specie. In 1999, we acquired Roslin Bio-Med Ltd., a commercial subsidiary of the
Roslin Institute, and an exclusive license to the use of nuclear transfer technology for the creation of cloned animals.
Agriculture. Our nuclear transfer technologies can
be used for applications in agriculture that improve livestock by producing unlimited numbers of genetically identical animals with superior commercial
qualities. Such applications can be extended to major agricultural sectors, such as beef, dairy, pork and poultry, to provide large numbers of animals
with superior characteristics of disease resistance, longevity, growth rate or product quality.
We are licensing our nuclear transfer technology to
others for applications in agriculture and production of biologicals. As of December 31, 2003, we had granted six non-exclusive licenses or license
options to various companies for applications in chickens, cows, pigs, goats or other animals.
Transgenic Animals. Our nuclear transfer technology
can be applied to clone animals that have been genetically engineered to produce proteins for human therapeutic or industrial use. For example, herds
which carry the genes to make human antibodies could be cloned, thereby allowing for the large-scale production of therapeutic antibodies or vaccines.
In 2001, we granted a non-exclusive license to Nexia Biotechnologies Inc. for the production of natural and synthetic silk proteins in goats for
industrial and medical applications.
Xenotransplantation. Our nuclear transfer
technologies can be used for applications in xenotransplantation to create animals whose cells, tissues or organs could be used in human organ
transplantation settings. This approach could be used either as a bridge to human organ transplantation or as a long-term therapy.
Commercial Collaborations
We believe that our broad scientific platforms will
generate significant opportunities for a variety of strategic collaborations. We have established and intend to continue to establish selective
collaborations with leading pharmaceutical, diagnostic and technology companies to enhance our research, development and commercialization capabilities
and to participate in commercialization opportunities. Among those companies are:
Kyowa Hakko Kogyo Co., Ltd., which
provided a total of $20 million of research funding to support our telomerase inhibition research program to discover a telomerase inhibitor for the
treatment of cancer through which we discovered GRN163 and GRN163L, and which has rights to co-develop and market those compounds in
Asia;
Merix Biosciences Inc. and
Dendreon Corporation (discussed above under Telomerase Therapeutic Vaccine);
Cell Genesys, Inc. (discussed
above under Oncolytic Virus);
Roche Diagnostics (discussed above
under Cancer Diagnostics);
Transgenomic, Inc., which we have
licensed to manufacture oligonucleotides and their chemical building blocks utilizing our proprietary oligonucleotide chemistry for diagnostic and
therapeutic applications, and which is currently one of our contract manufacturers of the monomer building blocks used in the synthesis of GRN163 and
GRN163L;
Variagenics, Inc., to which we
granted a non-exclusive license for use of our telomerase cell immortalization technology for pharmacogenomics applications that are expected to lead
to the development of molecular diagnostic products to be used by physicians for selection of optimal therapy for patients;
PanCel Corporation, to which we
granted a non-exclusive license for the use of telomerase to develop and commercialize macroencapsulated immortalized primary human pancreatic islet
cells for the treatment of diabetes; and
11
AviGenics, Inc., Origen
Therapeutics, Inc., Viragen, Inc., Clone International, AgResearch Pty Ltd, ProLinia, Inc. and Nexia Biotechnologies Inc., to which we have granted
licenses or options under our nuclear transfer technology.
Research Collaborations
We selectively enter into, and intend to continue to
enter into, collaborative research agreements with leading academic and research institutions. We design these collaborative agreements to
significantly enhance our research and development capabilities while enabling us to obtain commercial rights to intellectual property developed
through the research collaboration. Under these agreements, we generally provide funding or other resources for scientific research in return for
commercial rights to materials and discoveries arising out of this research. We seek to retain rights to develop and market discoveries made under
these research programs by obtaining rights to exclusively license technology developed under them, including patents and patent applications filed in
connection with these research programs.
As of December 31, 2003, we have collaborative
research agreements in support of our telomerase programs in oncology and our hESC therapeutics programs with a number of institutions, including Duke
University, Stanford University, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School at Dallas, the University of California at San Francisco, the
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, the University of California at Irvine, the Robarts Institute, the University of Washington and the University
of Wisconsin-Madison. Our collaboration with the Roslin Institute, in Midlothian, Scotland began in May 1999, when we completed the acquisition of
Roslin Bio-Med Ltd., a company formed by the Roslin Institute. In connection with this acquisition, we formed a research collaboration with the Roslin
Institute under which we have agreed to provide approximately $20.0 million in applied research funding over six years (of which $5.8 million remains
payable at December 31, 2003) and we retain exclusive license rights to commercialize the results of the research. We are using the Roslin
Institutes expertise in developmental biology to advance our hESC programs. Among other projects, we are collaborating with Roslin scientists to
derive new hESC lines; to improve the efficiency of producing hepatocytes and dopaminergic neurons from hESCs; and to differentiate hESCs into
chondrocytes for the treatment of osteoarthritis and osteoblasts for the treatment of osteoporosis.
Patents and Proprietary Technology
A broad intellectual property portfolio of issued
patents and pending patent applications supports our product development and out-licensing activities. We currently own or have licensed over 120
issued or allowed United States patents, 125 granted or accepted foreign patents and 330 patent applications that are pending around the
world.
Our policy is to seek appropriate patent protection
for inventions in our principal technology platforms telomerase, embryonic stem cells and nuclear transfer as well as ancillary
technologies that support these platforms or otherwise provide a competitive advantage to us. We achieve this by filing patent applications for
discoveries made by our scientists, as well as those that we make in conjunction with our scientific collaborators and strategic partners. Typically,
although not always, we file patent applications in the United States and internationally through the Patent Cooperation Treaty. In addition, where
appropriate we try to obtain licenses from other organizations to patent filings that may be useful in advancing our scientific and product development
programs.
Our human embryonic stem cell platform is protected
by patents rights that we either own or have licensed. The patents that we have licensed include foundational hESC patents that arose from work that we
funded at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. We have also filed patent applications to protect technologies developed by Geron scientists in our
ongoing efforts to develop products based on hESCs. By way of example, these patent applications cover technologies that we believe will facilitate the
commercial-scale production of hESCs, such as methods for growing the cells without the need for cell feeder layers. Patent applications that we own or
have licensed also cover cell types that can be made from hESCs, including hepatocytes (liver cells), cardiomyocytes (heart muscle cells), neural cells
(nerve cells,
12
including dopaminergic neurons and oligodendrocytes), chondrocytes (cartilage
cells), pancreatic islet cells, osteoblasts (bone cells) and hematopoietic cells (blood-forming cells). Currently there are over 120 Geron-owned patent
applications pending around the world covering various aspects of our stem cell technology. Examples of granted stem cell patents that are owned by
Geron include U.S. Patents Nos. 6,458,589 and 6,506,574 relating to hESC-derived hepatocytes; 6,642,048 relating to conditioned medium for growing
hESCs; and Australian Patent Nos. 729,377 and 751,321 covering methods of growing hESCs.
Our telomerase platform is the mainstay of our
oncology program, as well as providing the basis for a number of other product opportunities. Our extensive development of telomerase technologies has
so far produced over 70 issued or allowed United States patents, 80 granted foreign patents and over 95 patent applications pending around the world.
Our issued United States patents include patents covering the cloned genes that encode the RNA component (hTR) and the catalytic protein component
(hTERT) of human telomerase, as well as cells that are immortalized by expression of recombinant hTERT. Aspects of our oncology product development
program covered by issued and pending patent applications include cancer diagnostics based on detecting the expression of telomerase in cancer cells,
the use of telomerase as a cancer vaccine, the use of the hTERT promoter to power cancer-killing genes and viruses, and telomerase inhibitors for use
as cancer therapeutics. We own issued patents that cover the sequences of GRN163 and GRN163L, our anti-cancer telomerase inhibitor product candidates,
as well as patents covering the modified chemistry that is used to build these oligonucleotides.
Our third technology platform, nuclear transfer, is
protected in part by the patent rights that we acquired in 1999 with the acquisition of Roslin Bio-Med, which we now operate as Geron Bio-Med. Five
United States patents have now issued for this technology, and 33 foreign patents have been granted or accepted. In addition, we have more than 40
pending patent applications worldwide relating to nuclear transfer, arising both from the acquired patent rights and subsequent research that we funded
at the Roslin Institute. Intellectual property rights to nuclear transfer technology are the primary asset of our licensing program through which we
are granting licenses for cloning animals for use in agriculture, xenotransplantation and production of biologicals.
We endeavor to monitor worldwide patent filings by
third parties that are relevant to our business. Based on this monitoring, we may determine that an action is appropriate to protect our business
interests. Such actions may include the filing of oppositions against the grant of a patent in overseas jurisdictions, and the filing of a request for
the declaration of an interference with a U.S. patent application or issued patent. Similarly, third parties may take similar actions against our
patents. As examples, we are currently involved in interferences before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) involving patents and patent
applications for nuclear transfer technology and an opposition in Europe filed against our granted patent relating to the measurement of telomerase
activity.
Government Regulation
Regulation by governmental authorities in the United
States and other countries is a significant factor in the development, manufacture and marketing of our proposed products and in our ongoing research
and product development activities. The nature and extent to which such regulation applies to us will vary depending on the nature of any products
which may be developed by us. We anticipate that many, if not all, of our products will require regulatory approval by governmental agencies prior to
commercialization. In particular, human therapeutic products are subject to rigorous preclinical and clinical testing and other approval procedures of
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and similar regulatory authorities in European and other countries. Various governmental statutes and
regulations also govern or influence testing, manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage and recordkeeping related to such products and their marketing.
The process of obtaining these approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial
time and money, and there can be no guarantee that approvals will be granted.
FDA Approval Process
Prior to commencement of clinical studies involving
humans, preclinical testing of new pharmaceutical products is generally conducted on animals in the laboratory to evaluate the
potential
13
efficacy and the safety of the product. The results of these studies are submitted
to the FDA as a part of an IND application, which must become effective before clinical testing in humans can begin. Typically, human clinical
evaluation involves a time-consuming and costly three-phase process. In Phase I, clinical trials are conducted with a small number of people to assess
safety and to evaluate the pattern of drug distribution and metabolism within the body. In Phase II, clinical trials are conducted with groups of
patients afflicted with a specific disease in order to determine preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages and expanded evidence of safety. (In some cases,
an initial trial is conducted in diseased patients to assess both preliminary efficacy and preliminary safety and patterns of drug metabolism and
distribution, in which case it is referred to as a Phase I/II trial.) In Phase III, large-scale, multi-center, comparative trials are conducted with
patients afflicted with a target disease in order to provide enough data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety required by the FDA. The FDA closely
monitors the progress of each of the three phases of clinical testing and may, at its discretion, re-evaluate, alter, suspend, or terminate the testing
based upon the data which have been accumulated to that point and its assessment of the risk/benefit ratio to the patient. Monitoring of all aspects of
the study to minimize risks is a continuing process. All adverse events must be reported to the FDA.
The results of the preclinical and clinical testing
on a non-biologic drug and certain diagnostic drugs are submitted to the FDA in the form of a New Drug Application (NDA) for approval prior to
commencement of commercial sales. In the case of vaccines or gene and cell therapies, the results of clinical trials are submitted as a Biologics
License Application (BLA). In responding to a NDA or BLA, the FDA may grant marketing approval, request additional information or refuse to approve if
the FDA determines that the application does not satisfy its regulatory approval criteria. There can be no assurance that approvals will be granted on
a timely basis, if at all, for any of our products.
European and Other Regulatory Approval
Whether or not FDA approval has been obtained,
approval of a product by comparable regulatory authorities in Europe and other countries will likely be necessary prior to commencement of marketing
the product in such countries. The regulatory authorities in each country may impose their own requirements and may refuse to grant an approval, or may
require additional data before granting it, even though the relevant product has been approved by the FDA or another authority. As with the FDA, the
regulatory authorities in the European Union (EU) and other developed countries have lengthy approval processes for pharmaceutical products. The
process for gaining approval in particular countries varies, but generally follows a similar sequence to that described for FDA approval. In Europe,
the European Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products provides a mechanism for EU-member states to exchange information on all aspects of product
licensing. The EU has established a European agency for the evaluation of medical products, with both a centralized community procedure and a
decentralized procedure, the latter being based on the principle of licensing within one member country followed by mutual recognition by the other
member countries.
Other Regulations
We are also subject to various United States,
federal, state, local and international laws, regulations and recommendations relating to safe working conditions, laboratory and manufacturing
practices and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances, including radioactive compounds and infectious disease agents,
used in connection with our research work. We cannot accurately predict the extent of government regulation which might result from future legislation
or administrative action.
Scientific Consultants
We have consulting agreements with a number of
leading academic scientists and clinicians. These individuals serve as key consultants or as members of clinical focus group panels with
respect to our product development programs and strategies. They are distinguished scientists and clinicians with expertise in numerous scientific
fields, including embryonic stem cells, nuclear transfer and telomere and telomerase biology, as well as developmental biology, cellular biology and
molecular biology.
14
We use consultants to provide us with expert advice
and consultation on our scientific programs and strategies, as well as on the ethical aspects of our work. They also serve as important contacts for us
throughout the broader scientific community.
We retain each consultant according to the terms of
a consulting agreement. Under such agreements, we pay them a consulting fee and reimburse them for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in performing their
services for us. In addition, some consultants hold options to purchase our common stock, subject to the vesting requirements contained in the
consulting agreements. Our consultants are employed by institutions other than ours, and therefore may have commitments to, or consulting or advisory
agreements with, other entities or academic institutions that may limit their availability to us.
Executive Officers of the Company
The following table sets forth certain information
with respect to the executive officers of Geron Corporation:
Name
|
|
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
Thomas B.
Okarma, Ph.D., M.D. |
|
|
|
58 |
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director |
David J. Earp,
Ph.D., J.D. |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Vice President, Intellectual Property |
David L.
Greenwood |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
Calvin B.
Harley, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Chief Scientific Officer |
Melissa A.
Kelly |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Vice President, Oncology |
Jane S.
Lebkowski, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Senior Vice President, Regenerative Medicine |
William D.
Stempel, J.D. |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary |
Thomas B. Okarma, Ph.D., M.D., has served as
our President, Chief Executive Officer and director since July 1999. He is also a director of Geron Bio-Med Limited, a United Kingdom company and
wholly-owned subsidiary of Geron. From May 1998 until July 1999, Dr. Okarma was the Vice President of Research and Development. From December 1997
until May 1998, Dr. Okarma was Vice President of Cell Therapies. From 1985 until joining us, Dr. Okarma, the scientific founder of Applied Immune
Sciences, Inc., served initially as Vice President of Research and Development and then as its chairman, chief executive officer and a director, until
1995 when it was acquired by Rhone-Poulenc Rorer. Dr. Okarma was a Senior Vice President at Rhone-Poulenc Rorer from the time of the acquisition of
Applied Immune Sciences, Inc. until December 1996. From 1980 to 1985, Dr. Okarma was a member of the faculty of the Department of Medicine at Stanford
University School of Medicine. Dr. Okarma holds a A.B. from Dartmouth College and a M.D. and Ph.D. from Stanford University.
David L. Greenwood has served as our Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer since August 1995, Vice President of Corporate Development from April 1997 until August 1999, Senior Vice President of
Corporate Development from August 1999 until January 2004 and Executive Vice President since January 2004. He is a director of Geron Bio-Med Limited, a
United Kingdom company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Geron, and Clone International Pty Ltd., an Australian company. From 1979 until joining us, Mr.
Greenwood held various positions with J.P. Morgan & Co. Incorporated, an international banking firm, and its subsidiaries, J.P. Morgan Securities
Inc. and Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York. Mr. Greenwood holds a B.A. from Pacific Lutheran University and an M.B.A. from Harvard Business
School.
David J. Earp, J.D., Ph.D., joined us in June
1999 and has served as our Vice President of Intellectual Property since October 1999. From 1992 until joining us, Dr. Earp was with the intellectual
property law firm of Klarquist Sparkman Campbell Leigh and Whinston, LLP where his practice focused on biotechnology patent law. Dr. Earp holds a B.S.
in microbiology from the University of Leeds, England, a Ph.D. in biochemistry and molecular biology from The University of Cambridge, England, and
conducted postdoctoral research at the University of California at Berkeley/U.S.D.A. Plant Gene Expression Center. He received his J.D., magna cum
laude from the Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College in Portland, Oregon.
Calvin B. Harley, Ph.D., has served as our
Chief Scientific Officer since July 1996. From May 1994 until July 1996, Dr. Harley was Vice President of Research and from April 1993 to May 1994, Dr.
Harley
15
was Director, Cell Biology. Dr. Harley was an Associate Professor from 1989 until
joining us, and from 1982 to 1989, an Assistant Professor of Biochemistry at McMaster University. Dr. Harley was also an executive of the Canadian
Association on Gerontology, Division of Biological Sciences from 1987 to 1991. Dr. Harley holds a B.S. from the University of Waterloo, a Ph.D. from
McMaster University, and conducted postdoctoral work at the University of Sussex and the University of California at San Francisco.
Melissa A. Kelly, has served as our Vice
President of Oncology since January 2003. From April 2002 to January 2003, Ms. Kelly was Vice President of Corporate Development and from April 2001 to
April 2002, she was General Manager of Research and Development Technologies. Ms. Kelly joined us in November 1998 as Director of Corporate
Development. From 1990 to 1998, Ms. Kelly worked at Genetics Institute, Inc., serving initially as Assistant Treasurer and then as Associate Director
of Preclinical Operations where she was responsible for all business development, regulatory, and project management activities for the Preclinical
Development function. From 1985 to 1990, Ms. Kelly held financial management positions at several companies in the high technology industry. Ms. Kelly
graduated summa cum laude with a B.S. in Accounting from Boston College and received an M.B.A. in finance with high distinction from Babson
College.
Jane S. Lebkowski, Ph.D., has served as our
Senior Vice President of Regenerative Medicine since January 2004 and Vice President of Regenerative Medicine from August 1999 until January 2004.
Since joining us in April 1998 and until August 1999, Dr. Lebkowski served as Senior Director, Cell and Gene Therapies. Formerly, Dr. Lebkowski was
employed at Applied Immune Sciences from 1986 to 1995 where she served as Vice President, Research and Development. In 1995, Applied Immune Sciences
was acquired by Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, at which time Dr. Lebkowski was appointed Vice President, Discovery & Product Development. Dr. Lebkowski
graduated Phi Beta Kappa with a B.S. in Chemistry and Biology from Syracuse University and received her Ph.D. from Princeton
University.
William D. Stempel, J.D., has served as our
Vice President and General Counsel since January 2001 and Secretary since May 2001. From 1998 until joining us, Mr. Stempel was the General Counsel at
UCSF Stanford Health Care in San Francisco. From 1987 to 1998, Mr. Stempel was Deputy General Counsel at Yale University where he worked in a wide
range of areas including intellectual property, medical affairs and research administration. Mr. Stempel holds B.A. and J.D. degrees from Yale
University. He is a member of the bars of the States of California, Connecticut and New York, and the United States District Courts for the District of
Connecticut, Southern District of New York and Eastern District of New York.
Employees
As of December 31, 2003, we had 53 full-time
employees of whom 19 hold Ph.D. degrees and 11 hold other advanced degrees. Of the total workforce, 43 were engaged in, or directly support, our
research and development activities and 10 were engaged in business development, finance and administration. We also retain outside consultants. None
of our employees is covered by a collective bargaining agreement, nor have we experienced work stoppages. We consider relations with our employees to
be good.
ADDITIONAL FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT FUTURE RESULTS
Our business is subject to various risks, including
those described below. You should carefully consider the following risks, together with all of the other information included in this annual report and
the documents incorporated by reference. Any of these risks could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial
condition.
Our business is at an early stage of development.
Our business is at an early stage of development, in
that we do not yet have product candidates in late-stage clinical trials or on the market. Only one of our product candidates, a telomerase therapeutic
cancer vaccine, is in clinical trials. This product is being studied in a Phase I/II clinical trial being conducted by an academic institution. Our
lead anti-cancer drug compounds, GRN163 and GRN163L, are
16
in preclinical testing. Our ability to develop product candidates that progress to
and through clinical trials is subject to our ability to, among other things:
have success with our research and
development efforts;
select therapeutic compounds for
development;
obtain the required regulatory
approvals; and
manufacture and market resulting
products.
Potential lead drug compounds or product candidates
identified through our research programs will require significant preclinical and clinical testing prior to regulatory approval in the United States
and other countries. Our product candidates and compounds we have identified may prove to have undesirable and unintended side effects or other
characteristics adversely affecting their safety, efficacy or cost-effectiveness that could prevent or limit their commercial use. In addition, our
cancer vaccine and telomerase inhibitor product candidates may not prove to be more effective for treating cancer than current therapies. Accordingly,
we may have to delay or abandon efforts to research, develop or obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates. In addition, we will need
to determine whether any of our potential products can be manufactured in commercial quantities at an acceptable cost. Our research and development
efforts may not result in a product that can be approved by regulators or marketed successfully. Because of the significant scientific, regulatory and
commercial milestones that must be reached for any of our development programs to be successful, any program may be abandoned, even after we have
expended significant resources on the program, such as our investment in telomerase technology, which could cause a sharp drop in our stock
price.
The science and technology of telomere biology and
telomerase, human embryonic stem cells, and nuclear transfer are relatively new. There is no precedent for the successful commercialization of product
candidates based on our technologies. These development programs are therefore particularly risky.
We have a history of losses and anticipate future losses, and continued
losses could impair our ability to sustain operations.
We have incurred operating losses every year since
our operations began in 1990. As of December 31, 2003, our accumulated net loss was approximately $255.7 million. Losses have resulted principally from
costs incurred in connection with our research and development activities and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We
expect to incur additional operating losses and, as our development efforts and clinical testing activities continue, our operating losses may increase
in size. Substantially all of our revenues to date have been research support payments under collaboration agreements. We may be unsuccessful in
entering into any new corporate collaboration that results in revenues. We do not expect that the revenues generated from these arrangements will be
sufficient alone to continue or expand our research or development activities and otherwise sustain our operations.
We are unable to estimate at this time whether we
will receive any revenue from the sale of diagnostic product candidates and telomerase-immortalized cell lines, and do not currently expect to receive
sufficient revenues from the sale of these product candidates, if developed, to sustain our operations. Our ability to continue or expand our research
activities and otherwise sustain our operations is dependent on our ability, alone or with others, to, among other things, manufacture and market
therapeutic products.
We also expect to experience negative cash flow for
the foreseeable future as we fund our operating losses and capital expenditures. This will result in decreases in our working capital, total assets and
stockholders equity, which may not be offset by future financings. We will need to generate significant revenues to achieve profitability. We may
not be able to generate these revenues, and we may never achieve profitability. Our failure to achieve profitability could negatively impact the market
price of our
17
common stock. Even if we do become profitable, we cannot assure you that we would
be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.
We will need additional capital to conduct our operations and develop our
products, and our ability to obtain the necessary funding is uncertain.
We will require substantial capital resources in
order to conduct our operations and develop our candidates, and we cannot assure you that our existing capital resources, interest income and equipment
financing arrangements will be sufficient to fund our current and planned operations. The timing and degree of any future capital requirements will
depend on many factors, including:
the accuracy of the assumptions
underlying our estimates for our capital needs in 2004 and beyond;
scientific progress in our
research and development programs;
the magnitude and scope of our
research and development programs;
our ability to establish, enforce
and maintain strategic arrangements for research, development, clinical testing, manufacturing and marketing;
our progress with preclinical
development and clinical trials;
the time and costs involved in
obtaining regulatory approvals;
the costs involved in preparing,
filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patent claims; and
the number and type of product
candidates that we pursue.
We do not have any committed sources of capital.
Additional financing through strategic collaborations, public or private equity financings, capital lease transactions or other financing sources may
not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Additional equity financings could result in significant dilution to stockholders. Further, in the
event that additional funds are obtained through arrangements with collaborative partners, these arrangements may require us to relinquish rights to
some of our technologies, product candidates or products that we would otherwise seek to develop and commercialize ourselves. If sufficient capital is
not available, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of or eliminate one or more of our programs, any of which could have a material adverse
effect on our business.
Some of our competitors may develop technologies that are superior to or more
cost-effective than ours, which may impact the commercial viability of our technologies and which may significantly damage our ability to sustain
operations.
The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are
intensely competitive. Other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and research organizations currently engage in or have in the past engaged in
efforts related to the biological mechanisms that are the focus of our programs in oncology and human embryonic stem cell therapies, including the
study of telomeres, telomerase, human embryonic stem cells, and nuclear transfer. In addition, other products and therapies that could compete directly
with the product candidates that we are seeking to develop and market currently exist or are being developed by pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical
companies and by academic and other research organizations.
Many companies are also developing alternative
therapies to treat cancer and, in this regard, are competitors of ours. According to published reports as of July 2003, there were approximately 100
approved anti-cancer products on the market in the United States, and several hundred in clinical development. Many of the pharmaceutical companies
developing and marketing these competing products (including AstraZeneca PLC, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Novartis AG, among others) have
significantly greater financial resources and expertise than we do in:
research and
development;
18
manufacturing;
preclinical and clinical
testing;
obtaining regulatory approvals;
and
marketing.
Smaller companies may also prove to be significant
competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. Academic institutions, government agencies and other
public and private research organizations may also conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research,
clinical development and marketing of products similar to ours. These companies and institutions compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified
scientific and management personnel as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to our programs.
In addition to the above factors, we expect to face
competition in the following areas:
product efficacy and
safety;
the timing and scope of regulatory
consents;
availability of
resources;
reimbursement
coverage;
price; and
patent position, including
potentially dominant patent positions of others.
As a result of the foregoing, our competitors may
develop more effective or more affordable products, or achieve earlier patent protection or product commercialization than we do. Most significantly,
competitive products may render any product candidates that we develop obsolete.
Restrictions on the use of human embryonic stem cells, and the ethical, legal
and social implications of that research, could prevent us from developing or gaining acceptance for commercially viable products in these
areas.
Some of our most important programs involve the use
of stem cells that are derived from human embryos. The use of human embryonic stem cells gives rise to ethical, legal and social issues regarding the
appropriate use of these cells. In the event that our research related to human embryonic stem cells becomes the subject of adverse commentary or
publicity, the market price for our common stock could be significantly harmed.
Some political and religious groups have voiced
opposition to our technology and practices. We use stem cells derived from human embryos that have been created for in vitro fertilization procedures
but are no longer desired or suitable for that use and are donated with appropriate informed consent for research use. Many research institutions,
including some of our scientific collaborators, have adopted policies regarding the ethical use of human embryonic tissue. These policies may have the
effect of limiting the scope of research conducted using human embryonic stem cells, thereby impairing our ability to conduct research in this
field.
In addition, the United States government and its
agencies have until recently refused to fund research which involves the use of human embryonic tissue. President Bush announced on August 9, 2001 that
he would permit federal funding of research on human embryonic stem cells using the limited number of embryonic stem cell lines that had already been
created, but relatively few federal grants have been made so far. The Presidents Council on Bioethics will monitor stem cell research, and the
guidelines and regulations it recommends may include restrictions on the scope of research using human embryonic or fetal tissue. The Council issued a
report in July 2002 that recommended that the federal government undertake a thorough-going review of present and projected practices of human
embryo research, with the aim of establishing appropriate institutions to advise and shape federal policy in this arena. In the
United
19
Kingdom and other countries, the use of embryonic or fetal tissue in research
(including the derivation of human embryonic stem cells) is regulated by the government, whether or not the research involves government
funding.
Government-imposed restrictions with respect to use
of embryos or human embryonic stem cells in research and development could have a material adverse effect on us, by:
harming our ability to establish
critical partnerships and collaborations;
delaying or preventing progress in
our research and development; and
causing a decrease in the price of
our stock.
Potential restrictions or a ban on nuclear transfer could prevent us from
benefiting financially from our research in this area.
Our nuclear transfer technology could theoretically
be used to produce human embryos for the derivation of embryonic stem cells (sometimes referred to as therapeutic cloning) or cloned humans
(sometimes referred to as reproductive cloning). The U.S. Congress has recently considered legislation that would ban human therapeutic
cloning as well as reproductive cloning. Such a bill was passed by the House of Representatives, although not by the Senate. The July 2002 report of
the Presidents Council on Bioethics recommended a four-year moratorium on therapeutic cloning. If human therapeutic cloning is restricted or
banned, we will not be able to benefit from the scientific knowledge that would be generated by research in that area. Finally, if regulatory bodies
were to restrict or ban the sale of food products from cloned animals, our financial participation in the business of our nuclear transfer licensees
could be significantly harmed.
We do not have experience as a company in the regulatory approval process,
conducting large scale clinical trials, or other areas required for the successful commercialization and marketing of our product
candidates.
All of our product candidates are currently in early
stages of product development. We will need to receive regulatory approval for any product candidates before they may be marketed and distributed. Such
approval will require, among other things, completing carefully controlled and well-designed clinical trials demonstrating the safety and efficacy of
such product candidate. This process is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. We currently have no experience as a company in conducting such trials. Such
trials would require either additional financial and management resources, or reliance on third-party clinical investigators or clinical research
organizations (CROs). Relying on third-party clinical investigators or CROs may force us to encounter delays that are outside of our
control.
We also do not currently have marketing and
distribution capabilities for our product candidates. Developing an internal sales and distribution capability would be an expensive and time-consuming
process. We may enter into agreements with third parties that would be responsible for marketing and distribution. However, these third parties may not
be capable of successfully selling any of our product candidates.
Entry into clinical trials with one or more product candidates may not result
in any commercially viable products.
We may never generate revenues from product sales
because of a variety of risks inherent in our business, including the following risks:
clinical trials may not
demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates;
completion of clinical trials may
be delayed, or costs of clinical trials may exceed anticipated amounts;
20
we may not be able to obtain
regulatory approval of our products, or may experience delays in obtaining such approvals;
we may not be able to manufacture
our product candidates economically on a commercial scale;
we and our licensees may not be
able to successfully market our products;
physicians may not prescribe our
product candidates, or patients may not accept such product candidates;
others may have proprietary rights
which prevent us from marketing our products; and
competitors may sell similar,
superior or lower-cost products.
Our only product candidate that is in clinical
testing is the telomerase cancer vaccine, for which we have only early and preliminary results. Early stage testing may not be indicative of successful
outcomes in later stage trials.
Impairment of our intellectual property rights may limit our ability to
pursue the development of our intended technologies and products.
Protection of our proprietary technology is
critically important to our business. Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and enforce our patents and maintain trade secrets, both
in the United States and in other countries. The patent positions of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies, including ours, are highly
uncertain and involve complex legal and technical questions. In particular, legal principles for biotechnology patents in the United States and in
other countries are evolving, and the extent to which we will be able to obtain patent coverage to protect our technology, or enforce issued patents,
is uncertain. For example, the European Patent Convention prohibits the granting of European patents for inventions that concern uses of human
embryos for industrial or commercial purposes. We do not yet know whether or to what extent this restriction will impact our ability to obtain
patent protection for our human embryonic stem cell technologies in Europe. Further, our patents may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented, and
our patent rights may not provide proprietary protection or competitive advantages to us. In the event that we are unsuccessful in obtaining and
enforcing patents, our business would be negatively impacted.
Publication of discoveries in scientific or patent
literature tends to lag behind actual discoveries by at least several months and sometimes several years. Therefore, the persons or entities that we or
our licensors name as inventors in our patents and patent applications may not have been the first to invent the inventions disclosed in the patent
applications or patents, or the first to file patent applications for these inventions. As a result, we may not be able to obtain patents for
discoveries that we otherwise would consider patentable and that we consider to be extremely significant to our future success.
Where several parties seek patent protection for the
same tech