Showing posts with label Pharmaceuticals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pharmaceuticals. Show all posts

Tuesday, 13 August 2013

Simcere Pharmaceutical's CEO Discusses Q2 2013 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

Executives

Jinsheng Ren – Chairman & Founder

Hongquan Liu – Chief Executive Officer

Yushan Wan – Acting Chief Financial Officer

Jie Liu D’Elia – Vice President, Business Development and Investor Relations

Analysts

Alex Liu – Brean Capital

Simcere Pharmaceutical Group (SCR) Q2 2013 Earnings Call August 13, 2013 8:00 AM ET

Operator

Hello everyone, and thank you for standing by for Simcere’s Q2 2013 Earnings Conference Call. (Operator instructions.) Today’s conference is being recorded. If you have any objections you may disconnect at this time. I would now like to turn the meeting over to your host for today’s conference, Dr. Jie Liu D’Elia, Simcere’s Vice President of Business Development and Investor Relations. Thank you, please go ahead.

Jie Liu D’Elia

Thank you and welcome to Simcere Pharmaceutical Group’s Q2 2013 Earnings Conference Call. Our Q2 2013 results were released earlier today and are available on the company’s website as well as on all newswire services. In addition, an archived webcast of this conference call will be available in the Investor Relations section of our website at www.simcere.com.

Joining us for today’s call are Mr. Jinsheng Ren, our Chairman; Mr. Hongquan Liu, our Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer; and Mr. Yushan Wan, our Acting Chief Financial Officer.

Before we continue, please note that the discussion today will contain forward-looking statements made under the Safe Harbor Provision of the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties. As such, our results may be materially different from the views expressed today. A number of potential risks and uncertainties are outlined in our public filings with the SEC. Simcere does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement except as required under applicable law.

I will now turn the call over to Simcere’s CEO, Mr. Hongquan Liu.

Hongquan Liu

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Simcere’s Q2 2013 Earnings Call. With government policies impacting drug prices and restricting the use of antibiotics, our overall sales performance was less than ideal this quarter. Furthermore, as the market environment continues to change, we expect that the second half of this year will remain challenging.

Turning to our sales, impacted by factors such as government pricing policy and issues relating to the tendering process, sales of Bicun in Q2 2013 were RMB 124 million, a decrease of 18.5%. In the second half of this year, to moderate the further decline in Bicun sales, we plan to adjust the organizational structure of our sales team, increase marketing activities and adopt a more regional-focused sales approach.

Ongoing government restrictions on the use of antibiotics combined with China’s essential drug policy continued to impact sales of Anxin, Anqi, and Zailin which decreased 15.3%, 41.2%, and 30.7% respectively compared with the same period of last year. Faced with these challenges in the second half of this year we will devote more resources to key markets and hospitals while leveraging our optimized sales team and promotional activities to promote sales.

Sales of Endu, our oncology drug, were RMB 88.32 million in Q2 2013, representing a year-on-year increase of 32.3%. Our other oncology products, such as Sinofuan, [Giapaili], and Lowvo increased 9.8%, 192.0% and 15.3% compared to the same period of last year respectively. Sales of Jiebaishu remained stable.

In the second half of this year we will take advantage of the opportunities presented as the central government and provincial authorities adjust the drug reimbursement list. Our goal is to accelerate entry of our oncology drugs in to the provincial RDL as well as the reimbursement list of the new rural cooperative medical system which should help to boost sales.

Sales of our new product IREMOD were RMB 7.6 million in Q2 2013, representing growth of 22.4% year-over-year. This is not as fast as we expected, so looking forward we will optimize our sales team, focus on key hospitals, expand our product promotion, work to increase the effectiveness of our marketing activities and continue to work on IREMOD’s entry into the NRDL and provincial RDLs.

Now, turning to manufacturing, in Q2 2013 Simcere manufacturing facilities received the new GMP certification issued by the CFDA. I’m pleased to report that all of Simcere’s manufacturing facilities have now received the new GMP certification and the preparation of the relocation of Simcere’s Dongyuan facility is proceeding as planned.

In terms of R&D, we initiated the Phase II clinical trial for [Ederevon] (inaudible) combination in June this year. Also in June we entered into collaboration with BMS on development of subcutaneous formulation of Orencia for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. We have submitted a clinical trial application for Orencia which has been effected by the CFDA.

And on June 17, 2013, we entered into a share transfer agreement to sell Simcere’s approximately 99.99% equity interest in Jilin Boda Pharmaceutical Company to Zhuhai Rongding Equity Investment Partnership.

In the second half of 2013 we will focus on the opportunities presented by RDL adjustments and strive to have more drugs effected into the NRDL, provincial RDLs, and the essential drugs list. We will rationalize our current drug portfolio and R&D pipeline, optimize resource allocation, and improve the professional promotional capability of our sales team; and we will strictly control expenses and improve cost efficiencies in order to increase our profitability.

Thank you very much, and with that I will turn the call over to our acting CFO, Mr. Wan. I look forward to joining you for the Q&A session that follows.

Yushan Wan

Thank you, Mr. Liu. Now let me give you the financial overview for Q2 2013.

As announced on June 17, 2013, Simcere entered into a share transfer agreement with Zhuhai Rongding Equity Investment Partnership L.P. to sell the company’s approximately 99.99% equity interest in Jilin Boda Pharmaceutical Company for a total cash consideration of RMB 400 million. The assets and the liabilities associated with the sale are classified as “held for sale.”

Boda’s earnings results are listed under discontinued operations and Simcere’s earnings results are listed separately under continuing operations and discontinued operations. For Q2 2013, Boda’s total revenue was RMB 29.6 million compared to RMB 31.2 million for the same period in 2012. Boda’s net income for Q2 2013 was RMB 14.5 million compared to RMB 7.6 million for the same period in 2012.

Now moving to Simcere’s financials, for Q2 2013 total revenue was RMB 483 million compared to RMB 498 million for the same period in 2012, representing a decrease of 3%. Gross margin for Q2 2013 was 83.1% compared to 84.5% for the same period in 2012. The decrease was mainly due to a drop in sales of products with higher gross margins as a percentage of total sales.

Research and development expenses for Q2 2013 totaled RMB 45.15 million which represented a decrease of 16.5% from RMB 54.06 million for the same period in 2012. The decline was primarily due to us having completed the development of the company’s influenza vaccine products and its transition to commercial manufacturing. As a percentage of total revenue, research and development expenses decreased to 9.3% for Q2 2013 from 10.9% for the same period in 2012.

Sales, marketing and distribution expenses for Q2 2013 were RMB 280.0 million which represented a decrease of 0.8% from RMB 282.7 million for the same period in 2012. As a percentage of total revenue, sales, marketing and distribution expenses for Q2 2013 were 58.0% compared with 56.7% for the same period in 2012. The slight increase was due to an increase in marketing expenses.

General and administrative expenses were RMB 65.31 million for Q2 2013, an increase of 27.1% from RMB 51.38 million for the same period in 2012. The increase was primarily due to fees incurred during the company’s going-private process and an increase in share-based compensation expenses. As a percentage of total revenue, general and administrative expenses increased to 13.5% for Q2 2013 from 10.3% for the same period in 2012.

Income from operations was RMB 10.71 million for Q2 2013, representing a decrease of 67.5% from RMB 33.00 million for the same period in 2012. This decline was primarily due to a slight decrease in revenue and gross margin.

Investment loss was RMB 11.27 million for Q2 2013 compared to a loss of RMB 2.38 million for the same period in 2012. The investment loss was primarily due to an operational loss from the Simcere MSD joint venture in Q2 2013.

Interest expenses for Q2 2013 were RMB 10.96 million compared to RMB 18.39 million in the same period in 2012. The decrease was primarily due to reduced accounts receivables by adjusting commercial policies and increasing net operating cash flow.

Income tax benefit for Q2 2013 was RMB 10.31 million compared to an income tax benefit of RMB 0.50 million for the same period in 2012. The income tax benefit for Q2 was due to the reversal of unrecognized tax benefits and related accrued cumulative interest as a result of a lapse of the statute of limitations in accordance to the PRC Tax Administration and Collection Law.

Net income attributable to Simcere was RMB 8.23 million for Q2 2013, representing a decrease of 57.6% from RMB 19.39 million for the same period in 2012. Net margin, which represents net income attributable to Simcere divided by total revenue, was 1.7% for Q2 2013 compared to 3.9% for the same period in 2012.

As of June 30, 2013, the company had cash and restricted cash of RMB 643 million compared to RMB 201 million in 2012. The increase in cash was primarily due to the return of share transfer related to Shanghai Celgen for a cash consideration of RMB 244 million and improving net operating cash flow by adjusting our commercial policy.

Thank you very much for your attention. I would like now to open the call for questions.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, the question-and-answer session of this conference call will start in a moment. (Operator instructions.) Your first question comes from the line of Alex Liu at Brean Capital. Please ask your question.

Alex Liu – Brean Capital

Hi, good evening. Thanks for taking the questions. My first question is could you please give more color on your sale of Jilin Boda? What is the intention of selling the company and what is largely behind the deal?

Jiu Liu D’Elia

Yes, Mr. Liu will address the question relating to the rationale of sale relating to Jilin Boda.

Hongquan Liu

Jilin Boda has only one product which is an Iguratimod product, and Simcere, one of Simcere’s key products is Iguratimod as well. So when we acquired Jilin Boda several years ago there was only a handful, very few companies that actually manufactured and sold Iguratimod. So it was our strategic decision at the time to acquire Jilin Boda and then to acquire the Jilin Boda’s Iguratimod, which is priced at a lower pricing point than Simcere’s Iguratimod.

So at the time our strategy was to promote Jilin Boda’s Iguratimod in the second tier and third tier cities and even some rural areas while we focused Simcere’s products at the top-tier market at the higher pricing points. Now, several years later, there have been many generic Iguratimod products in the market, so now from a strategic perspective because the Jilin Boda’s Iguratimod pricing continues to deteriorate we decided to focus our resources on just Simcere’s Iguratimod, and then also focus on development of the second generation of Iguratimod which is why we made our decision to sell Jilin Boda.

Alex Liu – Brean Capital

Okay, thank you.

Operator

Thank you. (Operator instructions.) You have a follow-up question from the line of Alex Liu with Brean Capital. Please ask your question.

Alex Liu – Brean Capital

[Asks question in Chinese.]

Jiu Liu D’Elia

So let me translate Alex’s question. The question is regarding the privatization process of Simcere and he’s asking what Simcere’s process is in terms of going private. And then also once the company is privatized what will be Simcere’s strategic focus in the next several years.

Now, Mr. Liu has transferred the question to Mr. Jinsheng Ren, our Chairman, to address.

Jinsheng Ren

Thank you very much for your question, and as you know we proposed going private, we proposed the privatization of Simcere in March this year. And this going private process is ongoing as of now. Right now we don’t have any information to disclose, and if we do have information that must be disclosed according to applicable law we will certainly share that with you at an appropriate time. Thank you.

Alex Liu – Brean Capital

Thank you.

Operator

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now hand the call back over to Mr. Hongquan Liu for closing remarks. Thank you.

Hongquan Liu

Thank you very much for attending Simcere’s earnings call. Please do not hesitate to be in touch with us if you have any further questions. Thank you.

Operator

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today’s conference. You may now disconnect. Good day.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!


View the original article here

AcelRx Pharmaceuticals' CEO Discusses Q2 2013 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

Executives

Richard King - President and Chief Executive Officer

Jim Welch - Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Analysts

Louise Chen - Guggenheim

Randall Stanicky - Canaccord Genuity

Mario Corso - Mizuho

David Amsellem - Piper Jaffray

AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ACRX) Q2 2013 Earnings Conference Call August 12, 2013 4:30 PM ET

Operator

Welcome to the AcelRx Pharmaceuticals’ Second Quarter 2013 Financial Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following management’s prepared remarks, we will hold a question-and-answer session. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded today, August 12, 2013.

I would now like to turn the call over to Jim Welch, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Please go ahead.

Jim Welch - Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Thank you, Denise. Good afternoon and welcome to today’s call. This is Jim Welch. Joining me on the call today is Richard King, AcelRx’s President and CEO.

Earlier today, AcelRx issued its second quarter 2013 financial results, which we will discuss in more detail on this call. In addition, we would like to provide you with a corporate update and a review of our clinical program for Zalviso, which was previously known as ARX-01, or the Sufentanil NanoTab patient-controlled analgesia, or PCA system that has been evaluated for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain in the hospital. The financial results press release has been posted on our website at www.acelrx.com. Also a replay of this conference call will be available later today on the Investor page of our website.

Please keep in mind that the risks and uncertainties involved in the company’s business may affect the matters referred to in forward-looking statements made by management during today’s call. As a result, the company’s performance may differ from those expressed in or indicated by such forward-looking statements, which are qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained in this press release and the company’s Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

At this point, I will turn this call over to Richard King for a company overview.

Richard King - President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Jim and welcome everyone to this afternoon’s call. AcelRx has come a long way over the course of the first half of 2013 and expects to continue to transform itself in the remainder of this year and into next year. In May, we successfully completed our third planned Phase 3 trial for our lead product candidate, Zalviso. We look forward to positive top line results for this trial conducted in adult orthopedic surgery patients following either total hip or total knee replacement surgeries. With positive results from all three of our Phase 3 clinical trials for Zalviso, the preparation of our new drug application, or NDA, is in high gear. We plan to submit our NDA filing by the end of the third quarter 2013 for Zalviso with proposed indication for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain in the hospital setting.

Presentation of the results from the Zalviso safety program at major medical meeting has begun and will continue through 2013 and into 2014 as we educate anesthesiologists, surgeons, nurses, and other relevant hospital staff on the clinical profile of Zalviso. Some of the key medical meetings we plan to it on attending include the America’s Society of Anesthesiology Annual Meeting in San Francisco in October, the European Federation of IASP Chapters also in October, and the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Meeting in Dallas in November. The process of preparing for commercial readiness is underway at AcelRx.

In July, we completed a public offering of approximately 4.4 million shares of common stock. The total gross proceeds of this offering were approximately $50.9 million with estimated net proceeds to AcelRx of $47.9 million after deducting underwriting discounts and expenses. AcelRx intends to use the net proceeds from this offering to fund potential regulatory approval of Zalviso both in the United States and Europe to continue preparations of potential commercial launch of Zalviso in the United States and for working capital and other general corporate purposes.

Let me review a few of the important results from the recently completed Phase 3 orthopedic study. Utilizing our randomized double-blind placebo-controlled design, this pivotal Phase 3 study included 419 adult patients were treated at 34 U.S. sites in the intent to treat population for treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain immediately following major orthopedic surgery. Patients were treated for a minimum of 48 hours and up to 72 hours and were randomized 3 to 1, with 315 total patients randomized to Sufentanil treatment and 104 total patients to placebo treatments. Those treatments were delivered by the patient as needed using the Zalviso system. Patients in both groups could receive up to 2 milligrams of morphine intravenously per hour as a rescue medication. The primary purpose of this rescue medication being to enable placebo-treated patients to stay in the study. Pain scores were recorded just prior to the delivery of rescue medication and were collected and the scores imputed forward to minimize the impact of this rescue opioid on efficacy evaluations.

As with our other Phase 3 studies, there was no upper age limit on age or weight in the treatment of patients in the study, a design employed to provide the regulatory agencies with data on the use of Zalviso in a real life population undergoing synergy. The oldest patient treated was 90 years of age and the heaviest had a BMI of 62 kilograms per meter squared. Historically, older patients are more susceptible to the adverse events caused by opioids and heavier patients tend to have greater risk of obstructive apnea, which is often worsened by opioids. 215 or 68.3% of the Zalviso treated patients completed the 48-hour study period compared to 43 or 41.3% of the placebo-treated patients. Primary reasons for drop-out in the Sufentanil and placebo-treated groups were adverse events at 7% and 6.7% respectively and lack of efficacy 14.3% and 48.1% respectively.

The FDA requested primary endpoint of some pain intensity difference of baseline known as SPID-48 was met with a SPID score of plus 76.1 for Sufentanil-treated patients and minus 11.5 for placebo-treated patients. The difference in SPID-48 between the two groups be highly statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.001. SPID separated between Sufentanil and placebo-treated patients for the first hour and was also highly significant both at 24 and 72-hour time points in addition to the 48-hour time points. In this study, treatment emergent adverse events were generally mild-to-moderate in nature and similar for the majority of adverse events between Sufentanil and placebo-treated patients. Adverse events of nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and itching were the only adverse effects, that’s statistically separated between Sufentanil and placebo-treated patients. Nausea, vomiting, and itching are common in postoperative patients and can be managed effectively with anti-emetic and anti-histamine treatments.

The orthopedic study was the last of three successful Phase 3 trials conducted by AcelRx to support U.S. and ex-U.S. regulatory review of Zalviso. In November 2012, AcelRx announced positive results for a Phase 3 open-label active comparative study evaluating the efficacy and safety of Zalviso compared to IV PCA with morphine in the management of moderate-to-severe acute pain after surgery. In March 2013, we also announced top line results from a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled pivotal Phase 3 study evaluating the ability of Zalviso to control moderate-to-severe acute pain after major abdominal surgery compared to placebo.

Results from these studies demonstrated by Zalviso met the primary endpoints in both cases. Additional analyses also demonstrated that Zalviso was statistically superior to IV PCA morphine for a patient global assessment with pain control and that nurses managing patients in the study, and the patients themselves reported that they had significantly greater overall satisfaction with the NanoTab system compared to IV PCA morphine and significantly greater overall ease-of-care with the NanoTab system compared to IV PCA morphine using a validated assessment questionnaire. AcelRx believes that the results from the Phase 3 program meet the requirements defined by the FDA to submit an NDA for the management of moderate-to-severe pain in the hospital setting.

In early May 2013, AcelRx presented five posters related to clinical and pharmacokinetic data from the Phase 3 Zalviso clinical program as well as data from design and human factor studies relating to Zalviso delivery system at the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, or ASRA Annual Meeting in Boston. In one of these posters, new analyses from the active comparative Phase 3 trial comparing Zalviso to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, or IV PCA with morphine demonstrated that Zalviso had a significantly faster reduction in pain intensity compared to IV PCA morphine with a p-value less than 0.01. In addition, fewer patients experienced oxygen de-saturation events below 95% in the Zalviso treated group compared to the IV PCA morphine treated group whether p value equal to 0.028. Overall adverse events were similar between groups and also generally mild-to-moderate in nature in both groups.

Zalviso was designed to provide patient the ability to control the own moderate several pain in the hospital setting. Patient control of pain has historically been demonstrated to provide better satisfaction of the patients and nurse controlled management of a patient’s pain. Using the Zalviso system, Sufentanil in our proprietary NanoTab sublingual formulation is delivered through the Zalviso non-invasive preprogrammed dedicated delivery device.

We chose Sufentanil due to its high therapeutic index. It’s highly lipophilic, also loving nature, which results in rapid brain penetration and its potency which allows microgram dosing. As Sufentanil NanoTabs are formulated the timely pills, but rapidly adhere to the sublingual mucosa when placed under the tongue and dissolve within five minutes or so after dosing.

We designed the dedicated device that the patient uses to deliver NanoTabs to avoid misprogramming errors during setup that can cause possible harm to patients from drugs such as morphine and hydromorphone both of which are commonly used IV PCA. Patients are able to ambulate easily after surgery with Zalviso because the device is tethered to the patient’s bed unlike the current standard IV PCA where the pole mounted infusion pump is physically connected to the patients by IV tubing.

The nurse has controlled access to setup Zalviso through a radio frequency identification key and the patient controls access to their own system through a radio frequency identification thumb tag that prevents people other than the patient from using Zalviso. Post-operative pain treatment is a large attractive market that exceeds $5 billion in annual sales. It continues to grow based on estimates of the U.S., Japan and the five largest EU countries combined.

In the U.S., we believe there are over 12 million surgeries per year where moderate-to-severe post-operative pain occurs at approximately 95% of these patients will be candidates for treatment with Zalviso. Within this post-surgical population about two-thirds of the population, are admitted as in-patients to the hospital where we will be attempting to replace IV PCA as the current standard of care of managing post-operative pain.

In addition about one-third of that population is ambulatory, meaning they’re in the hospital for less than 23 hours where IV PCA system is too cumbersome to setup, but are simple to use, non-invasive patient-controlled analgesia systems such as Zalviso maybe highly appropriate. Our market research also indicates that there are in excess of 7 million hospital inpatients with moderate-to-severe pain, that’s – sorry, and that over two-thirds of its patient group maybe candidates for treatment with Zalviso. This group would include patients in hospital with a variety of clinical conditions that result in moderate-to-severe pain such as diverticulitis, burns or sickle cell disease patients among others.

Outside the U.S. in countries that have advanced healthcare systems, we believe there are three to four times as many patients undergoing surgical procedures that results in moderate-to-severe pain each year and for who Zalviso could provide effective and well-tolerated post-surgical management.

On April 24, 2013, AcelRx reported top-line data showing the primary endpoint was achieved in a placebo-controlled dose finding Phase 2 clinical trial of ARX-04 for acute pain. This trial randomized 101 patients following bunionectomy surgery in a 2:2:1 ratio to 30 micrograms Sufentanil – 20 micrograms Sufentanil of placebo treatment. Results demonstrated that patients receiving 30 micrograms of Sufentanil NanoTab doses administered by a healthcare professional, no more frequently than ones per hour had significantly greater pain reduction as measured by some pain intensity difference of the baseline during the 12-hour trial period than placebo-treated patients with a p-value equal to 0.003.

The clinical study and associated research activities of ARX-04 are funded by a grant from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command or USAMRMC. This product is designed to address the need for a rapid acting, strong analgesic where IV access is not available or possible. This title product could provide short-term treatment of moderate-to-severe pain for wounded soldiers on the battlefield, for victims of roadside traffic accidents and for patients in medically supervised settings such as with emergency room or for short stay ambulatory surgery patients. According to the CDC data, there are more than 45 million injury related emergency departments visits and 43 million ambulatory surgery procedures per year in the US.

With that overview, let me turn the call back over to Jim, who will review our financial results for second quarter of 2013.

Jim Welch - Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Thank you, Richard and good afternoon everyone. AcelRx reported a net loss in the second quarter of 2013 of $17.4 million or $0.47 per share compared with a net loss of $7.2 million or $0.35 per share for the second quarter of 2012. Common shares used in calculating the basic and diluted earnings per share were 37.3 million in the second quarter of 2013 and compared to 20.6 million in the period one year ago. During the second quarter of 2013 AcelRx recognized revenue of $407,000 compared to $224,000 in the second quarter of 2012.

The revenue resulted from reimbursement for the work completed under the research grant from USAMRMC for the development of ARX-04, a Sufentanil NanoTab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain, research and development or R&D expenses for this quarter ended June 30, 2013 totaled $6.1 million compared to $5.4 million in the quarter ended June 30, 2012 and compared to $9.3 million for the preceding quarter ended March 31, 2013. The increase over the quarter ended June 30, 2012 was primarily due to expenses associated with the Phase 3 clinical studies of Zalviso.

The decrease in R&D from the first quarter of 2013 reflects lower Zalviso Phase 3 costs as we completed Zalviso Phase 3 program. General and administrative expenses were $2.1 million in the second quarter of 2013 compared with $1.8 million for the second quarter of 2012. The increase was related to increased market research activity. Other income and expense includes a $9.3 million non-cash charge in the second quarter of 2013 resulting from the liability accounting related to warrant issued in connection with the piped financing completed in June of 2012.

The primary determinant of this charge is an increase in the share price during the second quarter of 2013 and is resulting impact on the Black-Scholes valuation of these warrants. If, the $9.3 million non-cash charge in the second quarter is excluded from the GAAP earnings per share calculation. Our second quarter 2013 net loss per share would be adjusted down to a loss of $0.22 per share. As of June 30, 2013 AcelRx had cash and cash equivalents and investments of $36.8 million compared to $59.8 million at December 31, 2012 and $48.2 million at the end of the quarter ended March 31, 2013.

Our net cash burn for the second quarter of 2013 was $11.4 million. The cash balance does not include the proceeds of the recent financing where we raised approximately $48 million in net proceeds. Now, I would like to provide you with some guidance of our financial expectations for the rest of 13. AcelRx records reimbursement receipts from the $5.6 million USAMRMC grant to fund development of ARX-04 as revenue. We have received $4.8 million from this grant through the second – to the end of the second quarter of 2013 and expect to record the remaining $800,000 during the rest of the life of the grant, which terminates on January 31, 2014.

We anticipate that research and development expenses in the second half of 2013 will be lower than the $9.3 million and the $6.1 million reported in the first and second quarters of 2013 respectively. Due to lower clinical development expenses associated with Zalviso and the ARX-04 program. These decreases in R&D will be partially offset by the preparation of an NDA for Zalviso expected to be submitted to the FDA by the end of the third quarter of 2013.

Additionally, AcelRx anticipates modest increases in 2013 in general and administrative expense due to costs associated with commercial preparations for the launch of Zalviso in the U.S. and expansion of its corporate infrastructure to support commercial launch. Total operating expenses in – for 2013 are anticipated to be only modestly higher than the 32.1 million recorded in 2012.

Other income and expense in future periods is expected to include non-cash charges that result from the liability accounting lead to the warrants we issued in connection with the PIPE financing completed in the second quarter of 2012. Since the primary determinant of this charge is share price change during the quarter and its effect on the Black-Scholes valuation of these warrants, the impact in future periods is very difficult to predict and is not included in our guidance.

AcelRx believes its cash and cash equivalents and investments include funding from the recently completed public financing are sufficient to fund operations figure at least the end of 2014 and actually well into 2015. We expect to use our cash and our cash will decrease over the second half of 2013 to the first half – when compared to the first half of the year as expenditures primarily R&D in clinical activity have been completed in many of our final payments to the contract research organizations have been made.

With that, I will turn the call back over to Richard at this time.

Richard King - President and Chief Executive Officer

Thanks, Jim. Before we answer your questions, I’d like to summarize our major goals and potential milestones looking at over the coming months. The value of our NanoTab system and the management of acute moderate-to-severe pain in the hospital is beginning to emerge. Zalviso, we believe is a product, which not only manages moderate-to-severe pain effectively over 48 to 72 hours, but can provide early pain control to better level than an IV delivered pain medication.

Zalviso has demonstrated superior patient global assessment of method of pain control compared to IV PCA with morphine, nurse and patient satisfaction, and ease-of-care during use are also enhanced with Zalviso. Due to its intrinsic design, Zalviso eliminates the risk of programming errors and since it frees the patient from an IV connection to an infusion pump, it can enable patients to ambulate more easily. The side effect profile relates the study drug. We have observed in the placebo-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials is similar to placebo-treated patients except the itching, which is the only adverse event considered related to study drug that is higher in Zalviso-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients. In addition, in a single head-to-head study with IV PCA with morphine, Zalviso demonstrated a reduced incidence of oxygen desaturation events in comparison to IV PCA morphine.

Now that we have all of our Phase 3 data, we plan to submit our new drug application to the FDA by the end of the third quarter of 2013 for the indication of moderate-to-severe pain management in the hospital setting. Our filing in the EU will be sometime after the U.S. submission. We are in the process of presenting full data from all Phase 3 studies of Zalviso at major medical meetings in 2013 and 2014 with the goal of raising awareness for product physicians, surgeons, nurses and pharmacists both in the U.S. and in Europe. We are beginning to build our commercial capabilities and plan to establish our marketing team in the second half of this year and our sales management team in 2014. We have planned to put active sales force in place in the first quarter of 2015 and planned to bring on board medical science liaisons in the first half of 2014 to be deployed for educational purposes in the hospital.

We continue to engage in discussions with potential partners regarding the U.S. commercial rights for Zalviso – ex-U.S. commercial rights for Zalviso sorry, of business objectives for AcelRx remains and ex-U.S. licensing agreement with a partner skilled in commercializing products in the hospital environment outside of the U.S. The coming months will be busy at AcelRx with the analysis of additional clinical results, the preparation of filing of our NDA, planning and building infrastructure to support the commercial introduction of Zalviso in the U.S. and ex-U.S. partnering discussions.

With that, I would like to open the call for questions. Denise, I wonder if we can invite the first question please.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

Certainly. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question-and-answer session. (Operator Instructions) Our first question will come from Louise Chen of Guggenheim. Please go ahead.

Louise Chen - Guggenheim

Hi, thanks for taking the questions. I had a few. The first question I had was on your SG&A spend, just curious how we should model that in 2014 and 2015 and if you don’t want to give specifics maybe you could just sort of give us generally what we need to think about adding on in that timeframe? Second question I have was on your label for ARX-01, just wondering if you think you maybe able to include the head-to-head data and also favorable labeling for the two at-risk groups older and heavy patients, just wondering about that? And then lastly, just curious in terms of early adopters for your products, would Kaiser be possibly one of those types of organizations given that it’s also investor in the company so just kind of curious there? Thank you.

Richard King

Okay, thanks Louise. Maybe Jim, you might want to talk first about SG&A and the one commentary I’ll give to start the ball rolling, the big bolus of headcount will come in January ‘15 as we add or we anticipate to be sales force of about 65 people. So, clearly SG&A will ramp significantly at that moment. But Jim, do you want to give any other commentary?

Jim Welch

What I would add is what you’ll see is starting here in the second half of this year. You will see a – I’ll say is a drifting up in the SG&A expenses as we start to kick off on various market research activities and commercial preparation activities. As Richard identified a little bit earlier in terms of the hiring of people in terms of marketing the MS sales and so forth, those will occur over the course of 2014 and so you’ll see a accelerated increase on the expenses and then as Richard just said, the real bolus will come in the first quarter of 2015 as we bring on the sales force, which we estimate to be about 65 people is what’s necessary and that will be brought in over the course of a few months in 2015. We are at this point in time not giving any specific guidance on outfitting or out that far, but if you look at the expenditures that should kind of give you the shape of which – where we expect things to happen.

Richard King

And your second question, Louise, in relation to label and I don’t anticipate that head-to-head study as a single study will be included in the label although, some of the data from that study particularly the safety related information are likely will be referred to in the label. And certainly the information as it relates to older and heavier patients, it’s unclear at the stage whether it will be called out specifically in the label itself, but certainly the fact that the information is available in the study data that will be forming the basis of approval to placebo-controlled study specifically. There will be a lot of information related to the use of Sufentanil in older and heavier patients.

Lastly in terms of early adopters, yes, certainly hospital systems with significant patient volume that manage both post-operative patients and certainly admit patients in the hospital with broader disease states that require management and support the pain. I think it will be early adopters and we haven’t called out any specific group at this stage. I don’t think we’re in a position yet to be able to do that. But over the course of the next year, we certainly imagine and anticipate that will lead to defining very specifically to early targets for Zalviso will be and then making sure that we had a sales force that is aligned to go and talk to and speak with those early-stage adopters.

Louise Chen - Guggenheim Partners

Thank you.

Operator

The next question will come from Randall Stanicky of Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead.

Randall Stanicky - Canaccord Genuity

Okay, great. Thanks guys. There has been a lot of focus – most of the focus has been on the U.S. opportunity appropriately. Richard or Jim, can you just help us think about the ex-U.S. opportunity and then a couple of questions on that. Number one, how do we think about, what you are targeting is it Europe, is it global more broadly and then as you think about the potential peak or potential opportunity, how does that compared to the U.S. and then finally with respect to a partner was that something that if you don’t see the right terms, you could just hold off on and we could see that coming well post NDA submission or even post approval and then – that would be need to file for Europe on your own, thanks.

Richard King

Okay, great questions. So, the ex-U.S. opportunity first and foremost in the context of the U.S. opportunity, procedures, hospital procedures and painful hospital procedures are a reality worldwide, it doesn’t matter which country you’re in. There is a significant procedural volume is done in Europe for example where in the U.S., we have about 12 million or so procedures resulting in moderate-to-severe pain on an annual basis for about 300 million people in the U.S.

In Europe, we estimate is about 18 million to 19 million procedures resulting in moderate to severe pain from the 500 million European total population volume. So I’ll give you some sense that it does scale based on populations number one. Certainly in markets which are quite westernized. As you go more towards Asian markets, and towards South American markets, it doesn’t quite scale in the same linear fashion to population. But there remain substantial opportunity for products like Zalviso beyond the realms of US and Europe. We do tend to split. And when we think about the world, our primary goal right now and focus is a European partner. And that’s clearly the market that’s well established. It’s definable in a significant way and we are looking down that road.

The global partnership of this product I do believe it has relevance on a global basis. In many countries outside of Europe and US, the way in which postoperative pain for example is managed is still on the basis of the patients, picking their hand in the air when they’re in pain and the nurse giving push opioids, because this acquisition of the IV PCA technology was too expensive. Where we think the acquisition of the Zalviso technology will be within the reach of many less well-funded healthcare systems around the world. So, I would say that we see opportunity on a global level. In terms of the partner shift, Randall it’s a great question. Certainly completing the recent financing that we did allows us to be comfortable waiting for the right partner with the right terms to present itself. And I think the further that we carry the product down the regulatory pathway will open up that particular opportunity for other partners to play here. But we’re working to find the right partner with the right profile the right capability to commercialized products, primarily in Europe and if we can do that sooner rather later than we absolutely will do so. But certainly this recent finding and gives us some options to that.

Randall Stanicky - Canaccord Genuity

Great color. Thanks, guys.

Richard King

Okay, thank you.

Operator

The next question will come from Mario Corso of Mizuho. Please go ahead.

Mario Corso - Mizuho

Yes, good evening. Thanks for taking my questions. In terms of data presentations in the second half of the year, I wonder if there is any kind of specific analysis or sub analysis we should be looking forward. It’s the matter of just we’re going to see similar cuts of data to what we have already seen but obviously you are building awareness in the various physician populations. And I am wondering what you can say separately longer term about kind of where you see the product in the company breaking even. And finally on the pipeline, anything – any thoughts percolating that you’re willing and able to share about future NanoTab targets or it where ARX-04 maybe heading? Thanks.

Richard King

Thanks, Mario, great question. So (indiscernible), you should anticipate that the data presentations later this year are primarily focused at with them covering much of the ground that we covered earlier in this year, but providing additional contact, and additional average to additional audiences. Next year as we start to build towards a commercial launch, you’ll see some additional data analysis presented that – in 2014, but derived from broader analysis across the entire database of the three studies that we’ve completed in our Phase 3 program. And we’ll look at subpopulations we look at a host of other interesting aspects of managing moderate to severe pain in the hospital setting. So that’s more 2014 to think about the – translations for the data in 2013.

In terms of your question about breaking even, we are still anticipating breakeven point around the middle part of 2016 and so with a penetration rate in U.S. And that’s based purely on U.S. commercialization by the way, but with our commercialization in the U.S. penetration rate of around kind of 4% to 5% by the mid-year point of 2016. Your question on pipeline, yes, obviously ARX-04 presents some very interesting opportunities for us as we think about this product that can potentially manage the pain of wounded soldier on the battlefield as well as provide other acute pain management situations with a product that can respond effectively to those conditions.

Certainly we’re interested in moving that program forward, ideally with support from a third party to move that forward. ARX-02 and ARX-03 at this stage are definitively waiting for partners to move those forward. Although, I do see significant opportunities for each products and certainly I think in many cases ARX-01’s clinical data set provides a lot of insight to how ARX-02 and ARX-03 may be able to help manage cancer breakthrough pain and also procedural pain and anxiety in an effective fashion. So – but certainly, ARX-04 at the moment is one that we are focusing on to see if we can move that forward quickly.

Operator

And our next question will come from David Amsellem of Piper Jaffray. Please go ahead.

David Amsellem – Piper Jaffray

I’ve just a couple of questions. Regarding your thoughts about use of cash into ‘14 and ‘15, is that building any spend on potential post-approval, post-marketing studies and just a broader question about Phase IV studies. Can you give us some color on what kind that you have planned in order to enable the product to gain further traction? This is beyond sort of the subgroup analysis and more expansive analysis that you just alluded to, but I was just thinking about your thoughts, your plans on that front, thanks.

Richard King

Okay. So Jim, do you want to talk used cash in ’14 or ’15 first?

Jim Welch

Yeah, absolutely. As we said and look at the ‘13, we don’t have any further studies that we have planned in ‘13. I do think that as we do look forward we’ve got a number of things that we want to look at in terms of the Phase 3b, 4, but most of that is going to out in ‘14, out in 2014, and 2015 is when we expect those things to occur rather than having it occur concurrently with the evaluation of the NDA with the FDA.

Richard King

So, a bit more specificity as well for you, David in terms of specific sorts of studies, clearly assist a study to the head-to-head study, I think will be very helpful so gaining traction from a labeling standpoint and would be certainly part of our plans and expectations. We are still looking at which population would be the total population to study for that head-to-head additional second head-to-head study, but certainly I think a study to support the IV PC morphine comparison would be helpful. We will also do work in pediatrics. Initially, I think we will look for expansion of labeling to basically accommodate adolescents between the age of 12 and 18. We anticipate an indication by the way for 18 years and above on initial approval. But we certainly are interested in providing support for pediatric population aged just 12 to 18.

As we go back to the between 6 and 12 population, which is what would be a second kind of push. Obviously it will depend on how we see the ability of young children to utilize the Zalviso device effectively, but we would certainly see some value first for Sufentanil and its application to manage the pain of the younger population, younger than adult population.

David Amsellem – Piper Jaffray

Okay, that’s helpful. And then another question if I may, this is a clarification question about the proposed indication in the label and you may have alluded to this, but would you expect the label indication to be just the moderate severe post- operative pain or is just a more general pain indication where potentially you could see usage of Zalviso in the ICU or in the emergency room or in say the (indiscernible) section of hospital. How should we think about that?

Richard King

Yes. So, we certainly think about this as being a broader indication than just postoperative, moderate-to-severe pain. It will be specific to hospitals. Clearly, our rooms will be focused on ensuring that the product stays within the environment of the hospital. And that’s something which we are very committed to as a company, but moderate-to-severe pain in the hospital certainly encompasses it comes to the broad range of arenas. Yes, the emergency room, but I think more particularly I anticipate you mentioned the kind of environment certainly I think that’s one where there is significant amounts of pain that could be managed – assisted and management by Zalviso Burns unit would be another one, where delivering an IV medication to a Burns patient is not necessarily an ideal set up at all in a variety of other situations. I mean, most people are in the hospital with pain if you think about the conditions that you find in the hospital. So, effective way of managing pain is certainly something which I think would be found to be abused by a broad set of people in the hospital setting and our indication is to support that.

David Amsellem - Piper Jaffray

Thank you.

Operator

(Operator Instructions) I am showing no additional questions at this time. This will conclude the question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Richard King for his closing remarks.

Richard King - President and Chief Executive Officer

Well, thank you everyone for joining us on the call today. If you have any additional questions, you would like to ask then please feel free to contact either Jim or myself. In the meantime, have a great evening everybody. Thank you.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, the conference has now concluded. We thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect your lines.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!


View the original article here

Tekmira Pharmaceuticals' CEO Discusses Q2 2013 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

Executives

Jodi Regts - Director, Investor Relations

Mark Murray - President, Chief Executive Officer

Ian Mortimer - Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President-Finance

Analysts

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Doug Loe - Euro Pacific

Shaukat Khan - Maxim

Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation (TKMR) Q2 2013 Earnings Conference Call August 12, 2013 4:30 PM ET

Operator

Good day ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Tekmira Corporate Update and Second Quarter 2013 Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will be given at that time. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, today’s conference is being recorded.

I would now like to turn the call over to Jodi Regts. Please go ahead, ma’am.

Jodi Regts

Thank you, Jamie. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us today on this conference call and webcast to provide a corporate update for Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation and reported results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2013. Joining me on the call is Dr. Mark Murray, Tekmira’s President and CEO along with Ian Mortimer Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

I would like to remind everyone that certain statements made on today's call will be forward-looking and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results to be materially different from any future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. We do not expect to update forward-looking statements continually as conditions change. A more complete discussion of the risks and uncertainties facing Tekmira appears in Tekmira’s Form 20-F for the year-ended December 31, 2012 which was filed on EDGAR and SEDAR and is available online under the Investors section of our website. This conference call is being webcast live and the archive will be available on our website at www.tekmirapharm.com following our call today.

Just to provide a brief overview of the format for today's call, Mark will provide a corporate update and Ian will then outline the key financial highlights. And Mark will then provide some closing remarks before we open up the call for your questions.

So, now over to Mark.

Mark Murray

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us today.

Let me start by saying that I’m enthusiastic about the development plans that we outlined for TKM-PLK1 today. We anticipate conducting two separate Phase I/II clinical trials targeting patient (proves) in need of new therapies.

As most of you know TKM-PLK1, is our lead oncology product, it targets polo-like kinase 1 or PLK1, a protein involved in tumor cell proliferation and a validated oncology target. Just briefly, we know that inhibition of PLK1 expression prevents the tumor cell from completing cell division resulting in self-cycle arrest and death of the cancer cell. PLK1 has been a drug target of interest for years and evidence that patients with elevated levels of PLK1 in their tumors exhibit poor prognosis and survival rates as documented in the medical literature.

We believe that by using an RNAi approach and exploiting its naturally occurring mechanism of action that Tekmira can overcome the limitations of other approaches and effectively silence PLK1 and bring new therapies to patients in need.

By way of background, in April, we released results from the Phase I portion of our TKM-PLK1 clinical trial and we reported that several objectives were achieved including establishing that PLK1 is generally well-tolerated, establishing a maximum tolerated dose of 0.5, 0.75 mg/kg, observing encouraging signs of drug activity and confirming that RNAi activity occurred in tumor biopsies from these patients.

Importantly, despite a heavily pre-treated patient population, we did see evidence of clinical activity in our Phase I trial. We are very pleased and encouraged that four out of nine or 44% of evaluable patients treated at doses in ranges consistent with pre-clinical efficacy showed clinical benefit. Of note, two patients enrolled with gastrointestinal neuroendocrine cancer or GI-NET both responded to treatment with TKM-PLK1. And one exhibited a significant reduction in tumor burden.

We have also completed the Phase I expansion cohort study further examining the safety of the established maximum tolerated dose for TKM-PLK1. Today, four out of 12 patients are evaluable having received two cycles of TKM-PLK. Of those four patients one with Adrenocortical Carcinoma or ACC achieved stable disease. No GI-NET patients were enrolled in this expansion cohort.

We are now looking forward to focusing on patients with GI-NET or ACC tumors in our next trial, which we outlined earlier today. This trial will enroll approximately 20 patients with either advanced GI-NET or ACC. With the current lack of available therapy for patients with GI-NET and ACC these indications represent areas of high unmet need and could support an accelerated development strategy.

Specifically, we expect to have data from this GI-NET, ACC trial by mid next year and if supported by the data, we believe we could be in a position to initiate a pivotal clinical study in GI-NET in 2014.

Now, in addition to the GI-NET, ACC trial in the first half of 2014, we anticipate initiating Phase I/II TKM-PLK1 clinical trial that we will enroll patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma or HCC, which represents another area of high unmet need.

The incidence of ACC has increased 300% in the U.S. from 1975 to 2005, supported by strong pre-clinical data evidence that PLK1 is needed for HCC proliferation and very efficient LNP delivery to the liver, we believe it is appropriate to pursue a clinical trial in HCC with PLK1.

In summary, we believe as the promising data generated to-date supports the further advancement of TKM-PLK1 in these indications GI-NET, HCC and ACC, which represent true unmet needs and high value to Tekmira.

So to conclude, I’m pleased with the promising clinical data obtained thus far with TKM-PLK1 and believe a strategy of initiating Phase I/II trials looking for efficacy and targeted indications represents an important next step in the development and if supported by the data, we could be in a position to initiate a pivotal trial in GI-NET next year.

Looking at the breadth of our plans for PLK1, it is indeed great timing to announce today that Dr. Mark Kowalski has joined us as Tekmira’s new Chief Medical Officer. Mark joins us most recently from Gilead, where he joined its oncology and inflammation group following Gilead’s $510 million acquisition of YM BioSciences.

As Tekmira’s business grows, we have a strong commitment to expand our product and clinical development capabilities by recruiting where we can find the very best talent. Mark will have responsibilities for all clinical development functions at Tekmira including clinical operations and regulatory affairs. I’m confident that Mark’s oncology background and extensive clinical development expertise are great fit with Tekmira in our current goals namely to advance the proprietary products within our pipeline while leveraging our LNP technology to enable the clinical programs as strategic partners. We are pleased to welcome Mark to our team and you can expect to hear from him on future calls.

Turning now to TKM-Ebola, which is an anti-Ebola viral therapeutic being developed under $140 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defenses joint project manager transformational medical technologies or JMP-TMT. Our contract with the JMP-TMT was recently modified to support development plans that integrate a more potent LNP formulations and advancements in manufacturing technology including lyophilization as well as provide for $6.9 million in additional funding.

We anticipate completion of the remaining preclinical studies and submission to the FDA by the end of the year in order to support the use of the more potent product in the Phase I clinical trial. One of the benefits of the TKM-Ebola TMT collaboration is that it supports ongoing innovations to our technology platform that can be applied to other product development programs. New data generated from TKM-Ebola program and other LNP innovations were presented at the 15th Annual TIDES Summit held in Boston in May.

Some highlights of this presentation include; the new LNP formulation that’s being incorporated into the TKM-Ebola program is more potent than any LNP currently in clinical development and it has demonstrated significant increased potency in non-human primates infected with the Ebola virus. At 0.5 mg/kg 100% of the infected animals survived after receiving TKM-Ebola daily for seven days. The previous LNP formulation provided that same level of protection 100% survival at 2 mg/kg.

Our scientists have also developed a lyophilized a freeze-dried LNP in order to eliminate cold-chain shipping and storage requirements for the product. Importantly, the lyophilized LNP formulation also provided 100% survival in non-human primates infected with Ebola virus with no loss in potency at 0.5 mg/kg.

Tekmira is also continuing work on LNP formulations that provide potent activity when administered subcutaneously. The data we have generated indicates that LNP is more potent when compared to other published data using conjugate delivery systems. LNP administers subcutaneously in a rodent model can knockdown a liver target by 96% at 1.0 mg/kg with a single administration.

We continue these innovations in order to expand Tekmira’s opportunities to products into our pipeline as well as to license them and to enable our partners’ products.

On the business development front, we are aggressively pursuing new partnerships with pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural companies that are seeking access to our industry leading LNP technology. I will provide more detailed updates when these relationships are formally established.

We have granted license to Alnylam to use our LNP technology enabling certain of its RNAi therapeutic products including ALN-TTR02, ALN-VSP and ALN-PCS02. We will receive milestone and royalty payments as the LNP enabled products are developed and commercialized.

ALN-TTR0-2 is an RNAi therapeutic for the treatment of TTR mediated amyloidosis or ATTR. That is enabled by Tekmira’s LNP technology. This past quarter, Alnylam reported results from 19 patients that demonstrated significant knockdown of up to 93% of circulating a wild type a mutant TTR in a multidose study.

Multiple doses of ALN-TTR02 were reported to be generally safe and well-tolerated, importantly Alnylam continue to guide that ALN-TTR02 is expected to enter a Phase III trial by year-end triggering a $5 million milestone payment to us.

In July of this year, Talon Therapeutics announced that it’s been acquired by Spectrum Pharmaceuticals. One of Tekmira’s legacy products Marqibo was licensed from Tekmira to Talon in 2006. In August of 2012, Marqibo received accelerated approval from the FDA for treatment of adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in second or greater relapse whose disease has progressed following two or more anti-leukemia therapies.

Spectrum has guided that it expects to commercially launch Marqibo later this year through their existing hematology sales force. The future sales of Marqibo will result in a recurring mid-single digit royalty stream for Tekmira. We are pleased that the commercialization plans for Marqibo continue to advance and that an innovated new treatment based on Tekmira’s technology will soon be available to cancer patients in need.

As outlined in my comments today, we are focused on meeting our key milestones over the coming months.

At this point, I would like to turn the call over to Ian, who will go over the financial highlights. But before doing that, I would like to thank Ian for his contributions and dedication to Tekmira over the past 5 years. We announced today that Ian will leave Tekmira in mid-October to pursue a new opportunity. As we gear up to recruit a new CFO, Ian will retain his responsibilities as CFO and assist us to ensure we have a smooth and straight forward transition. On behalf of the entire Tekmira team, I’m wishing well in his future endeavors. Ian?

Ian Mortimer

Thanks Mark.

I just wanted to also take a moment to thank you and the rest of the team for giving me the opportunities to a challenging and meaningful work here at Tekmira. As the search begins for my replacement, I do want to reiterate that I’m fully committed to doing whatever I can to support a smooth transition over the coming months. I believe, I’m leaving the company in a strong position as the leading company in the RNAi therapeutics field.

So now, I will turn over to the financial highlights.

I will place our Q2 2013 results in the context by comparing them to our Q1 2013 results. Tekmira’s net loss for Q2 2013 was $3.1 million that’s compared to a net loss of $2.6 million for the Q1 2013.

Looking at revenue, in Q2 2013 revenue was $2.9 million as compared to $2.2 million in Q1 2013. Most of our revenues so far in 2013 is from our U.S. Department of Defense contract to develop TKM-Ebola. Under the contract, we are being reimbursed for costs incurred and we are in an incentive fee. Expenses incurred on the contract are presented on a gross basis on our financial payments that is both as expenses and as revenue. Q2 2013, TKM-Ebola revenue and expenses increased over Q1 as there were some significant non-clinical studies ongoing.

Turning now to expenses, total research development collaborations and contract expenses increased from $4.2 million in Q1 2013 to $5.1 million in Q2 2013. Some of this increase relates to the TKM-Ebola contract but we saw also increase spending on our TKM-PLK1 program as we made a new drug batch for our ongoing clinical development.

General and administrative expenses were $0.9 million in Q2 2013 and the same $0.9 million in Q1 2013. Now that we are at the midpoint of the year, I will also provide updated financial guidance. I will remind you that in our 2012 year-end MD&A, we guided that R&D expenses would be in the range of $24 million to $29 million.

We now expect R&D expenses will be closer to the low-end of that range. We also guided that based on continued contract revenue from the U.S. government and U.S. $10 million in milestone payments expected from Alnylam that 2013 revenue would be in the range of $20 million to $25 million.

Also, we guided that cash would be greater than $35 million at the end of 2013. And the current funds on hand would be sufficient to continue product development into 2015. But, based on our updated cash projections and considering that payment of the $5 million ALN-VSP milestone is being disputed, we now expect 2013 revenue to be in the range of $15 million to $20 million and year-end 2013 cash and equivalents to be in the range of $30 million to $35 million.

Also, we are extending our cash runway and now believe that current funds on hand will be sufficient to last until mid-2015.

So, I will now turn things back over to Mark for some concluding comments before we open the call up for your questions. Mark?

Mark Murray

Thanks Ian.

In summary, the whole team at Tekmira feels a strong sense of urgency to bring innovative new therapeutics to patients and to maximize value for our shareholders. In the second half of 2013 and into next year, is shaping up to be a very busy time at Tekmira.

TKM-PLK1 is moving into two separate Phase I/II clinical trials which will generate important data points in 2014 and could put us in a position to initiate a pivotal trial in GI-NET next year. In addition, we expect that TKM-Ebola human Phase I should be completed in 2014. We also expect to nominate our next target for clinical development.

Looking at revenues from our partners, we will be paid royalties on commercial sales of Marqibo and received milestone payments from Alnylam.

We remain focused on developing our proprietary pipeline of RNAi products in therapeutically important commercially attractive markets, supported by a strong balance sheet and newly recruited talent, I believe we have the resources and the expertise to drive a number of product candidates through various stages of clinical development by 2015.

I appreciate your participation on this conference call today. And will now turn things over to the operator, who will open up the call for questions. Operator?

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions)

The first question comes from Jason Kolbert from Maxim.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Hi, guys. Thanks for the update. Couple of questions, help me understand Ian, your resigning, help me understand you had a pivotal role in building this company this far. Can you give us some insights into what drove this decision?

Ian Mortimer

Sure. I have been at the company a long time and Mark and I have worked with each other since 2008. And I think the company is in really good shape right now both from a financial point of view as well, an exciting time in terms of product development and the milestones of the company is going to ahead as we intend to move forward.

So, I think the company is in really good shape and in terms of my own career development this is just kind of my next (wagon) in development in my own career.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Okay. Can we talk a little bit in terms of products, it sounds fantastic that Marqibo is going to get a lot of traction with a great partner, have you have any idea what the estimates are – have they sat down and kind of said what they think they can achieve with this product. And when do you think the first royalties could be rolling in?

Ian Mortimer

Yes. So Jason, I think Spectrum as you said is a really good fit for Marqibo. They have an existing hematology sales force. And they have guided that they will be looking to launch the product later this year. We are excited for them to get out and help the patients.

So we receive a royalty based on sales so that royalty we expect depending on exact launch dates would start to flow to us, starting next year, if not before.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Okay. And can you give us some insight, two more questions, then I will jump back in the queue. I’m looking for some insights around the dispute with Alnylam on the milestone payment, is it just a dispute about timing or is it a dispute about what triggers it or is it just of the entire payment is in dispute.

Mark Murray

Jason, this is Mark. I think I would summarize it by saying that we believe the milestone has been achieved and therefore, the milestone is due and they take a different view. They don’t believe the milestone has been achieved. And so the agreements between the companies called for arbitration to sort out disagreements like this.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

It’s kind of like déjà vu though, it seems like both you and Alnylam would not want to repeat the arbitration process every time there is a disagreement. But, I’m sure its relatively costly and time consuming. But, I guess you have no choice.

Can you talk a little bit about hepatocellular carcinoma and PLK1? I mean that’s a really exciting opportunity. Now, you are moving into not just this kind of niche area; what’s the standard of care right now in HCC and what’s the expected longevity of a newly diagnosed HCC patient, so we can get some idea of where you find proof of concept in the Phase I/II HCC trial?

Mark Murray

So the approved product in the area at the moment is Sorafenib, which doesn’t work very well. And the – I think the expected life, I really, it will depend up on kind of the status of the diagnosis and the genetic underlying components of the patients. So it’s not a simple yes/no answer. But, I think if you look at Sorafenib, we would certainly hope to outperform that.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

So, are there a slices of patients that you would go for, whether its people at a very advanced stage for multiple metastasis or is it, maybe there is a particular slice, we know that liver cancer is typically pretty fast. So if you are having an impact, you probably see this relatively quickly and hopefully in a conservative or small number of patients. Am I on the right track in terms of my thinking?

Mark Murray

I think, keep in mind here, we are going to approach this in step wise, right? So initially here what we want to do is, all of these patients will have advanced disease, but we are not selecting patients or powering the study with product approval in mind, right? So we want to see what we can achieve with HCC in a limited set of patients and then we will address I think more specifically your questions, which is how do we identify a population and design an approval strategy.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Okay. Just very early on, very much an exploratory trial established dosing, safety and what patients respond better than other?

Mark Murray

We have a rationale supporting this decision but we haven’t treated patients with HCC yet. So, I just can’t tell you.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Yes. I know it’s really exciting because you have pointed to the fact that PLK opens up multiple other potential large markets. Thanks very much guys. We will look forward to chatting with you more later on.

Mark Murray

All right. Thanks Jason.

Operator

(Operator Instructions) The next question comes from Doug Loe from Euro Pacific.

Doug Loe - Euro Pacific

Thanks very much and good afternoon gentlemen. Probably going to ask the same (basket) of questions maybe just a little bit different focus, so I’m kind of intrigued by this eventual dispute with Alnylam again. I was just wondering if whatever is triggering their sense, if you have (met) obligations on that program would in anyway be relevant to the $5 million you expect to get in the TTR02 program before end of year?

Mark Murray

I don’t think so.

Ian Mortimer

Yes, I think that’s accurate Doug. The milestones were separate and discrete. And we still believe that the $5 million for TTR based on the initiation of a Phase III or pivotal study is – will happen before the end of 2013.

Doug Loe - Euro Pacific

Okay. In response to the previous question, I’m not sure, you actually specifically said what’s your obligations were in order to trigger the milestone and presumably they are separate but distinct in these circumstances, are you allowed to share with us just what exactly you are required to accomplish in order to schedule the payments?

Mark Murray

Yes. And I think this is probably in the filed documents. So with respect to TTR, the trigger is Alnylam initiating a Phase III or pivotal clinical trial for TTR02. And for the VSP the triggering event is Tekmira providing the technology to enable (skidoos) to produce VSP.

Doug Loe - Euro Pacific

Got it. Okay. Thank you very much for the clarification Mark. And then just real quick on Marqibo, I’m going to ask that tell on those – as the business development that trigger that should afford partner to commercialize Marqibo here. I was just wondering if, I haven’t see Spectrum provide any update on this maybe you could, are you aware of whether they or not they would still intend to continue funding the larger newly diagnosed ALO study that Talon was funding previously which certainly open up a broader ALO market if they were chose to continue to fund that study probably with that? Thanks.

Mark Murray

Yes. So, Spectrum has guided. There is two ongoing Phase III studies one as you mentioned the nearly diagnosed leukemia patients and the other nearly diagnosed non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma patients. So both of those studies are ongoing and I agree with your comments that there is an opportunity based on those data to expand the opportunity for Marqibo.

Doug Loe - Euro Pacific

That’s great. Thank you very much gentlemen.

Operator

The next question comes from Jason Kolbert from Maxim.

Shaukat Khan - Maxim

Hi, guys. This is Dr. Shaukat Khan. Actually I have two questions. And before actually deal with formulations of LNP, the first one is actually regarding sub-Q since Alnylam is really going after sub-Q and you have done some experiments with sub-Q, if you are on LNP formulation. Have you actually gone into primate and shown that it’s as efficacious as what Alnylam is claiming with their sub-Q?

Mark Murray

No, our data is in rodent.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

But, do you feel like you are going to be competitive by opening up to sub-Q pathway that you may ultimately end up with a very competitive sub-Q formulation, right because that could really bring Alnylam back to the sub-Q table, if you will?

Mark Murray

Jason, I think what we know at this point is based on the data that we have seen in the public domain. The LNP formulation sub-Q in rodents is considerably more potent. I really can’t speculate how anyone else would think about that or would consider using it or.

Jason Kolbert - Maxim

Okay. Fair enough. But, so far the preclinical data is very suggestive.

Mark Murray

Yes.

Shaukat Khan - Maxim

And as far as (inaudible) LNP formulation that’s using preclinical, when do you think you will bring that into the cancer side for PLK1 or other indication?

Mark Murray

Well, so, it would probably not be for an oncology application but for other sort of general applications. I think that we would almost very likely incorporate in our next development candidate which we haven’t yet announced. But, I said earlier we expect to do that by the end of the year.

Shaukat Khan - Maxim

So, does that have something to do with the different chance that you are using that allow TKM-PLK1 to stay in the blood stream longer?

Mark Murray

Yes. So remember that TKM-PLK1 utilizes a formulation that is designed to stay in circulation longer and accumulate at sites of distilled tumor growth. So, the new formulation that we are applying in the Ebola program does not have that feature.

Shaukat Khan - Maxim

All right. Thank you.

Operator

I’m showing no further questions. I would now like to turn the call back over to the presenters.

Jodi Regts

Thank you, Jamie. Thanks everyone for joining us on the call today. We look forward to sharing our progress with you in the months ahead.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude the conference for today. Again, thank you for your participation. You may all disconnect. Have a good day.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!


View the original article here

Monday, 12 August 2013

NPS Pharmaceuticals Has A Billion Plus Blockbuster On Its Hands

NPS Pharmaceuticals (NPSP) has an orphan blockbuster on its hands. The company is giddy with excitement over the successful launch of its recently approved therapy. Priced at $295,000 per year, teduglutide, marketed in the US as Gattex and internationally as Revestive, raised a great deal of skepticism earlier this year. I'm going to take a closer look at the US launch of Gattex and show you why I believe NPS will pass $2 billion in annual teduglutide sales within the next five years.

The costs of short bowel syndrome

Short bowel syndrome is an extremely debilitating condition that prior to the launch of teduglutide was largely untreatable. The condition typically results from the surgical resection of the intestine for any number of reasons including physical trauma, genetic misfortune, and Crohn's vascular disorder.

Often, the length of remaining intestine doesn't provide enough absorption of fluids and nutrients to sustain life. Patients rely on parenteral nutrition (PN), an awful intravenous (IV) infusion of fluids and nutrients. SBS patients typically spend 10-12 hours, 5-7 days a week plugged in. Long term PN isn't just inconvenient, it results in an assortment of life-threatening conditions.

At $295,000 per patient, per year, teduglutide therapy isn't cheap, but it is cost effective. In my first NPS Pharmaceuticals post, I explained that NPS has priced teduglutide to compete with PN infusions. In short, teduglutide therapy improves intestinal absorption of fluids and nutrients, reducing patients dependance on PN. Some patients are able to stop PN altogether. Despite it's seemingly outrageous price, it is cheaper, safer, more effective, and far more convenient than PN alone.

Revised guidance

The FDA approved Gattex (teduglutide) for adults with SBS in December 2012. Although the commercial launch began in Q1 2013, significant revenues weren't recorded until Q2 2013. The results so far have been encouraging enough that the NPS has revised its full year guidance in a good way. I've organized the company's FY 2013 guidance revisions in the table below.

Patients on Gattex/Revestive therapy

NPS management has increased its guidance regarding patients on therapy, but I think the estimate is fairly conservative. Since the launch, Gattex prescriptions have been rolling in at about 50 per month. During the Q2 2013 earnings call, NPS Pharmaceuticals CCO, Eric Pauwels, revealed that the time between prescription and patients actually beginning therapy has averaged between 90 and 120 days. Compliance, a measurement of patients staying on therapy, has come in at an astonishing 95%. At these rates, even the upper end of the revised guidance seems conservative.

A reasonable scenario

The Short Bowel Syndrome Community estimates there are between 10,000 and 15,000 patients in the US that require parenteral nutrition (PN). During the Q2 2013 call, CEO, Francois Nader estimated "that there are between 6,000 and 12,000 short bowel syndrome patients who are Revestive eligible in the 30 ex-US countries we are targeting"

Here's a scenario assuming US prescriptions grow to 5,000 over the next two and a half years, plateau until Gattex loses US exclusivity in 2020, then decline 50% per year. It also assumes that beginning in the second half of 2014, Ex-US sales will begin their climb to 120% of the US market over 6 years, then plateau until Revestive loses exclusivity in the EU in 2022.

Net Income at 30% profit margin

Notice the revenue and subsequent earnings do not take into account the company's current revenue stream from its royalty portfolio, or potential sales from its promising pipeline. The exciting per share earnings numbers are based on teduglutide sales alone and assumes the current number of shares outstanding (94.14 million) remains constant. The 30% profit margin is simply a conservative industry average.

The US Launch of Gattex

On the day of the latest NPS earnings call, August 2, the company had recorded 318 Gattex prescriptions, up from 160 announced during the Q1 2013 call in May. Over the same time frame the number of patients on therapy jumped to 141 from 42. According to Pauwels, about one-third of Gattex patients are coming from the handful of specialty infusion service providers that NPS already has a strong relationship with. The other two-thirds are patients that NPS didn't know existed prior to the launch.

As of August 2, 2013, more than 450 healthcare providers have signed off on the FDA required Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, and are capable of prescribing Gattex. As is typical of new therapies, most of them are testing Gattex with just one or two of their patients, before prescribing more. For this reason, you can expect prescriptions to pop near the end of 2013.

Company guidance concerning patient compliance, seems overly conservative. Pre-launch, the company issued compliance guidance of between 70% and 80%. At the time of the latest call, compliance was a stunning 95%. The less than 5% that have dropped out cited side effects contained in the label. My explanation for higher than expected compliance is that personal care coordinators are allowed more direct contact with patients than they were during clinical trials.

Whatever the case, patients are staying on therapy and prescriptions are being refilled. Most prescriptions last between six and 12 months. According to CFO, Luke Beshar, as of August 2, 2013, approximately 90 patients had ordered refills.

As I expected, reimbursement rates have been positive, and shouldn't present any roadblocks. According to Pauwels, "All key national and several regional health plans, along with the major pharmacy benefit managers and government plans have approved Gattex prescriptions." Insurers don't need to consult their actuaries to see that Gattex lowers PN treatments. It should also greatly reduce expensive treatment of complications that arise from lifelong PN.

The rates at which patients become independent of, or reduce dependance on PN are not fully understood at this time, but that is about to change. Since this metric will significantly impact reimbursement rates, the company is beginning a voluntary registry. Each Gattex patient meets regularly with a personal care coordinator that monitors their therapy. The coordinators' service to the company will include maintaining that registry. You better believe that I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for results, and sharing my thoughts about them here as soon as they're made available.

Ex-US launch of Revestive

NPS intends to begin its commercial launch of Revestive (teduglutide) in selected European countries during the first half of 2014. Outside of the EU, the company expects to generate named-patient sales in Turkey, Canada and Brazil later this year.

Compared to the US launch, it will take much longer to penetrate the Ex-US countries that NPS has targeted for Revestive sales. The prize however, is well worth the wait. NPS performed an "extensive market assessment" for Revestive. Given the results of the assessment and its experience during the US launch of Gattex, NPS estimates that there are between 6,000 and 12,000 SBS patients eligible for Revestive in the 30 Ex-US countries the company has targeted.

NPS hasn't been forthcoming about its pricing plans in Ex-US countries. The 30 countries selected for the Ex-US commercial strategy were chosen for their overall potential profitability. Pauwels has stated that NPS intends to "maintain an international pricing corridor within a narrow band that includes the US price." Japan in particular represents a fantastic opportunity with pricing premiums to the US, and 10 years of orphan exclusivity.

When pressed by analysts, Beshar confided that if the company encounters challenges obtaining price, NPS will withdraw those countries from its launch strategy.

Conclusion

Unlike most conditions, SBS is easily diagnosed. Patients either have shortened intestines or they don't. Reimbursement has so far been relatively straightforward in the US. The extensive data from the ongoing voluntary registry in the US should effectively prove to insurers and government payers that Revestive is cost effective.

Ex-US pricing and reimbursement issues will certainly vary from country to country. NPS only needs to reach half of the estimated patients in the targeted countries for the above projection to play out as expected.

In the table presented above, projections over the next couple years are a bit hard to swallow. Peak sales of 3.25 billion in 2020 also seem too good to be true. However, I am confident that combined annual Gattex and Revestive sales will pass the $2 billion mark within five years.

Unlike many authors, I greatly appreciate opposing viewpoints. If you feel the teduglutide projections I've made are flawed, incomplete, please explain via comments or private message.

Disclosure: I am long NPSP. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. (More...)


View the original article here

Saturday, 10 August 2013

Synergy Pharmaceuticals: There's Strength In Safety

The strong equities market of 2013 has benefited from the participation of individual investors such as myself who have arrived late in life with modest resources and great enthusiasm. We rarely buy large positions in a single trade but rather accumulate shares over time. Once enlarged, we can ill-afford to hold our equity through problematic binary events incurring massive portfolio losses.

This new investor profile of finite resources and abundant desire demands a strategy that emphasizes safety and proper timing. Reading the blueprint means identifying companies with strong financial positions, which essentially means no debt and a substantial amount of working capital preferably from recent financing activity.

Strength of Safety: Synergy's Solid Financial Position

Synergy Pharmaceuticals (SGYP) is just such a company. Still in its developmental stages, Synergy, with a market-cap of $414M, has no debt and a $105M balance sheet most of which came from a net $84.5M public offering on April 16th of this year. The nearness of that date and a cash burn rate of roughly $40M suggest that additional financing won't be required until the latter half of 2014. The stock price of today comes at a discount of nearly a dollar to the offering price of $5.50 which is a bargain.

Before I explain why, from Synergy's Website we have its mission statement: "At Synergy our mission is to improve the quality of patients' lives by discovering and developing novel drugs that will bring relief to millions of sufferers of gastrointestinal (GI) illnesses. We are committed to advancing the understanding of human biological mechanisms and the factors that can be influenced to correct disease states."

Essentially then, Synergy is in the same business as Ironwood Pharmaceuticals (IRWD) developing a competing and arguably superior biological treatment to Ironwood's groundbreaking constipation cure - Linzess.

To explain the 20% fall back in price from April, one need only look at the sluggish commercial start of Ironwood's product which shadowed Synergy's secondary offering. This dark confluence of events and the absence of any immediate FDA calendar catalyst for the balance of 2013 has left the stock aimlessly bobbing along the shores of buyer interest.

I don't know about you, but when I see something bobbing up and down on the horizon, I like to move in for a closer look because it just might be a big bag of cash like Vanda Pharmaceuticals was back in April of this year.

(click to enlarge)

No, no, no, I'm not making that comparison. However, Synergy could very well be a steady growth opportunity through March of next year. Strong insider buying statistics with purchases of 605k shares over the past 12 months with no insider sales indicate that Synergy is at least taxiing to the runway to prepare for take-off.

By comparison, Ironwood is a fully realized investment with a $1.42B market-cap and little potential for appreciation due to its enormous debt and paltry share of Linzess revenues (45%).

Plecanatide on the other hand is a wholly owned Synergy product with a low risk profile and thanks to Ironwood's stellar Q2 Linzess growth, astoundingly high potential reward as well. Simply stated then, Synergy is Ironwood Pharmaceuticals at one-third the present price.

So what makes Plecanatide better? Let's find out.

Strength of Safety: A Better Product In An Expanding Market

When scanning about for safer investment opportunities in biotechnology, I prefer companies with product constructs that are similar to those that have already been proven to pass muster in FDA trials. Since Plecanatide is essentially a better version of an already approved product, the entire approval process though not risk free is essentially risk diminished.

The market opportunity here is wide open. Sufferers of constipation in its many delineated forms often don't seek professional help because they're too embarrassed to talk about it. Over the counter remedies like laxatives are the first line of defense and are often abused exacerbating the problem. When frustration culminates in a doctor's visit, patients often meet with measured resistance because constipation is not a specific illness but rather a constellation of symptoms clustered into several clinical categories with a blurry set of solutions.

Ironwood therefore is spending large blocks of cash to educate the clinical, pharmaceutical and patient population of this very fact and it's working. Look at the Q2 script chart and the growth of late is astounding.

(click to enlarge)

Linzess is catching on, but at what price? Ironwood's total sales and marketing expenses for Linzess in Q2 were $16.9M with an additional collaboration expense of $11.1M. Assuming the latter was a one-time occurrence (you know what they say about assumptions) the sales and marketing expenses are at a yearly run rate of just under $68M.

Crazy world that we live in tells me that this large sum of operating cash is highly beneficial to not only Linzess but to Plecanatide as well as every dollar spent educating the medical world is a dollar Synergy doesn't have to spend.

Plecanatide Is Linzess Only Better

Like Linoclotide (Linzess), Plecanatide is a compound that stimulates fluid secretion in the intestinal tract that is instrumental to proper digestion. Constipation is in part the result of a drying out of the intestinal walls. In fancy scientific terms, Plecanatide is a proprietary GC-C receptor agonist that activates these receptors stimulating synthesis of cyclic GMP and activating the cystic fibrosis membrane conductance regulator which secretes fluid into the intestinal lumen. At that point, Plecanatide promotes spontaneous bowel movement and further reduces abdominal discomfort and bloating.

Now grasp this: Plecanatide is safer with less side-effects than Linzess as revealed in the large Phase IIb/III trial recently completed and conveyed.

(click to enlarge)

Strength of Safety: A Major Catalyst A Comfortable 8 Months Away

While I'm reticent to write articles that suggest a stock price target (and in 13 thus far I haven't done that), I'm convinced that this one will eclipse its pre-offering price of $5.50 by a solid 20% (meaning 45% growth from today's price) on positive Phase IIb in Plecanatide for constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) due by March 31, 2014. By then, Synergy's phase III trials in chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) should be enrolled and well underway with completion dates firmly positioned on the FDA calendar.

PropThink, a valuable resource in all things biotechnology related, has been a major proponent of Synergy on this website with two in-depth articles teeming with insights. Both stories, found here and here, seem to suggest that the lack of short term catalysts in the form of FDA trial results are offset by the probability of a big pharma buyout. The wholly owned rights to Plecanatide by Synergy are the linchpin of that position.

Whilst I prefer dreams to reality the facts don't necessarily support this thesis. Finding a buyer for Synergy at a premium price will be difficult for the following reasons.

The market is relatively new and untested. And because of this any buyer will have a difficult time assessing value.Even if they could put a price to the market, Linzess is not the only competing product to reference. Furthermore, generic challenges to Linzess could occur within a few years of Plecanatide's commercialization further muddling the picture.While SG&A expenses will be reduced for the seller of Plecanatide in terms of educating doctors, pharmacists and patients about the efficacy of this remedy, they will be increased relative to seizing market share from a formidable opponent whose sole weakness is a side effect that may in many cases can be regulated through dosage adjustment.Any buyer will pay a licensing fee to its competition which happens to be none other than Ironwood as that is how Synergy came about developing the compound to begin with. Though in the small single digits (I assume this means between 2 and 5% but nowhere can I find the exact figure) this is a bitter pill to swallow.

By March of 2014, we'll know better how much the market has opened up to Ironwood's Linzess because two more full quarters of scripts and sales will be on the books. Regardless of my pessimism, big pharma no doubt will be watching and evaluating. And if the efficacy of Plecanatide remains high and the percentage of adverse events remains low, Synergy may well be the itch big pharma needs to scratch on skyrocketing Linzess numbers.

A Word About Safety

Throughout this article, I've mentioned the word "safety" and feel the need to clarify how I'm using it so that there's no room for misunderstanding.

In the stock market and especially in small-cap biotechnology, there's no such thing as safety. There are safer investments than others but each of them carries considerable risk.

One need look no further than this particular space to find the tragic story of Zelnorm which was a drug approved for the treatment of constipation in 2002 and was pulled from the market in 2007. The FDA had determined its use was associated with a statistically significant increased risk of heart attack and stroke. A prescription can still be written and filled but only for patients with no other treatment option.

Fortunately for Novartis (NVS) shareholders, the maker of Zelnorm, the company was diversified enough to absorb the blow without it being fatal. Should such an occurrence befall Ironwood or Synergy, that would not be the case.

In Conclusion

I tend to veer toward safer biotechnology opportunities in the stocks that I own and articles that I write. This year, I've endorsed three companies by way of authorship as good long-term (by my definition 3-9 months) propositions - Novavax (up 31%), Seattle Genetics (up 41%) and Amarin (down 14%). And while I'm certainly more comfortable applying my stock selection process to identifying colossal mishaps in the making than to ferreting out gargantuan success stories, I remain pleased that my schemes are equally adept at targeting safer and appreciating biotechnology purchases.

In this particular case, I'm confident that Synergy will be a swelling tale of good fortune. I'll initiate my first position on September 4th and add to it upon satisfactory consideration.

Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. (More...)

Additional disclosure: The purpose of my article is to provide information the accuracy of which is as good as the public sources it was derived from. If providing my opinions on matters related to any investment has entertained you then I have accomplished my only goal. Do not act on anything I have written. Rather, do your own due diligence and consult an investment professional before making any investment decision. Acting on what any one writer, including me has imparted to you is foolish at best. I have no better access to resources or gift of opinion formulation than you do. Do not act on anything I have written without doing your own research. There are a myriad of things which can happen in lieu of any forward looking statement I have made. Any stock featured in an article I compose is subject to all manner of influences which can change its value in dramatic fashion upwards or downwards. Invest at your own risk and attain the reward your efforts have wrought.


View the original article here