|
Quotes & Info
|
| MNTA > SEC Filings for MNTA > Form 10-K on 28-Feb-2013 | All Recent SEC Filings |
28-Feb-2013
Annual Report
Our Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations include the identification of certain trends and other statements that may predict or anticipate future business or financial results. There are important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those indicated. See "Risk Factors" in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The Company
We are a biotechnology company specializing in the structural characterization, process engineering and biologic systems analysis of complex molecules such as polysaccharides, polypeptides and biologics (including proteins and antibodies). Our initial technology was built on the ability to characterize complex polysaccharides. Over the last decade, we have expanded our expertise into technologies that enable us to develop a diversified product portfolio of complex generic, biosimilars and novel products. Our business strategy has been to develop both generic and novel products, and we are working with collaborators to develop and commercialize our complex generics and biosimilars. This strategy was validated by the marketing approval and commercial launch of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection, a generic version of Lovenox®, in July 2010. Since its launch through December 31, 2012, we have recorded Enoxaparin Sodium Injection product revenues of approximately $422 million, driven primarily by its initial status as a sole generic. We believe that our scientific capabilities, engineering approaches, intellectual property and regulatory strategies, and synergistic business model position us to develop and commercialize competitively differentiated products in our target areas of complex generics, biosimilars and novel products.
Our Programs
Our complex generics programs target marketed products that were originally approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, as New Drug Applications, or NDAs. Therefore, we have been able to access the existing 505(j) generic regulatory pathway and have submitted Abbreviated New Drug Applications, or ANDAs, for these products. Our first commercial product, Enoxaparin Sodium Injection, which has been developed and commercialized in collaboration with Sandoz Inc. and Sandoz AG, collectively Sandoz, affiliates of Novartis AG, received FDA marketing approval in July 2010 as a generic version of Lovenox® (enoxaparin sodium injection). Lovenox is a complex mixture of polysaccharide chains derived from naturally sourced heparin which is used to prevent and treat deep vein thrombosis, or DVT, and to support the treatment of acute coronary syndromes, or ACS. The Enoxaparin Sodium Injection ANDA submitted by Sandoz was the first ANDA for a generic Lovenox to be approved by FDA, validating our novel approaches to the structural characterization, process engineering and biologic systems analysis of complex molecules. From July 2010 through early October 2011, the Enoxaparin Sodium Injection marketed by Sandoz was the sole generic version of Lovenox, and consequently, under the terms of our collaborative agreement with Sandoz, we earned a substantial profit share on Sandoz's sales of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection. The product now faces other generic competitors and we receive a royalty on net sales, which have been significantly eroded by competitive pressures.
Our second complex generic product candidate, M356, is designed to be a generic version of Copaxone® (glatiramer acetate injection), a drug that is indicated for the reduction of the frequency of relapses in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, or RRMS. Copaxone consists of a synthetic mixture of polypeptide chains. With M356, we extended our core polysaccharide characterization and process engineering capabilities to develop capabilities for the structural characterization, process engineering and biologic systems analysis of this complex polypeptide mixture.
We are also collaborating with Sandoz to develop and commercialize M356, and the Sandoz ANDA for M356 is currently under FDA review.
Our biosimilars program is targeted toward developing biosimilar versions of
marketed therapeutic proteins, with a goal of obtaining FDA designation as
interchangeable. The subset of biosimilars receiving an interchangeability
designation are known as interchangeable biologics. In March 2010, an
abbreviated regulatory process was codified in Section 351(k) of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. This new pathway opens the market
for biosimilar and interchangeable versions of a broad array of biologic
therapeutics, including antibodies, cytokines, fusion proteins, hormones and
blood factors. Forecasters predict a rapidly growing multi-billion dollar global
market for these products. Most of these biologics are complex mixtures, and for
several years we have been investing in developing novel approaches to the
structural characterization, process engineering and analysis of the biologic
activities of these products. In February 2012, FDA released three documents
containing their preliminary guidelines for applications under the
Section 351(k) pathway. These guidelines state that FDA will use a step-wise
review that considers the totality-of-the-evidence in determining extent of the
clinical development program. This approach puts a substantial emphasis on
structural and functional characterization data in evaluating biosimilar
products for approval. We believe the framework that the FDA has outlined in the
draft guidance documents aligns with our strategy for biosimilars. Our goal is
to engineer biologic products that will show minimal to no structural or
functional differences from the reference brand product, thereby justifying a
more selective and targeted approach to human clinical testing to support
demonstration of interchangeability. In December 2011, we and Baxter
International, Inc., Baxter Healthcare Corporation and Baxter Healthcare SA,
collectively, Baxter, entered into a global collaboration and license agreement,
or the Baxter Agreement, to develop and commercialize up to six biosimilars. The
Baxter Agreement became effective in February 2012. Baxter is an established
healthcare company with global product development, manufacturing and commercial
capabilities.
Our novel products program leverages the capabilities and expertise of our complex generics and biosimilars programs to address unmet clinical needs. Our most advanced efforts have been in the area of polysaccharide mixtures. M402, in Phase 1 clinical development as a potential anti-cancer agent, is a novel heparan sulfate mimetic that binds to multiple growth factors, adhesion molecules and chemokines to inhibit tumor angiogenesis, progression, and metastasis. In addition to this development candidate, we are also seeking to discover and develop additional novel products. Our goal is to leverage the multi-targeting nature of complex mixture molecules to develop novel products which could positively modulate multiple pathways in a disease. We believe that our core technology platform will enable us to map the critical nodes that regulate complex diseases. We will then be able to define the optimal therapeutic intervention to target the appropriate nodes. We have built significant capabilities in biological characterization and engineering of proteins through our biosimilars platform that provide us with the potential to create unique and novel formulations of protein (including antibody) drug compositions for specific disease indications. To add to these capabilities, in December 2011 we acquired selected assets of Virdante Pharmaceuticals, Inc. relating to sialylation technology. Sialic acid is a type of sugar modification on selected proteins that is understood to regulate anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory functions of these proteins. These assets add to our core ability to modify and engineer protein backbones to precisely regulate biological networks and develop novel biologic product candidates. We may apply our proprietary sialylation technology to develop a sialylated plasma-derived intravenous immunoglobulin, or IVIG, product or a recombinant sialylated Fc product. We are investigating both approaches, and expect to have data later this year that will guide our development efforts.
Our Collaborations
In 2003, we entered into a collaboration and license agreement, or the 2003 Sandoz Collaboration, with Sandoz N.V. and Sandoz Inc. to jointly develop, manufacture and commercialize Enoxaparin Sodium Injection. Sandoz N.V. later assigned its rights in the 2003 Sandoz Collaboration to Sandoz AG, an affiliate of Novartis Pharma AG. We refer to Sandoz AG and Sandoz Inc. together as Sandoz.
In 2006 and 2007, we entered into a series of agreements, including a Stock Purchase Agreement and an Investor Rights Agreement, with Novartis Pharma AG, and a collaboration and license agreement, as amended, or the Second Sandoz Collaboration Agreement, with Sandoz AG. Together, this series of agreements is referred to as the 2006 Sandoz Collaboration. Under the Second Sandoz Collaboration Agreement, we and Sandoz AG jointly develop, manufacture and commercialize M356. In connection with the 2006 Sandoz Collaboration, we sold 4,708,679 shares of common stock to Novartis Pharma AG at a per share price of $15.93 (the closing price of our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market was $13.05 on the date of purchase) for an aggregate purchase price of $75.0 million, resulting in an equity premium of $13.6 million.
Prior to the launch of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection in 2010, the
collaboration revenues derived from our 2003 Sandoz Collaboration and 2006
Sandoz Collaboration primarily consisted of amounts earned by us for
reimbursement by Sandoz of research and development services and development
costs. In July 2010, Sandoz began the commercial sale of Enoxaparin Sodium
Injection. The profit-share or royalties Sandoz is obligated to pay us under the
2003 Sandoz Collaboration differ depending on whether (i) there are no
third-party competitors marketing an interchangeable generic version of Lovenox,
or Lovenox-Equivalent Product (as defined in the 2003 Sandoz Collaboration),
(ii) a Lovenox-Equivalent Product is being marketed by Sanofi-Aventis, which
distributes the brand name Lovenox, or licensed by Sanofi-Aventis to another
company to be sold as a generic drug, both known as authorized generics, or
(iii) there are one or more third-party competitors which are not Sanofi-Aventis
marketing a Lovenox-Equivalent Product. From July 2010 through September 2011,
no third-party competitor was marketing a Lovenox-Equivalent Product; therefore,
during that period, Sandoz paid us 45% of the contractual profits from the sale
of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection. In September 2011, FDA approved the ANDA for the
enoxaparin product of Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. or Amphastar. In October
2011, Sandoz confirmed that an authorized generic Lovenox-Equivalent Product was
being marketed, which meant that Sandoz was obligated to pay us a royalty on its
net sales of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection until the contractual profits from
those net sales in a product year (July 1-June 30) reached a certain threshold.
Upon the achievement of the contractual profit threshold in December 2011,
Sandoz was obligated to pay us a profit share for the remainder of the product
year. In January 2012, following the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
granting a stay of the preliminary injunction previously issued against them by
the United States District Court, Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (now
Actavis, Inc., or Actavis) and Amphastar launched their third-party competitor
enoxaparin product. Consequently, in each product year, for net sales of
Enoxaparin Sodium Injection up to a pre-defined sales threshold, Sandoz is
obligated to pay us a royalty on net sales payable at a 10% rate, and for net
sales above the sales threshold, payable at a 12% rate.
Certain development and legal expenses may reduce the amount of profit-share, royalty and milestone payments paid to us by Sandoz. Any product liability costs and certain other expenses arising from patent litigation may also reduce the amount of profit-share, royalty and milestone payments paid to us by Sandoz, but only up to 50% of these amounts due to us from Sandoz each quarter. Our contractual share of these development and legal expenses is subject to an annual adjustment at the end of each product year, and ends with the product year ending June 2015. The second annual adjustment of $3.9 million was recorded as a reduction in product revenue in the year ended December 31, 2012.
In December 2011, we and Baxter International, Inc., Baxter Healthcare Corporation and Baxter Healthcare SA, collectively Baxter, entered into a global collaboration and license agreement, or the Baxter Agreement, to develop and commercialize up to six biosimilars. The Baxter Agreement became effective in February 2012. Baxter is an established healthcare company with global product development, manufacturing and commercial capabilities. To accelerate efforts in the biosimilars space and address this growing global market, we significantly increased the headcount and related operating expenses dedicated to our biosimilars program in 2012 and expect this trend to continue in 2013. We expect that the increase in operating expenses will be partially offset in future years by revenues from option fees and milestone payments under the Baxter Agreement, subject to achievement of technical and regulatory criteria.
As of December 31, 2012, we had an accumulated deficit of $162.1 million. To date, we have devoted substantially all of our capital resource expenditures to the research and development of our product candidates. In the second half of 2010, we began to derive revenue from our profit share on the commercial sale of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection. Due to the launch by Actavis and Amphastar of their enoxaparin product in January 2012, our enoxaparin product revenue has significantly decreased. Depending on the future outcome of enoxaparin litigation, we may incur annual operating losses over the next several years as we expand our drug commercialization, development and discovery efforts. Additionally, we plan to continue to evaluate possible acquisitions or licensing of rights to additional technologies, products or assets that fit within our growth strategy. Accordingly, we will need to generate significant revenue to return to profitability.
Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010
Collaboration Revenue
Collaboration revenue includes product revenue and research and development revenue earned under our collaborative arrangements. Product revenue consists of profit share, royalties and commercial milestones earned from Sandoz on sales of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection following its commercial launch in July 2010. For the year ended December 31, 2010, we earned $96.6 million in profit share on Sandoz's net sales of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection of $462 million. For the year ended December 31, 2011, we earned $260.5 million in part on a profit share and in part on a royalty on Sandoz's net sales of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection of $1.0 billion. For the year ended December 31, 2012, we earned $54.8 million in part on a profit share and in part on a royalty on Sandoz's net sales of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection of $451 million. The increases in our product revenue of $163.9 million, or 170%, and Sandoz's net sales of $538 million, or 116%, from the 2010 period to the 2011 period are due to a full year of sales in 2011 compared with less than six months of sales in 2010 due to the July 2010 approval and commercial launch. Additionally, in 2011 we earned a $10.0 million commercial milestone on the one-year anniversary of FDA approval of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection as sole generic. The decreases in our product revenue of $205.7 million, or 79%, and Sandoz's net sales of $549 million, or 55%, from the 2011 period to the 2012 period are due to a change in the contractual basis of our earned product revenues from profit share to royalty-based following the launch of an authorized generic in October 2011 and the January 2012 launch of a third-party competitor's generic Lovenox®, as well as decreased unit sales due to lower market share, as well as lower prices in response to competitor pricing reductions on enoxaparin.
Research and development revenue consists of amounts earned by us under the 2003 and 2006 Sandoz Collaborations for reimbursement of research and development services and reimbursement of development costs, a regulatory milestone earned by us under the 2003 Sandoz Collaboration, amounts earned by us under the 2006 Sandoz Collaboration for amortization of the equity premium, and amounts earned by us under the Baxter Agreement for amortization of an upfront payment. Research
and development revenue for 2012 was $9.1 million, compared with $12.6 million for 2011 and $20.1 million for 2010. The decrease in research and development revenue of $3.5 million, or 28%, from the 2011 period to the 2012 period is primarily due to a decrease in reimbursable manufacturing expenses associated with our M356 program offset by amortization of the upfront payment from Baxter. The decrease in research and development revenue of $7.5 million, or 37%, from the 2010 period to the 2011 period is primarily due to a $5.0 million regulatory milestone, earned in July 2010 upon the FDA's approval of the Enoxaparin Sodium Injection ANDA.
We expect research and development revenue earned by us under the 2003 and 2006 Sandoz Collaborations will be between $1.0 million and $2.0 million per quarter in 2013 and we will fully amortize the remaining equity premium of $1.6 million under the 2006 Sandoz Collaboration in 2013. We expect to continue to amortize the $33.0 million upfront payment from Baxter as we deliver research and development services for the two licensed biosimilars, with quarterly amortization of approximately $0.7 million in 2013.
There are a number of factors that make it difficult for us to predict the magnitude of future Enoxaparin Sodium Injection product revenue, including the impact of generic competition on the Sandoz market share; the pricing of products that compete with Enoxaparin Sodium Injection and other actions taken by our competitors; the inventory levels of Enoxaparin Sodium Injection maintained by wholesalers, distributors and other customers; the frequency of re-orders by existing customers and the change in estimates for product reserves. Accordingly, our Enoxaparin Sodium Injection product revenue in previous quarters may not be indicative of future Enoxaparin Sodium Injection product revenue. The change in Sandoz contractual payment terms, along with additional generic competition, has caused and we expect will continue to cause our future product revenue from Enoxaparin Sodium Injection to be significantly reduced compared to revenues earned during the product's exclusivity period.
Research and Development Expense
Research and development expenses consist of costs incurred in identifying, developing and testing product candidates. These expenses consist primarily of salaries and related expenses for personnel, license fees, consulting fees, nonclinical and clinical trial costs, contract research and manufacturing costs, and the costs of laboratory equipment and facilities. We expense research and development costs as incurred. Due to the variability in the length of time necessary to develop a product, the uncertainties related to the estimated cost of the projects and ultimate ability to obtain governmental approval for commercialization, accurate and meaningful estimates of the ultimate cost to bring our product candidates to market are not available.
Research and development expense for 2012 was $80.3 million, compared with
$64.7 million in 2011 and $51.7 million in 2010. The increase of $15.6 million,
or 24%, from the 2011 period to the 2012 period resulted from increases of:
$5.7 million in personnel and related costs associated with our headcount growth
to support our programs; $4.1 million in rent and facility-related expenses,
principally due to the commencement in the first quarter of 2012 of a sublease
for additional research and development space; $3.0 million in laboratory
expenses in support of our programs; $2.5 million in clinical trial expenses
associated with our M402 Phase 1/2 clinical study; $1.9 million in depreciation
and amortization expense primarily due to increased capital expenditures to
support our programs; $1.6 million in process development, manufacturing and
third-party research costs related to our biosimilars and novel products
programs; $0.9 million in share-based compensation expense associated with
grants of stock awards to new hires; and $0.4 million in consulting fees in
support of our programs. These increases were offset by a $4.5 million
in-process research and development charge in 2011 related to the acquisition of
sialylation technology assets. We expect future research and development
expenses to increase in support of our product candidates.
The increase of $13.0 million, or 25%, from the 2010 period to the 2011
period resulted from a $4.5 million in-process research and development charge
related to the acquisition of sialylation technology assets and increases of:
$2.0 million in research and development facility-related expenses, principally
due to the 2010 facility lease extension for office and laboratory space for an
additional term of 48 months; $1.6 million in personnel and related costs
associated with our headcount growth to support our programs; $1.4 million in
process development and third-party research costs in support of our novel
products program; $1.2 million in laboratory expenses; $1.1 million in
depreciation and amortization expense primarily due to the amortization related
to a milestone payment made during 2011 made with respect to our 2007 asset
purchase from Parivid; $1.0 million in consulting fees related to our M356 and
novel products programs; and $0.8 million in share-based compensation expense
principally associated with our 2011 employee-wide grant of performance-based
restricted stock. These increases were offset by a decrease of $0.8 million in
nonclinical costs related to our M402 program.
The lengthy process of securing FDA approval for new drugs requires the expenditure of substantial resources. Any failure by us to obtain, or any delay in obtaining, regulatory approvals would materially adversely affect our product development efforts and our business overall. Accordingly, we cannot currently estimate with any degree of certainty the amount of time or money that we will be required to expend in the future on our product candidates prior to their regulatory approval, if such approval is ever granted. As a result of these uncertainties surrounding the timing and outcome of any approvals, we are currently unable to estimate when, if ever, our product candidates will generate revenues and cash flows.
The following table summarizes the primary components of our research and development external expenditures, including amortization of our intangible assets, for each of our principal commercial and development programs for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010. The figures in the table include project expenditures incurred by us and reimbursed by our collaborative partner, but exclude project expenditures incurred by our collaborative partner. We do not maintain or evaluate, and therefore do not allocate, internal research and development costs on a project-by-project basis. Consequently, we do not analyze internal research and development costs by project in managing our research and development activities. Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.
Research and Development Expense
(in thousands)
Project
Inception to
December 31,
Commercial and Development Programs (Status) 2012 2011 2010 2012
Enoxaparin Sodium Injection (ANDA approved
July 2010) $ 1,562 $ 2,789 $ 2,093 $ 51,522
M356 (ANDA Filed) 3,880 6,618 7,389 44,562
M402 (Phase 1/2) 5,053 3,258 3,155 14,405
Biosimilars (Development) 7,440 875 1,042 11,438
Discovery programs 1,316 6,698 332
Research and development internal costs 61,094 44,419 37,701
Total research and development expense $ 80,345 $ 64,657 $ 51,712
|
The decrease of $1.2 million in external expenditures for Enoxaparin Sodium Injection from the 2011 period to the 2012 period was due to manufacturing activities assumed by Sandoz. The decrease of $2.7 million in M356 external expenditures from the 2011 period to the 2012 period was primarily due to timing of process development activities, manufacturing and third-party research costs. The increase of $1.8 million in M402 external expenditures from the 2011 period to the 2012 period was principally due to costs incurred in connection with the initiation of a Phase 1/2 proof-of-concept clinical study. The increase of $6.6 million in biosimilars external expenditures from the 2011 period to
the 2012 period was due to the timing of process development and third-party research costs to fund the build-out of our biologics infrastructure to support product development under our Baxter collaboration. Discovery program external expenditures decreased by $5.4 million from the 2011 period to the 2012 period primarily due to a $4.5 million in-process research and development charge in 2011 related to the acquisition of sialylation technology assets.
The increase of $0.7 million in external expenditures for Enoxaparin Sodium Injection from the 2010 period to the 2011 period was primarily due to an increase in amortization expense related to a milestone payment with respect to our 2007 asset purchase from Parivid made in 2011 offset by a shift to commercial activity being contracted directly with Sandoz. The decrease of $0.8 million in M356 external expenditures from the 2010 period to the 2011 period was primarily due to timing of process development activities, manufacturing and third-party research costs. The increase of $0.1 million in M402 external expenditures from the 2010 period to the 2011 period was due to process development work to prepare for the Phase 1/2 proof-of-concept clinical study. The decrease of $0.2 million in biosimilars external expenditures from the 2010 period to the 2011 period was due to the timing of process development and third-party research costs. Discovery program external expenditures increased by $6.4 million primarily due to a $4.5 million in-process research and development charge in 2011 related to the acquisition of sialylation technology assets and an increase in external services and research collaborations associated with our discovery programs.
. . .
|
|