California
|
27-1041563
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|
Title of each class
|
Name of exchange on which registered
|
|
Common Stock, no par value
|
NYSE American
|
Large accelerated filer
☐
|
Accelerated filer
☐
|
Non-accelerated filer ☒ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Smaller reporting company
☐
|
Emerging growth company
☒
|
Page
Number
|
|||
Part I.
|
Financial Information
|
||
Item 1 -
|
3
|
||
Item 1A -
|
32
|
||
Item 1B -
|
46
|
||
Item 2 -
|
46
|
||
Item 3 -
|
46
|
||
Item 4 -
|
46
|
||
Part II.
|
Other Information
|
||
Item 5 -
|
46
|
||
Item 6 -
|
48
|
||
Item 7 -
|
49
|
||
Item 7A -
|
56
|
||
Item 8 -
|
59
|
||
Item 9 -
|
82
|
||
Item 9A -
|
82
|
||
Item 9B -
|
82
|
||
Part III.
|
Item 10 -
|
83
|
|
Item 11 -
|
83
|
||
Item 12 -
|
83
|
||
Item 13 -
|
83
|
||
Item 14 -
|
83
|
||
Part IV
|
Item 15 -
|
84
|
|
Item 16 -
|
86
|
||
87
|
· |
Reduce unnecessary and sometimes risky procedures, as well as lower the cost of care through the avoidance of more expensive diagnostic procedures, including invasive biopsies;
|
· |
Improve the quality of life for cancer patients by reducing the anxiety associated with non-definitive diagnoses; and
|
· |
Improve health outcomes through avoidance of unnecessary invasive procedures
|
Graphic 1
|
|
|
· |
Diagnostic tests to prioritize in our development program;
|
· |
Diagnostic tests we should market ourselves;
|
· |
Diagnostic tests we should co-market through an alliance with one or more other companies; and
|
· |
Diagnostic tests we should out-license to third parties for development and/or commercialization.
|
· |
Reduced disclosure about our executive compensation arrangements;
|
· |
No non-binding shareholder advisory votes on executive compensation or golden parachute arrangements; and
|
· |
Exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting.
|
Graphic 2
|
Wistar 2015 Study
|
|
Graphic 3
|
Wistar 2016 Study
|
|
Graphic 4
|
OncoCyte 2017 Results
|
|
Graphic 5
|
|
· |
Person who has smoked a pack a day (20 cigarettes) for 30 years;
|
· |
Person who has smoked 15 cigarettes a day for 40 years; or
|
· |
Person who has smoked 40 cigarettes a day for 15 years.
|
Graphic 6
|
5 Year Survival Rates by Indication
1975 to 2007
|
|
· |
0.5 to 1% mortality and
|
· |
4-20% major complications.
|
Graphic 7
|
LungRADs Guidelines
|
|
Graphic 8
|
Nodule Size by Prevalence
|
|
Graphic 9
|
Market Opportunity for Lung Diagnostics
|
|
Graphic 10
|
|
Graphic 11
|
Lung Nodule Standard of Care
|
|
· |
cleared with a benign result and sent home and told to come back for annual scans like a mammogram
|
· |
monitored and sent home and told to return for a follow-up scan in three to six months.
|
Graphic 12
|
Breast Cancer Screening Protocol
|
|
Graphic 13
|
Market Opportunity for Breast Cancer Diagnostic Tests
|
|
Graphic 14
|
Current Bladder Diagnostic Protocol
|
|
Graphic 15
|
Bladder Diagnostic Market Opportunity
|
|
· |
Complete R&D studies to the extent necessary to ready DetermaVu™ for clinical validation.
|
· |
Finish Clinical validation of DetermaVu™;
|
· |
Launch DetermaVu
TM
|
· |
Start clinical utility studies of DetermaVu™;
|
· |
Submit dossier to CMS for draft Medicare Local Coverage Decision for DetermaVu™; and
|
· |
Obtain a certificate of registration, a certificate of compliance and inspection for our CLIA laboratory for all 50 states by completing requirements for State of Florida, Maryland, New York, and Rhode Island.
|
· |
Screening diagnostics could replace or be used as an alternative to existing screening procedures. Lung cancer screening is currently being done through the use of Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) for high risk patients who meet the guideline requirements. A diagnostic could be developed that could be used as an alternative to the annual LDCTs.
|
· |
Confirmatory diagnostics could be used in conjunction with a current standard of care screening procedure. For example, our lung confirmatory diagnostic would be used in conjunction with LDCT to confirm a suspicious nodule by yielding a secondary or confirming suspicious versus benign result. In the case of a benign result, the patient would not need additional invasive procedures to determine the presence of cancer. In the case of a suspicious result, additional procedures would be highly warranted.
|
· |
Prognostic or risk predictors could be used by physicians to determine if a patient is at high risk of a cancer recurrence and may be a candidate for closer monitoring or for adjuvant therapies;
|
· |
Companion diagnostics could be used by physicians to help determine an optimal therapy for a specific patient. An example of this would be PDL-1 and Keytruda;
|
· |
Recurrence diagnostics could be used for patients who had previously been diagnosed with cancer but are currently in remission. These diagnostics could potentially catch recurrence before cancer growth appears on follow-up imaging.
|
· |
Research and development expertise: development of a confirmatory diagnostic necessitates developing a scoring algorithm and the detection of multiple analytes to differentiate those patients who have the disease from those who do not. In the case of our confirmatory diagnostics, the tests distinguish a benign nodule or mass from a suspicious nodule or mass.
|
· |
Clinical relationships: relationships with larger cancer centers are required to produce the thousands of samples needed for the full continuum of trials from proof of concept to clinical validation of the diagnostic test.
|
· |
Medical community input: Key Opinion Leaders’ feedback from nationally recognized cancer clinicians is needed to determine whether the intended test is likely to be accepted and used by physicians in the applicable field of oncology.
|
Graphic 16
|
Types of Oncology Diagnostics
|
|
Graphic 17
|
|
Graphic 18
|
Diagnostic Development Stag
e
s
|
|
1) |
Research
: The first stage of the development of a CLIA LDT is the research stage. In the research stage of a molecular diagnostic, biological markers are analyzed to determine if specific markers are differentially expressed in certain diseases. We are developing blood and urine tests that differentiate malignant patient samples from benign patient samples by looking at differences in the amount of specific analytes expressed in whole blood or urine from cancer patients compared to patients who are cancer free. For our lung and bladder cancer tests the analytes we are looking at are specific mRNA and/or miRNA expressed in whole blood or urine; while for our breast cancer test we are looking at differentially expressing proteins. The objective of this phase of the development process is to delineate promising biomarkers, for further development and verification, before proceeding to validation work.
|
2) |
Assay Development
: The second stage is Assay Development. In this stage the best performing analytes (mRNA, miRNA, or protein biomarkers) are combined with all of the processes needed to create an assay system. The assay system includes the sample collection methods, sample processing and extractions, biomarker assay methods, and the mathematical "algorithm" required to provide a clinical test result for a sample. The optimal combination and weighting of biomarkers in an algorithm to be used in the final diagnostic are determined through bioinformatics which may be combined with machine learning software strategies that also reflect the biomarker contributions to and reliability within the algorithm. The end result of assay development is an assay system, including a "defined" algorithm, the performance of which has been verified on clinical samples from the targeted 'intended use' population. The test system, including the algorithm, can be further optimized during the R&D Validation phase.
|
3) |
R&D Validation:
The third stage is R&D Validation. There are three areas of studies that are undertaken during R&D Validation. These studies are carried out in our R&D laboratories.
|
● |
Assay System Reproducibility: During Assay System Reproducibility various critical aspects of diagnostic laboratory procedures are studied and tested to assure that the laboratory can produce consistent, reliable results. Multiple lots of reagents used in the laboratory are tested to determine whether lot to lot differences lead to differences in test results. Procedures for the collection of blood or urine samples from patients, the handling and storage of those samples, and the manner in which the samples are shipped to OncoCyte's diagnostic testing laboratory, are studied to assure that acceptable procedures are followed and that any variations in the procedures that can occur do not affect the diagnostic test results. Samples are studied for the stability of the biomarkers when the samples are subjected to various conditions that could be encountered throughout the total process of handling and shipping the samples, in order to define the conditions under which the clinical results for the sample will not change, at which point the results will change and lead to a different and erroneous result being reported by the lab.
|
● |
Algorithm Optimization and Lock: The Algorithm Optimization work that leads to an algorithm lock is usually customized to the needs of the specific product. In the case of the lung cancer test, we are employing a statistical method referred to as cross-validation where the algorithm is optimized on a subset of the clinical samples and then tested on the remaining untested samples. This process of optimizing the algorithm on a subset of samples and then testing on the remaining samples is repeated multiple times. Cross-validation is one of the methods for verifying the algorithm performance that leads to a 'lock' on the algorithm.
|
● |
Analytical Validation Studies. The last area of study in R&D Validation is Analytical Validation. The studies required for Analytical Validation have been established in the CLSI (Clinical Lab Standards Institute) Guidelines. These guidelines cover the testing for such matters as limits of quantitation, precision, reproducibility, and interfering substances. When completed, these Analytical Validation studies establish the performance characteristics of the assay system for subsequent clinical validation in the CLIA laboratory.
|
4) |
Clinical Validation:
The fourth stage is Clinical Validation. This stage has two distinct sets of studies within it, that are carried out in our CLIA laboratory.
|
● |
CLIA Lab Validation: In the CLIA Lab Validation Study, the CLIA lab will assay patient samples previously tested during the R&D Validation stage. This study is to demonstrate that the full assay system utilized in the CLIA lab, run by CLIA staff and on certified instrumentation, provides the same results on clinical samples as those obtained in the R&D lab.
|
● |
CLIA Lab Clinical Validation. The second kind of study performed in Clinical Validation is the CLIA Lab Clinical Validation. In this study, in general, additional new clinical samples will be collected and sent blinded to the CLIA lab. The CLIA lab will perform assays on these blinded samples and the performance of the full assay system will be assessed against clinical diagnosis.
|
5) |
Clinical Utility:
The final phase of the diagnostic pathway occurs after the diagnostic test has been launched and consists of carrying out one or more
Clinical Utility Studies.
These studies are important for driving adoption and obtaining coverage and reimbursement from payers such as Medicare, Medicaid, third party commercial insurers, health maintenance organizations ("HMOs"), and large corporations that self-insure. Clinical Utility Studies analyze the improvement in patient health outcomes associated with a diagnostic test. The outcomes of these studies can also be used to understand the health economics, including the cost effectiveness, of the new diagnostic. Clinical utility studies compare the treatment choices and outcomes of patients who received the test results versus those who did not receive the test results. The results of this phase may be published in peer review journals and are generally compiled in dossiers to share with managed care groups, including both public and commercial payers.
|
Graphic 19
|
Commercialization Strategy
|
|
Graphic 20
|
Target Markets for DetermaVu™
|
|
· |
medical conferences and symposia, for which the primary conferences are Chest, American Thoracic Society and the World Conference on Lung Cancer;
|
· |
speakers bureaus; and
|
· |
peer review journal articles
|
Graphic 21
|
|
· |
The claims of any patents that are issued may not provide meaningful protection, may not provide a basis for commercially viable diagnostic tests or may not provide us with any competitive advantages;
|
· |
Our patents may be challenged by third parties;
|
· |
Others may have patents that relate to our technology or business that may prevent us from marketing our diagnostic test candidates unless we are able to obtain a license to those patents;
|
· |
Patent applications to which we have rights may not result in issued patents; and
|
· |
We may not be successful in developing additional proprietary technologies that are patentable.
|
· |
Third-party payers that provide coverage to the patient, such as an insurance company, a managed care organization, or a governmental payer program;
|
· |
Physicians or other authorized parties, such as hospitals or independent laboratories, that order the testing service or otherwise refer the testing services to us; or
|
· |
Patients in cases where the patient has no insurance, has insurance that partially covers the testing, or owes a co-payment, co-insurance, or deductible amount.
|
· |
Analysis of multiple biomarkers of DNA, RNA or proteins combined with a unique algorithm to yield a single patient-specific result;
|
· |
Cleared or approved by the FDA; or
|
· |
Meets other similar criteria established by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
|
· |
We are attempting to develop new medical diagnostic tests and technologies. The main focus of our business is on diagnostic tests for cancer. Our diagnostic tests are being developed through the use of blood and urine samples obtained in prospective and retrospective clinical trials involving humans, but none of our diagnostic tests have been used in medicine to diagnose cancer. Our technologies many not prove to be sufficiently efficacious to use in the diagnosis of cancer.
|
· |
Some of our research could also have applications in new cancer therapeutics. None of our experimental therapeutic technologies have been applied in human medicine and have only been used in laboratory studies
in vitro
.
|
· |
The experimentation we are doing is costly, time consuming, and uncertain as to its results. We incurred research and development expenses amounting to approximately $7.2 million and $5.7 million during years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Since 2011, most of our research has been devoted to the development of our lead diagnostic tests to detect lung cancer, breast cancer, and bladder cancer.
|
· |
If we are successful in developing a new technology or diagnostic test, refinement of the new technology or diagnostic test and definition of the practical applications and limitations of the technology or diagnostic test may take years and require the expenditure of large sums of money.
|
· |
We need to successfully develop and market or license the diagnostic tests that we are developing in order to earn revenues in sufficient amounts to meet our operating expenses.
|
· |
Without diagnostic test sales or licensing fee revenues, we will not be able to operate at a profit, and we will not be able to cover our operating expenses without raising additional capital.
|
· |
Should we be able to successfully develop and market our diagnostic tests we may not be able to receive reimbursement for them from payers, such as health insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and Medicare, or any reimbursement that we receive may be lower than we anticipate.
|
· |
Physicians and hospitals may be reluctant to try a new diagnostic test due to the high degree of risk associated with the application of new technologies and diagnostic test in the field of human medicine, especially if the new test differs from the current standard of care for detecting cancer in patients.
|
· |
Competing tests for the initial diagnosis, reoccurrence diagnosis and optimal treatment of cancer are being manufactured and marketed by established companies and by other smaller biotechnology companies.
|
· |
Currently there are two diagnostic tests for lung cancer and multiple diagnostic tests for bladder cancer on the market. There is one diagnostic product for breast cancer that has been approved in Europe. In order to compete with other diagnostic tests, particularly any that sell at lower prices, our diagnostic tests will have to provide medically significant advantages or be more cost effective.
|
· |
There also is a risk that our competitors may succeed in developing safer, more accurate or more cost effective diagnostic tests that could render our diagnostic tests and technologies obsolete or noncompetitive.
|
· |
We plan to continue to incur substantial research and development expenses and we anticipate that we will be incurring significant sales and marketing costs as we develop and commercialize our diagnostic test candidates. We will need to raise additional capital to pay operating expenses until we are able to generate sufficient revenues from diagnostic test sales, royalties, and license fees, and we will need to sell additional equity or debt securities to meet those capital needs.
|
· |
Our ability to raise additional equity or debt capital will depend not only on progress made in developing our diagnostic tests, but also will depend on access to capital and conditions in the capital markets. There is no assurance that we will be able to raise capital at times and in amounts needed to finance the development and commercialization of our diagnostic tests and general operations. Even if capital is available, it may not be available on terms that we or our shareholders would consider favorable.
|
· |
Sales of additional equity securities by us could result in the dilution of the interests of our shareholders.
|
· |
The diagnostic tests that we may develop cannot be sold until the CMS or the FDA, and corresponding foreign regulatory authorities approve the laboratory tests or the IVDs for medical use.
|
· |
We will have to obtain a CLIA certificate of registration license for our laboratory for the manufacture and use of diagnostic tests and as part of the submission, our laboratory will be inspected.
|
· |
In addition to meeting federal regulatory requirements, each state has its own laboratory certification and inspection requirements for a CLIA laboratory that must be met in order to sell diagnostic tests in the state.
|
· |
We will have to conduct expensive and time consuming clinical trials of new diagnostic tests. The full cost of conducting and completing clinical trials necessary to obtain FDA approval of IVD tests or CLIA certification of a new laboratory diagnostic test or for gaining reimbursement from health insurance companies, health maintenance organizations, Medicare, and other third party payers cannot be presently determined but could exceed our current financial resources.
|
· |
Data obtained from preclinical and clinical studies is susceptible to varying interpretations that could delay, limit or prevent regulatory agency approvals. Delays or denials of the regulatory approvals may be encountered as a result of changes in regulatory agency policy, regulations, or laws.
|
· |
A diagnostic test that is approved may be subject to restrictions on use.
|
· |
The FDA can withdraw approval of an FDA regulated product if problems arise.
|
· |
CLIA licensed laboratories can lose their licenses if problems arise during a periodic inspection.
|
· |
We may be required to obtain pre-market clearance or approval before selling our diagnostic tests;
|
· |
As a result of required FDA pre-market review, our tests may not be cleared or approved on a timely basis, if at all;
|
· |
FDA labeling requirements may limit our claims about our diagnostic tests, which may have a negative effect on orders from physicians;
|
· |
The regulatory approval process may involve, among other things, successfully completing additional clinical trials and making a 510(k) submission, or filing a pre-market approval application with the FDA; and,
|
· |
If regulatory actions affect any of the reagents we obtain from suppliers and use in conducting our tests, our business could be adversely affected in the form of increased costs of testing or delays, limits or prohibitions on the purchase of reagents necessary to perform our testing.
|
· |
Delays in securing clinical investigators or trial sites for our clinical trials;
|
· |
Delays in obtaining Institutional Review Board and other regulatory approvals to commence a clinical trial;
|
· |
Slower than anticipated rates of patient recruitment and enrollment, or failing to reach the targeted number of patients due to competition for patients from other trials;
|
· |
Limited or no availability of coverage, reimbursement and adequate payment from health maintenance organizations and other third party payers for the use of our diagnostic test candidates in our clinical trials;
|
· |
Negative or inconclusive results from clinical trials;
|
· |
Approval and introduction of new diagnostic or changes in standards of practice or regulatory guidance that render our clinical trial endpoints or the targeting of our proposed indications obsolete;
|
· |
Inability to monitor patients adequately during or after treatment or problems with investigator or patient compliance with the trial protocols;
|
· |
Inability to replicate in large controlled studies safety and efficacy data obtained from a limited number of patients in uncontrolled trials; and
|
· |
Inability or unwillingness of medical investigators to follow our clinical protocols.
|
· |
If data shows that the list price was greater than 130% of the payment using established methodology (a weighted median), CMS will recoup the difference from the laboratory through a payment claw back.
|
· |
Payment will be updated annually based on the weighted median of commercial payer reimbursement.
|
· |
The federal Anti-Kickback Statute;
|
· |
The federal physician self-referral prohibition, commonly known as the Stark Law;
|
· |
The federal false claims and civil monetary penalties laws;
|
· |
The federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act requirements under the ACA; and
|
· |
State law equivalents of each of the federal laws enumerated above.
|
· |
Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and enforce patents and maintain trade secrets in the United States and in other countries. If we are unsuccessful in obtaining and enforcing patents, our competitors could use our technology and create diagnostic tests that compete with our diagnostic tests, without paying license fees or royalties to us.
|
· |
The preparation, filing, and prosecution of patent applications can be costly and time consuming. Our limited financial resources may not permit us to pursue patent protection of all of our technology and diagnostic tests throughout the world.
|
· |
Even if we are able to obtain issued patents covering our technology or diagnostic tests, we may have to incur substantial legal fees and other expenses to enforce our patent rights in order to protect our technology and diagnostic tests from infringing uses. We may not have the financial resources to finance the litigation required to preserve our patent and trade secret rights.
|
· |
The Supreme Court decisions in
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.
and
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
may adversely impact our ability to obtain patent protection for some or all of our diagnostic tests, which use certain gene markers to indicate the presence of certain cancers. The claims in the contested patents that were the subject of the Supreme Court decision in
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.
were directed to measuring the serum level of a drug metabolite and adjusting the dosing regimen of the drug based on the metabolite level. The Supreme Court said that a patent claim that merely claimed a mathematical correlation between the blood levels of a drug metabolite and the best dosage of the drug was not patentable subject matter because it did no more than recite a correlation that occurs in nature. In
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics,
the Supreme Court ruled that the discovery of the precise location and sequence of certain genes, mutations of which can dramatically increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, was not patentable. Knowledge of the gene location and sequences was used to determine the genes’ typical nucleotide sequence, which, in turn, enabled the development of medical tests useful for detecting mutations in these genes in a particular patient to assess the patient’s cancer risk. But the mere discovery of an important and useful gene did not render the genes patentable as a new composition of matter. The holdings in
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.
and
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
may limit our ability to obtain patent protection on diagnostic methods that merely recite a correlation between a naturally occurring event and a diagnostic outcome associated with that event.
|
· |
The preparation and filing of patent applications, and the maintenance of patents that are issued, may require substantial time and money.
|
· |
A patent interference proceeding may be instituted with the USPTO when more than one person files a patent application covering the same technology, or if someone wishes to challenge the validity of an issued patent. At the completion of the interference proceeding, the USPTO will determine which competing applicant is entitled to the patent, or whether an issued patent is valid. Patent interference proceedings are complex, highly contested legal proceedings, and the USPTO's decision is subject to appeal. This means that if an interference proceeding arises with respect to any of our patent applications, we may experience significant expenses and delay in obtaining a patent, and if the outcome of the proceeding is unfavorable to us, the patent could be issued to a competitor rather than to us.
|
· |
A derivation proceeding may be instituted by the USPTO or an inventor alleging that a patent or application was derived from the work of another inventor.
|
· |
Post Grant Review under the America Invents Act enables opposition-like proceedings in the United States. As with the USPTO interference proceedings, Post Grant Review proceedings will be very expensive to contest and can result in significant delays in obtaining patent protection or can result in a denial of a patent application.
|
· |
Oppositions to the issuance of patents may be filed under European patent law and the patent laws of certain other countries. As with USPTO interference proceedings, these foreign proceedings can be very expensive to contest and can result in significant delays in obtaining a patent or can result in a denial of a patent application.
|
· |
We might not be able to obtain any patents beyond the bladder cancer marker patent and lung cancer marker patents that have been issued by the USPTO, and any patents that we do obtain might not be comprehensive enough to provide us with meaningful patent protection.
|
· |
There will always be a risk that our competitors might be able to successfully challenge the validity or enforceability of any patent issued or licensed or licensed to us.
|
· |
In addition to interference proceedings, the USPTO can reexamine issued patents at the request of a third party. Our patents may be subject to inter partes review (replacing the reexamination proceeding), a proceeding in which a third party can challenge the validity of one of our patents to have the patent invalidated. This means that patents owned or licensed by us may be subject to reexamination and may be lost if the outcome of the reexamination is unfavorable to us.
|
· |
Any amendment of our articles of incorporation or bylaws;
|
· |
Any merger or consolidation of us with another company;
|
· |
Any recapitalization or reorganization of our capital stock;
|
· |
Any sale of assets or purchase of assets; or
|
· |
A corporate dissolution or a plan of liquidation of our business.
|
· |
Even if we utilize different technologies than BioTime or its subsidiaries, we could find ourselves in competition with them for research scientists, financing and other resources, licensing, manufacturing, and distribution arrangements, and for customers if we and BioTime or a BioTime subsidiary both bring diagnostic tests to market.
|
· |
BioTime may retain sufficient influence through its share ownership to deter us from engaging in research and development programs, investments, business ventures, or agreements to develop, license, or acquire diagnostic tests or technologies that would or might compete with those owned, licensed, or under development by BioTime or any of its other subsidiaries.
|
· |
BioTime and its subsidiaries will engage for their own accounts in research and product development programs, investments, and business ventures, and we will not be entitled to participate or to receive an interest in those programs, investments, or business ventures. BioTime and its subsidiaries will not be obligated to present any particular research and development, investment, or business opportunity to us, even if the opportunity would be within the scope of our research and development plans or programs, business objectives, or investment policies. These opportunities may include, for example, opportunities to acquire businesses or assets, including but not limited to patents and other intellectual property that could be used by us or by BioTime or by any of BioTime's subsidiaries. Our respective boards of directors will have to determine which company should pursue those opportunities, taking into account relevant facts and circumstances at the time, such as the financial and other resources of the companies available to acquire and utilize the opportunity, and the best "fit" between the opportunity and the business and research and development programs of the companies. However, to the extent that BioTime has sufficient voting power to elect the members of our Board of Directors, BioTime may have the ultimate say in decision making with respect to the allocation of opportunities.
|
· |
If we enter into any patent or technology license or sublicense, or any other agreement with BioTime or with a BioTime subsidiary, a conflict of interest could arise in determining how and when a party should enforce its rights under the agreement if the other BioTime company that is a party were to default or otherwise fail to perform any of its obligations under the agreement.
|
· |
One of our significant assets is 353,264 BioTime common shares that we acquired from BioTime in exchange for shares of our common stock. We may sell the BioTime shares from time to time, or pledge the shares as collateral for loans, to raise capital to finance our operations. Because a sale of those shares could have a depressing effect on the market value of BioTime common shares, BioTime will have a continuing interest in the number of shares we sell, the prices at which we sell the shares, and the time and manner in which the shares are sold. Further, we may need or find it desirable to sell BioTime common shares at the same time as BioTime, or BioTime subsidiaries that hold BioTime common shares, also desire to sell some of their BioTime common shares. Concurrent sales of BioTime common shares by us, BioTime, or BioTime subsidiaries cold have a depressing effect on the market price of the BioTime common shares, lower the price at which we and they are able to sell BioTime common shares, and result in lower net proceeds from the sales. We plan to coordinate any future sales of our BioTime common shares with BioTime and its subsidiaries in order to provide an orderly and controlled process for raising capital through the sale of BioTime shares. This will include an agreement as to the number of shares to be sold, the time period or "market window" for selling shares, the use of a common securities broker-dealer, and a fair allocation of net sales based on average sales prices during any trading day on which we and they sell BioTime shares.
|
· |
Each conflict of interest will be resolved by our respective boards of directors in keeping with their fiduciary duties and such policies as they may implement from time to time. However, the terms and conditions of patent and technology licenses and other agreements between us and BioTime or BioTime subsidiaries will not be negotiated on an arm's-length basis due to BioTime's ownership interest in us and due to the commonality of certain directors serving on our respective boards of directors.
|
· |
Sales or potential sales of substantial amounts of our common stock;
|
· |
Results of or delays in preclinical testing or clinical trials of our diagnostic test candidates;
|
· |
Announcements about us or about our competitors, including clinical trial results, regulatory approvals, new diagnostic test introductions and commercial results;
|
· |
The cost of our development programs;
|
· |
The success of competitive diagnostic tests or technologies;
|
· |
Litigation and other developments relating to our issued patents or patent applications or other proprietary rights or those of our competitors;
|
· |
Conditions in the diagnostic, pharmaceutical or biotechnology industries;
|
· |
Actual or anticipated changes in estimates as to financial results, development timelines or recommendations by securities analysts;
|
· |
Variations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us, including the failure of our earnings to meet analysts' expectations;
|
· |
General economic, industry and market conditions; and
|
· |
Changes in payer coverage and or reimbursement.
|
Item 5. |
Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Quarter Ended
|
High
|
Low
|
||||||
March 31, 2016
|
$
|
10.11
|
$
|
2.62
|
||||
June 30, 2016
|
$
|
6.07
|
$
|
3.37
|
||||
September 30, 2016
|
$
|
5.32
|
$
|
3.25
|
||||
December 31, 2016
|
$
|
7.70
|
$
|
3.95
|
||||
March 31, 2017
|
$
|
7.00
|
$
|
4.70
|
||||
June 30, 2017
|
$
|
7.35
|
$
|
4.95
|
||||
September 30, 2017
|
$
|
7.55
|
$
|
3.60
|
||||
December 31, 2017
|
$
|
7.40
|
$
|
3.90
|
Plan Category
|
Number of Shares
to be Issued
upon Exercise of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants, and Rights
|
Weighted Average
Exercise Price of
the Outstanding
Options, Warrants,
and Rights
|
Number of Shares
Remaining Available
for Future Issuance
under Equity
Compensation Plans
|
||||||
OncoCyte Stock Option Plans Approved by Shareholders
|
3,390
|
$3.25
|
1,384
|
(1) |
This Section is not "soliciting material," is not deemed "filed" with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference in any filing of OncoCyte under the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any such filing.
|
(2) |
Shows the cumulative total return on investment assuming an investment of $100 in each of OncoCyte, the Amex Market Value and the NYSE Arca Biotechnology Index on December 31, 2015. The cumulative total return on OncoCyte common shares has been computed based on a price of $9.00 per share, the price at which OncoCyte's common shares closed on January 4, 2016, OncoCyte's first day of "regular way" trading on NYSE American.
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES
|
||||||||||||
Research and development
|
$
|
7,174
|
$
|
5,677
|
$
|
4,527
|
||||||
General and administrative
|
9,232
|
4,265
|
3,867
|
|||||||||
Sales and marketing
|
2,443
|
1,198
|
324
|
|||||||||
Total operating expenses
|
18,849
|
11,140
|
8,718
|
|||||||||
Loss from operations
|
(18,849
|
)
|
(11,140
|
)
|
(8,718
|
)
|
||||||
OTHER EXPENSES, NET
|
||||||||||||
Loss on sale of available-for-sale securities and other expenses, net
|
(309
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||
Interest expense, net
|
(217
|
)
|
(28
|
)
|
(19
|
)
|
||||||
Other income, net
|
-
|
-
|
2
|
|||||||||
Total other expenses, net
|
(526
|
)
|
(28
|
)
|
(17
|
)
|
||||||
NET LOSS
|
$
|
(19,375
|
)
|
$
|
(11,168
|
)
|
$
|
(8,735
|
)
|
|||
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
$
|
(0.64
|
)
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
|||
Weighted average shares outstanding: basic and diluted
|
30,195
|
26,529
|
21,009
|
December 31,
|
||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
|||||||
Balance Sheet Data (in thousands):
|
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
7,600
|
$
|
10,174
|
||||
BioTime shares held as available-for-sale securities, at fair value
|
760
|
2,237
|
||||||
Intangible assets, net
|
746
|
988
|
||||||
Total assets
|
10,216
|
14,447
|
||||||
Total liabilities
|
5,813
|
4,585
|
||||||
Total stockholders' equity
|
$
|
4,403
|
$
|
9,862
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
$
Increase
|
%
Increase
|
|||||||||||||
|
2017
|
2016
|
||||||||||||||
Research and development expenses
|
$
|
7,174
|
$
|
5,677
|
$
|
1,497
|
|
26.4
|
%
|
|||||||
General and administrative expenses
|
|
9,232
|
|
4,265
|
|
4,967
|
|
116.5
|
%
|
|||||||
Sales and marketing expenses
|
2,443
|
1,198
|
1,245 | 103.9 |
%
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
$
Increase
|
|
%
Increase
|
|||||||||||||
2016
|
2015 | |||||||||||||||
Research and development expenses
|
$
|
5,677
|
$
|
4,527
|
$
|
+1,150
|
+ 25.4
|
%
|
||||||||
General and administrative expenses
|
4,265
|
3,867
|
+398
|
+10.3
|
%
|
|||||||||||
Sales and marketing expenses
|
1,198
|
324
|
+874
|
+269.8
|
%
|
Amount
(1)
|
Percent
|
|||||||||||||||
Program
|
2016
|
2015
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||||
General
|
$
|
1,649
|
$
|
1,687
|
29.1
|
%
|
37.3
|
%
|
||||||||
Lung Cancer Confirmatory Diagnostic
|
2,940
|
763
|
51.8
|
%
|
16.8
|
%
|
||||||||||
Bladder Cancer Confirmatory Diagnostic
|
376
|
895
|
6.6
|
%
|
19.8
|
%
|
||||||||||
Breast Cancer Confirmatory Diagnostic
|
375
|
1,105
|
6.6
|
%
|
24.4
|
%
|
||||||||||
CLIA Lab
|
337
|
77
|
5.9
|
%
|
1.7
|
%
|
||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
5,677
|
$
|
4,527
|
100 |
%
|
100 |
%
|
(1) |
Amount also includes certain general research and development expenses, such as laboratory supplies, laboratory expenses, rent allocated, and insurance allocated to research and development expenses, incurred directly by BioTime on behalf of OncoCyte and allocated to OncoCyte under the Shared Facilities Agreement.
|
(1) |
This table does not include payments to key employees that could arise if their employment is involuntary terminated or if their employment terminated following a change in control of OncoCyte.
|
(2) |
Under the Shared Facilities Agreement, we reimburse BioTime for a portion of the rent and other expenses of leasing our office and laboratory facility, and for BioTime's cost of providing us with the use of laboratory and office equipment and supplies, utilities, and personnel. Salaries and related expenses for accounting services and building maintenance are allocated based on a fixed percentage evaluated by BioTime management and us on a periodic basis and adjusted based on the level of activity, if warranted.
|
(3) |
Includes certain capital leases for lab equipment.
|
(4) |
Loan payable amounts include principal and interest.
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES
|
||||||||||||
Research and development
|
$
|
7,174
|
$
|
5,677
|
$
|
4,527
|
||||||
General and administrative
|
9,232
|
4,265
|
3,867
|
|||||||||
Sales and marketing
|
2,443
|
1,198
|
324
|
|||||||||
Total operating expenses
|
18,849
|
11,140
|
8,718
|
|||||||||
Loss from operations
|
(18,849
|
)
|
(11,140
|
)
|
(8,718
|
)
|
||||||
OTHER EXPENSES, NET
|
||||||||||||
Loss on sale of available-for-sale securities and other expenses, net
|
(309
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||
Interest expense, net
|
(217
|
)
|
(28
|
)
|
(19
|
)
|
||||||
Other income, net
|
-
|
-
|
2
|
|||||||||
Total other expenses, net
|
(526
|
)
|
(28
|
)
|
(17
|
)
|
||||||
NET LOSS
|
$
|
(19,375
|
)
|
$
|
(11,168
|
)
|
$
|
(8,735
|
)
|
|||
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
$
|
(0.64
|
)
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
|||
Weighted average shares outstanding: basic and diluted
|
30,195
|
26,529
|
21,009
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||
NET LOSS
|
$
|
(19,375
|
)
|
$
|
(11,168
|
)
|
$
|
(8,735
|
)
|
|||
Other comprehensive loss, net of tax:
|
||||||||||||
Realized loss on sale of available-for-sale securities
|
293
|
-
|
397
|
|||||||||
Unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities
|
(527
|
)
|
(304
|
)
|
75
|
|||||||
COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
|
$
|
(19,609
|
)
|
$
|
(11,472
|
)
|
$
|
(8,263
|
)
|
Common Stock
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
|
Accumulated
|
Total
Shareholders’
|
|||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Loss
|
Deficit
|
Equity (Deficit)
|
||||||||||||||||
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2014
|
18,200
|
$
|
15,147
|
$
|
(822
|
)
|
$
|
(15,399
|
)
|
$
|
(1,074
|
)
|
||||||||
Net loss
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
(8,735
|
)
|
|
(8,735
|
)
|
|||||||||
Unrealized gain on BioTime shares held as available-for-sale securities
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
75
|
|
-
|
|
75
|
|||||||||||
Stock-based compensation
|
-
|
|
1,815
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
1,815
|
|||||||||||
Common stock issued to BioTime for extinguishment of debt
|
1,500
|
|
3,300
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
3,300
|
|||||||||||
Common stock issued to investors for cash
|
1,500
|
|
3,300
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
3,300
|
|||||||||||
Common stock issued to BioTime upon conversion of BioTime convertible note payable and accrued interest
|
1,508
|
|
3,318
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
3,318
|
|||||||||||
Common stock issued to BioTime for cash
|
2,711
|
|
8,349
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
8,349
|
|||||||||||
Exercise of stock options
|
3
|
|
4
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
4
|
|||||||||||
Fair value of contingently issuable warrant
|
-
|
|
65
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
65
|
|||||||||||
OncoCyte common stock received as a dividend in kind from BioTime
|
(31
|
)
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
||||||||||
Transfer of realized loss into equity from sale of BioTime shares
|
-
|
|
(397
|
)
|
|
397
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
||||||||||
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2015
|
25,391
|
|
34,901
|
|
(350
|
)
|
|
(24,134
|
)
|
|
10,417
|
|||||||||
Net loss
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
(11,168
|
)
|
|
(11,168
|
)
|
|||||||||
Unrealized loss on BioTime shares held as available-for-sale securities
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
(304
|
)
|
|
-
|
|
(304
|
)
|
|||||||||
Stock-based compensation
|
-
|
|
922
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
922
|
|||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and warrants, net of discounts and financing costs
|
3,246
|
|
9,777
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
9,777
|
|||||||||||
Exercise of stock options
|
100
|
|
218
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
218
|
|||||||||||
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2016
|
28,737
|
|
45,818
|
|
(654
|
)
|
|
(35,302
|
)
|
|
9,862
|
|||||||||
Net loss
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
(19,375
|
)
|
|
(19,375
|
)
|
|||||||||
Unrealized loss on BioTime shares held as available-for-sale securities
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
(527
|
)
|
|
-
|
|
(527
|
)
|
|||||||||
Stock-based compensation
|
-
|
|
1,630
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
1,630
|
|||||||||||
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of 2016 warrants |
2,392
|
|
7,774
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
7,774
|
|||||||||||
Exercise of stock options
|
323
|
|
610
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
610
|
|||||||||||
Issuance of warrants for inducement to exercise 2016 warrants
|
-
|
|
4,074
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
4,074
|
|||||||||||
Issuance of warrants to Silicon Valley Bank
|
-
|
|
62
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
62
|
|||||||||||
Transfer of realized loss on sale of BioTime shares
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
293
|
|
-
|
|
293
|
|||||||||||
BALANCE AT DECEMBER 31, 2017
|
31,452
|
$
|
59,968
|
$
|
(888
|
)
|
$
|
(54,677
|
)
|
$
|
4,403
|
· |
Level 1
– Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities.
|
· |
Level 2
– Inputs other than Level 1 that are observable, either directly or indirectly, such as quoted market prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
|
· |
Level 3
– Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||
Net loss
|
$
|
(19,375
|
)
|
$
|
(11,168
|
)
|
$
|
(8,735
|
)
|
|||
Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic and diluted
|
30,195
|
26,529
|
21,009
|
|||||||||
Net loss per common share – basic and diluted
|
$
|
(0.64
|
)
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||
Stock options
|
3,390
|
3,017
|
2,240
|
|||||||||
Warrants
|
2,779
|
3,246
|
-
|
2017
|
2016
|
|||||||
Accrued bonuses and payroll related expenses
|
$
|
636
|
$
|
549
|
||||
Other accrued expenses
|
406
|
248
|
||||||
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities
|
$
|
1,042
|
$
|
797
|
2017
|
2016
|
|||||||
Intangible assets
|
$
|
2,419
|
$
|
2,419
|
||||
Accumulated amortization
|
(1,673
|
)
|
(1,431
|
)
|
||||
Intangible assets, net
|
$
|
746
|
$
|
988
|
2017
|
2016
|
|||||||
Equipment and furniture
|
$
|
1,479
|
$
|
1,007
|
||||
Accumulated depreciation
|
(657
|
)
|
(319
|
)
|
||||
Equipment and furniture, net
|
$
|
822
|
$
|
688
|
Year Ending
December 31,
|
Loan
Payments
|
||||
2018
|
$
|
876
|
|||
2019
|
835
|
||||
2020
|
386
|
||||
Total payments of principal and interest
|
|
2,097
|
|||
Less: amounts representing interest
|
(114
|
)
|
|||
Total payments of principal before deferred financing costs
|
|
1,983
|
|||
Less: deferred financing costs
|
(113
|
)
|
|||
Total loan payable, net of deferred financing costs
|
$
|
1,870
|
Options
|
Shares
Available
for Grant
|
Number of
Options
Outstanding
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|||||||||
Total at January 1, 2016
|
1,757
|
2,240
|
$
|
2.03
|
||||||||
Options granted
|
(962
|
)
|
962
|
3.58
|
||||||||
Options exercised
|
-
|
(100
|
)
|
2.19
|
||||||||
Options forfeited, cancelled or expired
|
85
|
(85
|
)
|
2.00
|
||||||||
Total at December 31, 2016
|
880
|
3,017
|
|
2.52
|
||||||||
Increase in pool
|
1,200
|
-
|
||||||||||
Options granted
|
(896
|
)
|
896
|
5.17
|
||||||||
Options exercised
|
-
|
(323
|
)
|
1.89
|
||||||||
Options forfeited, cancelled or expired
|
200
|
(200
|
)
|
3.11
|
||||||||
Total at December 31, 2017
|
1,384
|
3,390
|
$
|
3.25
|
||||||||
Exercisable at December 31, 2017
|
1,835
|
$
|
2.48
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
||||||||||
Research and development
|
$
|
668
|
$
|
312
|
$
|
456
|
||||||
General and administrative
|
841
|
610
|
1,359
|
|||||||||
Sales and marketing
|
121
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||
Total stock-based compensation expense
|
$
|
1,630
|
$
|
922
|
$
|
1,815
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
|||||||||||||
Expected life (in years)
|
6.15
|
|
6.21
|
6.83
|
|||||||||||
Risk-free interest rates
|
2.03
|
%
|
|
1.46
|
%
|
|
1.87
|
%
|
|
||||||
Volatility
|
66.01
|
%
|
|
64.64
|
%
|
|
74.15
|
%
|
|
||||||
Dividend yield
|
-
|
%
|
|
-
|
%
|
|
-
|
%
|
|
2017
|
2016
|
|||||||
Deferred liabilities:
|
||||||||
Available-for-sale securities
|
$
|
-
|
|
$
|
(761
|
)
|
||
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
-
|
|
(761
|
)
|
||||
Deferred tax assets:
|
||||||||
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
11,414
|
11,730
|
||||||
Research and development credit carryforwards
|
2,141
|
1,765
|
||||||
Patents and fixed assets
|
268
|
179
|
||||||
Stock-based compensation and accrued payroll
|
1,260
|
1,041
|
||||||
Valuation Allowance
|
(15,083
|
)
|
(13,954
|
)
|
||||
Total deferred tax assets
|
-
|
761
|
||||||
Net deferred tax asset (liability)
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||
2017
|
2016
|
2015
|
|||||||||||||
Computed tax benefit at federal statutory rate
|
34 |
%
|
|
34 |
%
|
|
34 |
%
|
|
||||||
Re-rate of federal net deferred tax assets
|
(35 |
)%
|
|
0 |
%
|
|
0 |
%
|
|
||||||
Permanent differences
|
(8 |
)%
|
|
(1 |
)%
|
|
(9 |
)%
|
|
||||||
State tax benefit
|
3 |
%
|
|
2 |
%
|
|
15 |
%
|
|
||||||
Research and development credits
|
1 |
%
|
|
2 |
%
|
|
2 |
%
|
|
||||||
Other
|
0 |
%
|
|
7 |
%
|
|
3 |
%
|
|
||||||
Adjust basis for available-for-sale-securities | 11 | % | 0 | % | 0 | % | |||||||||
Change in valuation allowance
|
(6 |
)%
|
|
(44 |
)%
|
|
(45 |
)%
|
|
||||||
- |
%
|
|
- |
%
|
|
- |
%
|
|
Year Ending
December 31,
|
Capital Lease
Payments
|
||||
2018
|
$
|
383
|
|||
2019
|
248
|
||||
2020
|
59
|
||||
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
690
|
|||
Less amounts representing interest
|
(63
|
)
|
|||
Present value of net minimum lease payments
|
$
|
627
|
· |
Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;
|
· |
Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and
|
· |
Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
|
(a-1) |
Financial Statements.
|
Exhibit
Numbers
|
Exhibit Description
|
|
Articles of Incorporation with all amendments
(1)
|
||
By-Laws, as amended
(1)
|
||
Specimen of Common Stock Certificate
(1)
|
||
Form of August 2016 Warrant
(5)
|
||
Form of 2017 Warrant, Exercise Price $3.25
(7)
|
||
Form of 2017 Warrant, Exercise Price $5.50
(7)
|
||
Silicon Valley Bank Warrant
(7)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant, Exercise Price $5.50; five-year term
(10)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant, Exercise Price $3.25, five-year term
(10)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant, Exercise Price $3.25, two-year term
(10)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant, Exercise Price $5.50, two-year term
(10)
|
||
Shared Facilities Agreement, dated October 8, 2009 between OncoCyte Corporation and BioTime, Inc.
(1)
|
||
Form of Director/Consultant Option Agreement
|
||
Form of Employee Incentive Stock Option Agreement
(1)
|
||
Employment Agreement, dated June 15, 2015, between OncoCyte Corporation and William Annett
(1)
|
||
Employment Agreement, dated August 1, 2015, between OncoCyte Corporation and Kristine Mechem
(1)
|
||
Registration Rights Agreement dated October 15, 2009
(1)
|
||
Amendment of Registration Rights Agreement, dated August 23, 2011
(1)
|
||
Second Amendment of Registration Rights Agreement, dated May 8, 2015
(1)
|
Third Amendment to Registration Rights Agreement, dated November 16, 2015
(2)
|
||
License Agreement, dated January 22, 2016, between OncoCyte Corporation and The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology (Portions of this exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment)
(3)
|
||
First Amendment to License Agreement, dated January 25, 2016, between OncoCyte Corporation and The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
(3)
|
||
Second Amendment to License Agreement, dated January 25, 2016, between OncoCyte Corporation and The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
(4)
|
||
Form of OncoCyte Corporation Securities Purchase Agreement
(5)
|
||
Alternate Form of OncoCyte Corporation Securities Purchase Agreement
(5)
|
||
Employment Agreement, dated November 1, 2016, between OncoCyte Corporation and Lyndal Hesterberg
(7)
|
||
Form of Warrant Exercise Agreement
(6)
|
||
Form of Alternate Warrant Exercise Agreement
(6)
|
||
Loan and Security Agreement, dated February 21, 2017, between OncoCyte Corporation and Silicon Valley Bank
(7)
|
||
Employment Termination and Release Agreement, dated February 27, 2017, between OncoCyte Corporation and Karen Chapman
(8)
|
||
2017 Amendment to 2010 Stock Option Plan
(9)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant Exercise Agreement (July 2017 Warrant for 100% of shares received on exercise of Original Warrant, at $5.50 exercise price with five-year term)
(10)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant Exercise Agreement (July 2017 Warrant for 50% of shares received on exercise of Original Warrant, at $3.25 exercise price with five-year term)
(10)
|
||
Form of July 2017 Warrant Exercise Agreement (July 2017 Warrant for 50% of shares received on exercise of Original Warrant, at $3.25 exercise price with two-year term, and July 2017 Warrant for 50% of shares received on exercise of Original Warrant, at $5.50 exercise price with two-year term)
(10)
|
||
10.24 |
Employment Agreement, dated November 15, 2017, between OncoCyte Corporation and Mitchell Levine*
|
|
10.25 |
Employment Agreement, dated August 31, 2017, between OncoCyte Corporation and Michael Vicari*
|
|
Consent of OUM & Co. LLP*
|
||
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
*
|
||
Section 1350 Certification *
|
||
101
|
Interactive Data Files
|
|
101.INS
|
XBRL Instance Document*
|
|
101.SCH
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema*
|
101.CAL
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase*
|
|
101.DEF
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Document*
|
|
101.LAB
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase*
|
|
101.PRE
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase*
|
(1) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Form 10 12(b) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 23, 2015.
|
(2) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Form 10 12(b) A-1 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 29, 2015.
|
(3) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2016.
|
(4) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2016.
|
(5) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 29, 2016.
|
(6) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 24, 2017.
|
(7) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 27, 2017.
|
(8) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 28, 2017.
|
(9) |
Incorporated by reference to Registration Statement on Form S-8, File Number 333-219109 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 30, 2017.
|
(10) |
Incorporated by reference to OncoCyte Corporation's Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 26, 2017.
|
* |
Filed herewith.
|
ONCOCYTE CORPORATION
|
|||
By:
|
/s/
William Annett
|
||
William Annett
|
|||
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
||
/s/
William Annett
|
President and Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
WILLIAM ANNETT
|
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|||
/s/
Mitchell Levine
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
MITCHELL LEVINE
|
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|||
/s/
Andrew Arno
|
Director
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
ANDREW ARNO
|
||||
/s/
Alfred D. Kingsley
|
Director
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
ALFRED D. KINGSLEY
|
||||
/s/
Andrew Last
|
Director
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
ANDREW LAST
|
||||
/s/
Aditya Mohanty
|
Director
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
ADITYA MOHANTY
|
||||
/s/
Cavan Redmond
|
Director
|
April 2, 2018
|
||
CAVAN REDMOND
|
EMPLOYEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mitch Levine | ||
Signature
|
|
|
Mitch Levine
|
||
(Please Print Name) |
OncoCyte Corporation
|
||
|
||
By:
|
/s/ William Annett | |
William Annett
|
||
Title:
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
•
|
Reports to Chief Executive Officer ("CEO")
|
• |
Description of Job Duties:
As the senior financial executive in the Company, the incumbent will provide technical expertise, business strategy and leadership in key financial areas, including advising the Board of Directors, and actively participating in the planning, decision- making and execution of the Company's strategic plans. This individual will have responsibility for compliance with all reporting obligations of a public corporation, and will help the Company maintain the highest level of ethics, profitability, financial strength and operating efficiency. He will also possess business leadership expertise along with the demonstrated ability to manage and lead a team and optimize the financial organization. Additional representative responsibilities will include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
|
• |
Provide overall leadership, financial strategy and proactive direction to the Company's financial organization, and recruit and develop financial talent as required.
|
• |
Provide advice and counsel on all financial matters to the Chief Executive Officer and the Board of Directors.
|
• |
Contribute to the strategic direction of the Company and collaborate with other senior management and the Board of Directors to refine and implement the Company's strategic plan.
|
• |
In collaboration with the Chief Executive Officer be responsible for ensuring that the Company has adequate capital to execute its strategic and business plans, creating financing plans, and executing equity and debt transactions as approved by the Board of Directors.
|
• |
Work closely with Senior Management to assess and execute potential partnering opportunities and collaborations.
|
• |
Ensure an effective investor relations function and, with the Chief Executive Officer serve as a primary point of contact with institutional investors, analysts and shareholders.
|
• |
Participate actively in Board of Directors and Audit Committee meetings; provide advice and counsel on matters pertaining to governance and corporate compliance.
|
• |
Manage key relationships and serve as the Company's principal contact with external auditors and tax advisors.
|
• |
Ensure the Finance Department maintains a high level of performance, productivity and integrity.
|
EMPLOYEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Michael Vicari
|
|
|
Signature, Michael Vicari |
ONCOCYTE:
|
|
|
|
OncoCyte C01·por
|
|
By: | /s/ William Annett | ||
Signature, William Annett | |||
Title: | C hi ef Executive Officer |
• |
Inspire the US Sales organization to meet and exceed defined sales and revenue targets and other business objectives when selling a suite of breakthrough products that fulfill significant unmet clinical needs, to maximize the huge commercial potential for OncoCyte products in the US market.
|
• |
Manage resources for and provide leadership and development of the US Sales organization that encompasses Physician Sales, Sales Management, Sales Operations, and Sales Training.
|
• |
Lead and coach the sales management team, drive change management when needed, and be a visible example of leadership through presence, influence, and negotiation.
|
• |
Partner with sales management, human resources, and other cross functional partners to recruit, train, and develop the US sales organization, implementing retention and succession plans to maximize and sustain effectiveness as the company grows.
|
• |
Lead all sales business planning efforts, including development of field sales strategies, setting of sales objectives by territory with input from Marketing, sales reporting and business opportunity identification, and alignment with marketing plans and tactics.
|
• |
Provide leadership, guidance, and direction to sales management regarding sales strategy, call planning/frequency, sales productivity, POA execution, etc.
|
• |
Build and foster strategic partnerships with key customers and KOLs to maintain effective local, regional, and national relationships that can be leveraged as the company grows.
|
• |
Oversee all sales meetings and associated operations for national meetings and sales training, coordinating with marketing and other key cross functional partners on planning and content.
|
• |
Collaborate with Marketing and Market Access teams to develop strategic business plans and tactics for near and long-term planning cycles as the company grows.
|
• |
Regularly monitor, track, and report sales performance/progress including use of budget and resources across all US sales regions and territories.
|
•
|
Be a key part of, and contributor to, the senior management team at OncoCyte.
|
•
|
Comply with laws, regulations and policies that govern our commercial activities.
|
/s/
William Annett
|
|
William Annett
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
/s/
Mitchell Levine
|
|
Mitchell Levine
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
/s/
William Annett
|
||
William Annett
|
||
Chief Executive Officer
|
||
/s/
Mitchell Levine
|
||
Mitchell Levine
|
||
Chief Financial Officer
|