PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. annual report, FY2016

Puma Biotechnology, Inc. — 2016 Form 10-K

Reporting period: Fiscal year ended December 31, 2016. The filing is an annual report, not a standalone quarterly filing; selected fourth-quarter results are included below. Puma is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused primarily on neratinib, with no approved products and no product revenue during the period.

Financial performance and position

MetricFY 2016FY 2015Change / context
Revenue$0$0No product sales
Research and development expense$222.8 million$208.5 millionUp 6.9%
General and administrative expense$53.8 million$31.8 millionUp 69.1%
Operating loss$276.6 million$240.3 millionLoss widened
Net loss$276.0 million$239.3 millionLoss widened 15.3%
Net loss per share, basic and diluted$8.29$7.45Loss per share increased
Cash used in operating activities$141.7 million$154.5 millionCash use decreased
Cash and cash equivalents$194.5 million$31.6 millionAt year-end
Marketable securities$35.0 million$184.3 millionAt year-end
Total assets / liabilities$252.8 million / $43.0 million$239.8 million / $33.8 millionAt year-end

Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities totaled approximately $229.5 million at year-end. Current liabilities were $37.5 million. No borrowings are listed in the presented balance sheet; liabilities primarily comprise accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred rent. No operating margin is meaningful because Puma had no revenue. Net loss included $117.3 million of non-cash stock-based compensation, approximately 42.5% of net loss.

In the fourth quarter of 2016, net loss was $72.7 million, or $2.04 per share, compared with a $61.7 million loss, or $1.90 per share, in fourth-quarter 2015. Quarterly revenue was zero in both periods.

Material developments and outlook

  • Puma filed an FDA NDA in July 2016 and submitted an EMA marketing authorization application in June 2016 for neratinib as extended adjuvant treatment for early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer after trastuzumab-based therapy. The filing says the FDA accepted the NDA for review and the EMA validated the application.
  • In the ExteNET Phase III trial, the primary analysis reported a 33% reduction in the risk of invasive disease recurrence or death versus placebo at two years (hazard ratio 0.67; p=0.009). An interim five-year analysis reported a 26% risk reduction (hazard ratio 0.74; p=0.017); this was not prespecified, and full five-year data were expected in the second half of 2017.
  • Severe diarrhea is a prominent tolerability issue. In ExteNET, 39.9% of neratinib-treated patients had grade 3 or higher diarrhea without prophylaxis. Interim CONTROL results reported grade 3 diarrhea in 28.1% with loperamide prophylaxis and 15.0% with loperamide plus budesonide; these groups were small and the combination cohort had shorter treatment exposure.
  • The Phase III PUMA-NER-1301 trial of neratinib plus capecitabine versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in third-line HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer was ongoing. Puma also reported multiple Phase I/II studies in breast cancer, HER2-mutated tumors and lung cancer.
  • Management said it expected regulatory approval no earlier than approximately the second half of 2017, but cautioned approval and commercialization were not assured. Commercialization strategy remained undecided: options included a direct sales force, third parties or a combination. Puma reported inventory sufficient to support at least the first year of a potential launch.
  • For the next 12 months, management estimated R&D spending of $140 million to $150 million, excluding stock-based compensation, and expected G&A costs to rise with commercialization preparation. It anticipated continued losses and negative operating cash flow.
  • Puma raised approximately $161.9 million net in an October 2016 public offering, issuing 4.3125 million shares including the underwriters’ option. Shares outstanding rose to 36.8 million at year-end.

Risks, contingencies and unusual items

  • The independent auditor’s report included an explanatory paragraph expressing substantial doubt about Puma’s ability to continue as a going concern, based on significant operating losses. Management said further financing may be needed; no committed financing source was in place.
  • The company depends heavily on neratinib, regulatory decisions, clinical outcomes and third-party manufacturing and trial contractors. FDA or EMA review, manufacturing inspections, safety findings or trial delays could prevent or delay approval.
  • Commercial success depends on building or contracting sales capabilities, market acceptance, reimbursement, pricing and adequate commercial supply. Puma had no sales, marketing or distribution infrastructure at filing.
  • Four legal proceedings were disclosed: a securities class action, two shareholder derivative actions and a defamation suit. The class action motion to dismiss was denied, with trial set for November 2018; the defamation motion to dismiss was denied in February 2017. Puma said the outcomes and potential loss could not be determined.
  • The Pfizer license carries potential milestone payments totaling approximately $187.5 million if all milestones are achieved and royalties at a fixed rate in the low-to-mid-teens on licensed-product net sales. These are contingent on development and commercialization milestones and sales.
  • Operating lease obligations totaled $41.4 million, including $4.0 million due within one year. Clinical-trial and other contractor agreements had estimated obligations of $123.1 million, including potential milestone payments; many agreements were cancelable on 30–45 days’ notice.
  • Stock-based compensation was a substantial non-cash expense. Excluding it, Puma reported non-GAAP adjusted net loss of $158.7 million, a company-defined measure that should not replace GAAP results.

Most important facts to verify

  • Current FDA and EMA review status, approval decision timing, label scope and any required post-approval studies.
  • Full five-year ExteNET results and whether the interim, non-prespecified analysis is confirmed; assess benefit against the absolute DFS difference and diarrhea burden.
  • Updated CONTROL safety results, including diarrhea-related discontinuations, adherence, and whether prophylaxis findings hold in broader patient populations.
  • Cash runway against projected operating burn and launch costs, and whether additional financing or dilution is likely.
  • Commercialization plan, manufacturing readiness, reimbursement assumptions and royalty/milestone economics under the Pfizer license.
  • Developments and potential financial exposure from the pending lawsuits and other contingencies.