ITEM 1A.    RISK FACTORS

         The following risk factors should be considered in conjunction with the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This report may include forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. In addition to those risk factors discussed elsewhere in this report, we identify the following risk factors, which could affect our actual results and cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION AND CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS

We have incurred losses since inception, have limited cash resources and anticipate that we will continue to incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future, and we may never become profitable.

        As of December 31, 2014, we had an accumulated deficit of $70.6 million since our inception in December 2000. Our net losses were $20.8 million and $14.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These losses resulted principally from costs incurred in our research and development programs and from our general and administrative expenses. We have had limited revenue and have sustained significant operating losses since inception, and we are likely to sustain operating losses in the foreseeable future. Since inception, we have funded our operations through the private placement of equity securities and convertible notes and loans. We expect that we will continue to fund our operations primarily through the issuance of public or private equity or debt securities, or other sources, such as strategic partnerships. Such financings or other sources may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would inhibit our ability to continue operations and implement our business strategy.

        We expect to continue to incur significant and increasing negative cash flow and operating losses as we continue our research activities, conduct potential future clinical trials, seek regulatory approvals for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and prepare for commercialization of our SCD product. These losses, among other things, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders' equity, total assets and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical development, we are unable to predict the extent of any future losses, whether or when we will be able to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or when we will become profitable, if ever. Our strategy depends heavily on the success of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. If we are unable to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD or any of our other product candidates, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business may fail. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

We will require substantial additional funding and may be unable to raise capital when needed, which could force us to delay, reduce or eliminate planned activities or result in our inability to continue as a going concern.

        We will require additional capital to pursue potential future clinical trials and regulatory approvals, as well as further research and development and marketing efforts for our products and potential products. We have no committed sources of additional capital and our access to capital funding is uncertain. If we are not able to secure financing, we may no longer be a going concern and may be forced to curtail operations, delay or stop ongoing clinical trials, or cease operations altogether, file for bankruptcy, or undertake any combination of the foregoing. In such event, our stockholders may lose their entire investment in our company. Our future capital requirements will depend on, and could increase significantly as a result of, many factors, including:

•

the duration and results of the clinical trials for our various products going forward;



•

unexpected delays or complications in seeking regulatory approvals;

28

Table of Contents

•

the time and cost in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims;



•

adverse developments encountered in implementing our business development and commercialization strategies;



•

our undertaking of collaborations with strategic partners and the outcome of those collaborations; and



•

any need to engage in litigation relating to protecting our intellectual property rights or other commercial or regulatory matters and the outcome of any such litigation.

        We may attempt to raise additional funds through public or private financings, collaborations with other companies or financing from other sources. Additional funding may not be available in amounts or on terms which are acceptable to us, if at all. If adequate funding is not available to us, or on reasonable terms, we may need to delay, reduce or eliminate one or more of our product development programs or obtain funds on terms less favorable than we would otherwise accept.

        In addition, if we do not meet our payment obligations to third parties as they become due, we may be subject to litigation claims and our credit worthiness would be adversely affected. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and would be a distraction to management, and may result in unfavorable results that could further adversely impact our financial condition.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights.

        We may seek additional capital through a combination of private and public equity offerings, debt financings and collaborations and strategic and licensing arrangements. To the extent that additional capital is raised through the sale of equity securities or securities convertible into or exchangeable for equity securities, the issuance of those securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. The terms of such securities may include liquidation or other preferences that could adversely affect the rights of our existing stockholders. Moreover, the incurrence of debt financing could result in a substantial portion of our future operating cash flow, if any, being dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on such indebtedness and could impose restrictions on our operations. This could render us more vulnerable to competitive pressures and economic downturns.

        Debt financing, if available, would result in increased fixed payment obligations and may involve agreements that include grants of security interests or covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions such as incurring debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through collaboration, strategic alliance and licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Our recurring operating losses and significant short-term indebtedness have raised substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

        We have incurred recurring operating losses. In addition, we have a significant amount of notes payable and other obligations due within the next year and are projecting that our operating losses and expected capital needs will exceed our existing cash balances and cash expected to be generated from operations for the foreseeable future, including the expected costs relating to seeking FDA approval for, and the commercialization of, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. As a result, our independent registered public accounting firm included an explanatory paragraph in its report on our financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014 with respect to this uncertainty. The continuation and expansion of our business is dependent upon obtaining further financing,

29

Table of Contents

successful and sufficient market acceptance of our products, and, finally, achieving a profitable level of operations. The perception of our ability to continue as a going concern may make it more difficult for us to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations and could result in the loss of confidence by investors, suppliers and employees.

We have adopted an equity incentive plan under which we may grant securities to compensate employees and other services providers, which could result in increased share-based compensation expenses and, therefore, reduced net income.

        Under current accounting rules, we are required to recognize share-based compensation as compensation expense in our statement of comprehensive loss, based on the fair value of equity awards on the date of the grant, and recognize the compensation expense over the period in which the recipient is required to provide service in exchange for the equity award. We made grants of equity awards in 2013 and 2014, and accordingly our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014 contain share-based compensation charges. Additional expenses associated with share-based compensation may reduce the attractiveness of issuing stock options under our existing equity incentive plan or any equity incentive plan that we may adopt in the future. If we grant equity compensation to attract and retain key personnel, the expenses associated with share-based compensation may adversely affect our net income. However, if we do not grant equity compensation, we may not be able to attract and retain key personnel or be forced to expend cash or other compensation instead. Furthermore, the issuance of equity awards would dilute existing stockholders' ownership interests in our company. In February 2013 our board of directors amended our equity incentive plan to increase the number of shares of our common stock that may be subject to awards granted under the plan from 3 million shares to 6 million shares. In July 2014, our board of directors amended our equity incentive plan again to increase the number of shares of our common stock that may be subject to awards granted under the plan from 6 million shares to 9 million shares.

We have issued and may continue to issue debt instruments that are convertible and/or may include warrant features, which could result in the calculation of discounts on the debt issued and increased amortization of discount expenses and, therefore, reduced net income.

        Under current accounting rules, we are required to recognize discounts on debt issued with stock conversion features or with attached or accompanying warrants which can result in amortization of the discount as an expense in our statement of consolidated comprehensive loss, based on the fair value of conversion feature or warrant on the date of issue. If we grant stock conversion features or warrants with debt instruments to attract capital, the expenses associated with amortization of the calculated discount may adversely affect our net income. However, if we do not grant stock conversion features or warrants with debt instruments, we may not be able to attract debt capital.

We obtained a summary judgment and court order in June 2013 allowing us to cancel approximately 2.5 million shares of our common stock issued to AFH Advisory and certain others in connection with our Merger. Following the litigation of certain claims that were not adjudicated in the summary judgment, the summary judgment and court order would be subject to appeal for a thirty-day period. If the summary judgment and court order are appealed, and our defense of such appeal is unsuccessful, we may have to re-issue the cancelled shares, resulting in dilution to our stockholders.

        Since July 2012, we have been engaged in significant litigation with Amir Heshmatpour and AFH Holding and Advisory, LLC, or AFH Advisory. Mr. Heshmatpour, one of our former directors, owns AFH Advisory, which was our majority stockholder until our combination with Emmaus Medical, Inc. pursuant to the Merger in May 2011. In September 2012, AFH Advisory, Griffin Ventures, Ltd., or Griffin, and The Amir & Kathy Heshmatpour Family Foundation, or the Foundation, filed a complaint against us in the Superior Court of Delaware. The complaint alleged that we did not have the right to

30

Table of Contents

cancel the plaintiffs' shares, a right that we had previously asserted under a Letter of Intent between us and AFH Advisory, and asked the court to issue a declaratory judgment to that effect. In October 2012 we filed counterclaims against the plaintiffs and third-party claims against Mr. Heshmatpour. We asked the court for an order declaring that the plaintiffs' shares were canceled and that, because of fraudulent inducement on their part, the letter of intent between us and AFH Advisory was void and of no further effect. In addition, we asked the court to award compensatory and punitive damages, in amounts to be determined, for breach of contract, unjust enrichment and fraud.

        On June 27, 2013, the court issued an order implementing a partial summary judgment in our favor. The order, among other things, (i) stated that the letter of intent between us and AFH Advisory was properly terminated as of July 19, 2012, and (ii) ordered our transfer agent to effect the cancellation of 2,504,249 shares of our common stock held by AFH Advisory, Griffin and the Foundation. The cancellation of such shares, which represented approximately 10 percent of our common stock, was effected by our transfer agent on June 28, 2013. The cancellation of such shares will be subject to appeal for 30 days after the completion of trial court proceedings. While the partial summary judgment in favor of the Company led to the cancellation of 2,504,249 shares of the Company's common stock by the transfer agent on June 28, 2013, we have determined that gain contingency accounting, which would result in derecognition of these shares and the related liability amount, is not appropriate under the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, until the right of appeal has lapsed and no further contingency remains. Hence, the Company will continue to present these shares in its financial statements as outstanding until the right of appeal has lapsed and all contingencies have been resolved.

        On April 16, 2014, the court granted our motion for attorneys' fees, costs and expenses and denied a competing motion for attorneys' fees, costs and expenses brought by AFH Advisory and Mr. Heshmatpour. The court ruled that under the letter of intent between us and AFH Advisory, we are entitled to an award of $700,000 in attorneys' fees, costs and expenses from AFH Advisory. Our cause of action for fraud has not yet been litigated or settled.

        Conduct of the litigation has entailed significant expense to us and will continue to do so until it is resolved. It has also required significant amounts of time and attention from our management. If the court's summary judgment ruling is appealed, it could result in our incurring liabilities and expenses that may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and cash flows and result in dilution to our stockholders.

We may be required to make an $8.5 million payment to CellSeed under our Research Agreement with CellSeed relating to the delivery to and acceptance by us of data relating to CellSeed's technology, and if this condition is satisfied and we do not make this payment, CellSeed has the right to terminate one or both of the Research Agreement and Individual Agreement with us, which will negatively impact our ability to implement our business strategies related to CAOMECS.

        In April 2011, Emmaus Medical, Inc. entered into the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement with CellSeed and, in August 2011, entered into an addendum to the Research Agreement. Pursuant to the Individual Agreement, CellSeed granted us the exclusive right to manufacture, sell, market and distribute CAOMECS for the treatment of corneal impairments in the United States, which we would be able to exercise only after receiving FDA marketing approval for the product, and agreed to disclose to us its accumulated information package for the joint development of CAOMECS. Under the Individual Agreement, we agreed to pay CellSeed $1.5 million, which we paid in February 2012. Pursuant to the Research Agreement, we formed a relationship with CellSeed regarding the future research and development of cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products, and the future commercialization of such products. Under the Research Agreement, as supplemented by the addendum, we agreed to pay CellSeed $8.5 million within 30 days of the completion of all of the following: (i) the execution of the Research Agreement; (ii) the execution of the Individual Agreement;

31

Table of Contents

and (iii) CellSeed's delivery of the accumulated information package, as defined in the Research Agreement, to us and our providing written confirmation of our acceptance of the complete accumulated information package. The third of these conditions has not yet been satisfied. At the time we entered into our agreements with CellSeed, we left for further negotiation provisions covering how we and CellSeed will share any financial results of commercializing any cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products that we are seeking to develop in collaboration with CellSeed. If we are not able to successfully negotiate these terms, our current development and commercialization plans with respect to any of these products would be materially adversely affected.

        If our payment obligation under the Research Agreement becomes due and payable prior to our generation of revenue from the commercialization of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD under development, we will need to use available cash or seek other funding sources, including the sale of additional equity or debt securities, in order to fund that payment. CellSeed may terminate either or both of the Research Agreement and the Individual Agreement if we are unable to timely make this payment. If CellSeed terminates one or both of these agreements, our strategy to develop and commercialize regenerative medicine products would be adversely affected and we would become more reliant on our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, making it more difficult to raise external funding.

RISKS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF OUR PRODUCT CANDIDATES

We may not be able to receive regulatory approval for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or, even if approved, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD or any other product candidates, which would adversely affect our financial and operating condition.

        Our current efforts are, and a substantial portion of our efforts for the foreseeable future will be, focused primarily on our lead product candidate, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, for which we have recently completed a single Phase 3 clinical trial. All of our other product candidates are still in preclinical development. Regulatory approval is required to market our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or other product candidates we may develop. There are many reasons that we may fail in our efforts to commercialize our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD or that such efforts will be delayed, including:

•

the chance that the FDA will conclude that our clinical trial does not demonstrate substantial evidence that our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is effective and safe;



•

the chance that the FDA will not accept for filing the NDA that we intend to submit based on the results of only one Phase 3 clinical trial, instead of two such studies, to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD;



•

the failure of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD to receive necessary regulatory approvals from the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities in a timely manner, or at all;



•

the failure of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, once approved, to be produced in commercial quantities or at reasonable costs;



•

physicians' reluctance to switch to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD from existing SCD treatment methods, including traditional therapy agents;



•

the failure of our L-glutamine product candidate, once approved, to achieve commercial acceptance for the treatment of SCD;

32

Table of Contents

•

the introduction of products by our competitors that are or are perceived to be more effective or have or are perceived to have a better safety profile than our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD;



•

the application of restrictions to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD by regulatory or governmental authorities;



•

the possibility that we may not be able to maintain Orphan Drug designation prior to or after our submission to the FDA of a NDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, as well as the possibility that we may not be able to obtain and maintain Orphan Drug market exclusivity for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD even if the FDA approves that NDA because the approved indication differs from the indication for which the FDA granted us Orphan Drug designation;



•

the possibility, even if we obtain regulatory approval and Orphan Drug market exclusivity for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, that another company with the same drug for the same indication could demonstrate clinical superiority over our product, thus making that third party drug eligible for approval and Orphan Drug market exclusivity despite our market exclusivity;



•

the possibility that another product, different from L-glutamine, receives Orphan Drug designation and is approved for the treatment of SCD, which our Orphan Drug exclusivity, should we receive it, would not bar;



•

the possibility, if we obtain Orphan Drug market exclusivity for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, that we are unable to ensure an adequate supply of it, thus allowing the FDA to approve another L-glutamine product for Orphan Drug exclusivity; and



•

the possibility that our Fast Track designation for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD may be rescinded or may not actually lead to a faster regulatory review and approval of the NDA that we intend to submit in 2015.

        Even if the FDA and other regulatory authorities approve our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, or any of our other product candidates, the manufacture, packaging, labeling, distribution, marketing and sale of such products will be subject to strict and ongoing post-approval regulations. Compliance with such regulations will be expensive and consume substantial financial and management resources.

        The FDA has the authority to regulate the claims we make in marketing our prescription products to ensure that such claims are true, not misleading, supported by scientific evidence, and consistent with the approved labeling of those products. The FDA also has the authority to regulate the claims we make in marketing our dietary supplement AminoPure. Failure to comply with FDA requirements in this regard could result in, among other things, warning letters, withdrawal of approvals, seizures, recalls, injunctions prohibiting a product's manufacture and distribution, restricting promotional activities, requiring corrective actions regarding sales and marketing activities, other operating restrictions, civil money penalties, and prosecution under the False Claims Act, which imposes liability on individuals and companies who defraud governmental programs and may lead to criminal prosecutions. Any of these government enforcement actions, if taken against us, could negatively impact our product sales and profitability.

        Additionally, regulatory approval of any of our prescription products may be conditioned on our agreement to conduct costly post-marketing follow-up studies to monitor the safety or effectiveness of such products or to implement specific risk mitigation strategies. In addition, as clinical experience with any of our products following such approval, if any, expands after approval because the product is used by a greater number and more diverse group of patients than during clinical trials, unknown side

33

Table of Contents

effects or other problems may be observed that were not observed or anticipated during pre-approval clinical trials. In any such case, one or more regulatory authorities could restrict the indications for which the product may be sold or restrict the distribution channels, or revoke the product's regulatory approval, which could hinder our ability to generate revenues from that product. If we fail to develop and commercialize our product candidates as planned, our financial results and financial condition will be adversely affected, we will have to delay or terminate some or all of our research product development programs, and we may be forced to cease operations.

If the FDA does not accept for filing a NDA with only one Phase 3 clinical trial, instead of two such studies, to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we may be forced to incur the time, expense, and risk of undertaking a confirmatory study prior to obtaining marketing approval of such product, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

        Historically, the FDA has generally required applicants to submit as part of a NDA in respect of a drug two adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of that drug. The Modernization Act, however, makes clear that the FDA may consider data from only one adequate and well-controlled clinical investigation and confirmatory evidence (obtained prior to or after such investigation) if the FDA determines that such evidence is sufficient to establish effectiveness. In a guidance document titled "Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products" (May 1998), the FDA stated that reliance on a single study is generally limited to situations in which a trial has demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity, or prevention of a disease with a potential serious outcome, and where confirmation of the result in a second trial would be impractical or unethical. The factors the FDA considers for accepting a single study include, but are not limited to, having large multi-centered studies, consistent data across subgroups, multiple endpoints, and statistically very persuasive findings. Our single Phase 3 clinical trial was multi-centered with multiple endpoints. However, there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept this single study to be sufficient to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness.

        On June 11, 2014, we met with the FDA to discuss the preliminary data from our Phase 3 clinical trial and our plans to submit to the FDA a NDA, based on our single Phase 3 clinical trial. In minutes of the meeting that the FDA has provided to us, based on its review of preliminary data from our Phase 3 clinical trial, the FDA expressed concern that the primary endpoint of painful sickle cell crisis (controlling for both region and hydroxyurea use) did not reach the pre-specified p-value significance level of 0.045.

        The FDA commented that the primary efficacy results were inconsistent among regions, as shown by the large difference in results observed based on the stratified analyses adjusted for both region and hydroxyurea use and the stratified analysis adjusted for hydroxyurea use only. The FDA also commented that a reduction in the median number of painful sickle cell crises by one (from four to three) is not clinically meaningful and is not consistent across regions. The FDA asked us to provide explanations for the differences in results observed based on the stratified analysis adjusted for region and hydroxyurea.

        The FDA also commented on the number of patients who discontinued the study, which was greater in the L-glutamine group, and the FDA would need to understand what impact the imputation of such data, which is a method of accounting for missing information, would have on the interpretation of the results.

        Based on preliminary data, the FDA recommended a second Phase 3 study be conducted to support the indication for SCD and suggested enrolling patients with a higher baseline level of sickle cell crises to help demonstrate a larger difference in the mean results.

34

Table of Contents

        Based on other questions we submitted to the FDA regarding the previous pre-clinical work and evidence gathered for the L-glutamine treatment related to pharmacology, toxicology, and clinical pharmacology, the FDA noted that the information provided appeared to be acceptable; however, final affirmations regarding such matters would be made during the FDA's review of a NDA. The FDA also made certain recommendations to the chemistry, manufacturing and controls of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD which we intend to incorporate or address.

        In September 2014 we submitted to the FDA the Clinical Study Report for our Phase 3 clinical trial, supplemental analyses and a new meeting request. Consequently, we met again with the FDA on October 15, 2014. In the minutes of the October 15 meeting, the FDA noted that it continued to be concerned that the primary endpoint did not meet the pre-specified p-value and observed that our efficacy finding would be more persuasive if supported by an additional, confirmatory study. We communicated to the FDA that over-stratification in our statistical analysis plan led to the pre-specified p-value not being met. We also provided sensitivity analyses and results to address the over-stratification which demonstrated a statistically significant p-value for the primary endpoint.

        At the October 15 meeting, in response to a question raised by the FDA at the June 11 meeting, we provided evidence of the clinical meaningfulness of a reduction in the median number of painful sickle cell crises by one (from four to three). In the October 15 minutes the FDA expressed the view that the reduction of one sickle cell crises may not be clinically significant and advised us to provide all information and data to support this clinical meaningfulness and the FDA stated they will evaluate the overall clinical benefit and risk of L-glutamine based on results from our Phase 3 trial and all available safety data.

        In the October 15 minutes the FDA reiterated certain concerns outlined in the June 11 minutes. Other questions that we posed for discussion at the October 15 meeting related to the safety of L-glutamine use, the benefit-risk margin for L-glutamine use, the sufficiency of our Phase 2 and 3 trials to support a NDA submission and whether a confirmatory study could be conducted as a post-marketing commitment. The FDA noted that its decisions regarding these questions would be made after the submission of a NDA.

        Based on our discussions with the FDA, we intend to conduct a confirmatory study of our L-glutamine treatment for SCD. We submitted a draft protocol outline to the FDA. We plan to work with the FDA to finalize the study design. In addition to planning and conducting a confirmatory study, we plan to submit a NDA for our L-glutamine treatment for SCD during 2015 containing all efficacy and safety data through our completed Phase 3 trial and additional analyses and information in accord with the feedback the FDA provided in the context of the June 11 and October 15 meetings. We will request that our planned confirmatory study be accepted by the FDA as a post-approval study that is, a study to be completed after approval of the NDA. There can be no assurance that the FDA will accept our submission for filing before the completion of a confirmatory study or that the information and data in the NDA will satisfy concerns identified by the FDA.

        Regarding the submission of NDAs that include only one Phase 3 clinical trial, the FDA has in some cases accepted evidence from one clinical trial to support a finding of substantial evidence of effectiveness. A change in the law under the Modernization Act made clear that the FDA may consider data from only one adequate and well controlled clinical investigation and confirmatory evidence if the FDA determines that such evidence is sufficient to establish effectiveness of the medicine under study.

        In a guidance document titled "Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products" (May 1998), the FDA stated that reliance on a single clinical trial is generally limited to situations in which a trial has demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity, or prevention of a disease with a potential serious outcome, and where confirmation of the result in a second trial would be impractical or unethical. The factors the FDA

35

Table of Contents

considers for accepting a single clinical trial include, but are not limited to, having large multi centered studies, consistent data across subgroups, multiple endpoints, and statistically very persuasive findings.

The development process to obtain FDA approval for new drugs, biologics and cell-based therapies is very costly and time consuming and if we cannot complete our clinical trials in a cost-effective manner, our operations may be adversely affected.

        Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we or a collaborator must complete preclinical development and then complete one or more extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. Costs of clinical trials may vary significantly over the life of a development project owing, but not limited to, the following:

•

the number of patients that participate in the trials;



•

the per patient trial costs;



•

the number of sites included in the trials;



•

the length of time required to enroll eligible patients;



•

the duration of the clinical trials;



•

the countries in which the trials are conducted;



•

the number of doses that patients receive;



•

adverse events experienced by trial participants;



•

the drop-out or discontinuation rates of patients;



•

potential additional safety monitoring or other studies requested by regulatory agencies;



•

the extent and duration of patient follow-up;



•

difficulties that could arise in analyzing and reporting to regulators the results of clinical trials; and



•

the efficacy and safety profile of the product candidate.

        If we are unable to control the timing and costs of our clinical trials and conduct our trials and apply for regulatory approvals in a timely and cost-effective manner, our operations may be adversely affected.

        Our product development costs will also increase if any regulatory agencies impose a clinical hold on any of our clinical studies or we experience delays in obtaining marketing approvals, particularly if we are required to conduct additional clinical studies beyond those that we submit in any NDA. We do not know whether any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant preclinical study or clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our approved product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, and thereby impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

36

Table of Contents

We may not be able to complete clinical trial programs for any of our product candidates successfully within any specific time period or at all, and if such clinical trials take longer to complete than we project, our ability to execute our current business strategy will be adversely affected.

        Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete, and is uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of development. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of them.

        Generally speaking, whether we complete our clinical trials in a timely manner, or at all, for any product candidate is dependent in part upon: (i) the date the applicable investigational new drug application, or IND, becomes effective enabling us to commence the applicable clinical studies (which, under U.S. law, occurs no more than thirty days after the FDA receives the IND, unless the FDA places the IND on clinical hold, in which case the FDA may request us to provide additional data from completed preclinical studies or undertake additional preclinical studies, the latter of which could materially delay the clinical and regulatory development of the applicable product candidate); (ii) the engagement of clinical trial sites and clinical investigators; (iii) reaching an agreement with clinical investigators on acceptable clinical trial agreement terms, clinical trial protocols or informed consent forms; (iv) obtaining approval from the institutional review boards used by the clinical trial sites we seek to engage; (v) the rate of patient enrollment and retention; and (vi) the rate to collect, clean, lock and analyze the clinical trial database.

        Patient enrollment in trials is a function of many factors, including the design of the protocol, the size of the patient population, the proximity of patients to and availability of clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under trial and of the control product, if any, the clinical investigator's efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials, the patient referral practices of local physicians, the existence of competitive clinical trials, and whether other investigational or new therapies are available for the indication. If we experience delays in identifying and contracting with appropriate clinical investigators and sites, in obtaining approval of the applicable institutional review boards, in enrolling and retaining patients and/or in completing our clinical trial programs, we may incur additional costs and delays in our development programs, and may not be able to complete our clinical trials on a cost-effective or timely basis, if at all. If we or any third party have difficulty obtaining sufficient clinical drug materials or enrolling a sufficient number of patients in a timely or cost-effective manner to conduct clinical trials as planned, or if enrolled patients do not complete the trial as planned, we or a third party may need to delay or terminate ongoing clinical trials, which could negatively affect our business.

        Clinical trials required for demonstration of substantial evidence of efficacy and safety often require the enrollment of large numbers of patients, and suitable patients may be difficult to identify and recruit. Our ability to enroll sufficient numbers of patients in our clinical trials, especially when the disease or condition being studied is rare, depends on many factors, including the size of the relevant patient population, the nature and design of the protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility and exclusion criteria applicable for the trial, existence of competing clinical trials and the availability of already approved therapeutics for the indications being studied (whether or not such therapeutics are less safe or less effective than our product candidate under trial). In addition, patients may withdraw from a clinical trial or be unwilling to follow our clinical trial protocols for a variety of reasons, such as adverse events or noncompliance with trial requirements. If we fail to enroll and maintain the number of patients for which the clinical trial was designed, the statistical significance and/or statistical power of that clinical trial may be reduced which would make it harder to

37

Table of Contents

demonstrate that the product candidate being tested in such clinical trial is safe and effective for its intended use.

We may be required to suspend, repeat or terminate our clinical trials if they do not meet regulatory requirements, the results are negative or inconclusive, human subject protections are inadequate, the trials are not well designed, or clinical investigators fail to comply with all requirements for the conduct of trials under the applicable IND, any of which may result in significant negative repercussions on our business and financial condition.

        Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, which is currently our only product candidate in clinical development, has not yet received marketing approval in any jurisdiction. We cannot market a pharmaceutical product in any jurisdiction until we have completed rigorous preclinical testing and clinical trials for that product, demonstrated the product's safety and substantial evidence of effectiveness for its intended use, obtained the approval of the applicable regulatory authority for our proposed labeling of the product, and met the other requirements of such jurisdiction's extensive regulatory approval process. Preclinical testing and the conduct of clinical trials are long, expensive and uncertain processes. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical tests can be interpreted in different ways and could ultimately be deemed by regulatory authorities to be insufficient with respect to providing substantial evidence of safety and effectiveness required for regulatory approval, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. It may take us many years to complete the required testing of our product candidates to support an application for marketing approval and failure can occur at any stage during this process.

        We cannot provide assurance that our preclinical testing and clinical trials will be completed successfully within any time period specified by us, or without significant additional resources or expertise provided by third parties to conduct such testing. We cannot provide assurance that any such testing will demonstrate that our product candidates meet regulatory approval requirements for safety and effectiveness or that any such product will be approved for a specific indication. Results from early clinical trials may not be indicative of the results that will be obtained in later-stage clinical trials or in the population of patients for whom the applicable product is prescribed following any approval. In addition, negative or inconclusive results from the clinical trials we conduct or adverse events experienced by the patients in such clinical trials could cause us to have to suspend, repeat or terminate the clinical trials. Clinical trials are subject to continuing oversight by governmental regulatory authorities and institutional review boards and must meet the requirements of these authorities including but not limited to requirements for informed consent, human subject protection and good clinical practices; and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to comply, or that a regulatory authority will agree that we have complied, with such requirements. We rely on third parties, such as contract research organizations and/or contract laboratories, regulatory consultants and data management companies to assist us in overseeing and monitoring clinical trials as well as to process the clinical data and manage test requests, which may result in delays or failure to complete trials, if the third parties fail to perform or meet applicable regulatory requirements and standards. A failure by us or any such third parties to comply with the terms and conditions of the protocol for any clinical study or the regulatory requirements for any particular product candidate or to complete the clinical trials for a product candidate in the projected time frame could have a significant negative effect on our business and financial condition.

        There are significant requirements imposed on us and on clinical investigators who conduct clinical trials under an IND. Although we are responsible for selecting qualified clinical investigators, providing them with the information they need to conduct an investigation properly, ensuring proper monitoring of the investigation(s), and ensuring that the investigation(s) is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols contained in the IND, we cannot ensure the clinical investigators will maintain compliance with all regulatory requirements at all times. The pharmaceutical

38

Table of Contents

industry has experienced cases where clinical investigators have been found to incorrectly record data, omit data, or even falsify data. We cannot ensure that the clinical investigators in our trials will not make mistakes or otherwise compromise the integrity or validity of data, any of which would have a significant negative effect on our ability to obtain marketing approval, our business, and our financial condition.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance or unanticipated events during our clinical trials may occur, which may result in necessary changes to clinical trial protocols, informed consents and clinical trial budgets, any of which changes could result in increased costs to us, delay our development timeline or reduce the likelihood of successful completion of the clinical trial.

        Changes in regulatory requirements or the FDA's interpretation of those requirements, which may be provided through guidance documents, or the occurrence of unanticipated events during our clinical trials could require us to amend clinical trial protocols, informed consent forms and trial budgets. If we experience delays in initiation, conduct or completion of any of our clinical trials, or if we terminate any of our clinical trials due to changes in regulatory requirements or guidance documents, unexpected and serious adverse events, or other unanticipated events, we may incur additional costs and have difficulty enrolling subjects or achieving clinical investigator or institutional review board acceptance of the changes and successfully completing the trial. Any such additional costs and difficulties could potentially materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates and delay our ability to generate product revenue.

There are various uncertainties related to the research, development and commercialization of the cell sheet engineering regenerative medicine products we are developing in collaboration with a strategic partner which could negatively affect our ability to commercialize such products.

        We have historically focused on the research and development of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and have limited experience in the research, development or commercialization of cell sheet regenerative medicine products or any other biological product. No clinical trials of cell sheet regenerative products have been conducted in the United States and no biological products based on cell sheet engineering have been approved by regulatory authorities in any jurisdiction. Such products must be manufactured in conformance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, requirements as well as Good Tissue Practice, or GTP, requirements and demonstrate that they are safe, pure and potent to be effective for their intended uses to obtain FDA approval. The GTP requirements, which are specifically applicable to all cellular-based products, are intended to prevent communicable disease transmission. It is uncertain what type and quantity of scientific data would be required to support initiation of clinical studies or to sufficiently demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of cell sheet regenerative medicine products for their intended uses. Such uncertainties could delay our ability to obtain FDA approval for and to commercialize such products. In addition, the research and commercialization of cell sheet regenerative medicine products could be hindered if third party manufacturers of such products are not compliant with cGMP, GTP, and any other applicable regulations. Any delay in the development of, obtaining FDA approval for, or the occurrence of any problems with third party manufacturers of cell sheet regenerative medicine products would negatively affect our ability to commercialize such products.

The use of any of our product candidates in clinical trials and in the market may expose us to liability claims.

        The nature of our business exposes us to potential liability risks inherent in the testing, manufacturing and marketing of our product candidates. While we are in clinical stage testing, our product candidates could potentially harm people or allegedly harm people and we may be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims. Some of the patients who participate in clinical trials are

39

Table of Contents

already critically ill when they enter a trial. Informed consent and contractual limitations on payments for subject injury or waivers we obtain may not be enforceable and may not protect us from liability or the costs of product liability litigation. Although we currently carry a $5 million clinical product liability insurance policy, it may not be sufficient to cover future claims. In addition, in some cases the contractors on which we rely for manufacturing our product candidates may indemnify us for third party claims brought against us arising from matters for which these contractors are responsible. We could be materially and adversely affected if we were required to pay damages or incur defense costs in connection with a claim outside the scope of indemnity or insurance coverage, if the indemnity is not performed or enforced in accordance with its terms, or if our liability exceeds the amount of applicable insurance or indemnity. In addition, there can be no assurance that insurance will continue to be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all, or that if obtained, the insurance coverage will be sufficient to cover any potential claims or liabilities. Similar risks would exist upon the commercialization or marketing of any products by us or our partners. We currently do not have any clinical or product liability claims or threats of claims filed against us.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

        Because we have limited financial and management resources, we focus on a limited number of research programs and product candidates. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable product candidates or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for the specific indications we have selected may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

RISKS RELATED TO COMMERCIALIZATION OF OUR PRODUCT CANDIDATES

The failure of our products to gain market acceptance will hinder our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our products.

        Even if our product candidates are approved for commercialization, they may be too expensive to manufacture or market or they may not otherwise be successful in the marketplace. Market acceptance of any of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors including, but not limited to:

•

demonstration of significant clinical effectiveness and safety of our product;



•

the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects experienced by patients to whom our product is administered;



•

limitations or warnings contained in the approved labeling or package insert for our product;



•

the availability of alternative treatments for the indications approved for our product;



•

the availability of acceptable pricing and adequate third-party reimbursement for our product;



•

the effectiveness of marketing and distribution methods for our product; and



•

comparison of the above factors to those associated with treatments with which our product competes.

40

Table of Contents

        If our products do not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, treatment centers, healthcare payors and others in the health care community, any of which may not accept or utilize our products, our ability to generate significant revenues from our products would be limited and our financial condition will be materially adversely affected. In addition, if we fail to successfully penetrate our core markets and successfully expand our business into new markets, the growth in sales of our products, along with our business's operating results, could be negatively impacted.

        Our ability to penetrate the SCD treatment market and other markets in which we compete, or to expand our business into additional countries in Africa, Europe, Asia and the Americas, is subject to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. Our products, if successfully developed, may compete with a number of therapeutic products currently manufactured and marketed by major pharmaceutical companies. Our products may also compete with new products currently under development by others or with products which may be less expensive than our products. There is no assurance that our efforts to increase market penetration in our core markets and existing geographic markets will be successful. Our failure to do so could have an adverse effect on our operating results.

We may need to meet some or all of our commercialization needs through strategic partnerships and alliances which may not yield anticipated benefits and may adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and existing business.

        We may seek to meet some or all of our commercialization needs through strategic partnerships and alliances. The success of this approach will depend on, among other things:

•

the availability of suitable strategic partners and alliance candidates;



•

competition from other companies for strategic partners or forming alliances with available strategic partner and alliance candidates;



•

our ability to value any potential strategic partnerships or alliances accurately and negotiate favorable terms for any strategic partnerships or alliances;



•

the ability to establish new informational, operational and financial systems to meet the needs of such strategic partnerships or alliances;



•

the ability to achieve anticipated synergies with such strategic partnerships or alliances; and



•

the availability of management resources to oversee the integration and operation of such strategic partnerships or alliances.

        If we are not successful in finding, negotiating and operating with such strategic partnerships or alliances in the future, we may be required to reevaluate our strategic partnerships and alliance strategy. We also may incur substantial expenses and devote significant management time and resources in seeking to complete such strategic partnerships and alliances. Strategic partnerships and alliances may fail to meet our performance expectations. If we do not achieve the anticipated benefits of such strategic partnerships and alliances as rapidly as expected, or at all, investors or analysts may not perceive the same benefits of the acquisition or alliance as we do. If these risks materialize, our operating results, financial condition and existing business could be materially adversely affected.

We lack experience in commercializing products, and we may not be able to establish the sales and marketing infrastructure necessary to support the commercialization of our product candidates if and when they are approved.

        With the conclusion of our Phase 3 clinical trial with respect to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we are transitioning from a company with a development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain marketing approval for product candidates and have

41

Table of Contents

limited experience in commercializing products. As a result, we may not be as successful as companies that have previously obtained marketing approval for product candidates and have more experience commercially launching them as products.

        To achieve commercial success for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval, including our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we will need to establish a sales and marketing infrastructure to market them as products. This will require us to attract and retain key personnel with commercial experience to lead the commercialization of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD if approved by the FDA and other product candidates that we may develop. We have not yet identified or retained these key personnel and have no assurance that we will be able to do so on commercially acceptable terms, or at all. There are risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.

        Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our products on our own include:

•

our inability to recruit, train and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel;



•

the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or persuade adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe any of our products;



•

the lack of complementary or sample products to be offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more products;



•

unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization; and



•

the inability of sales and marketing personnel to maintain compliance with federal and state regulations and our inability to adequately monitor and ensure such compliance.

        If we are unable to establish our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and instead enter into arrangements with third parties to perform these services, our revenue and our profitability, if any, are likely to be lower than if we were to sell, market and distribute any products that we develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell, market and distribute our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we do not establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing any of our product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

Failure to obtain acceptable prices or adequate reimbursement for our products may cause an adverse impact on our results of operations.

        Our ability to successfully commercialize our products will depend significantly on our ability to obtain acceptable prices and the availability of reimbursement to the patient from third-party payors, such as governmental and private insurance plans. Our products may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective, may not compare favorably on price with other L-glutamine products, and reimbursement to the patient may not be available or sufficient to allow us or our partners to sell our

42

Table of Contents

products on a competitive basis. It may not be possible to negotiate favorable reimbursement rates for our products.

        Significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. Third-party payors frequently require companies to provide predetermined discounts from list prices, and they are increasingly challenging the prices charged for pharmaceuticals and other medical products. In addition, the continuing efforts of third-party payors to contain or reduce the costs of healthcare through various means may limit our commercial opportunity and reduce any associated revenue and profits. For example, in some foreign markets, the pricing or profitability of healthcare products is subject to government control. In other foreign markets, including Africa where the largest population of patients with SCD exists, there is a limited number of third-party payors from which reimbursement can be sought. In the United States, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of federal and state proposals to implement similar government control, as evidenced by the passing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and its amendment, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. Such government-adopted reform measures may adversely impact the pricing of healthcare products and services in the United States or internationally and the amount of reimbursement available from governmental agencies or other third-party payors. In addition, increasing emphasis on managed care will continue to put pressure on the pricing of pharmaceutical products. Cost control initiatives could decrease the price that we or any current or potential collaborators could receive for any of our products and could adversely affect our profitability. If we fail to obtain acceptable prices or an adequate level of reimbursement for our products, the sales of our products would be adversely affected or there may be no commercially viable market for our products.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our revenues may be adversely affected and our business may suffer. Because the target patient populations of our product candidates are small, we must be able to successfully identify patients and achieve a significant market share to maintain profitability and growth.

        We focus our research and product development on treatments for rare diseases and conditions. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases or conditions, as well as the subset of people with these diseases or conditions who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases or conditions. The number of patients in the United States, Europe and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our product candidates (if approved), or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

The intellectual property that we have licensed relating to our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is limited, which could adversely affect our ability to compete in the market and adversely affect the value of our product candidate.

        The patent and exclusivity protections that we expect to protect our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine product for treatment of SCD from competition is a combination of (i) rights under a license of U.S. Patent No. 5,693,671, entitled "L-glutamine Therapy for SCD and Thalassemia" issued on December 2, 1997 to Niihara et al., which we refer to as the SCD Patent, (ii) Orphan Drug market exclusivity under FDA, European Union and similar foreign regulations, and (iii) data exclusivity in the United States under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Restoration Act of 1984, called the Hatch/Waxman Act. These protections are limited in ways that may affect our ability to effectively

43

Table of Contents

exclude third parties from competing against us if we obtain regulatory approval to market our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. In particular:

•

each of the protections run concurrently, resulting in protection from competition that will diminish over time as the protections expire;



•

protection under the SCD Patent is scheduled to expire in 2016;



•

the FDA may not agree that our product is entitled to data exclusivity under the Hatch/Waxman Act and, if granted, data exclusivity protection under the Hatch/Waxman Act will expire three years after our product is approved;



•

Orphan Drug market exclusivity in the United States will only be granted if our product receives the first FDA approval for an L-glutamine treatment for SCD and, if granted, Orphan Drug market exclusivity protection will expire seven years after our product is approved. To be eligible for Orphan Drug market exclusivity in the United States requires that the indication approved by the FDA for our product (if it is approved) matches the indication for which the FDA originally granted us Orphan Drug designation. Orphan Drug designation will not preclude the FDA from approving a clinically superior product, approving a product that is the same as our product for a different indication, or approving a different product intended to treat SCD;



•

Orphan Drug status in the European Union is subject to exclusions similar to those in the United States; and



•

there are many countries, including some key markets for our product, in which we do not have intellectual property coverage and where neither orphan drug nor data exclusivity is available.

        If we obtain marketing approval for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, these limitations and any reductions in our expected protection resulting from any failure to obtain exclusivity under Orphan Drug protections or the Hatch/Waxman Act, or the approval of competing products based on the exceptions to Orphan Drug protections, may subject our product to greater competition than we expect and reduce our ability to generate revenue from our product candidate, possibly materially. These circumstances may also impair our ability to obtain license partners or other international commercialization opportunities on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

If our competitors succeed in developing products and technologies that are more effective than our own, or if scientific developments change our understanding of the potential scope and utility of our product candidates and products, then our technologies and future product candidates and products may be rendered less competitive.

        We face significant competition from industry participants, both pharmaceutical and nutritional, that are pursuing similar technologies to those we are pursuing and are developing pharmaceutical products that are competitive with our product candidates and any resulting products. Nearly all of our industry competitors have greater capital resources, larger research and development staffs and facilities, and a longer history in drug discovery and development, obtaining regulatory approval and pharmaceutical product manufacturing and marketing than we do. With these additional resources and experience, our competitors may be able to respond to the rapid and significant technological changes in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries faster than we can. Our future success will depend in large part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with respect to these technologies and to respond effectively and timely to competition. We may not be able to do this successfully. Rapid technological development, as well as new scientific developments, may result in our lead compounds, development compounds, product candidates or products becoming obsolete or less effective or otherwise clinically inferior for some or all patients before we can recover any of the expenses incurred to develop them. For example, changes in our understanding of the appropriate population of patients who should be treated with a targeted therapy of the type that we are developing may limit the market

44

Table of Contents

potential of our treatment if it is subsequently demonstrated that only certain subsets of the overall patient population should be treated with our treatment. If a competitor develops the same product candidate as ours for the same indication but is able to demonstrate that its product candidate is clinically superior to ours, or if the same product candidate is intended for a different indication, or if we are unable to ensure adequate supplies of our product candidate following any approval by the FDA, the FDA may approve our competitor's marketing application regardless of any marketing exclusivity we may obtain. Any of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidate if it is approved and thus on our business and financial condition.

We may face potential competition for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD from manufacturers and resellers of L-glutamine that may or may not be manufactured with the same purity and quality as our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine.

        The amino acid L-glutamine is manufactured in large quantities, primarily by a few large chemical companies, and processed and sold as nutritional supplements. These quantities may not evidence the same level of quality and purity as our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine. The sale of either pharmaceutical grade or non-pharmaceutical grade supplies of L-glutamine at prices lower than the minimum that we must charge to become and remain profitable could have a material adverse effect on our results.

There are known adverse side effects to our NutreStore product.

        We market and sell NutreStore L-glutamine powder for oral solution, a prescription pharmaceutical product that has received FDA approval for the treatment of SBS when used in combination with a recombinant human growth hormone approved for SBS, and a specialized nutritional support. Patients with SBS receiving intravenous parenteral nutrition, or IPN, and NutreStore should be routinely monitored for kidney and liver function, particularly patients with kidney or liver impairment. Common reported side effects of NutreStore for patients with SBS include, but are not limited to, nausea or vomiting, feeling the need or urge to empty bowels, gas, abdominal pain, hemorrhoids, constipation, and aggravation of Crohn's disease, gastric ulcer or gastric fistula. The approved indication of the product in combination with recombinant human growth hormone and specialized diets, and any of these known side effects or any associated warning statements or labeling requirements may limit the commercial profile of this product and prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of such product.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR RELIANCE ON THIRD PARTIES

If the L-glutamine manufacturers upon which we rely fail to produce in the volumes and quality that we require on a timely basis, or fail to comply with stringent regulations applicable to pharmaceutical manufacturers, we may face delays in the development and commercialization of, or be unable to meet demand for, our L-glutamine-based products, if any, and may lose any marketing exclusivity and potential revenues.

        We do not currently have our own manufacturing capabilities. We therefore depend heavily upon third party manufacturers for supplies of both our product candidates under development and the products we sell. The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Our third party manufacturers and key suppliers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes, unstable political environments at foreign facilities, financial difficulties or other problems beyond their control and may not be able to expand their capacity or to produce additional product requirements for us in the event that demand for our products increases. If these manufacturers or key suppliers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to

45

Table of Contents

comply with their regulatory and contractual obligations, our ability to timely launch any potential product candidate, if approved, would be jeopardized. If we are unable to ensure adequate supply of an orphan drug for which we have obtained marketing exclusivity, the FDA may approve another drug for marketing, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

        We currently obtain our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine from two Japanese companies, which together produce the vast majority of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine approved for sale in the United States, and obtain all of our L-glutamine for our NutreStore product from one of these companies. We intend to continue to rely on these manufacturers to produce our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine, but we have not entered into, and may not be able to establish, long-term supply agreements with these key suppliers on acceptable terms. If these suppliers were to experience any manufacturing or production difficulties producing pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine, or we were unable to purchase sufficient quantities of pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine on acceptable terms, our ability to conduct additional clinical trials, to commercialize pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine for the treatment of SCD, to maintain marketing exclusivity if granted, and to continue to sell NutreStore would be harmed.

        In addition, all manufacturers, packers, distributors, and suppliers of pharmaceutical products must comply with applicable cGMP regulations for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, which are enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. The FDA is likely to conduct inspections of our third party manufacturer and key supplier facilities as part of the FDA's pre-approval review of any of our NDAs and post-approval, ongoing compliance programs. If our third party manufacturers and key suppliers are not in compliance with cGMP requirements, it may result in a delay of approval for products undergoing regulatory review or the inability to meet market demands for any approved products, particularly if these sites are supplying single source ingredients required for the manufacture of any potential product. These cGMP requirements include quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation, among other items. Furthermore, each manufacturing facility used to manufacture drug or biological products is subject to FDA inspection and must meet cGMP requirements. As a result, if one of the manufacturers that we rely on shifts production from one facility to another, the new facility must undergo a preapproval inspection and, for biological products, must be licensed by regulatory authorities prior to being used for commercial supply. Our manufacturers may be unable or fail to comply with these cGMP requirements and with other FDA, state and foreign regulatory requirements. A failure to comply with any applicable manufacturing requirements may result in warning or untitled letters, fines, product recalls, seizures, corrective actions involving public notifications, injunctions, total or partial suspension of production, civil money penalties, suspension or withdrawals of previously granted regulatory approvals, refusal to approve new applications or supplements to applications for marketing of new products, import or export bans or restrictions, disgorgement of profits, debarment, and criminal prosecution and criminal penalties. Any of these penalties could delay or prevent the promotion, marketing or sale of our products. If the safety of any quantities supplied is compromised due to a third party manufacturer's failure to comply with or adhere to applicable laws or for other reasons, we may be liable for injuries suffered by patients who have taken such products and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our products.

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct future clinical trials of our product candidates and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the conduct of such trials.

        We engaged a third-party contract research organization, or CRO, to conduct our clinical trials for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and expect to engage a CRO to conduct any further required clinical trials with respect to such product and any clinical trials with respect to any of our other product candidates that may progress to clinical development. We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and

46

Table of Contents

clinical investigators, to conduct those clinical trials. Agreements with such third parties might terminate for a variety of reasons, including a failure to perform by the third parties. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, that would delay our product development activities.

        Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities, but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practices, or GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in the FDA refusing to accept a NDA for the product candidate under study, fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

        Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements and our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize them as products.

        We also expect to rely on other third parties to store and distribute supplies of our product candidates for clinical trials of them. Any performance failure on the part of our distributors could delay clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates or commercialization of them as products, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential revenue.

If we do not obtain the support of new, and maintain the support of existing, key scientific collaborators, it may be difficult to research medical indications for L-glutamine other than SCD and to expand our product offerings, which may limit our revenue growth and profitability and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

        We will need to establish relationships with additional leading scientists and research institutions in order to develop new products and expand our product offerings and to explore other medical indications for L-glutamine-based products. Although we have established research collaborations, we cannot assure you that our relationships with our research collaborators will continue or that we will be able to attract additional research partners. If we are not able to maintain existing or establish new scientific relationships to assist in our research and development, we may not be able to successfully develop our product candidates or expand our product offerings.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

We depend on licenses and sublicenses of certain patents for our existing L-glutamine products and our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD product candidate. If any of these licenses, sublicenses, or the licenses under which we have been sublicensed terminates, or if any of the patents that have been licensed or sublicensed to us are challenged and we are limited in our ability to utilize any of those patents, we may be unable to develop, out-license, market and sell our products, which would cause a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, and operating results.

        Our ability to develop products depends on licenses and sublicenses we have obtained to patents that claim the use of L-glutamine to treat SCD.

47

Table of Contents

        We face the risk that any of these licenses and sublicenses could be terminated if we fail to satisfy our obligations under them. In addition, even if we satisfy our obligations as sublicensee under any sublicense, if the license under which we have been sublicensed terminates, our sublicense could also terminate. In the event any claims in the patents that we have been licensed or sublicensed are challenged, the court or patent authority to which such challenge is presented could determine that such patent claims are invalid or unenforceable or not sufficiently broad in scope to protect our proprietary rights. In addition, as the licensee or sublicensee of such patents, our ability to participate in the defense or enforcement of such patents could be limited.

If we are unable to protect proprietary technology that we invent and develop, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business and financial prospects may be harmed.

        Where appropriate, we seek patent protection for inventions we conceive and reduce to practice. Patent protection, however, is not available for all of these inventions and for some of these patent protection may be limited. In addition, in developing some of our inventions, we may have to design around patents held by others. If we must spend significant time and money protecting our patents, designing around patents held by others or in-licensing patent or other proprietary rights held by others, potentially for large fees, our business and financial prospects may be harmed.

        The patent prosecution process is expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. We also may have to relinquish to strategic partners or other third parties to whom we license our technology the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications claiming our inventions and to maintain any resulting patents. Therefore, patent applications and patents claiming our inventions may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

        The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, or vice versa. For example, European patent law restricts the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than U.S. law does. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our product candidates, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

        Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, only became effective on March 16, 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the

48

Table of Contents

operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our licensed patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

        Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative treatments in a non-infringing manner.

        In addition, the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing products similar or identical to our product candidates or products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our product candidates or products. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new therapeutics, patents protecting our product candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized as products. Patent protection for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD expires in 2016. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

        We will incur significant ongoing expenses in maintaining our patent portfolio. Should we lack the funds to maintain our patent portfolio or to enforce our rights against infringers, we could be adversely impacted.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

        Our commercial success depends upon our ability, and the ability of our collaborators, to develop, manufacture, market and sell our products without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may become party to, or threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates and products. In these proceedings or litigation, third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future. The party making such claims could secure a judgment awarding substantial damages, as well as injunctive or other equitable relief. Such relief could effectively block our ability to make, use, sell, distribute or market our products in such jurisdiction. Even if claims of infringement are without merit, any such action could divert the time and attention of management and impair our ability to access additional capital and/or cost us significant funds to defend.

        If we are found to infringe a third party's intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing our product candidates and manufacturing and marketing any of our products. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. Alternatively, we could be ordered to cease commercializing any of our products that is found to infringe a third party's intellectual property rights. In addition to being forced to cease commercialization of such a product, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys' fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a third party's patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from developing our product candidates and commercializing our products or force us to cease some of our business operations. Claims that we have misappropriated

49

Table of Contents

the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.

We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that we or our employees have misappropriated their intellectual property, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

        Although we try to ensure that our employees do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that these employees or we have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such employee's former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims.

        Moreover, we may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of or invalidate our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize products similar or identical to our product candidates or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

        Competitors may infringe our issued patents, trade secrets, know-how or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use or to determine the scope and validity of our intellectual property rights, we may be required to file infringement claims or pursue other proceedings, which can be expensive and time consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent's claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. An adverse result in any litigation or other proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, subject us to significant liabilities, require us to cease using the subject technology or require us to license the subject technology from the third party, any or all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.

        Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace.

50

Table of Contents

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

        In addition to licensing patent rights and seeking patents for our intellectual property, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Our competitors may use our methods, or acquire similar expertise, in order to develop L-glutamine-based treatments and progress these through clinical development and commercialization, which could impair our ability to successfully develop our product candidates and commercialize them as products.

        We seek to protect our trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

        Filing, prosecuting and defending patents in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

        Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

51

Table of Contents

Companies and universities that have licensed product candidates to us for research, clinical development and marketing are sophisticated competitors that could develop similar products to compete with our products, which could reduce our future revenues.

        Licensing our product candidates from other companies, universities or individuals does not always prevent them from developing non-identical but competitive products for their own commercial purposes, nor from pursuing patent protection in areas that are competitive with us. While we seek patent protection for all of our owned and in-licensed product candidates, the entities and individuals who have assigned or licensed to us these product candidates employ or are, as applicable, experienced scientists who may continue to do research and development relevant to our product candidates, and any of them may seek patent protection in the same areas that led to the discovery of the product candidates that they have assigned or licensed to us. By virtue of the previous research that led to the discovery of the inventions that they licensed or assigned to us, these companies, universities, and individuals may be able to develop and market competitive products in less time than might be required to develop a product with which they have no prior experience and may reduce our future revenues from products resulting from successful development and approval of our product candidates.

RISKS RELATED TO REGULATORY APPROVAL OF OUR PRODUCT CANDIDATES AND OTHER LEGAL COMPLIANCE MATTERS

Our business is subject to extensive government regulation, which could cause delays in the development of our product candidates and commercialization of any resulting products, impose significant costs on us or provide advantages to our larger competitors.

        The FDA and similar regulatory authorities in foreign countries impose substantial requirements upon the development, manufacture and marketing of therapeutic products, such as drugs, biologics, and cell-based therapies. Failure to obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates in any jurisdiction will prevent us from commercializing it as a product in that jurisdiction. The FDA and most other regulatory authorities impose requirements for laboratory and clinical testing, manufacturing, labeling, registration, marketing, storage, distribution, recordkeeping, reporting, and advertising and promotion, and other costly and time-consuming processes and procedures applicable to therapeutic products. In some cases, as a condition for approval to market any of our product candidates, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may impose commitments that we must satisfy following any such approval. These post-approval commitments could vary substantially from country to country depending upon the type, complexity and novelty of the applicable therapeutic product. Satisfaction of any such post-approval commitments (including the requirement to conduct additional clinical studies), if imposed by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, could take several years or more. In addition, post-approval requirements regarding safety surveillance, cGMP compliance, advertising and promotion, adverse event reporting, and recordkeeping must be satisfied at all times.

        The effect of government regulation may be to delay marketing approval of our product candidates for a considerable or indefinite period of time, to impose costly processes and procedures upon our activities and to furnish a competitive advantage to companies that compete with us. There can be no assurance that marketing approval for any of our product candidates would be granted by the FDA or other regulatory authority on a timely basis, if at all, or, once granted, that the marketing authorization would not be withdrawn or other regulatory actions taken which might limit our ability to market our proposed products. Any such delay in obtaining or failing to obtain such approvals or imposition of regulatory actions would adversely affect us, the manufacturing and marketing of the products resulting from marketing approval of any of our product candidates, and our ability to generate product revenue.

52

Table of Contents

Even though we have obtained Orphan Drug designation for our most advanced product candidate, our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we may not be able to obtain or maintain Orphan Drug marketing exclusivity for this product candidate or any of our other product candidates.

        Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union, or EU, may designate therapeutic products under development for relatively small patient populations as "orphan drugs". Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a therapeutic product as an Orphan Drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. We have obtained Orphan Drug designation from the FDA and European Commission, or EC, for L-glutamine treatment for SCD, and we may seek Orphan Drug designation for our other product candidates. Generally, if a product candidate with an Orphan Drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has been granted such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or European Medicines Agency, or EMA, as applicable, from approving another marketing application for the same product candidate prior to the expiration of that time period. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and 10 years in the European Union. The exclusivity period in the European Union can be reduced to six years if the product no longer meets the criteria for Orphan Drug designation or if its commercialization is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan Drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or EMA determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to ensure sufficient quantity of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. In the United States, Orphan Drug exclusivity may be lost if another L-glutamine product for the same indication demonstrates clinical superiority, such as a better safety or efficacy profile, in which case the FDA would be permitted to approve the third party product. Orphan Drug exclusivity does not bar the FDA from approving another L-glutamine product for any other indication. Nor does Orphan Drug designation bar the FDA from granting Orphan Drug designation and approving another product for the same orphan disease or condition.

Even if we receive three years of data exclusivity upon approval of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD under the Hatch-Waxman Act, that exclusivity will run concurrently with Orphan Drug exclusivity and will not prevent the FDA from approving other products intended to treat SCD or other L-glutamine products intended to treat other diseases or conditions.

        Under the Hatch/Waxman Act, a three-year period of data exclusivity is granted for a drug product that contains an active pharmaceutical ingredient, or active moiety, that has been previously approved, when the NDA for that drug product contains reports of new clinical investigations (other than bioavailability studies) conducted or sponsored by the sponsor of the NDA that were essential to approval of the NDA. When granted to a sponsor, data exclusivity under the Hatch/Waxman Act prevents any third parties, such as generic drug manufacturers, from relying on or using the sponsor's data from the sponsor's new clinical investigations in order to obtain marketing approval for the same active moiety and indication for which the sponsor's NDA was approved.

        The FDA defines "new clinical investigation" as "a clinical study in humans the results of which have not been relied upon by FDA to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness of a previously approved drug product for any indication or of safety for a new patient population and do not duplicate the results of another investigation that was relied upon by the agency to demonstrate the effectiveness or safety in a new patient population of a previously approved drug product." Our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD contains the same active moiety contained in our previously approved NutreStore product and we believe our Phase 3 clinical study meets the definition of a new clinical investigation for purposes of satisfying the requirements for Hatch/Waxman data exclusivity to be granted.

53

Table of Contents

        Although we anticipate receiving three years of data exclusivity if our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD is approved, we may not be able to take advantage of all or any of the benefits of such exclusivity if Orphan Drug exclusivity is granted, because both exclusivities would run concurrently. However, Hatch/Waxman three-year exclusivity would bar the approval of the same product for the same indication even if the same product demonstrated clinical superiority. Similar to Orphan Drug exclusivity, the three-year exclusivity provided under the Hatch/Waxman Act would not bar the FDA from approving another L-glutamine product for an indication other than SCD; nor would it bar the FDA from approving a different active moiety to treat SCD.

The FDA Fast Track designation for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD may not actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

        If a product candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and it demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this disease or condition, its sponsor may apply for FDA Fast Track designation. If Fast Track designation is obtained, the FDA may initiate review of completed individual sections of a NDA before all sections of the application are complete and the application can be submitted for filing by the FDA. This "rolling review" is available if the applicant provides, and the FDA approves, a schedule for submission of the individual sections of the application.

        Although we have obtained a Fast Track designation from the FDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. Our Fast Track designation may be withdrawn by the FDA if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Our Fast Track designation does not guarantee that we will qualify for or be able to take advantage of the expedited review procedures or that we will ultimately obtain regulatory approval of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD.

        A product candidate that receives Fast Track designation is also eligible for, among other benefits, Priority Review, if certain criteria are met. These criteria for Priority Review include whether, if approved, the resulting product would provide significant improvements in the safety or effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions caused by a disease when compared to standard treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of those conditions. Under Priority Review of a NDA, assuming that there are no requests for additional information, the FDA's goal is to take action on the NDA within six months (compared to 10 months under standard review) after it is accepted as filed. Requests for Priority Review of a NDA must be submitted to the FDA when the NDA is submitted. Our current plan is to request Priority Review for the NDA for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD that we plan to file this year. We cannot predict whether the FDA will grant our request for Priority Review for any such NDA or, if the request is granted, that the Priority Review status will be maintained and the NDA approved in a timely manner.

Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval would be subject to post-marketing regulatory requirements and limitations and could be subject to recall or withdrawal from the market, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with such regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems in commercializing any of our product candidates, when and if any of them are approved by regulators.

        Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval, along with the collection and reporting of post-approval clinical data, manufacturing processes, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for the resulting product, will be subject to continual requirements of and review by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, establishment registration and product listing requirements, cGMP requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding

54

Table of Contents

maintenance of records and documents, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping. Even if the FDA or other regulators outside the United States grant marketing approval to any of our product candidates, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which it may be marketed as a product or to the conditions of approval, including the requirement to implement a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS. If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, the labeling (including the package insert) that must accompany its distribution as a product may limit its approved use, which could limit the total number of prescriptions written for such products.

        The FDA may also impose requirements for costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety or effectiveness of any approved product. The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of therapeutic products to ensure they are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers' communications regarding off-label use, and if we market any of our products for indications that have not been approved, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label marketing. Violations of the FD&C Act relating to the promotion of prescription products may lead to investigations alleging violations of federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws. In recent years, several pharmaceutical companies have been fined significant amounts for such violations.

        In addition, later discovery of previously unknown adverse events or other problems with any of our product candidates that are approved for marketing as products, the contract manufacturers from which we obtain supplies of these products, the manufacturing processes they use to manufacture these products, or our or their failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may have negative consequences, including:

•

restrictions on the manufacturers or manufacturing processes for such products;



•

restrictions on the labeling or marketing of such products;



•

restrictions on distribution or use of such products;



•

requirements to conduct post-marketing studies or clinical trials;



•

warning letters;



•

recall or withdrawal of such products from the market;



•

refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved marketing applications that we submit;



•

clinical holds on clinical studies of such products;



•

fines, restitution or disgorgement of revenue or profit generated by sales of such products;



•

suspension or withdrawal of the marketing approvals of such products;



•

refusal to permit the import or export of such products;



•

seizure of such products;



•

injunctions prohibiting the manufacture, marketing, sale, distribution, or related action in respect of such products;



•

the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; or



•

debarment of our company and any of our officers or other employees responsible for such problems from future dealings with the FDA.

55

Table of Contents

        Non-compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding safety monitoring, also called pharmacovigilance, and with requirements related to the development of therapeutics for the pediatric population, can also result in significant financial penalties. Similarly, failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the protection of personal information can also lead to significant penalties and sanctions.

Our current and future relationships with customers and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere may be subject, directly or indirectly, to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, transparency, health information privacy and security and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings.

        We are subject to various federal and state laws pertaining to healthcare fraud and abuse, including inducing, facilitating or encouraging submission of false claims to government programs and prohibitions on the offer or payment or acceptance of kickbacks or other remuneration for the purchase of our products. Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with customers and third-party payors may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we sell, market and distribute any products. In addition, we may be subject to transparency laws aimed at controlling healthcare costs and patient privacy regulation by the U.S. federal and state governments and by governments in foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include:

•

the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made under federal and state healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid;



•

federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws, including the federal False Claims Act, which impose criminal and civil penalties, including civil qui tam actions (commonly referred to as "whistleblower actions"), against individuals or entities for knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government;



•

provisions under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, that impose criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters;



•

provisions under HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, that impose obligations on covered healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, as well as their business associates that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;



•

the federal Open Payments program under the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act , which requires manufacturers of drugs, biologics, cell-based therapies, medical devices and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the Centers for Medicare &

56

Table of Contents

Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to "payments or other transfers of value" made to physicians, which is defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors, and teaching hospitals and applicable manufacturers and applicable group purchasing organizations to report annually to CMS ownership and investment interests held by the physicians and their immediate family members;

•

state and foreign laws and regulations analogous to those described above, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers;



•

state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry's voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers;



•

state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; and



•

state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

        Because of the sweeping language of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, many potentially beneficial business arrangements would be prohibited if the statute were strictly applied. To avoid this outcome, the Department of Health and Human Services has published regulations, known as "safe harbors," that identify exceptions to or exemptions from the statute's prohibitions. Arrangements that do not fit within the safe harbors are not automatically deemed to be illegal, but must be evaluated on a case by case basis for compliance with the statute. We seek to comply with the Anti-Kickback Statute and, if necessary, to fit within one of the defined safe harbors. We are unaware of any violations of these laws. However, due to the breadth of the statutory provisions and the absence of uniform guidance in the form of regulations or court decisions, there can be no assurance that our practices will not be challenged under anti-kickback or similar laws. Violations of such restrictions may be punishable by civil or criminal sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, as well as the possibility of exclusion from U.S. federal healthcare programs (including Medicaid and Medicare). Any such violations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results or operations and cash flows.

        Under the False Claims Act, drug manufacturers have been held responsible for claims filed by physicians for reimbursement of the cost of medical services related to uses of a pharmaceutical product that are not on the approved labeling, known as "off-label use," if the manufacturer promoted the product for such off-label use. Violations of the False Claims Act may result in treble damages based on the amount of overpayment and additional civil fines of $5,000 to $10,000 for each false claim. Drug manufacturers could also be held responsible for reimbursement claims submitted by any physician for pharmaceutical products that were knowingly not manufactured in compliance with cGMP regulations.

        Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we, our employees, officers, or directors may be subject to significant civil,

57

Table of Contents

criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business, including our collaborators, is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, such person or entity may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from participation in government healthcare programs, which could also materially affect our business.

Recently enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of our product candidates and then commercialize them as products and affect the prices we may obtain.

        In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

        Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or, collectively, the PPACA (often commonly referred to as the "Affordable Care Act"), a law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

        Among the provisions of the PPACA of importance to our potential product candidates are:

•

an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs;



•

an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13.0% of the average manufacturer price for branded and generic drugs, respectively;



•

expansion of healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Statute, new government investigative powers and enhanced penalties for non-compliance;



•

a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand medicines to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for a manufacturer's medicines purchased outside a hospital setting to be covered under Medicare Part D;



•

extension of a manufacturer's Medicaid rebate liability to covered medicines dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations;



•

expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level beginning in 2014, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer's Medicaid rebate liability;

58

Table of Contents

•

expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service pharmaceutical pricing program;



•

the new requirements under the federal Open Payments program and its implementing regulations;



•

a new requirement to annually report samples of medicines that manufacturers and distributors provide to physicians; and



•

a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research.

        In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the PPACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, starting in 2013. On March 1, 2013, the President signed an executive order implementing the 2% Medicare payment reductions, and on April 1, 2013, these reductions went into effect. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for any of our products, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

        We expect that the PPACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any of our products. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize any of our products.

        Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for prescription medicines. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA's approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements.

A variety of risks associated with marketing any of our products internationally could hurt our business.

        We may seek regulatory approval for our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and our other product candidates outside of the United States and, accordingly, we expect that we will be subject to additional risks related to operating in foreign countries if we obtain the necessary approvals, including:

•

differing regulatory requirements in foreign countries;



•

the potential for so-called parallel importing, which is what happens when a local seller, faced with high or higher local prices, opts to import goods from a foreign market with low or lower prices rather than buying them locally;



•

unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers, price and exchange controls and other regulatory requirements;



•

economic weakness, including inflation or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;

59

Table of Contents

•

compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad;



•

foreign taxes, including withholding of payroll taxes;



•

foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenues, and other obligations related to doing business in another country;



•

difficulties staffing and managing foreign operations;



•

workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the United States;



•

potential liability under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or comparable foreign regulations;



•

challenges enforcing our contractual and intellectual property rights, especially in foreign countries that do not respect and protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the United States;



•

production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad; and



•

business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism.

        These and other risks associated with our potential international operations may compromise our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenue, if any.

        In some countries, particularly in the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product candidate. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of any of our products to other available therapies. If reimbursement of any of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be harmed, possibly materially.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could harm our business.

        We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with such laws and regulations.

        Although we maintain workers' compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials.

60

Table of Contents

        In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

RISKS RELATED TO EMPLOYEE MATTERS AND MANAGING OUR GROWTH

We rely heavily on the founder of Emmaus Medical, Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, our President and Chief Executive Officer. The loss of his services would have a material adverse effect upon us and our business and prospects.

        Our success depends, to a significant extent, upon the continued services of Yutaka Niihara, M.D., MPH, founder of Emmaus Medical and our President and Chief Executive Officer. Since inception, we have been dependent upon Dr. Niihara, who was one of the initial patentees for the method we are utilizing in our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD. While Dr. Niihara and the rest of our executive officers are parties to confidentiality agreements that prevent them from soliciting our existing customers or disclosing information deemed confidential to us, we do not have any agreement with Dr. Niihara or any key members of management that would prohibit them from joining our competitors or forming competing companies. In addition, we do not maintain key man life insurance policies on any of our executive officers. If Dr. Niihara or any key management personnel resign to join a competitor or form a competing company, the loss of such personnel, together with the loss of any customers or potential customers due to such executive's departure, could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We are dependent on a technically trained workforce and an inability to retain or effectively recruit such employees could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

        Our ability to compete effectively depends largely on our ability to attract and retain certain key personnel, including our clinical, regulatory and scientific staff members. Industry demand for such skilled employees, however, exceeds the number of personnel available, and the competition for attracting and retaining these employees is intense. Because of this intense competition for skilled employees, we may be unable to retain our existing personnel or attract additional qualified employees to keep up with future business needs. If this should happen, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

        In addition, we intend to hire in-house marketing personnel to promote and market and sell our SCD and SBS treatment products to patients, physicians and treatment centers, and obtain the approval of insurance companies and healthcare payors for reimbursement of the cost of these treatments. We cannot assure you that we will be able to recruit and retain qualified personnel to perform these marketing functions. Our inability to hire and then retain such personnel and scientists could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are subject to rapid technological change, and if we fail to keep up with such change, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely impacted.

        Biotechnology and related pharmaceutical technology have undergone and are subject to rapid and significant change. We expect that the technologies associated with biotechnology research and development will continue to develop rapidly. Our failure to keep pace with such rapid change could result in our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and other product candidates becoming obsolete and we may be unable to recoup any expenses incurred with developing such products, which may adversely affect our future revenues and financial condition.

61

Table of Contents

We expect to expand our product development, regulatory and marketing capabilities, and, as a result, we may encounter difficulties managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

        We expect to continue to grow, which could strain our managerial, operational, financial and other resources. With the completion of our Phase 3 clinical trial of our pharmaceutical grade L-glutamine treatment for SCD and the potential expansion of clinical-stage programs and in-licensing and acquisition of additional clinical-stage product candidates, we will be required to retain experienced personnel in the regulatory, clinical and medical areas over the next several years. Also, as our preclinical pipeline diversifies through the acquisition or in-licensing of new product candidates, we will need to hire additional scientific and other personnel in order to supplement our existing scientific expertise over the next several years.

        Our staff, financial resources, systems, procedures or controls may be inadequate to support our operations, and our management may be unable to take advantage of future market opportunities or manage successfully our relationships with third parties if we are unable to adequately manage our anticipated growth and the integration of new personnel. We may not be able on a timely and cost effective basis to identify, hire and retain any needed additional management, scientific, or sales and marketing personnel to develop and implement our product development plans, conduct preclinical and clinical testing of our product candidates and, if they are approved by the FDA and other government regulators, commercialize them as products. In addition, we may not be able to successfully manage potential rapid growth with our current limited managerial, operational, and financial resources.

We may pursue future growth through strategic acquisitions and alliances which may not yield anticipated benefits and may adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and existing business.

        We may seek to grow in the future through strategic acquisitions and alliances in order to complement and expand our business. The success of our acquisition strategy will depend on, among other things:

•

the availability of suitable acquisition and alliance candidates;



•

competition from other companies for acquiring or forming alliances with available acquisition and alliance candidates;



•

our ability to value any acquisition candidates or alliances accurately and negotiate favorable terms for any prospective acquisitions or alliances;



•

the availability of funds to finance any such acquisitions or alliances;



•

the ability to establish new informational, operational and financial systems to meet the needs of our business;



•

the ability to achieve anticipated synergies, including with respect to complementary products; and



•

the availability of management resources to oversee the integration and operation of the acquired businesses.

        If we are not successful in integrating acquired businesses and completing acquisitions in the future, we may be required to reevaluate our acquisition and alliance strategy. We also may incur substantial expenses and devote significant management time and resources in seeking to complete acquisitions and alliances. Acquired businesses and alliances may fail to meet our performance expectations. If we do not achieve the anticipated benefits of an acquisition or alliance as rapidly as expected, or at all, investors or analysts may not perceive the same benefits of the acquisition or alliance as we do. If these risks materialize, our operating results, financial condition and existing business could be materially adversely affected.

62

Table of Contents

RISKS RELATED TO OWNERSHIP OF OUR COMMON STOCK

There is no current trading market for our common stock, and we cannot predict when or if an established public trading market will develop.

        There is no market for shares of our common stock. An active trading market for our shares may never develop. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of your shares. Further, an inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock and may impair our ability to enter into collaborations or acquire companies or products by using our shares of common stock as consideration.

The market price and trading volume of shares of our common stock may be volatile and you could lose all of your investment.

        When and if a market develops for our securities, the market price of our common stock could fluctuate significantly for many reasons, including reasons unrelated to our specific performance, such as reports by industry analysts, investor perceptions, or announcements by our competitors regarding their own performance, as well as general economic and industry conditions. For example, to the extent that other companies, whether large or small, within our industry experience declines in their share price, our share price may decline as well. Fluctuations in operating results or the failure of operating results to meet the expectations of public market analysts and investors may negatively impact the price of our securities. Quarterly operating results may fluctuate in the future due to a variety of factors that could negatively affect revenues or expenses in any particular quarter, including vulnerability of our business to a general economic downturn; changes in the laws that affect our products or operations; competition; compensation related expenses; application of accounting standards; and our ability to obtain and maintain all necessary government certifications and/or licenses to conduct our business. In addition, in situations where the market price of a company's shares may drop significantly, stockholders could institute securities class action lawsuits against the company. A lawsuit against us could cause us to incur substantial costs and could divert the time and attention of our management and other resources. In addition, the market price for securities of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies historically has been volatile, and the securities markets have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These broad market fluctuations may cause the market price of our common stock to decline substantially. Market price and volume volatility could cause you to lose part or all of your investment.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research about our business, the price and trading volume of our common stock could decline.

        In the event a public trading market develops for our common stock, the price and trading volume of our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If no securities or industry analysts commence coverage of us, the trading price for our common stock and other securities would be negatively affected. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our securities, the price of our securities would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to publish regular reports on us, interest in the purchase of our common stock could decrease, which could cause the price and trading volume of our common stock to decline.

63

Table of Contents

Members of our management team have significant influence over us.

        As of March 20, 2015, our officers and directors beneficially owned approximately 43.5% of the outstanding shares of our common stock on an undiluted basis. These stockholders, therefore, have a controlling influence in determining the outcome of any corporate transaction or other matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including mergers, consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets, election of directors, and other significant corporate actions. These stockholders may also have the power to prevent or cause a change in control. In addition, without the consent of these stockholders, we could be prevented from entering into transactions that could be beneficial to us. The interests of these stockholders may differ from the interests of our other stockholders.

We have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting and we may be unable to develop, implement and maintain appropriate controls in future periods. If the material weakness is not remediated, or if after remediation we are unable to maintain appropriate controls, the accuracy and timing of our financial reporting may be adversely affected.

        We have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting and, as a result of such weakness, our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2014. The material weakness related to our not having an adequate level of resources with the appropriate level of training and experience regarding the application of generally accepted accounting principles for certain complex transactions. In addition, we did not maintain effective controls over the completeness and accuracy of financial reporting for complex or significant unusual transactions. With respect to our controls over the reporting of complex or significant unusual transactions, we did not have controls designed and in place to ensure the accuracy of our accounting treatment of such transactions, including, without limitation, our reporting of liabilities and costs associated with the issuance and sale of units consisting of common stock and common stock purchase warrants during the third quarter of fiscal 2013, the recording of share based compensation only after establishing the grant date of the awards, and the proper reporting of the amounts relating to gain contingencies. This and related events contributed to a delay in the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 and the restatement of our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contained in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2013.

        Unless and until remediated, this material weakness could result in additional material misstatements to our interim or annual consolidated financial statements and disclosures that may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In addition, we may experience delay or be unable to meet our reporting obligations or to comply with SEC rules and regulations, which could result in investigation and sanctions by regulatory authorities. Management's assessment of internal controls over financial reporting may in the future identify additional weaknesses and conditions that need to be addressed in our internal control over financial reporting. Any failure to improve our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting or to address identified weaknesses in the future, if they were to occur, could prevent us from maintaining accurate accounting records and discovering accounting errors and financial frauds. Any of these results could adversely affect our business and the value of our common stock.

We incur significant costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management is required to devote substantial time to compliance efforts.

        As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and related SEC regulations have created uncertainty for public companies

64

Table of Contents

and significantly increased the costs and risks associated with accessing the public markets and public reporting. We are required to comply with these rules. Our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time and financial resources to comply with these requirements, as well any new requirements implemented by the SEC. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly and could lead to a diversion of management time and attention from revenue generating activities to compliance activities. We are currently unable to estimate these costs with any degree of certainty. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors and board committees or as executive officers and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance.

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage, delay or prevent a change in control, which may cause our stock price to decline.

        Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if closing such a transaction would be beneficial to our stockholders. We are authorized to issue up to 20,000,000 shares of preferred stock. This preferred stock may be issued in one or more series, the terms of which may be determined at the time of issuance by our board of directors without further action by stockholders. The terms of any series of preferred stock may include voting rights (including the right to vote as a series on particular matters), preferences as to dividend, liquidation, conversion and redemption rights and sinking fund provisions. No preferred stock is currently outstanding. The issuance of any preferred stock could materially adversely affect the rights of the holders of our common stock, and therefore, reduce the value of our common stock. In particular, specific rights granted to future holders of preferred stock could be used to restrict our ability to merge with, or sell our assets to, a third party and thereby preserve control by the present management.

        Provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law also could have the effect of discouraging potential acquisition proposals or making a tender offer or delaying or preventing a change in control, including changes a stockholder might consider favorable. Such provisions may also prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our management. In particular, the certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law, as applicable, among other things:

•

provide the board of directors with the ability to alter the bylaws without stockholder approval;



•

place limitations on the removal of directors;



•

provide that vacancies on the board of directors may be filled by a majority of directors in office, although less than a quorum; and



•

provide that stockholders must provide advance notice to nominate directors or submit proposals for consideration at stockholder meetings.

        These provisions are expected to discourage certain types of coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids and to encourage persons seeking to acquire control of our company to first negotiate with our board of directors. These provisions may delay or prevent someone from acquiring or merging with us, which may cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

We are an "emerging growth company" and we may take advantage of reduced disclosure and governance requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, which could result in our common stock being less attractive to investors.

        We are an "emerging growth company," as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we may choose to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation

65

Table of Contents

requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive if we choose to rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock if one develops and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company, which in certain circumstances could be for up to five years.

Our status as an "emerging growth company" under the JOBS Act may make it more difficult to raise capital as and when we need it.

        Because of the exemptions from various reporting requirements provided to us as an "emerging growth company" we may be less attractive to investors and it may be difficult for us to raise additional capital as and when we need it. Investors may be unable to compare our business with other companies in our industry if they believe that our financial accounting is not as transparent as other companies in our industry. If we are unable to raise additional capital as and when we need it, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

        We will remain an "emerging growth company" until the earliest of (a) the last day of the first fiscal year in which our annual gross revenues exceed $1.0 billion, (b) the date that we become a "large accelerated filer" as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, which would occur if the market value of our shares that are held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter, (c) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the preceding three-year period and (d) the last day of our fiscal year containing the fifth anniversary of the date on which shares of our common stock become publicly traded in the U.S.

We do not foresee paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future and, as a result, our investors' sole source of gain, if any, will depend on capital appreciation, if any.

        We do not plan to declare or pay any cash dividends on our shares of common stock in the foreseeable future and currently intend to retain any future earnings for funding growth. As a result, investors should not rely on an investment in our securities if they require the investment to produce dividend income. Capital appreciation, if any, of our shares may be investors' sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Moreover, investors may not be able to resell their shares of our common stock at or above the price they paid for them.