that
customer base could be expected until the economy recovers. The vast majority of our international
sales and medi-spa sales fall into this market. We expect our Non-PDT revenues for 2009 to be
significantly reduced compared to 2008 since, although we are receiving royalties, we are no longer
manufacturing and marketing Nicomide® as a prescription product and we licensed the AVAR
product line.
COST OF PRODUCT REVENUES Cost of product revenues for the three-month period ended March 31,
2009 were $1,938,000 as compared to $1,701,000 in 2008. A summary of the components of cost of
product revenues and royalties is provided below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/ |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
|
Levulan® Kerastick® Cost of Product Revenues and Royalties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Levulan® Kerastick® Product costs |
|
$ |
564,000 |
|
|
$ |
638,000 |
|
|
$ |
(74,000 |
) |
Other Levulan® Kerastick® production costs including
internal costs assigned to support products, net |
|
|
359,000 |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
349,000 |
|
Royalty and supply fees |
|
|
253,000 |
|
|
|
248,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal Levulan® Kerastick® Cost of Product Revenues and
Royalties |
|
|
1,176,000 |
|
|
|
896,000 |
|
|
|
280,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BLU-U® Cost of Product Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct BLU-U® Product Costs |
|
|
291,000 |
|
|
|
201,000 |
|
|
|
90,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other BLU-U® Product Costs including internal costs assigned to
support products; as well as, costs incurred to ship, install and service the
BLU-U® in physicians offices |
|
|
248,000 |
|
|
|
177,000 |
|
|
|
71,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal BLU-U® Cost of Product Revenues |
|
|
539,000 |
|
|
|
378,000 |
|
|
|
161,000 |
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/ |
|
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
|
TOTAL PDT DRUG AND DEVICE COST OF PRODUCT REVENUES AND ROYALTIES |
|
|
1,715,000 |
|
|
|
1,274,000 |
|
|
|
441,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-PDT Drug Cost of Product Revenues and Royalties |
|
|
223,000 |
|
|
|
427,000 |
|
|
|
(204,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL COST OF PRODUCT REVENUES AND ROYALTIES |
|
$ |
1,938,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,701,000 |
|
|
$ |
237,000 |
|
|
|
|
MARGINS Total product margins for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 was $5,200,000 as
compared to $6,229,000 for the comparable 2008 period, as shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/ |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Levulan® Kerastick® Gross Margin |
|
$ |
4,901,000 |
|
|
|
81 |
% |
|
$ |
4,458,000 |
|
|
|
83 |
% |
|
$ |
443,000 |
|
BLU-U® Gross Margin |
|
|
103,000 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
98,000 |
|
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total PDT Drug and Device Gross Margin |
|
$ |
5,004,000 |
|
|
|
74 |
% |
|
$ |
4,556,000 |
|
|
|
78 |
% |
|
$ |
448,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Non-PDT Drug Gross Margin |
|
|
196,000 |
|
|
|
47 |
% |
|
$ |
1,673,000 |
|
|
|
80 |
% |
|
|
(1,477,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL GROSS MARGIN |
|
$ |
5,200,000 |
|
|
|
73 |
% |
|
$ |
6,229,000 |
|
|
|
79 |
% |
|
$ |
(1,029,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kerastick® gross margins for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 were 81% versus
83% for the comparable 2008 period. The decrease in the Kerastick® margin is mainly
attributable to the absence of production volumes associated with initial stocking orders from our
international partners, which occurred in the first quarter of 2008, partially offset by an
increase in both sales volumes and the average selling price in the U.S. Our long-term goal is to
achieve higher gross margins on Kerastick® sales which will be significantly dependent
on increased volume. We believe that we can achieve improved gross margins on our
Kerastick® during 2009 due to the anticipated increased volumes from continued growth in
the U.S.
BLU-U® margins for the three month period ended March 31, 2009 were 16% versus 21% for
the comparable 2008 period. The decrease in gross margin is a result of a decrease in the average
selling price per unit; as well as, increased overall costs incurred to support the product line.
Our short-term strategy is to at a minimum breakeven on device sales in an effort to drive
Kerastick® sales volumes.
Non-PDT Drug Product Margins reflect the gross margin generated by the products acquired as part of
our merger with Sirius. Total margin for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 was 47%
compared with 80% for the comparable period in 2008. Non-PDT Product margins in 2009 were
negatively impacted by our discontinuance of sales of Nicomide® as a prescription
product.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS Research and development costs for the three-month period ended
March 31, 2009 were $1,185,000 as compared to $2,186,000 in the comparable 2008 period. The
decrease in 2009 compared to 2008 was due primarily to the absence of spending related to our Phase
IIb clinical trial on acne, which concluded in October 2008, and a one-time $0.6 million
Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) charge, which occurred in the first quarter of 2008, related
to our approved AK indication.
Based on the results of the Phase IIb clinical trial, which were previously announced, we will not
pursue further clinical development of Levulan® PDT with BLU-U® for moderate
to severe acne. However, we do expect to continue to support investigator initiated studies in
moderate to severe acne with Levulan and various light sources. In May 2009 we filed a 510(k)
application with the FDA for an expansion of our BLU-U® label to include severe acne.
We previously had filed a patent application to cover an invention arising from the study.
We
initiated a Phase II pilot clinical trial, which we expect will include up to 36 patients at multiple
centers across the United States, for the treatment of actinic
keratoses and reduction of
non-melanoma skin cancers in immunosuppressed solid organ transplant recipients, or SOTR, who have
demonstrated that they are at risk of developing multiple squamous cell carcinomas. An Orphan Drug
Designation Application with respect to the prevention of cancer
occurrence in these patients is pending with the FDA, and
we expect a decision by FDA by the end of the second quarter of 2009.
We expect enrollment of these patients to take approximately one
year. We expect to receive preliminary results from the study in
approximately 15 months and full results in approximately two years. We expect that our overall
research and development costs for 2009 will remain below 2008 levels since we will not have
expenditures relating to the acne trial.
We have entered into a series of agreements for our research projects and clinical studies. As of
March 31, 2009 future minimum payments to be made pursuant to these agreements, under certain terms
and conditions, total approximately $788,000 for the remainder of 2009.
MARKETING AND SALES COSTS Marketing and sales costs for the three-month period ended March 31,
2009 were $3,410,000 as compared to $3,057,000 for the comparable 2008 period. These costs
consisted primarily of expenses such as salaries and benefits for the marketing and sales staff,
commissions, and related support expenses such as travel, and telephone, totaling $2,309,000 for
the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, compared to $2,057,000 in the comparable 2008 period.
The increase in this category is
17
due to primarily to increased headcount. The remaining expenses
consisted of tradeshows, miscellaneous marketing and outside consultants totaling $1,101,000 for
the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, compared to $1,000,000 for the comparable 2008
period. The increase in this category is due primarily to an increase in tradeshow related
expenditures. We expect marketing and sales costs for the full year 2009 to increase slightly over
2008 levels, but to decrease as a percentage of revenues.
GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS General and administrative costs for the three-month period
ended March 31, 2009 were $2,141,000 as compared to $2,368,000 for the comparable 2008 period. The
decrease is mainly attributable to a decrease in compensation related costs, offset by an increase
in legal expenses. General and administrative expenses are highly dependent on our legal and other
professional fees, which can vary significantly from period to period particularly in light of our
litigation strategy to protect our intellectual property. We may incur significant legal fees in
2009 due to the arbitration process which has been commenced by Winston Laboratories. See Note 17
to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
NET GAIN FROM SETTLEMENT OF LITIGATION During the fourth quarter of 2007, we entered into a
Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release with Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC. Under the terms of
the Settlement Agreement, Rivers Edge made a lump-sum settlement payment to us in the amount of
$425,000 for damages and paid to DUSA $25.00 for every prescription of NIC 750 above 5,000
prescriptions that were substituted for Nicomide® from September 30, 2007 through June
30, 2008. During the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 the net gain from
settlement of litigation was $0 and $236,000, respectively. These payments under the Settlement
Agreement ceased due to an amendment effective as of July 3, 2008. See Note 15 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
OTHER INCOME, NET Other income for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, decreased to
$65,000, as compared to $207,000 during the same period in 2008. This decrease reflects a decrease
in our average investable cash balances during 2009 as compared to 2008 along with a general
decrease in interest rates over the same timeframe.
LOSS ON CHANGE IN FAIR VALUE OF WARRANTS The warrants issued to investors in connection with the
October 29, 2007 private placement were recorded initially at fair value and are marked to market
each reporting period. The increase in the liability during the three month periods ended March 31,
2009 and 2008 was $135,000 and $345,000, respectively, which resulted in a non-cash loss in both
periods. The increases in fair value were due primarily to increases in our stock price during
both quarters.
NET LOSS We incurred a net loss of $1,607,000, or $0.07 per share, for the three-month period
ended March 31, 2009, as compared to a net loss of $1,284,000, or $0.05 per share, for the
comparable 2008 period. The increase in the net loss is attributable to the reasons discussed
above.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
At March 31, 2009, we had approximately $17,911,000 of total liquid assets, comprised of $3,671,000
of cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities available-for-sale totaling $14,240,000. We
believe that our liquidity will be sufficient to meet our cash requirements for at least the next
twelve months based on our projections of revenues and spending over that timeframe. We have
invested our funds in liquid investments, so that we will have ready access to these cash reserves,
as needed, for the funding of development plans on a short-term and long-term basis. As of March
31, 2009, these securities had a weighted average yield of 2.98% and maturity dates ranging from
May 2009 to January 2013. Our net cash used in operations for the three-month period ended March
31, 2009 was $841,000, versus $5,000 provided by operations in the comparable prior year period.
The year over year decrease in cash from operations is primarily attributable to an increase in our
net loss as well as a decrease in payments received from our international distributor partners
primarily from a one-time milestone payment and purchase of launch quantities and the absence of a
bonus payout in 2008. As of March 31, 2009 working capital (total current assets minus total
current liabilities) was $18,464,000, as compared to $20,278,000 as of December 31, 2008. Total
current assets decreased by $1,984,000 during the three-month period ended March 31, 2009, due
primarily to decreases in our marketable securities, accounts receivable, inventory and prepaid and
other current asset balances. Total current liabilities decreased by $170,000 during the same
period due primarily to a decrease in accrued compensation, partially offset by an increase in
other accrued expenses and the current portion of deferred revenues associated with our
international distributions agreements. In response to the instability in the global financial
markets, we regularly review our marketable securities holdings, and have reduced or avoided
investing in securities deemed to have increased risk. We do not hold any asset-backed or auction
rate securities.
Since our inception, we have generated significant losses while we have advanced our product
candidates into preclinical and clinical trials, development and commercialization. We have funded
our operations primarily through public offerings, private placements of equity securities and
payments received under our collaboration agreements. We expect to incur significant additional
research and development and other costs including costs related to preclinical studies and
clinical trials. Our costs, including research and development costs for our product candidates and
sales, marketing and promotion expenses for any of our existing or future products to be marketed
by us or our collaborators may exceed revenues in the future, which may result in continued losses
from operations.
We are actively seeking to further expand or enhance our business by using our resources to acquire
by license, purchase or other arrangements, additional businesses, new technologies, or products in
the field of dermatology. For 2009, we are focusing primarily on increasing the sales of the
Levulan® Kerastick® and the BLU-U®, as well as the
Non-Photodynamic Therapy Drug Products and advancing our Phase II study for use of
Levulan® PDT in SOTR. DUSA has no off-balance sheet financing arrangements.
18
If our domestic PDT growth rate in 2008 continues into 2009, we expect to become cash flow
positive and profitable on a quarterly basis sometime late in 2009. If we are unable to do so, we
may have to reduce our headcount, reduce spending in other areas, or raise funds through financing
transactions. We cannot predict whether financing will be available at all or on reasonable terms.
As part of our merger with Sirius, as amended, we agreed to pay additional consideration to
the former shareholders of Sirius in future periods, based upon the attainment of pre-determined
total cumulative sales milestones for the Sirius products over the period ending December 31,
2011. The pre-determined cumulative sales milestones for the Sirius products and the related
milestone payments which may be paid in cash or DUSA shares, as DUSA may determine, are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
Cumulative Sales Milestone: |
|
Consideration: |
|
|
$35.0 million |
|
$1.0 million |
$45.0 million |
|
$1.0 million |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$2.0 million |
|
|
|
|
The first cumulative sales milestone at $25.0 million was achieved during the third quarter of
2008, and a cash payment in the amount of $1.5 million was paid to the former Sirius shareholders
during that period. The payment was recorded initially as goodwill and then subsequently deemed
impaired and expensed during the same period. In April 2009, we entered into the Third Amendment
to the Merger Agreement as described in Note 16 to the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements. In April 2009 we paid the former Sirius shareholders $100,000 on a pro rata
basis and may be required to pay the $250,000 in January 2012 under certain circumstances.
Contractual Obligations and Other Commercial Commitments
L. PERRIGO COMPANY
On October 25, 2005, the former Sirius entered into a supply agreement with L. Perrigo Company, or
Perrigo, for the exclusive manufacture and supply of a proprietary device/drug kit designed by
Sirius pursuant to an approved ANDA owned by Perrigo. The agreement was assigned to us as part of
the Sirius merger. We were responsible for all development costs and for obtaining all necessary
regulatory approvals and launched the product, ClindaReach, in March 2008. Perrigo is entitled to
royalties on net sales of the product, including certain minimum annual royalties, which commenced
May 1, 2006, in the amount of $250,000. The initial term of the agreement expires in July, 2011 and
may be renewed based on certain minimum purchase levels and other terms and conditions.
MERGER WITH SIRIUS LABORATORIES, INC.
In March 2006, we closed our merger to acquire all of the common stock of Sirius Laboratories Inc.
in exchange for cash and common stock worth up to $30,000,000. Of the up to $30,000,000, up to
$5,000,000, ($1,500,000 of which would be paid in cash, and $3,500,000 of which would be paid in
cash or common stock) may be paid based on a combination of new product approvals or launches, and
achievement of certain pre-determined total cumulative sales milestones for Sirius products. With
the launch of ClindaReach®, one of the new Sirius products, we were obligated to make a
cash payment of $500,000 to the former shareholders of Sirius. Also, as a consequence of the
decision not to launch the product under development with Altana and pursuant to the terms of the
merger agreement with Sirius, DUSA paid $250,000 on a pro rata basis to the former Sirius
shareholders. Similarly, with the decision by DUSA in early 2008 not to develop a third product
from a list of product candidates acquired as part of the merger, another $250,000 was paid on a
pro rata basis to the former Sirius shareholders. The payments for ClindaReach® and the
other two product decisions satisfy DUSAs obligations for the $1,500,000 portion of the purchase
price mentioned above. In the third quarter of 2008, the first of the pre-determined total
cumulative sales milestones for Sirius products was achieved, and accordingly, we made a cash
payment of $1,500,000 to the former Sirius shareholders in consideration of the milestone
achievement. In connection with the Third Amendment to the merger agreement entered into April
2009, we paid the former Sirius shareholders $100,000 and may be required to pay the $250,000 in
January 2012 under certain circumstances.
PARTEQ AGREEMENT
We license certain patents underlying our Levulan® PDT/PD systems under a license
agreement with PARTEQ Research and Development Innovations, or PARTEQ. Under the agreement, we have
been granted an exclusive worldwide license, with a right to sublicense, under PARTEQ patent
rights, to make, have made, use and sell certain products, including ALA. The agreement covers
certain use patent rights. When we sell our products directly, we have agreed to pay to PARTEQ
royalties of 6% and 4% on 66% of
the net selling price in countries where patent rights do and do not exist, respectively. In cases
where we have a sublicensee, we will pay 6% and 4% when patent rights do and do not exist,
respectively, on our net selling price less the cost of goods for products sold to the sublicensee,
and 6% of payments we receive on sales of products by the sublicensee. We are also obligated to pay
to PARTEQ 5% of any lump sum sublicense fees received, such as milestone payments, excluding
amounts designated by the sublicensee for future research and development efforts.
19
Annual minimum royalties to PARTEQ must total at least CDN $100,000 (U.S. $80,000 as of March 31,
2009).
NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL CORPORATION AMENDED AND RESTATED PURCHASE AND SUPPLY AGREEMENT
On June 21, 2004, we signed an Amended and Restated Purchase and Supply Agreement with National
Biological Corporation, or NBC, one of the manufacturers of our BLU-U® light source.
This agreement provides for the elimination of certain exclusivity clauses, permits us to order on
a purchase order basis without minimums, and includes other modifications of the original
agreement providing both parties greater flexibility related to the development and manufacture of
light sources and the associated technology within the field of PDT. On December 23, 2008, we
signed the Second Amendment to the Amended and Restated Purchase and Supply Agreement, which
extends the Agreement until June 30, 2009, and gives us an option to extend for an additional two
years subject only to agreement on price terms to be negotiated in good faith. The parties are
actively engaged in discussions to extend the term of the agreement.
SOCHINAZ SA
Under an agreement dated December 24, 1993, Sochinaz SA manufactures and supplies our requirements
of Levulan® from its FDA approved facility in Switzerland. The agreement expires on
December 31, 2009 and we are in discussions with Sochinaz regarding terms for its renewal. While we
can obtain alternative supply sources in certain circumstances, any new supplier would have to be
inspected and qualified by the FDA.
LEASE AGREEMENTS
We have entered into lease commitments for office space in Wilmington, Massachusetts, and Toronto,
Ontario. The minimum lease payments disclosed below include the non-cancelable terms of the
leases. In the fourth quarter of 2008, we vacated the Toronto, Ontario office and have listed the
space with a real estate broker for potential sublease.
RESEARCH AGREEMENTS
We have entered into various agreements for research projects and clinical studies. As of March 31,
2009, future payments to be made pursuant to these agreements, under certain terms and conditions,
totaled approximately $1,243,000. Included in this future minimum payment is a master service
agreement, effective June 15, 2001, with Therapeutics, Inc., which is renewable on an annual basis,
to engage Therapeutics to manage the clinical development of our products in the field of
dermatology. The agreement was renewed on June 15, 2008 for a one year period. Therapeutics is
entitled to receive a bonus valued at $50,000, in cash or stock at our discretion, upon each
anniversary of the effective date.
Our contractual obligations and other commercial commitments to make future payments under
contracts, including lease agreements, research and development contracts, manufacturing contracts,
or other related agreements are as follows at March 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1 Yr or less |
|
|
2-3 Years |
|
|
4-5 Years |
|
|
After 5 |
|
Operating lease obligations |
|
$ |
1,550,000 |
|
|
$ |
453,000 |
|
|
$ |
903,000 |
|
|
$ |
194,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Purchase obligations (1, 2) |
|
|
3,694,000 |
|
|
|
3,203,000 |
|
|
|
491,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum royalty obligations (3) |
|
|
780,000 |
|
|
|
326,000 |
|
|
|
340,000 |
|
|
|
114,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total obligations |
|
$ |
6,024,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,982,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,734,000 |
|
|
$ |
308,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
1) |
|
Research and development projects include various commitments including obligations for our study on the treatment of actinic
keratoses and reduction of non-melanoma skin cancers in immunosuppressed solid organ transplant recipients, or SOTR, who have
demonstrated that they are at risk of developing multiple squamous cell carcinomas. |
|
2) |
|
In addition to the obligations disclosed above, we have contracted with Therapeutics, Inc., a clinical research organization,
to manage the clinical development of our products in the field of dermatology. This organization has the opportunity for
additional stock grants, bonuses, and other incentives for each product indication ranging from $250,000 to $1,250,000,
depending on the regulatory phase of development of products under Therapeutics management. |
|
3) |
|
Minimum royalty obligations relate to our agreements with PARTEQ and Perrigo described above. |
Rent expense incurred under these operating leases was approximately $100,000 and $111,000 for
the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
INFLATION
Although inflation rates have been comparatively low in recent years, inflation is expected to
apply upward pressure on our operating costs. We have included an inflation factor in our cost
estimates. However, we expect the overall net effect of inflation on our operations to be
minimal.
20
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Interest Rates
Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our investment
portfolio. We do not use derivative financial instruments in our investment portfolio. Our
investment policy specifies credit quality standards for our investments and limits the amount
of credit exposure to any single issue, issuer or type of investment. Our investments consist of
United States government securities and high grade corporate bonds. All investments are carried
at market value, which approximates cost. In response to the instability in the global financial
markets, we have regularly reviewed our marketable securities holdings, and have reduced or
avoided investing in securities deemed to have increased risk.
As of March 31, 2009, the weighted average rate of return on our investments was 2.98%. If
market interest rates were to increase immediately and uniformly by 100 basis points from levels
as of March 31, 2009, the fair market value of the portfolio would decline by $138,000. Declines
in interest rates could, over time, reduce our interest income.
Derivative Financial Instruments
The warrants that we issued on October 29, 2007 in connection with the private placement of our
common stock were determined to be derivative financial instruments and accounted for as a
liability. These warrants are revalued on a quarterly basis with the change in value reflected
in our earnings. We value these warrants using various assumptions, including the Companys
stock price as of the end of each reporting period, the historical volatility of the Companys
stock price, and risk-free interest rates commensurate with the remaining contractual term of
the warrants. Changes in the Companys stock price or in interest rates would result in a change
in the value of the warrants.
Currency Exchange Rates
The royalties we earn each quarter under our agreement with Stiefel Laboratories are based on a
percentage of the net sales to end-users. These royalties are calculated in local currencies and
converted to and paid in United States dollars each reporting period.
Under our agreement with Daewoong, revenues we earn under the excess purchase price provision of
the agreement, if any, are calculated based on end-user pricing in local currencies and
converted to United States dollars before a determination is made whether any payments are due
us. These payments, if any, are made in United States dollars each reporting period.
Other exchange rates that we are subject to, such as the Canadian dollar, are not
material to our operations.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
We carried out an evaluation, under the direction of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)). Based upon that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of March 31, 2009.
There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the quarter ended March 31, 2009 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, DUSAs internal control over financial reporting.
Forward-Looking Statements Safe Harbor
This report, including the Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations, contains various forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 which
represent our expectations or beliefs concerning future events, including, but not limited to
managements statements regarding our strategies and core objectives for 2009, our use of estimates and assumptions in the
preparation of our financial statements and policies and impact on us of the adoption of certain
accounting standards, managements beliefs regarding the unique nature of Levulan® and its use and potential
use, expectations regarding the enrollment
and timing of results of clinical trials, future development of
Levulan® and our other products and other potential indications, statements regarding
the sale of Nicomide® in the future, beliefs concerning manufacture of the
BLU-U® , intention to pursue licensing, marketing, co-promotion, collaboration or
acquisition opportunities, status of clinical programs for all other indications and beliefs
regarding potential efficacy and marketing, our beliefs regarding the safety, simplicity,
reliability and cost-effectiveness of certain light sources, expectations regarding additional market
expansion, expectations regarding the marketing and
distribution of Levulan®
Kerastick® by Daewoong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Stiefel Laboratories, Inc.,
beliefs regarding the clinical benefit of Levulan® PDT for acne and other indications,
expectations regarding the confidentiality of
our proprietary information, statements of our intentions to seek additional U.S. and foreign
regulatory approvals, and to market
21
and increase sales outside the U.S., beliefs regarding
regulatory classifications, filings, timelines, off-label use and environmental compliance,
beliefs concerning patent disputes and litigation, intentions to defend our patent estate, the
impact of a third-partys regulatory compliance and fulfillment of contractual obligations, and
our anticipation that third parties will launch products upon receipt of regulatory approval,
beliefs concerning the impact of price increases, expectations of increases or decreases in cost of product sales, expected use of cash resources,
requirements of cash resources for our future liquidity, beliefs regarding investments and
economic conditions, expectations regarding outstanding options and warrants and our dividend
policy, anticipation of increases or decreases in personnel, beliefs regarding the effect of
reimbursement policies on revenues and acceptance of our therapies, expectations for future
strategic opportunities and research and development programs and expenses, expectations for
continuing operating losses and competition including from Metvixia, expectations for growth of PDT segment revenues and reduction of Non-PDT segment revenues, expectations regarding the
adequacy and availability of insurance, expectations regarding general and administrative costs,
expectations regarding legal expenses, sales and marketing costs and research and development costs,
levels of interest income and our capital resource needs, intention to raise additional funds to
meet capital requirements and the potential dilution and impact on our business, potential for
additional inspection and testing of our manufacturing facilities or additional FDA actions,
beliefs regarding the adequacy of our inventory of Kerastick® and BLU-U®
units, our manufacturing capabilities and the impact of inventories
on revenues, beliefs regarding interest rate risks to our investments and effects of inflation,
beliefs regarding the impact of any current or future legal proceedings, dependence on key
personnel, and beliefs concerning product liability insurance, the enforceability of our patents,
the impact of generic products, our beliefs regarding our sales and marketing efforts,
competition with other companies, the adoption of our products, and the outcome of such efforts,
our beliefs regarding our sales and marketing efforts, our beliefs regarding the use of our
products and technologies by third parties, our beliefs regarding our compliance with applicable
laws, rules and regulations, our beliefs regarding available reimbursement for our products, our
beliefs regarding the current and future clinical development and testing of our potential
products and technologies and the costs thereof, the volatility of our stock price, the impact of
our rights plan, and the possibility that the holders of options and warrants will purchase our
common stock by exercising these securities. These forward-looking statements are further
qualified by important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in
the forward-looking statements. These factors include, without limitation, changing market and
regulatory conditions, actual clinical results of our trials, the impact of competitive products
and pricing, the timely development, FDA and foreign regulatory approval, and market acceptance
of our products, environmental risks relating to our products, reliance on third-parties for the
production, manufacture, sales and marketing of our products, the availability of products for
acquisition and/or license on terms agreeable to us, sufficient sources of funds, the securities
regulatory process, the maintenance of our patent portfolio and ability to obtain competitive
levels of reimbursement by third-party payors, none of which can be assured. Results actually
achieved may differ materially from expected results included in these statements as a result of
these or other factors.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
In October 2008, we were notified that Winston Laboratories, Inc. had filed a demand for
arbitration against the Company. The demand for arbitration arises out of the 2006 Micanol License
Agreement and subsequent 2006 Micanol Transition License Agreement, which we refer to together as
the Agreement, and claims that DUSA breached the Agreement. Winston Laboratories is claiming
damages in excess of $2.0 million. The Company plans to defend itself vigorously and has not
recorded any liability pursuant to the claim at March 31, 2009.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Investing in our common stock is very speculative and involves a high degree of risk. You should
carefully consider and evaluate all of the information in, or incorporated by reference in, this
report. The following are among the risks we face related to our business, assets and operations.
They are not the only ones we face. Any of these risks could materially and adversely affect our
business, results of operations and financial condition, which in turn could materially and
adversely affect the trading price of our common stock and you might lose all or part of your
investment.
This report contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, such as
statements of our plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. We use words such as
anticipate, believe, expect, future and intend and similar expressions to identify
forward-looking statements. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in
these forward-looking statements for many reasons, including the factors described below and
elsewhere in this report. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which apply only as of the date of this report.
22
Risks Related To DUSA
We Are Not Currently Profitable And May Not Be Profitable In The Future Unless We Can
Successfully Market And Sell Significantly Higher Quantities Of Our Products.
If We Do Not Become Profitable As Expected, We May Need More Capital.
We have approximately $17,911,000 in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of
March 31, 2009. Our cash should be sufficient for current operations for at least the next 12
months. While our goal is to become cash flow positive and profitable on a quarterly basis
sometime late in 2009, if we are unable to do so, we may have to reduce our headcount,
curtail certain variable expenses, or raise funds through financing transactions. We cannot
predict whether financing will be available at all or on reasonable terms.
Our Ability To Become Profitable Has Been Delayed Since We No Longer Sell and Distribute
Nicomide® As A Prescription Product.
In March 2006, we acquired Nicomide® in connection with our merger with Sirius
Laboratories, Inc. Following investigation by the FDA of Actavis Totowa, LLC, the former
manufacturer of Nicomide®, in April 2008, Actavis ceased manufacturing several
prescription vitamins, including Nicomide®. The FDA considers prescription dietary
supplements to be unapproved new drugs. In response to our discussions with the FDA, we stopped
the sale and distribution of Nicomide® as a prescription product in June 2008.
On August 12, 2008, we entered into a worldwide non-exclusive patent License Agreement to our
patent covering Nicomide® with Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC and an amendment to
our Settlement Agreement with Rivers Edge which we entered into in October 2007 to settle certain
patent litigation. The amendment to the Settlement Agreement allows Rivers Edge to manufacture
and market a prescription product that could be substitutable for Nicomide® pursuant to
the terms of the License Agreement and changes certain payment obligations of Rivers Edge for
sales of its substitutable product. In consideration for granting the license, we were paid a
share of the net revenues, as defined in the License Agreement, of Rivers Edges licensed product
sales under the License Agreement. In April 2009, we and Rivers Edge entered into an
Amendment to the License Agreement (the License Amendment) originally entered into in August
2008. The License Amendment grants Rivers Edge an exclusive license to U.S. Patent, No.
6,979,468, and a license to use all know-how and the trademark associated with the Licensed
Products worldwide. Under the License Amendment, we are required to
transfer all of our rights,
title and interest in and to our patent, know-how and trademark relating to the Licensed
Products (but not the copyright registration relating to product labeling) to Rivers Edge upon
our receipt of $5,000,000. Of the $5,000,000, Rivers Edge is required to make a
minimum guaranteed payment to us of $2,600,000, in thirteen monthly installments of
$200,000, subject to reduction under certain conditions, and pay additional consideration of
$2,400,000 payable over time based on a share of Rivers Edges net revenues as defined in the
License Amendment. The License Agreement, as amended, has a term of 30 months, subject to a
further extension under certain circumstances to 48 months, and may be terminated early by Rivers
Edge on 30 days prior written notice to us. Under the License Agreement, Rivers Edge
has assumed all regulatory responsibilities for the Licensed Products. If Rivers Edge terminates
the License Agreement prior to the payment of the $5,000,000, all of the rights and licenses
granted by us to Rivers Edge will revert to us. Once we receive
$5,000,000 under the terms of the License Agreement, we will no longer receive any revenues from sales of this
product. If Rivers Edge terminates the License Agreement before we receive $5,000,000, we may consider selling the product in
accordance with the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, but in that case, we would expect volume and revenues to be lower than
historical levels.
If Product Sales Do Not Continue to Increase, We May Not Be Able To Advance Development Of
Our Other Potential Products As Quickly As We Would Like To, Which Would Delay The
Approval Process And Marketing Of New Potential Products.
If we do not generate sufficient revenues from our approved products, we may be forced to delay
or abandon our development program for solid organ transplant recipients or other programs we may
wish to initiate. The pharmaceutical development and commercialization process is time consuming
and costly, and any delays might result in higher costs which could adversely affect our
financial condition. Without sufficient product sales, we would need alternative sources of
funding. There is no guarantee that adequate funding sources could be found to continue the
development of our technology. We might be required to commit substantially greater capital than
we have available to research and development and we may not have sufficient funds to complete
this program.
Any Failure To Comply With Ongoing Governmental Regulations In The United States And
Elsewhere Will Limit Our Ability To Market Our Products And Become Profitable.
The manufacture and marketing of our products are subject to continuing FDA review as well
as comprehensive regulation by the FDA and by state and local regulatory authorities. These
laws require, among other things:
|
|
|
approval of manufacturing facilities, including adherence to good manufacturing
and laboratory practices during production and storage, |
23
|
|
|
controlled research and testing of some of these products even after approval, and |
|
|
|
|
control of marketing activities, including advertising and labeling. |
If we, or any of our contract manufacturers, fail to comply with these requirements, we may
be limited in the jurisdictions in which we are permitted to sell our products.
Additionally, if we or our manufacturers fail to comply with applicable regulatory approval
requirements, a regulatory agency may:
|
|
|
send warning letters, as received by the manufacturer of our BLU-U®, |
|
|
|
|
impose fines and other civil penalties on us, |
|
|
|
|
seize our products, |
|
|
|
|
suspend our regulatory approvals, |
|
|
|
|
cease the manufacture of our products, as Actavis Totowa did with Nicomide®, |
|
|
|
|
refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us, |
|
|
|
|
refuse to permit exports of our products from the United States, |
|
|
|
|
require us to recall products, |
|
|
|
|
require us to notify physicians of labeling changes and/or product related problems, |
|
|
|
|
impose restrictions on our operations, and/or |
|
|
|
|
criminally prosecute us. |
We and our manufacturers must continue to comply with cGMP and Quality System Regulation, or QSR,
and equivalent foreign regulatory requirements. The cGMP requirements govern quality control and
documentation policies and procedures. In complying with cGMP and foreign regulatory requirements,
we and our third-party manufacturers will be obligated to expend time, money and effort in
production, record keeping and quality control to assure that our products meet applicable
specifications and other requirements.
Manufacturing facilities are subject to ongoing periodic inspection by the FDA, including
unannounced inspections. We cannot guarantee that our third-party supply sources, including our
sole source supplier for the active ingredients in Levulan® and the BLU-U®
or our own Kerastick® facility, will continue to meet all applicable FDA regulations.
If we, or any of our manufacturers, including without limitation, the manufacturer of the
BLU-U®, who has received warning letters from the FDA, fail to maintain compliance with
FDA regulatory requirements, it would be time consuming and costly to remedy the problem(s) or to
qualify other sources. These consequences could have a significant adverse effect on our financial
condition and operations. As part of our FDA approval for the Levulan®
Kerastick® for AK, we were required to conduct two Phase IV follow-up studies. We
successfully completed the first study; and submitted our final report on the second study to the
FDA in January 2004. The FDA has requested additional information, which was provided to them in
June 2008. We are awaiting their response. Additionally, if previously unknown problems with the
product, a manufacturer or its facility are discovered in the future, changes in product labeling
restrictions or withdrawal of the product from the market may occur. Any such problems could
affect our ability to become profitable.
The Current Global Credit And Financial Market Conditions May Affect Our Business.
Sales of our products are dependent, in large part, on reimbursement from government health and
administration authorities, private health insurers, distribution partners and other
organizations. As a result of the current global credit and financial market conditions,
government authorities and private insurers may be unable to satisfy their reimbursement
obligations or may delay payment. In addition, federal and state health authorities may reduce
Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements, and private insurers may increase their scrutiny of claims.
A reduction in the availability or extent of reimbursement could negatively affect our product
sales and revenues.
Due to the recent tightening of global credit, there may be disruption or delay in the performance
by our third-party contractors, suppliers or collaborators. We rely on third parties for several
important aspects of our business, including the active ingredient in Levulan® and key
portion of the BLU-U®, portions of our product manufacturing, royalty revenues,
clinical development of future
24
collaboration products, conduct of clinical trials and the supply
of raw materials. If such third parties are unable to satisfy their commitments to us, our
business would be adversely affected.
If the Economic Slowdown Affects Our Market, Our Cash Burn Will Increase And Our Ability To
Achieve Profitability Will Be Delayed.
We are aware that a portion of our revenues are generated by patients that pay for their
procedures out-of-pocket. We believe that the recession may be causing these patients to postpone
or cancel their procedures, reducing our volume, and if this continues we will be required to use
more of our cash. This could cause a delay in our ability to achieve profitability on a
sustainable basis.
We Have Significant Losses And Anticipate Continued Losses.
We have a history of operating losses. We expect to have continued losses until sales of our
products increase substantially. We incurred net losses of $6,250,000, $14,714,000 and $31,350,000
for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively, and $1,607,000 for the
three-month period ended March 31, 2009. As of March 31, 2009, our accumulated deficit was
approximately $143,458,000. We cannot predict whether any of our products will achieve significant
enough market acceptance or generate sufficient revenues to enable us to become profitable on a
sustainable basis.
If We Are Unable To Obtain The Necessary Capital To Fund Our Operations, We Will Have To
Delay Our Development Program And May Not Be Able To Complete Our Clinical Trials.
While we completed a private placement raising net proceeds of approximately $10.3 million in
October 2007, we may need substantial additional funds to fully develop, manufacture, market and
sell other potential products. We may obtain funds through other public or private financings,
including equity financing, and/or through collaborative arrangements. We cannot predict whether
any additional financing will be available at all or on acceptable terms. Depending on the extent
of available funding, we may delay, reduce in scope or eliminate our SOTR research and development
program. We may also choose to license rights to third parties to commercialize products or
technologies that we would otherwise have attempted to develop and commercialize on our own which
could reduce our potential revenues.
The availability of additional capital to us is uncertain. There can be no assurance that
additional funding will be available to us on favorable terms, if at all. Any equity financing, if
needed, would likely result in dilution to our existing shareholders and debt financing, if
available, would likely involve significant cash payment obligations and include restrictive
covenants that restrict our ability to operate our business. Failure to raise capital if needed
could materially adversely impact our business, our financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows.
If We Are Not Successful With The Reexamination Of Our Patent, We Could Lose Market Share.
In January 2009, we filed a request for reexamination with the United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) of one of the patents licensed from Queens University covering certain methods of
using our product, Levulan®, for our FDA-approved indication. The USPTO accepted our
request for reexamination during the first quarter of 2009. While we believe that the reexamination
will strengthen the patent, there is no guarantee that the process will be successful since the
USPTO reviews the entire prosecution history
of a patent during a reexamination and could determine that some or all of the patent claims are
invalid. Typically, a reexamination takes approximately 18 months to complete. The patent is due to
expire in 2013. If the USPTO finds that the patent is invalid, generic competitors could enter the
market and we could lose market share. This would adversely affect our financial condition and
results of operations and make it more difficult for us to become profitable.
We Have Limited Patent Protection, And If We Are Unable To Protect Our Proprietary Rights,
Competitors Might Be Able To Develop Similar Products To Compete With Our Products And
Technology.
Our ability to compete successfully depends, in part, on our ability to defend patents that have
issued, obtain new patents, protect trade secrets and operate without infringing the proprietary
rights of others. We have no compound patent protection for our Levulan® brand of the
compound ALA. Our basic ALA patents are for methods of detecting and treating various diseased
tissues using ALA (or related compounds called precursors), in combination with light. We own or
exclusively license ALA patents and patent applications related to the following:
|
|
|
methods of using ALA and its unique physical forms in combination with light, |
|
|
|
|
compositions and apparatus for those methods, and |
|
|
|
|
unique physical forms of ALA. |
25
We also own patents covering our BLU-U® and our Kerastick®. However, other
third-parties may have blue light devices or drug delivery devices that do not infringe our
patents.
The patents relating to methods of using ALA for detecting or treating disease, other than for
acne and our approved indication for AKs of the face or scalp, start to expire in July 2009. The
patents covering our AK product do not start to expire until 2013. In January 2009, we filed an
application with the USPTO for reexamination of one of our patents. If the USPTO determines that
the patent is invalid, generic competitors could enter the market.
We have limited ALA patent protection outside the United States, which may make it easier for
third-parties to compete there. Our basic method of treatment patents and applications have
counterparts in only six foreign countries, and certain countries under the European Patent
Convention. Even where we have patent protection, there is no guarantee that we will be able to
enforce our patents. Additionally, enforcement of a given patent may not be practicable or an
economically viable alternative.
Some of the indications for which we may develop PDT therapies may not be covered by the claims in
any of our existing patents. Even with the issuance of additional patents to DUSA, other parties
are free to develop other uses of ALA, including medical uses, and to market ALA for such uses,
assuming that they have obtained appropriate regulatory marketing approvals. ALA in the chemical
form has been commercially supplied for decades, and is not itself subject to patent protection.
There are reports of third-parties conducting clinical studies with ALA in countries outside the
United States where PARTEQ, the licensor of our ALA patents, does not have patent protection. In
addition, a number of third-parties are seeking patents for uses of ALA not covered by our
patents. These other uses, whether patented or not, and the commercial availability of ALA, could
limit the scope of our future operations because ALA products could come on the market which would
not infringe our patents but would compete with our Levulan® products even though they
are marketed for different uses.
On August 12, 2008, we entered into a worldwide non-exclusive patent License Agreement to our
patent covering Nicomide® with Rivers Edge and an amendment to our Settlement
Agreement with Rivers Edge. The amendment to the Settlement Agreement allows Rivers Edge to
manufacture and market a prescription product that could be substitutable for Nicomide®
pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement and changes certain payment obligations of Rivers
Edge for sales of its substitutable product. In consideration for granting the license, we were
paid a share of the net revenues, as defined in the License Agreement, of Rivers Edges licensed
product sales under the License Agreement. In April 2009, we and Rivers Edge entered into an
Amendment to the License Agreement (the License Amendment) originally entered into in August
2008. The License Amendment grants Rivers Edge an exclusive license to U.S. Patent, No.
6,979,468, and a license to use all know-how and the trademark associated with the Licensed
Products worldwide. Under the License Amendment, DUSA is required to transfer all of its rights,
title and interest in and to DUSAs patent know-how and trademark relating to the Licensed
Products (but not the copyright registration relating to product labeling) to Rivers Edge upon
our receipt of $5,000,000. Of the $5,000,000, Rivers Edge is required to make a
minimum guaranteed payment to us of $2,600,000, in thirteen monthly installments of
$200,000, subject to reduction under certain conditions, and pay additional consideration of
$2,400,000 payable over time based on a share of Rivers Edges net revenues as defined in the
License Amendment. The License Agreement, as amended, has a term of 30 months, subject to a
further extension under certain circumstances to 48 months, and may be terminated early by Rivers
Edge on 30 days prior written notice to
us. Under the License Agreement, Rivers Edge has assumed all regulatory responsibilities for the
Licensed Products. If Rivers Edge terminates the License Agreement prior to the payment of the
$5,000,000, all of the rights and licenses granted by us to Rivers Edge will revert to us
Another company has launched a substitutable niacinamide product. Under the Amendment to the
License Agreement, Rivers Edge has the right but not the obligation to bring litigation against
this third-party and the validity of the Nicomide® patent could be tested again. Also,
new products have been launched that are competing with Nicomide®. These events could
negatively impact our royalty revenues and delay our ability to be profitable.
Furthermore, PhotoCure received FDA approval to market Metvixia® for treatment of AKs
in July 2004, and this product, which is directly competitive with our Levulan®
Kerastick® product, is now commercially available. While we are entitled to royalties
from PhotoCure on its net sales of Metvixia®, a large dermatology company has the
marketing rights in the U.S., which may adversely affect our ability to maintain or increase our
Levulan® market.
While we attempt to protect our proprietary information as trade secrets through agreements with
each employee, licensing partner, consultant, university, pharmaceutical company and agent, we
cannot guarantee that these agreements will provide effective protection for our proprietary
information. It is possible that all of the following issues could negatively impact our ability
to be profitable:
|
|
|
these persons or entities might breach the agreements, |
|
|
|
we might not have adequate remedies for a breach, and/or |
|
|
|
our competitors will independently develop or otherwise discover our trade secrets. |
26
Litigation Is Expensive And We May Not Be Able To Afford The Costs.
The costs of litigation or any proceeding relating to our intellectual property rights could be
substantial even if resolved in our favor. Some of our competitors have far greater resources than
we do and may be better able to afford the costs of complex patent litigation. Also, in a lawsuit
against a third-party for infringement of our patents in the United States, that third-party may
challenge the validity of our patent(s). We cannot guarantee that a third-party will not claim,
with or without merit, that our patents are not valid or that we have infringed their patent(s) or
misappropriated their proprietary material. Defending these types of legal actions involve
considerable expense and could negatively affect our financial results.
Additionally, if a third-party were to file a United States patent application, or be issued a
patent claiming technology also claimed by us in a pending United States application(s), we may be
required to participate in interference proceedings in the USPTO to determine the priority of the
invention. A third-party could also request the declaration of a patent interference between one
of our issued United States patents and one of its patent applications. Any interference
proceedings likely would require participation by us and/or PARTEQ, which could involve
substantial legal fees and result in a loss or lessening of our patent protection.
In October 2008, Winston Laboratories, Inc. filed a notice of demand for arbitration with us
alleging that we breached the agreements relating to Psoriatec®. We intend to vigorously
defend ourselves, and this proceeding will likely involve considerable legal expenses which could
negatively affect our financial results.
Since We Now Operate The Only FDA Approved Manufacturing Facility For The
Kerastick® And Continue To Rely Heavily On Sole Suppliers For The Manufacture Of
Levulan®, The BLU-U®, And Meted®, Any Supply Or
Manufacturing Problems Could Negatively Impact Our Sales As Occurred With
Nicomide®.
If we experience problems producing Levulan® Kerastick® units in our
facility, or if any of our contract suppliers fail to supply our requirements for products, our
business, financial condition and results of operations would suffer. Although we have received
approval by the FDA to manufacture the BLU-U® and the Levulan®
Kerastick® in our Wilmington, Massachusetts facility, at this time, with respect to the
BLU-U® , we expect to utilize our own facility only as a back-up to our current third
party manufacturer or for repairs.
Manufacturers and their subcontractors often encounter difficulties when commercial quantities of
products are manufactured for the first time, or large quantities of products are manufactured,
including problems involving:
|
|
|
product yields, |
|
|
|
|
quality control, |
|
|
|
|
component and service availability, |
|
|
|
|
compliance with FDA regulations, and |
|
|
|
|
the need for further FDA approval if manufacturers make material
changes to manufacturing processes and/or facilities. |
We cannot guarantee that problems will not arise with production yields, costs or quality as we and
our suppliers manufacture our products. Any manufacturing problems could delay or limit our
supplies which would hinder our marketing and sales efforts. If our facility, any facility of our
contract manufacturers, or any equipment in those facilities is damaged or destroyed, we may not be
able to quickly or inexpensively replace it. Likewise, if there are quality or supply problems with
any components or materials needed to manufacturer our products, we may not be able to quickly
remedy the problem(s). Any of these problems could cause our sales to suffer.
The third-party contracts relating to the manufacturer of the BLU-U® and the active
ingredient in the Levulan® are scheduled to expire in June and December of this year,
respectively. If we cannot renew these agreements on terms which are acceptable to us, we would
need to find new sources of supply. If we have any delay or problems with a new manufacturer, our
revenues and results of operations could suffer.
We Have Only Limited Experience Marketing And Selling Pharmaceutical Products And As A
Result, Our Revenues From Product Sales May Suffer.
If we are unable to successfully market and sell sufficient quantities of our products, revenues
from product sales will be lower than anticipated and our financial condition may be adversely
affected. We are responsible for marketing our products in the United States and the rest of the
world, except Canada, Latin America and parts of Asia, where we have distributors. We are in
negotiations with Stiefel because they did not purchase the required minimum number of
Kerastick® units under our agreement. They have the right to
27
terminate the contract. If
our sales and marketing efforts fail, then sales of the Levulan® Kerastick®,
the BLU-U®, and other products will be adversely affected and our goal to be profitable
by late 2009 could be jeopardized.
The Commercial Success Of Any Product That We May Develop Will Depend Upon The Degree Of
Market Acceptance Of Our Products Among Physicians, Patients, Health Care Payors, Private
Health Insurers And The Medical Community.
Our ability to commercialize any product that we may develop will be highly dependent upon the
extent to which the product gains market acceptance among physicians, patients, health care payors,
such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers, including managed care organizations and
group purchasing organizations, and the medical community. If a product does not achieve an
adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate material product revenues, and we may not become
profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our currently marketed products and our SOTR product
candidate, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
the effectiveness, or perceived effectiveness, of our product in comparison to competing products; |
|
|
|
|
the existence of any significant side effects, as well as their severity in comparison to any competing products, |
|
|
|
|
potential advantages over alternative treatments, |
|
|
|
|
the ability to offer our product for sale at competitive prices, |
|
|
|
|
relative convenience and ease of administration, |
|
|
|
|
the strength of marketing and distribution support, and |
|
|
|
|
sufficient third-party coverage or reimbursement. |
If We Cannot Improve Physician Reimbursement And/Or Convince More Private Insurance Carriers To
Adequately Reimburse Physicians For Our Product, Sales May Suffer.
Without adequate levels of reimbursement by government health care programs and private health
insurers, the market for our Levulan® Kerastick® for AK therapy will be
limited. While we continue to support efforts to improve reimbursement levels to physicians and
are working with the major private insurance carriers to improve coverage for our therapy, if our
efforts are not successful, broader adoption of our therapy and sales of our products could be
negatively impacted. Although positive reimbursement changes related to AK were made over the last
five years, some physicians still believe that reimbursement levels do not fully reflect the
required efforts to routinely execute our therapy in their practices.
If insurance companies do not cover our products, or stop covering our products which are
covered, our sales could be dramatically reduced.
We Have Only Three Therapies That Have Received Regulatory Approval Or Clearance, And We Cannot
Predict Whether We Will Ever Develop Or Commercialize Any Other Levulan® Products.
Our Potential Products Are In Early Stages Of Development And May Never Result In Any Commercially
Successful Products.
To be profitable, we must successfully research, develop, obtain regulatory approval for,
manufacture, introduce, market and distribute our products. Except for Levulan® PDT for
AKs, the BLU-U® for acne, the ClindaReach® pledget and several other
products we acquired in our merger with Sirius, all of our other potential Levulan® and
other potential product candidates are at an early stage of development and subject to the risks
of failure inherent in the development of new pharmaceutical products and products based on new
technologies. These risks include:
|
|
|
delays in product development, clinical testing or manufacturing, |
|
|
|
|
unplanned expenditures in product development, clinical testing or manufacturing, |
|
|
|
|
failure in clinical trials or failure to receive regulatory approvals, |
|
|
|
|
emergence of superior or equivalent products, |
28
|
|
|
inability to market products due to third-party proprietary rights, and |
|
|
|
|
failure to achieve market acceptance. |
We cannot predict how long the development of our investigational stage products will take or
whether they will be medically effective. We cannot be sure that a successful market will continue
to develop for our Levulan® drug technology.
We Must Receive Separate Approval For Any Drug or Medical Device Products Before We Can Sell Them
Commercially In The United States Or Abroad.
Any potential Levulan® product will require the approval of the FDA before it can be
marketed in the United States. Before an application to the FDA seeking approval to market a new
drug, called an NDA, can be filed, a product must undergo, among other things, extensive animal
testing and human clinical trials. The process of obtaining FDA approvals can be lengthy, costly,
and time-consuming. Following the acceptance of an NDA, the time required for regulatory approval
can vary and is usually one to three years or more. The FDA may require additional animal studies
and/or human clinical trials before granting approval. Our Levulan® PDT
products are based on relatively new technology. To the best of our knowledge, the FDA has
approved only three drugs for use in photodynamic therapy, including Levulan®. This
factor may lengthen the approval process. We face much trial and error and we may fail at numerous
stages along the way as happened with our acne trials.
We cannot predict whether we will obtain any other regulatory approvals. Data obtained from
preclinical testing and clinical trials can be susceptible to varying interpretations which could
delay, limit or prevent regulatory approvals. Future clinical trials may not show that
Levulan® PDT or photodetection, known as PD, is safe and effective for any new use we
are studying as we experienced with our recent acne study. In addition, delays or disapprovals may
be encountered based upon additional governmental regulation resulting from future legislation or
administrative action or changes in FDA policy.
Because Of The Nature Of Our Business, The Loss Of Key Members Of Our Management Team Could Delay
Achievement Of Our Goals.
We are a small company with only 87 employees, including 2 part-time employees, as of March 31,
2009. We are highly dependent on several key officer/employees with specialized scientific and
technical skills without whom our business, financial condition and results of operations would
suffer, especially in the photodynamic therapy portion of our business. The photodynamic therapy
industry is still quite small and the number of experts is limited. The loss of these key
employees could cause significant delays in achievement of our business and research goals since
very few people with their expertise could be hired. Our growth and future success will depend, in
large part, on the continued contributions of these key individuals as well as our ability to
motivate and retain other qualified personnel in our specialty drug and light device areas.
Collaborations With Outside Scientists May Be Subject To Restriction And Change.
We work with scientific and clinical advisors and collaborators at academic and other
institutions that assist us in our research and development efforts. These scientists and advisors
are not our employees and may have other commitments that limit their availability to us. Although
our advisors and collaborators generally agree not to do competing work, if a conflict of interest
between their work for us and their work for another entity arises, we may lose their services. In
addition, although our advisors and collaborators sign agreements not to disclose our confidential
information, it is possible that valuable proprietary knowledge may become publicly known through
them.
29
Risks Related To Our Industry
Product Liability And Other Claims Against Us May Reduce Demand For Our Products Or Result
In Damages.
We Are Subject To Risk From Potential Product Liability Lawsuits Which Could Negatively
Affect Our Business.
The development, manufacture and sale of medical products expose us to product liability claims
related to the use or misuse of our products. Product liability claims can be expensive to defend
and may result in significant judgments against us. A successful claim in excess of our insurance
coverage could materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Additionally, we cannot guarantee that continued product liability insurance coverage will be
available in the future at acceptable costs. If the cost is too high, we may have to self-insure.
Our Business Involves Environmental Risks And We May Incur Significant Costs Complying With
Environmental Laws And Regulations.
We have used various hazardous materials, such as mercury in fluorescent tubes in our research and
development activities. We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations which
govern the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of hazardous materials and specific
waste products. We believe that we are in compliance in all material respects with currently
applicable environmental laws and regulations. However, we cannot guarantee that we will not incur
significant costs to comply with environmental laws and regulations in the future. We also cannot
guarantee that current or future environmental laws or regulations will not materially adversely
affect our operations, business or assets. In addition, although we believe our safety procedures
for handling and disposing of these materials comply with federal, state and local laws and
regulations, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from
these materials. In the event of such an accident, we could be held liable for any resulting
damages, and this liability could exceed our resources.
We May Not Be Able To Compete Against Traditional Treatment Methods Or Keep Up With Rapid Changes
In The Biotechnology And Pharmaceutical Industries That Could Make Some Or All Of Our Products
Non-Competitive Or Obsolete.
Competing Products And Technologies Based On Traditional Treatment Methods May Make Our Products
Or Potential Products Noncompetitive Or Obsolete.
Well-known pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device companies are marketing
well-established therapies for the treatment of AKs and acne. Doctors may prefer to use familiar
methods, rather than trying our products. Reimbursement issues affect the economic competitiveness
of our products as compared to other more traditional therapies.
Many companies are also seeking to develop new products and technologies, and receiving approval
for treatment of AKs and acne. Our industry is subject to rapid, unpredictable and significant
technological change. Competition is intense. Our competitors may succeed in developing products
that are safer or more effective than ours. Many of our competitors have substantially greater
financial, technical and marketing resources than we have. In addition, several of these companies
have significantly greater experience than we do in developing products, conducting preclinical and
clinical testing and obtaining regulatory approvals to market products for health care.
We cannot guarantee that new drugs or future developments in drug technologies will not
have a material adverse effect on our business. Increased competition could result in:
|
|
|
price reductions, |
|
|
|
|
lower levels of third-party reimbursements, |
|
|
|
|
failure to achieve market acceptance, and |
|
|
|
|
loss of market share, any of which could adversely affect our
business. Further, we cannot give any assurance that developments by
our competitors or future competitors will not render our technology
obsolete. |
On May 30, 2006, we entered into a patent license agreement with PhotoCure ASA whereby we granted
a non-exclusive license to PhotoCure under the patents we license from PARTEQ, for esters of ALA.
Furthermore, we granted a non-exclusive license to PhotoCure for its existing formulations of its
Hexvix® and Metvix® (known in the United States as Metvixia®)
products for any DUSA patents that may issue or be licensed by us in the future. PhotoCure
received FDA approval to market Metvixia for treatment of AKs in July 2004 and it is directly
competitive with our Levulan® Kerastick® product. We understand that
Metvixia is now commercially available and that its price is comparable to the price of
Levulan®. While we are entitled to royalties from PhotoCure on
30
its net sales of Metvixia, this product, which is marketed in the U.S. by a large dermatology company could
adversely affect our ability to maintain or increase our market.
Our Competitors In The Biotechnology And Pharmaceutical Industries May Have Better Products,
Manufacturing Capabilities Or Marketing Expertise.
We are aware of several companies commercializing and/or conducting research with ALA or
ALA-related compounds, including: medac GmbH and photonamic GmbH & Co. KG (Germany); Biofrontera,
PhotoTherapeutics, Inc. (U.K.) and PhotoCure ASA (Norway) which entered into a marketing agreement
with Galderma S.A. for countries outside of Nordic countries for certain dermatology indications.
We also anticipate that we will face increased competition as the scientific development of PDT
and PD advances and new companies enter our markets. Several companies are developing PDT agents
other than Levulan®. These include: QLT Inc. (Canada); Axcan Pharma Inc. (U.S.);
Miravant, Inc. (U.S.); and Pharmacyclics, Inc. (U.S.). There are many pharmaceutical companies
that compete with us in the field of dermatology, particularly in the acne and rosacea markets.
Axcan Pharma Inc. has received FDA approval for the use of its product, PHOTOFRIN®, for
PDT in the treatment of high grade dysplasia associated with Barretts Esophagus. Axcan is the
first company to market a PDT therapy for this indication for which we designed our proprietary
sheath device and have conducted pilot clinical trials.
We expect that our principal methods of competition with other PDT products will be based upon
such factors as:
|
|
|
the ease of administration of our method of PDT, |
|
|
|
|
the degree of generalized skin sensitivity to light, |
|
|
|
|
the number of required doses, |
|
|
|
|
the selectivity of our drug for the target lesion or tissue of interest, and |
|
|
|
|
the type and cost of our light systems. |
Our primary competition in the acne market includes oral and topical antibiotics, other topical
prescription and over-the-counter products, as well as various laser and non-laser light
treatments. The market is highly competitive and other large and small companies have more
experience than we do which could make it difficult for us to penetrate the market. The entry of
new products from time to time would likely cause us to lose market share.
Risks Related To Our Stock
Our Common Stock May Not Continue To Trade On The Nasdaq Global Market, Which Could Reduce The
Value Of Your Investment And Make Your Shares More Difficult To Sell.
In order for our common stock to trade on the Nasdaq Global Market, we must continue to meet the
listing standards of that market. Among other things, those standards require that our common
stock maintain a minimum closing bid price of at least $1.00 per share. Recently, our common stock
has traded at prices near and below $1.00. On October 16, 2008, and several times since then,
Nasdaq suspended the enforcement of rules requiring a minimum $1.00 closing bid price. The
suspension will remain in effect through July 19, 2009. If we do not continue to meet Nasdaqs
applicable minimum listing standards, Nasdaq could delist us from the Nasdaq Global Market. If our
common stock is delisted from the Nasdaq Global Market, we could seek to have our common stock
listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market or other Nasdaq markets. However, delisting of our common
stock from the Nasdaq Global Market could
hinder your ability to sell, or obtain an accurate quotation for the price of, your shares of our
common stock. Delisting could also adversely affect the perception among investors of DUSA and its
prospects, which could lead to further declines in the market price of our common stock. Delisting
would also make it more difficult and expensive for us to raise capital. In addition, delisting
might subject us to a Securities and Exchange Commission rule that could adversely affect the
ability of broker-dealers to sell or make a market in our common stock, thus hindering your
ability to sell your shares.
Our Results Of Operations And General Market Conditions For Specialty Pharmaceutical And
Biotechnology Stocks Could Result In Sudden Changes In The Market Value Of Our Stock.
The price of our common stock has been highly volatile. These fluctuations create a greater
risk of capital losses for our shareholders as compared to less volatile stocks. From
January 1, 2008 to May 11, 2009, the price of our stock has ranged from a low of $0.87 to a
high of $2.58. Factors that contributed to the volatility of our stock during this period
included:
|
|
|
quarterly levels of product sales; |
31
|
|
|
clinical trial results; |
|
|
|
|
general market conditions; |
|
|
|
|
patent litigation; |
|
|
|
|
increased marketing activities or press releases; and |
|
|
|
|
changes in third-party payor reimbursement for our therapy. |
The significant general market volatility in similar stage pharmaceutical and biotechnology
companies made the market price of our common stock even more volatile.
Significant Fluctuations In Orders For Our Products, On A Monthly And Quarterly Basis, Are Common
Based On External Factors And Sales Promotion Activities. These Fluctuations Could Increase The
Volatility Of Our Stock Price.
The price of our common stock may be affected by the amount of quarterly shipments of our products
to end-users. Since our PDT products are still in relatively early stages of adoption, and sales
volumes are still low, a number of factors could affect product sales levels and growth rates in
any period. These could include the level of penetration of new markets outside of the United
States, the timing of medical conferences, sales promotion activities, and large volume purchases
by our higher usage customers. In addition, seasonal fluctuations in the number of patients
seeking treatment at various times during the year could impact sales volumes. These factors
could, in turn, affect the volatility of our stock price.
If Outstanding Options, Warrants And Rights Are Converted, The Value Of The Shares Of Common Stock
Outstanding Just Prior To The Conversion Will Be Diluted.
As of May 11, 2009, there were outstanding options and warrants to purchase 4,984,000 shares of
common stock, with exercise prices ranging from $1.08 to $31.00 per share, and from $2.85 to $6.00
per share, respectively. In addition, there are 393,250 shares of unvested common stock. The
holders of the options and warrants have the opportunity to profit if the market price for the
common stock exceeds the exercise price of their respective securities, without assuming the risk
of ownership. The holders are likely to exercise their securities during a time when we would
likely be able to raise capital from the public on terms more favorable than those provided in
these securities.
Effecting A Change Of Control Of DUSA Would Be Difficult, Which May Discourage Offers For Shares
Of Our Common Stock.
Our certificate of incorporation authorizes the board of directors to issue up to 100,000,000
shares of stock, 40,000,000 of which are common stock. The board of directors has the authority to
determine the price, rights, preferences and privileges, including voting rights, of the remaining
60,000,000 shares without any further vote or action by the shareholders. The rights of the
holders of our common stock will be subject to, and may be adversely affected by, the rights of
the holders of any preferred stock that may be issued in the future.
On September 27, 2002, we adopted a shareholder rights plan at a special meeting of DUSAs board
of directors. The rights plan could discourage, delay or prevent a person or group from acquiring
15% or more of our common stock, thereby limiting, perhaps, the ability of our shareholders to
benefit from such a transaction.
The rights plan provides for the distribution of one right as a dividend for each outstanding
share of our common stock to holders of record as of October 10, 2002. Each right entitles the
registered holder to purchase one one-thousandths of a share of preferred stock at an exercise
price of $37.00 per right. The rights will be exercisable subsequent to the date that a person or
group either has acquired, obtained the right to acquire, or commences or discloses an intention
to commence a tender offer to acquire, 15% or more of our outstanding common stock or if a person
or group is declared an Adverse Person, as such term is defined in the rights plan. The rights
may be redeemed by DUSA at a redemption price of one one-hundredth of a cent per right until ten
days following the date the person or group acquires, or discloses an intention to acquire, 15% or
more, as the case may be, of DUSA, or until such later date as may be determined by the our board
of directors.
Under the rights plan, if a person or group acquires the threshold amount of common stock, all
holders of rights (other than the acquiring person or group) may, upon payment of the purchase
price then in effect, purchase shares of common stock of DUSA having a value of twice the purchase
price. In the event that we are involved in a merger or other similar transaction where DUSA is
not the surviving corporation, all holders of rights (other than the acquiring person or group)
shall be entitled, upon payment of the purchase price then in effect, to purchase common stock of
the surviving corporation having a value of twice the purchase price. The rights will expire on
October 10, 2012, unless previously redeemed. Our board of directors has also adopted certain
amendments to DUSAs certificate of incorporation consistent with the terms of the rights plan.
32
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS.
None.
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES.
None.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
None.
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION.
None.
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
|
|
|
EXHIBIT |
|
|
NO. |
|
DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBIT |
|
|
|
2(a.3)
|
|
Third Amendment to Merger Agreement between Registrant and Sirius Laboratories, Inc. dated April 21, 2009; |
|
|
|
3(a.1)
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, filed as Exhibit 3(a) to the Registrants Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 1998, and is incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3(a.2)
|
|
Certificate of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, dated October 28, 2002 and filed as
Exhibit 99.3 to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30,
2002, filed November 12, 2002, and is incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3(b)
|
|
By-laws of the Registrant, filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrants current report on Form 8-K, filed on
November 2, 2008, and is incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
10(a)
|
|
Letter Agreement between Registrant and the representatives of Sirius Laboratories, Inc. dated April 3, 2009; |
|
|
|
10(b)
|
|
Letter Agreement between Registrant and the representatives of Sirius Laboratories, Inc. dated April 21, 2009; |
|
|
|
10(c)
|
|
Amendment to License Agreement between Registrant and Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC dated April 21, 2009; |
|
|
|
31(a)
|
|
Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
31(b)
|
|
Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
32(a)
|
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32(b)
|
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
99.1
|
|
Press Release dated May 12, 2009. |
33
SIGNATURES
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Robert F. Doman
|
|
|
|
Robert Doman |
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer) |
|
|
Dated: May 12, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Richard C. Christopher
|
|
|
|
Richard C. Christopher |
|
|
|
Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial
Officer (principal financial officer) |
|
|
Dated: May 12, 2009
34
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
2(a.3)
|
|
Third Amendment to Merger Agreement between Registrant and Sirius Laboratories, Inc. dated April 21, 2009; |
|
|
|
3(a.1)
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, filed as Exhibit 3(a) to the Registrants Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 1998, and is incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3(a.2)
|
|
Certificate of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, dated October 28, 2002 and filed as
Exhibit 99.3 to the Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30,
2002, filed November 12, 2002, and is incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3(b)
|
|
By-laws of the Registrant, filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrants current report on Form 8-K, filed on
November 2, 2008, and is incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
10(a)
|
|
Letter Agreement between Registrant and the representatives of Sirius Laboratories, Inc. dated April 3, 2009; |
|
|
|
10(b)
|
|
Letter Agreement between Registrant and the representatives of Sirius Laboratories, Inc. dated April 21, 2009; |
|
|
|
10(c)
|
|
Amendment to License Agreement between Registrant and Rivers Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC dated April 21, 2009; |
|
|
|
31(a)
|
|
Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
31(b)
|
|
Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
32(a)
|
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32(b)
|
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
99.1
|
|
Press Release dated May 12, 2009. |
35