Item 1. Business.

Background

Kintara Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly DelMar Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) is a clinical stage, biopharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of new cancer therapies.

On June 10, 2020, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization (the “Merger Agreement”), dated as of June 9, 2020, by and among Adgero Acquisition Corp., our wholly-owned subsidiary incorporated in the State of Delaware (“Merger Sub”), and Adgero Biopharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Adgero”). On August 19, 2020, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub merged with and into Adgero (the “Merger”), the separate corporate existence of Merger Sub ceased and Adgero continued its existence under Delaware law as the surviving corporation in the Merger and became our direct, wholly-owned subsidiary. As a result of the Merger, each issued and outstanding share of Adgero common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Adgero Common Stock”) (other than treasury shares held by Adgero), was converted automatically into the right to receive 1.5740 shares (the “Exchange Ratio”) of our common stock, and cash in lieu of any fractional shares. Also, each outstanding warrant to purchase Adgero Common Stock was converted into a warrant exercisable for that number of shares of our common stock equal to the product of (x) the aggregate number of shares of Adgero Common Stock for which such warrant was exercisable and (y) the Exchange Ratio.

Following the completion of the Merger, we changed our name from DelMar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to Kintara Therapeutics, Inc. and began trading on Nasdaq under the symbol “KTRA”. Unless the context provides otherwise, the “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our” refers to Kintara and its consolidated subsidiaries, including Adgero.

We are dedicated to the development of novel cancer therapies for patients with unmet medical needs.  Our mission is to benefit patients by developing and commercializing anti-cancer therapies for patients whose solid tumors exhibit features that make them resistant to, or unlikely to respond to, currently available therapies, with particular focus on orphan cancer indications.  

Our two lead candidates are VAL-083, a novel, validated, DNA-targeting agent, for the treatment of drug-resistant solid tumors such as glioblastoma multiforme (“GBM”) and potentially other solid tumors, including ovarian cancer, non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”), and diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (“DIPG”) and REM-001, a late-stage photodynamic therapy (“PDT”) for the treatment of cutaneous metastatic breast cancer (“CMBC”). PDT is a treatment that uses light sensitive compounds, or photosensitizers, that, when exposed to specific wavelengths of light, act as a catalyst to produce a form of oxygen that induces local tumor cell death.  

Recent Highlights

2

Private Placement of Series C Preferred Stock

In conjunction with the closing of the Merger, and through a series of three private placement closings, we issued a total of 25,028 shares of Series C Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series C Stock”) at a purchase price of $1,000 per share for total aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $25 million, or net proceeds of approximately $21.7 million.  Each closing of the private placement was priced at-the-market under the rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market. 

The Series C Stock was issued in three series (C-1, C-2, and C-3) at conversion prices equal to $1.16, $1.214 and $1.15, respectively.   As result, we issued a total of 25,028 shares of Series C Stock, which will be convertible into an aggregate of 21,516,484 shares of common stock.  The Series C Stock will be entitled to receive dividends, payable in shares of common stock at a rate of 10%, 15%, 20% and 25% of the number of shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Series C Stock, on the 12^th, 24^th, 36^th and 48^th month, anniversary of the initial closing of the private placement which occurred on August 19, 2020; provided, that the holder of such shares has not converted the shares of Series C Stock prior to the applicable dividend rate.

In connection with the private placement, we entered into a Placement Agency Agreement (the “Placement Agency Agreement”), with Aegis Capital Corp., which acted as our exclusive placement agent (the “Placement Agent”) for the private placement. Pursuant to the terms of the Placement Agency Agreement, in connection with the three closings of the private placement, we paid the Placement Agent an aggregate cash fee of $2,502,800, a non-accountable expense allowance of $650,840 and issued to the Placement Agent, or its designees, warrants to purchase 2,504 shares of Series C Stock (the “Placement Agent Warrants”). The Placement Agent Warrants have an exercise price of $1,000 per share, provide for a cashless exercise feature and are exercisable for a period of four years from the date of the initial closing of the private placement. The Series C Stock issuable upon exercise of the Placement Agent Warrants will be convertible into shares of common stock and will be entitled to the same dividend rights as the outstanding Series C Stock. In addition, and as compensation for advisory services rendered in connection with the Merger, we issued 571,951 shares of common stock to the Placement Agent.

Targeted Clinical Milestones

(calendar quarters)

Below are our planned, or expected, milestones for the respective time periods noted:

Q4 2020

Q1 2021

Q2 2021

Q4 2021

3

H1 2022

Product Pipeline

VAL-083

Background

VAL-083 is a first-in-class, small-molecule, DNA-targeting chemotherapeutic that has demonstrated activity against a range of tumor types in prior Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical studies sponsored by the US National Cancer Institute (“NCI”). As part of our business strategy, we leverage and build upon these prior NCI investments and data from more than 40 NCI- Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical studies, which includes an estimated 1,100 patient safety database. We assess the NCI results and our own research to identify and target unmet medical needs in modern cancer care. DNA-targeting agents are among the most successful and widely used treatments for cancer. Their efficacy is based on the ability to bind with a cancer cell’s DNA and interfere with the process of protein production required for growth and survival of cancer cells. “First-in-class” means that VAL-083 embodies a unique molecular structure which is not an analogue or derivative of any approved product, or product under development, for the treatment of cancer.

Prior studies of VAL-083 have shown increased median overall survival benefits versus radiation alone validating the tumor affecting properties of VAL-083. Our recent research has highlighted the opportunities afforded by VAL-083’s unique mechanism of action and its potential to address unmet medical needs in a well-defined and acknowledged biomarker selected population within the larger GBM population. We are thus focusing our initial development efforts on patients whose tumors exhibit biological features that make them resistant to, or unlikely to respond to, currently available therapies as identified by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (“NCCN”). For example, our research demonstrating VAL-083’s activity in GBM independent of the O6-methyl guanine methyltransferase (“MGMT”) methylation status allows us to focus patient selection based on this important biomarker and thus improve the probability of success in our current and future clinical studies.

4

We are currently conducting two open-label, biomarker driven Phase 2 studies in MGMT-unmethylated GBM. MGMT is a DNA-repair enzyme that is associated with resistance to temozolomide (“TMZ”), the current standard-of-care chemotherapy used in the treatment of GBM. Greater than 60% of GBM patients have MGMT-unmethylated tumors and exhibit a high expression of MGMT, which is correlated with TMZ treatment failure and poor patient outcomes as indicated in the NCCN guidelines for GBM treatment published in September 2017. Our research to-date demonstrates that VAL-083’s anti-tumor activity is independent of MGMT expression. In our current Phase 2 studies we are using MGMT as a biomarker to identify patients for treatment with VAL-083 in three distinct GBM patient populations:

On June 4, 2020, we accepted an invitation from the Global Coalition for Adaptive Research (“GCAR”) to include VAL-083 in GCAR’s Glioblastoma Adaptive Global Innovative Learning Environment (“GBM AGILE”) Study, an adaptive clinical study platform for patients with GBM. We plan to utilize the GBM AGILE study to serve as the basis for VAL-083’s new drug application submission and registration.

GBM AGILE is an international effort to develop potential therapies for newly-diagnosed and recurrent GBM utilizing an FDA approved master protocol with multiple drugs from multiple sponsors tested simultaneously and over time against a common control arm with a primary endpoint of overall survival. We intend to use results from the VAL-083 arm of the GBM AGILE study to file for FDA approval, assuming results support such a filing. GBM AGILE is a Phase II/Phase III study which employs a cost-efficient, adaptive study design with a Stage 1 learning and adapting phase and a Stage 2 expansion and confirmation phase. GBM AGILE will consist of up to a maximum 200 patients stratified by three subtypes: newly-diagnosed methylated, newly-diagnosed unmethylated, and recurrent. The effort is led by key opinion leaders in the GBM field and has the collective support of an international group of more than 130 clinicians, researchers, biostatisticians, imagers, pathologists, leaders from government and industry, and patient advocates.

GCAR is a 501(c)(3) organization that functions as GBM AGILE study sponsor, and provides financial support for the program infrastructure, as well as general study oversight. Comprising leading clinical, translational, and basic science investigators, GCAR strives to support the development of novel treatments to fight against rare and deadly diseases like GBM where patient prognosis is poor and treatment options are limited. Other key strategic partners for the GBM AGILE study effort include the National Brain Tumor Society, National Foundation for Cancer Research, and Asian Fund for Cancer Research. These nonprofit organizations are working together to provide philanthropic support as well as assistance in communicating with patients and families and inviting all others to join in supporting this innovative approach to brain tumor treatment development.

We have also undertaken research in ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cancer in women and is the leading cause of death among women diagnosed with gynecological malignancies. We are in the process of evaluating the best path forward in ovarian cancer including the potential combination of VAL-083 with PARP inhibitors. The FDA granted orphan drug designation for the use of VAL-083 in the treatment of ovarian cancer in 2016.

In addition to our clinical development activities in the United States, pursuant to our collaboration with Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical (Group) Co. Ltd. (“Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company”), we have provided Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company certain commercial rights to VAL-083 in China where it is approved as a chemotherapy for the treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (“CML”) and lung cancer. Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company is the only manufacturer presently licensed by the China Food and Drug Administration (“CFDA”) to produce the product for the China market.

We have a broad patent portfolio to protect our intellectual property. Our patent applications claim composition of matter and methods of use of VAL-083 and related compounds, synthetic methods, and quality controls for the manufacturing process of VAL-083. We believe that our portfolio of intellectual property rights provides a defensible market position for the commercialization of VAL-083. In addition, VAL-083 has been designated by the FDA as an orphan drug under the Orphan Drug Act and the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) for the treatment of gliomas, including GBM. The FDA has also granted Orphan Drug description to VAL-083 for the treatment of medulloblastoma and ovarian cancer.

5

Our corporate development strategy is to advance VAL-083 on an indication-by-indication basis, and then to consider out-licensing when it has matured enough to warrant proper licensing valuations. In addition to VAL-083’s applicability to multiple solid tumor indications, we are also constantly evaluating licensing, or acquiring additional product candidates, in order to establish a product pipeline and to position us for long-term sustainability and growth of shareholder value. We believe the experience of our clinical development team will position us to efficiently develop possible drug candidates that we may acquire, or license, in the future.

We intend to continue to evaluate options for our strategic direction. These options may include raising additional capital, the acquisition of another company and/or complementary assets, our sale, or another type of strategic partnership.

MGMT-unmethylated GBM

GBM is the most common and the most lethal form of glioma. According to the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, GBM occurs with an incidence of 3.20 per 100,000 person-years. Approximately 13,000 new cases of GBM were diagnosed in the United States and 16,000 in Europe during 2017. Within the GBM patient population, approximately two-thirds of patients are unmethylated with respect to their MGMT status.

Measurement of MGMT (O6-methyl guanine methyltransferase) methylation status has become routine in clinical practice as a biomarker that correlates with resistance to the standard-of-care chemotherapy with TMZ (Temodar^®), and patient outcomes in GBM. Approximately two-thirds of GBM patients’ tumors are characterized as “MGMT-unmethylated” and exhibit a high expression of MGMT, a naturally occurring DNA-repair enzyme, the activity of which nullifies the chemotherapeutic activity of TMZ. The lack of specific therapies for MGMT-unmethylated GBM is a significant unmet medical need. Importantly, the 2017 update to the NCCN guidelines states that the treatment benefit of TMZ is likely to be lower in GBM patients with an unmethylated MGMT promoter.

We have demonstrated that VAL-083’s anti-tumor mechanism is active independent from the MGMT status in vitro. We believe this suggests the potential of VAL-083 as a replacement for the current standard-of-care chemotherapy, temozolomide, in MGMT-unmethylated GBM. We are therefore utilizing MGMT-methylation status to identify GBM patients who are unlikely to respond to temozolomide and including only MGMT-unmethylated patients in our current clinical studies of VAL-083.

We believe that our research, in the context of the 2017 update to the NCCN guidelines, highlights this unmet need and the opportunity for VAL-083 as a potential new standard-of-care in the treatment of MGMT-unmethylated GBM.

VAL-083 Clinical Studies

Phase 2 Study in Newly-Diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated GBM

In September 2017, we initiated a single arm, biomarker driven, open-label Phase 2 study in newly-diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated GBM patients at SYSUCC in Guangzhou, China. The study is being conducted under our collaboration agreement with Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company.

In this Phase 2 study, VAL-083 is being combined with radiotherapy as a potential replacement for standard-of-care chemoradiation with temozolomide in patients with MGMT-unmethylated GBM. The goals of the study are to confirm the safety of the three-day VAL-083 dosing regimen in combination with radiotherapy and to investigate efficacy outcomes of the combination of VAL-083 and radiotherapy in MGMT-unmethylated GBM patients.

We have completed enrollment of this study with a total of 29 newly-diagnosed, MGMT-unmethylated GBM patients. The efficacy endpoints of the study include tumor response, as assessed by the Response Assessment in NeuroOncology (“RANO”), and progression-free survival (“PFS”), progression-free survival at six months (“PFS6”), and overall survival (“OS”), compared to historical results in the target population. The study is being conducted in two parts: (1) Dose-confirmation: VAL-083 in cohorts (20, 30 and 40 mg/m²/day IV daily x 3 every 21 days) to assess safety and activity when administered concurrently with x-ray therapy (“XRT”) to confirm the maximum tolerated dose (“MTD”), and (2) Expansion: VAL-083 will be studied in up to 20 additional patients at the target dose, as determined by the dose-confirmation part of the study, administered concurrently with XRT. Assessments of safety and tolerability will be used to support further clinical development of VAL-083 in combination with radiotherapy. Pharmacokinetic assessments of VAL-083 in plasma and cerebral spinal fluid (“CSF”) will be used to correlate drug exposure in the central nervous system with patient outcomes.

Dose-confirming cohorts studying 20, 30, and 40 mg/m²/day x three every 21 days have been completed. Based on the dose confirmation phase of the study, we have selected 30 mg/m²/day for combination with irradiation for the treatment of newly-diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated GBM patients. This study is fully enrolled at 29 patients.

6

On June 22, 2020 at the AACR’s Virtual Annual Meeting II, we provided an update on patient data as follows:

While this is not a head-to-head study, historically, temozolomide (“TMZ”) has been demonstrated to have 6.9 months PFS in unmethylated GBM patients. Other doses were also examined as part of the dose escalation aspect of the study, and all but the 20 mg/m²/day dose also demonstrated superior PFS to the historical comparator. A median of eight cycles of treatment has been received by all patients who had either completed treatment, or remain in active treatment. Nine patients have received ten or more cycles.

Through our research, and that of the NCI, we have previously demonstrated that VAL-083 crosses the blood brain barrier. Preliminary data from the SYSUCC study indicate that the concentration of VAL-083 is generally as high in CSF as in plasma at two hours post-infusion.

By comparison, temozolomide is typically 80% lower in the CSF than the plasma (Schreck et al. 2018, Oncology (Williston Park)). The accumulation of VAL-083 in the CSF further validates that VAL-083 crosses the blood-brain-barrier and demonstrates that therapeutic drug concentrations in the CSF are achievable for extended periods of time.

Phase 2 Study in MGMT-unmethylated GBM in Collaboration with University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

In February 2017, we initiated a biomarker driven, open-label, single-arm Phase 2 study in collaboration with MDACC. This biomarker-driven study (testing for MGMT methylation status) has been amended to enroll up to 83 patients (35 with a starting dose of 40 mg/m²/day and 48 with a starting dose of 30 mg/m²/day) to determine the potential of VAL-083 treatment to improve overall survival in GBM patients whose tumors have recurred following treatment with temozolomide. These patients will not have been treated previously with Avastin^®. In addition, this study has been amended to add a new adjuvant patient arm. This arm will include up to 36 patients previously treated with TMZ in combination with radiation who, rather than being treated with additional cycles of TMZ, will begin treatment with VAL-083.

Recurrent Study Arm 

The patients in the recurrent study arm are receiving second-line therapy with VAL-083 following TMZ failure. As of May 28, 2020, 72 patients (out of a planned 83) have been enrolled in the recurrent arm of this study.

On June 22, 2020 at the AACR’s Virtual Annual Meeting II, we provided an update on patient data as follows:

The safety profile in this study has been well within the existing safety monitoring guidelines described in the study protocol. However, in consultation with the principal investigator at MDACC, we have amended the protocol for this clinical study to modify the starting dose of VAL-083 to 30 mg/m²/day on days 1, 2 and 3, of a 21-day cycle. This modification may improve tolerance in this patient population and thereby potentially increase overall exposure to VAL-083 by increasing the number of cycles of drug patients may be able to receive. We have modified the patient screening platelet count, from 100,000/µL to 125,000/µL, for the same reasons. Safety data from this study will become part of the overall safety dossier to support future filings with the FDA and other regulatory agencies.

7

It is important for this GBM patient population, which has been heavily pre-treated with temozolomide, to be able to be treated with multiple cycles of VAL-083 without significant hematological toxicities. We believe the modified dose of VAL-083, in addition to the change in patient eligibility platelet counts, should help provide for enhanced patient safety. We believe a positive outcome from this study will help support approval of VAL-083 for the treatment of MGMT-unmethylated recurrent GBM.

A detailed description of this study can be found at clinicatrials.gov, Identifier Number: NCT02717962.

Adjuvant Study Arm

On July 24, 2019, we announced the enrollment of the first patient in the adjuvant arm of the Phase 2 study being conducted at MDACC. The adjuvant arm was originally planned for 24 patients, but based on encouraging outcomes, we plan to increase the adjuvant arm enrollment from the originally planned 24 patients to include up to 12 additional patients. These patients will have had initial cycles of temozolomide concomitant with radiation but will not have yet started subsequent cycles of TMZ (i.e., maintenance stage TMZ patients). Published data from Tanguturi et al (2017 Nero-Oncology) indicates that MGMT-unmethylated patients receiving current standard of care have a median progression-free survival of 6.9 months.

On June 22, 2020 at the AACR’s Virtual Annual Meeting II, we provided an update on patient data as follows:

As noted above, patients in the recurrent arm of the MDACC clinical study have been heavily pre-treated with temozolomide. Based on published data from our MDACC and SYSUCC clinical studies, we believe there is a significant opportunity to treat GBM patients in the pre-temozolomide maintenance stage (i.e., adjuvant). At the AACR’s annual meeting in April 2019, we reported that myelosuppression (thrombocytopenia and neutropenia) is the most common adverse event associated with VAL-083.

Safety Across Studies

Three subjects have experienced a serious adverse event (“SAE”), possibly related to VAL-083 in the newly-diagnosed study as of May 15, 2020, while as of May 28, 2020, 10 subjects have experienced a possibly drug-related SAE in the recurrent arm of the Phase 2 Study in MGMT-unmethylated GBM, and one patient has experienced a possibly drug-related SAE in the adjuvant arm of that study.

VAL-083 Fast Track Designation

The FDA has granted us Fast Track designation for VAL-083 in recurrent GBM.

Fast Track designation is designed to expedite the review of drugs that show promise in treating life-threatening diseases and address unmet medical needs, with the goal of getting new treatments to patients earlier. Fast Track designation provides sponsors with an opportunity for increased frequency for communication with the FDA to ensure an optimal development plan and to collect appropriate data needed to support drug approval. Additional benefits of the Fast Track designation may include an Accelerated Approval, a Priority Review, and a Rolling Review. Accelerated Approval is granted to drugs that demonstrate an effect on a surrogate, or intermediate endpoints, reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Priority Review shortens the FDA review process for a new drug from ten months to six months and is appropriate for drugs that demonstrate significant improvements in both safety and efficacy of an existing therapy. Rolling Review provides a drug company the opportunity to submit completed sections of its New Drug Application (“NDA”) for review by the FDA. Typically, NDA reviews do not commence until the drug company has submitted the entire application to the FDA. Through the Fast Track designation, the FDA attempts to ensure that questions raised during the drug development process are resolved quickly, often leading to earlier approval and increased access for patients.

Current Treatments for Gliomas and Glioblastoma Multiforme

Gliomas are a type of Central Nervous System (“CNS”) tumor that arises from glial cells in the brain or spine. Glial cells are the cells surrounding nerves. Their primary function is to provide support and protection for neurons in the CNS.

GBM is the most common and the most lethal form of glioma. According to the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, GBM occurs with an incidence of 3.20 per 100,000 person-years. Approximately 13,000 new cases of GBM were diagnosed in the United States and 16,000 in Europe during 2017.

8

Common symptoms of GBM include headaches, seizures, nausea, weakness, paralysis and personality or cognitive changes such as loss of speech or difficulty in thinking clearly. GBM progresses quickly and patients’ conditions deteriorate rapidly progressing to death. The outlook for GBM patients is generally poor. The overall median survival in newly diagnosed GBM patients with best available treatments is less than 15 months, and two-year and five-year survival rates are approximately 30% and 10%, respectively. Median overall survival in newly-diagnosed, unmethylated GBM patients is 12.2 months.

In September 2017, the NCCN updated treatment guidelines for GBM. The recommended treatment regimen for GBM includes surgical resection to remove as much of the tumor as possible (“debulking”) followed by radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide with or without tumor treating fields (“TTF”). GBM patients whose tumors exhibit an unmethylated promoter for the gene encoding the DNA repair enzyme MGMT, a biomarker correlated with resistance to temozolomide, may be treated with radiation alone following surgery.

Patients with an unmethylated MGMT promoter have high levels of MGMT, a naturally-occurring DNA repair enzyme that repairs tumor-fighting lesions induced by TMZ thus allowing a patient’s tumor to continue to grow despite treatment, which leads to poor outcomes. Measurement of MGMT methylation status has become routine in clinical practice as biomarker that correlates with response to TMZ and patient outcomes in GBM.

Probability of GBM Patient Survival Correlated to Expression of MGMT Enzyme (Unmethylated promoter = High MGMT Expression and Significantly Shorter Survival)

TTF (Optune^®) is a non-invasive technique for adults with GBM. TTF uses alternating electrical fields to disrupt tumor cell division, or cause cell death, thereby preventing the tumor from growing or spreading as quickly. A clinical study reported that GBM patients treated with TTF combined with TMZ experienced longer survival than those treated with TMZ alone.

The majority of GBM patients’ tumors recur within 6 – 12 months of initial treatment. Experimental therapy through clinical studies is recommended under NCCN guidelines for eligible patients. NCCN guidelines also recommend treatment with systemic chemotherapy, such as lomustine (“CCNU”). For patients who are eligible for additional surgical debulking, local chemotherapy with carmustine (“BCNU”) wafers may be employed. CCNU and BCNU target the same DNA-site as TMZ and are also subject to MGMT-related resistance.

Avastin (Avastin^®, an anti-VEGF antibody) recently received full approval in the US, Canada, Australia, and Japan as a single agent for patients with recurrent GBM following prior therapy. Avastin carries an FDA “black-box warning” related to severe, sometimes fatal, side effects such as gastrointestinal perforations, wound healing complications and hemorrhage. There are no data demonstrating an improvement in disease-related symptoms or increased survival for GBM patients treated with Avastin.

Recurrent GBM patients, especially those whose tumors progress following treatment with Avastin, have limited or no treatment options and a very poor prognosis. According to published literature, the median survival for GBM patients whose tumors progress following Avastin is less than five months.

9

VAL-083 Mechanism of Action

Chemotherapy forms the basis of treatment in nearly all cancers. We believe that VAL-083 may be effective in treating tumors exhibiting biological features that cause resistance to currently available chemotherapy, particularly for patients who have failed, or become resistant to, other treatment regimens.

Based on published research and our own data, the cytotoxic functional groups, and the mechanism of action of VAL-083 are functionally different from alkylating agents commonly used in the treatment of cancer. VAL-083 has previously demonstrated activity in cell-lines that are resistant to other types of chemotherapy. No evidence of cross-resistance has been reported in published clinical studies.

Our research suggests that VAL-083 attacks cancer cells via a unique mechanism of action which is distinct from other chemotherapies used in the treatment of cancer. Our data indicate that VAL-083 forms inter-strand crosslinks at the N⁷ position of guanine on the DNA of cancer cells. Our data also indicate that this crosslink forms rapidly and is not easily repaired by the cancer cell, resulting in cell-cycle arrest and lethal double-strand DNA breaks in cancer cells. VAL-083 readily crosses the blood brain barrier. Published preclinical and clinical research demonstrate that VAL-083 is absorbed more readily in tumor cells than in normal cells.

In vitro, our data also demonstrate that VAL-083’s distinct mechanism may be able to overcome drug resistance against a range of cancers. For example, VAL-083 is active against MGMT-unmethylated GBM cells which are resistant to treatment with temozolomide and nitrosoureas. VAL-083 also retains a high level of activity in p53 mutated non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”), ovarian cancer and medulloblastoma cell lines that are resistant to platinum-based chemotherapy.

Importantly, clinical activity against each of the tumors mentioned above was established in prior NCI-sponsored Phase 2 clinical studies. We believe that these historical clinical data and our own research support the development of VAL-083 as a potential new treatment for multiple types of cancer.

The main dose-limiting toxicity (“DLT”) related to the administration of VAL-083 in previous NCI-sponsored clinical studies and our own clinical studies is myelosuppression, particularly thrombocytopenia. Myelosuppression, including thrombocytopenia, is a common side effect of chemotherapy. Myelosuppression is the decrease in cells responsible for providing immunity, carrying oxygen, and causing normal blood clotting. Thrombocytopenia is a reduction in platelet counts which assist in blood clotting. Modern medicine allows for better management of myelosuppressive side effects. We believe this offers the potential opportunity to improve upon the drug’s already established efficacy profile by substantially increasing the dose of VAL-083 that can be safely administered to cancer patients.

There is no evidence of lung, liver, or kidney toxicity even with prolonged treatment by VAL-083. Data from the Chinese market where the drug has been approved for more than 15 years supports the safety findings of the NCI studies.

10

VAL-083 is Active Independent of MGMT

We have presented data at several peer reviewed meetings demonstrating that VAL-083 is active independent of MGMT resistance in GBM cell lines and other CNS tumor cells. Our research, along with that of others, demonstrates that VAL-083’s unique cytotoxic mechanism forms DNA cross-links at the N ⁷position of guanine and retains cytotoxic activity independent of MGMT expression in vitro. Our studies demonstrate that VAL-083 has more potent activity against brain tumor cells in comparison to TMZ and overcomes resistance associated with MGMT, suggesting the potential to surpass the current standard-of-care in the treatment of GBM.

In addition, historical NCI clinical study data and our own research support the activity of VAL-083 as a potentiator of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy in combination with temozolomide is the current standard of care in the treatment of newly diagnosed GBM. Our research demonstrates that temozolomide and radiotherapy are ineffective against GBM cells exhibiting a high expression of MGMT, whereas VAL-083 potentiates the tumor-killing effect of radiation independent of MGMT expression. Furthermore, the combination of VAL-083 and radiation has been demonstrated to be active against GBM cancer stem cells (“CSCs”) in vitro. CSCs are often resistant to chemotherapy and form the basis for tumor recurrence and metastasis. GBM CSCs display strong resistance to TMZ, even where MGMT expression is low. However, our data demonstrates that GBM CSCs are susceptible to VAL-083 independent of MGMT expression.

Other Indications for VAL-083—Potential Future Opportunities

VAL-083 in Ovarian Cancer

With the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approval for our investigational new drug application (“IND”) for ovarian cancer, we have future plans for a phase 1/2, open-label, multicenter study of VAL-083 in patients with Recurrent Platinum Resistant Ovarian Cancer (“REPROVe”). Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard-of-care in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Nearly all ovarian cancer patients eventually become resistant to platinum (“Pt”) based chemotherapy leading to treatment failure and poor patient outcomes. We have demonstrated that VAL-083 is active against Pt-resistant ovarian cancer in vitro. However, based on ongoing evaluation and input from our ovarian cancer advisory board, we are reassessing the development of VAL-083 for the treatment of ovarian cancer. We are in the process of evaluating the best path forward in ovarian cancer and are evaluating strategic options, including the potential combination of VAL-083 with PARP inhibitors. As a result, we have inactivated the IND while we explore alternative study designs.

VAL-083 in Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer death around the world and effective treatment for lung cancer remains a significant global unmet need despite advances in therapy. Incidence of lung cancer in the United States is approximately 47 per 100,000 with the majority (85%) being NSCLC, the most common type of lung cancer. Globally, the market for lung cancer treatment may exceed $24 billion by 2033 according to a report published by Evaluate Pharma.

11

The activity of VAL-083 against solid tumors, including lung cancer, has been established in both preclinical and human clinical studies conducted by the NCI. We have developed nonclinical data to support the utility of VAL-083 in the modern treatment of lung cancer. In an established murine xenograft model of NSCLC, the activity of VAL-083 was compared to standard platinum-based therapy with cisplatin against human NSCLC cell lines A549 (TKI-sensitive) and H1975 (TKI-resistant). In the study, VAL-083 demonstrated superior efficacy and safety in the treatment of TKI-susceptible (A549) tumors and in TKI-resistant (H1975) tumors.

Central Nervous System Metastases of Solid Tumors

The successful management of systemic tumors by modern targeted therapies has led to increased incidence of mortality due to CNS metastases of lung cancer and other solid tumors. In June 2013, we split our Phase 1/2 clinical study protocol into two separate studies: one focusing solely on refractory GBM and the other focusing on secondary brain cancers caused by other tumors that have spread to the brain.

Based on historical clinical activity and our own research, we believe that VAL-083 may be suitable for the treatment of patients with CNS metastases who currently have limited treatment options. Subject to the availability of financial and operating resources, we plan to develop a separate protocol for the continued exploration of VAL-083 in patients with secondary brain cancer caused by a solid tumor spreading to the brain.

Pediatric Brain Tumors

Tumors of the brain and spine make up approximately 20 percent of all childhood cancers and they are the second most common form of childhood cancer after leukemia.

The activity of VAL-083 against childhood and adolescent brain tumors has been established in both preclinical and human clinical studies conducted by the NCI. We have presented data indicating that VAL-083 offers potential therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of pediatric brain tumors including SHH-p53 mutated medulloblastoma. In March 2016, the FDA granted orphan drug designation for the use of VAL-083 in the treatment of medulloblastoma. Subject to the availability of resources, we intend to collaborate with leading academic researchers for the continued exploration of VAL-083 as a potential treatment of childhood brain tumors.

Additional Indications for VAL-083

In historical studies sponsored by the NCI in the United States, VAL-083 exhibited clinical activity against a range of tumor types including central nervous system tumors, solid tumors, and hematologic malignancies. We have gathered nonclinical data supporting the activity of VAL-083 in different types of cancer that are resistant to modern targeted therapies and we believe that the unique cytotoxic mechanism of VAL-083 may provide benefit to patients in a range of indications. We intend to continue to research these opportunities, and if appropriate, expand our clinical development efforts to include additional indications.  

Source: Evaluate Pharma

DNA-targeting agents such as alkylating agents or platinum-based chemotherapy form the mainstay of chemotherapy treatments used in the treatment of cancers. For example, TMZ had peak annual sales of $1.1 billion in 2010, while bendamustine, had peak annual sales of $0.8 billion in 2014.

We believe VAL-083 is a first-in-class DNA targeting agent with a novel mechanism of action. VAL-083’s anti-cancer activity was established in a range of tumor types in prior NCI-sponsored clinical studies. Based on this novel mechanism, we have demonstrated that the anti-cancer activity is maintained against tumor cells that are resistant to other DNA-targeting agents. We believe this positions VAL-083 as a potential chemotherapy-of-choice for patients whose tumors are resistant to current standard-of-care chemotherapy in orphan and major cancer indications.

12

Our ongoing research and development activities are focused on indications where VAL-083 demonstrated promising activity in prior NCI-sponsored studies and where our research suggests an opportunity to address significant unmet medical needs due to the failure of existing treatments.

Glioblastoma Multiforme

GBM is the most common and the most lethal form of glioma. According to the Central Brain Tumor Registry of The United States, GBM occurs with an incidence of 3.20 per 100,000 person-years. Approximately 13,000 new cases of GBM were diagnosed in the United States and 16,000 in Europe during 2017.

Newly diagnosed patients suffering from GBM are initially treated through invasive brain surgery, although disease progression following surgical resection is nearly 100%. Temozolomide (Temodar^®) in combination with radiation is the front-line therapy for GBM following surgery. Global revenues of branded Temodar reached $1.1 billion in 2010. Approximately 60% of GBM patients treated with Temodar^® experience tumor progression within one year. Median overall survival in newly-diagnosed, unmethylated GBM patients is 12.2 months.

Bevacizumab (Avastin^®) has been approved for the treatment of GBM in patients failing Temodar^®. In clinical studies, approximately 20% of patients failing Temodar^® respond to Avastin^® therapy and no improvement in median survival was reported.

The market for refractory (Avastin-failed) GBM is limited to those jurisdictions where Avastin is approved for the treatment of GBM. The United States, Canada, Australia, Japan and Switzerland represent the major markets where Avastin is used in the treatment of GBM.

Based on a November 2018 report from GlobalData, we believe there is a projected market opportunity for GBM of approximately $800 million, estimated to reach approximately $1.8 billion by 2027.

REM-001

Background

Through REM-001, we are developing our photodynamic therapy (“PDT”) for the treatment of rare, unmet medical needs. PDT is a treatment that uses light sensitive compounds, or photosensitizers, that, when exposed to specific wavelengths of light, act as catalysts to produce a form of oxygen that induces local tumor cell death. REM-001 consists of three parts, the laser light source, the light delivery device, and the REM-001 drug product (collectively, the “REM-001 Therapy”). REM-001 consists of an active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) in a lipid formulation. The REM-001 API is SnET2 (“tin ethyl etiopurpurin”) which is a second-generation PDT photosensitizer agent. We believe REM-001 possesses multiple advantages over earlier generation PDT compounds. Our lead indication for REM-001 is CMBC which is a disease that may strike individuals with advanced breast cancer and for which effective treatment options are limited. In four Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 clinical atudies in CMBC patients, primarily targeting patients who had previously received chemotherapy and failed radiation therapy, REM-001 Therapy was able to reduce or eliminate a substantial number of the treated CMBC tumors. Specifically, our analysis of the data collected from these studies indicates that in approximately 80% of evaluable tumor sites treated with REM-001 Therapy, there was a complete response; meaning that follow-up clinical assessments indicated no visible evidence of the tumor remaining. We believe clinical data indicates that REM-001 Therapy holds promise as a treatment to locally eliminate, or slow the growth of, treated cutaneous cancerous tumors in this difficult-to-treat patient population.

In 2012, Adgero acquired certain assets and regulatory filings, including REM-001 Therapy developed by Miravant Medical Technologies, and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, a former public pharmaceutical and research development company (collectively, “Miravant”), and the associated technology, clinical data and intellectual property, from a creditor of Miravant. Between February 1996 and January 1999, Miravant, with support from certain corporate partners, conducted four Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 clinical studies for the treatment of CMBC using REM-001 Therapy (collectively, the “Miravant CMBC Studies”). The primary motivation behind our acquisition of the technology was to secure the rights to the REM-001 Therapy and its associated technology, proprietary processes and regulatory filings which have already undergone substantial clinical development which we believe will help expedite the process of gaining regulatory approval to market our REM-001 Therapy.

Miravant initiated commercial development of REM-001 and its associated device components in the 1990s. This led to late-stage clinical studies in CMBC and also in an aspect of “wet” age-related macular degeneration (“AMD”) a disease that affects over 1.5 million people in the United States and is a cause of vision loss in older individuals. Of these two indications, AMD represented a much larger market, and in 1998, for what we believe were primarily business reasons, Miravant discontinued its CMBC program and, together with, or through its corporate partners, ultimately focused its REM-001 development efforts on AMD. In 2004, Miravant

13

submitted a new drug application (“NDA”) to the FDA for the use of REM-001 to treat an aspect of AMD. The FDA reviewed this submission and granted Miravant an approvable letter for REM-001 in the treatment of AMD, with final approval contingent on, among other things, the successful completion of a Phase 3 study. Miravant ceased operations in 2006 prior to completing this study.

While Miravant did not pursue the CMBC indication through to approval, it did compile substantial clinical data in the four Miravant CMBC Studies. The first two of these studies were Phase 2/3 studies that treated 68 CMBC patients who, for the most part, previously failed radiation therapy, and were then treated with REM-001 Therapy. Miravant compiled both safety and efficacy data for these two studies. At the time Miravant discontinued its CMBC program, REM-001 Therapy was also being tested in two additional Phase 2 or 3 clinical studies that treated a total of 81 patients. Our review of internal Miravant records indicates that data was collected in all four studies generally in accordance with Good Clinical Practice and the data was analyzed for safety, and reports were filed with the FDA. Our review also indicates that Miravant never conducted an efficacy analysis of the 81 patients in the last two studies which were not yet complete when Miravant discontinued its CMBC program.

Since acquiring the rights to REM-001 Therapy, we have performed a preliminary analysis of the data collected from the 81 patients that Miravant never analyzed for efficacy. Based on our analysis of both that data, and data collected from the initial 68 patients, we believe REM-001 Therapy provided promising safety and efficacy in CMBC patients and that, taken together, these results provide strong support for REM-001 Therapy as a potential therapy for this disease. Furthermore, we believe the approvable letter previously granted to Miravant with respect to its NDA for REM-001 in an aspect of AMD may indicate that many of the elements required for approval have already been completed for REM-001.

Numerous approaches have been utilized to treat CMBC patients, including various forms of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgical excision, hyperthermia, cryotherapy, electro-chemotherapy, topical drugs, and intra-lesional chemotherapy injections. However, for the most part, we believe that these therapies are often inadequate given the limited efficacy, toxicities and/or side effects of each. We believe our REM-001 Therapy has several advantages for this indication: it can be highly directed to the tumor site, has minimal systemic effects or normal tissue toxicities, can be used in conjunction with other therapies, and can be periodically repeated. Our analysis of the data collected from the Miravant CMBC Studies indicates that in approximately 80% of evaluable tumor sites treated with REM-001 Therapy, there was a complete response, meaning that follow-up clinical assessments indicated no visible evidence of the tumor remaining. Based on these results, we believe that REM-001 Therapy also holds promise as a treatment for other cutaneous metastatic cancers and locally advanced basal cell carcinomas.

Our initial product goal is to achieve marketing approval of REM001 Therapy for the treatment of CMBC in the United States. We conducted a preliminary analysis of existing REM001 Therapy clinical study data for CMBC, including data from the Miravant CMBC Studies. We then conducted a more in-depth analysis that was overseen by regulatory experts who have expertise in interacting with the FDA. The consultants we have engaged were either former FDA employees with directly related experience in reviewing similar oncology treatments, or individuals who have provided senior regulatory guidance to major pharmaceutical or medical device companies in situations that led to regulatory approval. The results of this second more in-depth analysis were consistent with our original analysis. As a result of our review, we submitted questions to the FDA under a Type C format to review the technology and results and determine the anticipated requirements for regulatory approval. On March 3, 2017, we received FDA’s written response to these questions. Based on that response, we believe our plans to manufacture REM-001 by revising the prior quality standards to meet the currently-recommended regulatory standards will be acceptable. The FDA also indicated our plans for utilizing light delivery devices that have been shown to be functionally equivalent to the devices used by Miravant will be acceptable.

In October 2017, we held a Type B face-to-face guidance meeting with the FDA that was primarily focused on the design of a Phase 3 study in CMBC. Then, in May 2018, we held a Type B end-of-phase 2 meeting with the FDA that focused on our plans for addressing CMC and device topics related to our CMBC effort. In these interactions, the FDA provided guidance on a number of clinical parameters it would like us to measure in the planned clinical study, and on the associated CMC and device plans. Based on the FDA’s responses, we plan to conduct a Phase 3 clinical study in CMBC to test the safety and efficacy of REM-001 Therapy for marketing approval. In June 2018, we submitted to the FDA a Phase 3 protocol and statistical analysis plan incorporating feedback received from FDA at the October 2017 meeting. We have also undertaken extensive discussions with clinical research organizations to carry out this study and have received detailed proposals from five of these organizations. Since our May 2018 meeting, we have engaged a contract manufacturer who has manufactured the starting material for our API, manufactured two API lots under GMP. We are currently planning to undertake GMP manufacturing of finished drug product for use in the planned clinical study.

We also believe REM-001 Therapy holds promise as a treatment for cutaneous metastatic cancers other than CMBC, as well as locally-advanced basal cell cancer such as often occurs in patients with Basal Cell Carcinoma Nevus Syndrome (“BCCNS”) and cutaneously recurrent basal cell cancer. On January 16, 2018, the FDA granted our request that tin ethyl etiopurpurin (the active pharmaceutical ingredient in REM-001) be designated as an orphan drug for treatment of BCCNS. Following this designation, we contacted clinical experts in BCCNS and related indications to seek their guidance on the most appropriate clinical pathway for REM-001 Therapy in these indications.

14

We believe REM-001 Therapy also holds promise for certain cardiovascular conditions, including prevention and de novo treatment of cardiovascular access sites in hemodialysis patients. We also hold an orphan drug designation that was initially awarded to Miravant for tin ethyl etiopurpurin for the prevention of access graft disease in hemodialysis patients. We have been working to further develop this indication, including engaging with a key opinion leader in this area and submitting an NIH grant proposal for late stage preclinical research that we believe could lead directly to an IND and clinical study. We recently received notification that that grant has been awarded.

REM-001 Regulatory Filings

The initial investigational new drug (“IND”) filing for REM-001 Therapy was IND 39,940 which was filed in June 1992 with the FDA’s Division of Oncology and Pulmonary Drug Products. This IND is now under the purview of the FDA’s Division of Oncology Products. All CMBC studies were conducted under this IND. Miravant kept this IND in place but in 2005 they placed it on inactive status since they had focused their REM-001 development efforts on ophthalmology. In 2012, following St Cloud’s foreclosure action on Miravant and our subsequent purchase of the Miravant assets, St. Cloud transferred ownership of this IND to us. This transfer was formally recognized by the FDA with a Change of Sponsor letter dated December 14, 2012. Our interactions with the FDA for CMBC are under the auspices of this IND. It is our expectation, based on input from regulatory consultants, that clinical development in CMBC, non-CMBC cutaneous metastatic cancer and BCCNS basal cell nevus syndrome would be conducted under this IND. Recent FDA approvals in locally advanced basal cell cancers, which included patients with BCCNS, have been under the purview of the FDA’s Division of Oncology Products.

As part of our purchase agreement with St. Cloud, sponsorship of two other INDs was transferred to us. On February 25, 2013, the FDA’s Division of Dermatology and Dental Products notified us with a Change of Sponsor letter that it recognized us as the sponsor of IND 50,116. On May 8, 2013 the FDA’s Division of Transplant and Ophthalmology Products notified us with a Change of Sponsor letter that it recognized Adgero as the sponsor of IND 49,648. At this time, we do not anticipate any of our planned, or contemplated, clinical development activities would be under either of these INDs.

REM-001 Therapy

Our REM-001 Therapy product consists of three parts, the DD series laser light source (or equivalent), the ML2-0400 light delivery device (or equivalent) and the drug REM-001. Pursuant to the Miravant oncology IND, the FDA previously approved all three components to be used together in certain Miravant CMBC Studies. In use, the drug REM-001 is first administered by intravenous infusion and allowed to distribute within the body and be taken up by the tumors. Tumors are then illuminated with light using the light delivery device, which is attached to the laser light source, so that the accumulated drug REM-001 can be activated for the desired clinical effect. Our analysis of clinical data collected in the Miravant CMBC Studies shows that REM-001 Therapy provides a stronger reaction in tumor tissues than in healthy tissues, which was a goal with REM-001’s formulation.

Our plan is to use new lasers that are functionally equivalent to the Miravant DD2, the laser used in certain prior Miravant clinical studies, for CMBC. The Miravant DD2 lasers are capable of delivering two watts of optical power centered at a wavelength of 664 nanometers. Based on our interactions with the FDA, we believe that use of such new functionally equivalent lasers will be acceptable to the FDA.

The light delivery devices we plan to use in our CMBC program are the same basic design developed and used previously by Miravant in its clinical studies. In the case of cutaneous treatment, such as with CMBC, the light delivery device consists of an optical fiber which has a modified end to allow it to deliver a uniform light treatment field to the tumor. Our plan is to have clinical light delivery devices built by a contract medical device manufacturer using the basic Miravant design and tested to the same performance specifications as used previously.

The REM-001 Drug

REM-001 is a light activated photosensitizer drug used in PDT. During light activation, photosensitizer drugs act as a catalyst and absorb light energy which they transfer to surrounding oxygen-containing molecules to create reactive oxygen species (“ROS”). ROS can initiate various biological mechanisms of action:

15

REM-001 has been shown to induce apoptosis and, in treating an aspect of AMD, to have anti-angiogenesis properties. REM-001 is a second-generation photosensitizer drug designed with the following attributes to overcome several of the shortcomings of earlier, first generation photosensitizer drugs such as Photofrin:

Photofrin, which is sold by Pinnacle Biologics Inc. (“Pinnacle”), a subsidiary of Advanz Pharma Corp (TSX: ADVZ), is the only PDT compound that we are aware of which is approved by the FDA for the treatment of cancer. Specifically, it is approved in the United States for certain non-small-cell lung cancers and esophageal cancers. Currently, Photofrin it is not approved for treatment of CMBC or similar cutaneous tumors and we are not aware of any efforts to get approval in these indications.

REM-001’s chemical structure is designed to allow the use of longer wavelength, deeper penetrating light than is used in Photofrin. Deeper penetrating light means the treatment effect can reach deeper into the tumor which we believe should allow for the treatment of larger tumor volumes. REM-001 also has a stronger light absorption coefficient than Photofrin, which we believe should allow it to generate ROS more efficiently. In addition, REM-001 is an easily synthesized single molecule meaning that its manufacturing process is consistent with modern drug manufacturing strategies; we believe this will make REM-001 better suited for today’s rigorous regulatory environment. Unlike REM-001, Photofrin is a polymer mixture derived from naturally occurring substances. Polymer mixtures can present challenges in achieving a consistent drug product in line with modern regulatory requirements. An additional advantage provided by REM-001 is the rate at which it clears from the skin. Clinical data from a Phase 1 clinical study conducted by Miravant in healthy volunteers showed that, at the 1.2 mg/kg dose of REM-001, there was no measurable photosensitivity when patients were exposed 15 days after drug administration to light equivalent to fifteen minutes of midday sunlight. Further data indicates this effect is present for longer periods if higher drug doses or more extended periods of light exposure are used. Based on our review of limited published data (Wagnieres, et. al., Photochemistry and Photobiology, 1998, 68(3): 382-87), we believe that, when used under similar conditions, the photosensitivity of REM-001 is of shorter duration and is less intense than that seen with Photofrin. In the Wagnieres paper, the authors describe photosensitivity measurements on a human subject that was done using test conditions that were virtually identical to a study conducted by Miravant using REM-001. All patients in the Miravant study had photosensitivity reactions that were much less intense and of much shorter duration than that seen in the Wagnieres paper.

Given what we believe are its potential multiple mechanisms of action, efficacy results to date and substantial development, we believe REM-001Therapy is a promising platform therapy for the treatment of CMBC and other cutaneous metastatic cancers.

REM-001 Safety and Toxicology

PDT carries what we believe is an inherent safety advantage since it uses photosensitizer compounds that are largely inactive except when they are being illuminated by intense light at specific wavelengths. Nevertheless, drug molecules, including photosensitizer molecules, can carry safety or toxicology risks on their own. REM-001 has previously undergone preclinical and clinical studies throughout its development cycle and has undergone certain tests typically required for FDA drug approval. REM-001 has been safely administered to over 1,100 patients in prior clinical studies. Most significantly, REM-001 has been previously reviewed by the FDA as part of the NDA submitted by Miravant for the use of REM-001 to treat an aspect of AMD, a non-CMBC indication. Following that review, the FDA granted an approvable letter for REM-001 in an aspect of AMD in 2004, with final approval contingent on, among other things, the successful completion of a Phase 3 study. While not definitive, we believe this letter, along with feedback we received from FDA meetings, indicates that it is unlikely that there will be significant safety or toxicology issues associated with REM-001 that would ultimately prevent marketing approval.

16

Based on our review of the clinical data of the Miravant CMBC Studies, we believe pain was the most common treatment-related adverse event experienced by patients in these studies. The second most common safety issue experienced with REM-001 was a transient photosensitivity, meaning extended exposure in bright light and direct sunlight should be avoided.  Transient photosensitivity occurs with all photosensitizers to some degree. We believe this issue can be addressed by minimizing one’s exposure to bright light and sunlight for two to four weeks after treatment. In general, the potentially treatment-related adverse events observed in these CMBC studies were expected in nature (pain, edema, skin photosensitivity) and severity, and mostly resolved during the course of the studies.

REM-001 Therapy Target Markets

Our development plan for REM-001 Therapy is focused on the treatment of rare unmet needs in cancer, particularly those where the tumor can be accessed with a light delivery fiber device.

CMBC

While most internal cancers can metastasize to the skin, the internal cancer where this most commonly occurs is breast cancer. Radiotherapy is often used as an adjunctive therapy in breast cancer, in part to help prevent the development of local recurrences including CMBC. However, breast cancer survivors may still develop CMBC lesions, even over a decade after their original cancer treatment. In fact, physicians often watch for cutaneous (skin surface) metastases as a sign of breast cancer recurrence. A 2003 meta-analysis of approximately 20,000 cancer patients found that 24% of metastatic breast cancer patients included in the analysis had developed cutaneous metastases, which was the highest rate of skin metastases of any cancer type. Given that approximately 155,000 women suffer from metastatic breast cancer, we believe the prevalence of CMBC may approach 40,000 in the United States. In many cases of CMBC, surgical excision is not possible, so various standard cancer therapies, particularly radiotherapy or chemotherapy, are the first course of treatment. We believe these therapies are inadequate given the well-known dose limiting toxicities, limited efficacy, and/or side effects of each. We are not aware of any prospective clinical studies that have led to FDA approval of a therapy specifically for the treatment of CMBC and we do not expect any to be approved in the near future.

According to an April 2018 market assessment from Charles River Associates, there is an estimated market opportunity of approximately $500 million for the treatment of CMBC.

Cutaneous Metastatic Cancers

A meta-analysis has shown that approximately five percent of people with internal (non-melanoma, non-lymphatic, non-leukemic) cancers develop cutaneous metastatic tumors in their skin. Based on an estimated incidence of 1,500,000 such internal cancers in the United States, this means that the incidence of such cutaneous metastases is approximately 75,000 with a substantially higher prevalence given the fact that individuals often live with metastatic cancer for years. Regardless of the primary source of the cancer, these cutaneous metastatic tumors often begin as small skin nodules but, as the cancer spreads, more nodules form and can eventually cover large areas of skin. With progression, the tumor field generally becomes more painful as tumors may grow larger and more numerous, ulcerate, bleed and carry a strong odor. Part of our goal is to treat these cutaneous tumors as early as possible to either cause them to be locally eliminated or to slow their growth sufficiently to reduce their late stage development.

Basal Cell Carcinoma Nevus Syndrome (“BCCNS”)

In addition to the clinical studies that Miravant conducted with REM-001 Therapy in CMBC, it also generated clinical data for patients with Basal Cell Carcinoma Nevus Syndrome (“BCCNS”) who developed extensive basal cell carcinoma. BCCNS is a rare but serious condition that is often characterized by the formation of multiple and recurring cutaneous basal cell carcinoma lesions. According to Cancer.net, as of April 2020, approximately 1 in 40,000 individuals in the U.S. have underlying genetic condition that causes BCCNS and approximately 90% of these have BCCNS and it has been recognized as an orphan indication by FDA. In a Miravant Phase 1/2 clinical study (CA001B), 14 patients with BCCNS were enrolled and treated with REM-001 Therapy using the same dosing conditions as were used in the CMBC studies. A total of 157 lesions were treated in these patients and showed a 91% overall response rate. This was composed of a 68% complete response rate (no remaining visible evidence of a lesion) and a 23% partial response rate (lesion was reduced in size by more than 50%). In addition, 7% of lesions had stable disease (any increase in lesion size was less than 25%). The various response rates are shown in the graph below and are similar to the results seen in CMBC patients as we would expect. Based on these results we requested, and were granted, an orphan drug designation for tin ethyl etiopurpurin, the API in REM-001.

17

Until the FDA approval of the drugs Odomzo and Erivedge approximately five and eight years ago, respectively, treatment options for these BCCNS patients were very limited. However, we believe that, based on their package inserts, Odomzo and Erivedge have dose limiting toxicity profiles which are broader in scope than the primarily transient adverse effects observed to-date with REM-001 Therapy. We believe that the potential toxicity limitations related to the existing therapies for BCCNS, plus the positive initial Phase 1/2 data generated in clinical studies with REM-001 Therapy, suggest that REM-001 Therapy could be a viable alternative in treating recurrent basal cell carcinoma in BCCNS patients.

Current and Experimental Treatments for CMBC

As with many cancers, the current standard treatment for CMBC is surgical excision. However, this is often not feasible due to the extent of the tumor field or the condition of the skin, particularly in patients who have had radiation therapy. A number of other therapies have been used on patients with CMBC, including various forms of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, hyperthermia, cryotherapy, electro-chemotherapy, topical drugs and intra-lesional chemotherapy injections. Researchers have also attempted to combine therapies in an effort to improve efficacy. However, we believe that these therapies are often inadequate given the limited efficacy, toxicities and/or side effects of each. The side effects associated with therapies may be particularly difficult for patients who may have already experienced extensive surgery along with a full course of radiation and/or systemic chemotherapy. Also, the fact that CMBC tumors continue to develop following these therapies is a signal that the tumor cells may have developed a resistance to some of these approaches. Based on our discussions with clinicians and literature reviews, and its March 3, 2017 response from FDA, we believe that treatment of unresectable CMBC tumors is a largely unmet medical need, particularly in patients who have already received extensive radiation and chemotherapy.

Clinical Results in CMBC

We have conducted an analysis of the Phase 1 and four Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 CMBC clinical studies done previously with REM-001 Therapy by Miravant (the “Miravant CMBC Studies”) and have concluded that, in these studies, REM-001 Therapy provided higher tumor response rates than are generally seen with alternative CMBC treatments but this program was discontinued in 1998. Our review of Miravant’s records further indicates that, following this decision, Miravant continued to monitor patients in the CMBC studies and collected data as required by protocol, but they conducted no further treatment of CMBC patients with REM-001 Therapy. We believe that Miravant primarily chose to discontinue this program in order to focus its REM-001 development efforts on an aspect of “wet” age-related macular degeneration (“AMD”).

Phase 1 Clinical Study

A Phase 1 dose escalation clinical study was initially conducted by Miravant to establish the REM-001 dosimetry to be used in subsequent safety and efficacy studies. The study was initiated in 1993 and enrolled 22 patients with a variety of types of cutaneous cancer lesions. Of these, 213 cutaneous cancer lesions were treated using escalating REM-001 drug and light doses. This study used earlier generation light delivery devices than those used in later studies but these devices provided equivalent light output to those units used in later studies. In these studies, REM-001 drug doses ranged from 0.1 mg/kg to 1.2 mg/kg, light doses ranged from 100 to 200 J/cm2 and treatment time-points ranged from 24 to 72 hours. This study indicated that a drug dose in excess of 0.8 mg/kg and a light dose of 200 J/cm2 administered at 24 hours provided a high overall response rate when delivered in a variety of cutaneous cancer lesions. The previously tested dose of 1.2mg/kg was then tested further in a second Phase 1 trial, where it was administered to 27 cutaneous tumor lesions and provided a 66% complete response rate and a 90% overall response rate. Based on these results, this dosimetry was used in subsequent CMBC studies, including the Miravant CMBC Studies described below.

18

Phase 2/3 Studies

Miravant conducted four Phase 2/3 studies with REM-001 Therapy for the treatment of CMBC as summarized below. These studies all used the same dosimetry as described above and most of the patients had been previously treated with radiation therapy and chemotherapy. The light delivery devices used in these studies were the ML1-0400 or the functionally equivalent ML2-0400. The laser light source used in three of the studies was the Miravant DD2 laser and one study used the KTP model laser manufactured by LaserScope. Each study was conducted under Miravant’s REM-001 cancer Investigational New Drug Application (“IND”) using Good Clinical Practices with safety and efficacy data collected accordingly. In connection with our acquisition of the Miravant assets, ownership of that IND has been transferred to us.

The table below summarizes the Miravant CMBC Studies. Studies CA008, CA009 and CA019 required that the patients enrolled had received prior radiation therapy. Study CA013 did not have this specific inclusion requirement but our review of the data indicates that at least 50 of the 56 patients in CA013 had received prior radiation therapy. A second difference across the studies is that studies CA008, CA009 and CA019 had a 24-week follow-up period while study CA013 had a 52-week follow-up period. Also, in studies CA008 and CA009 two tumor lesions on each patient were randomly selected as controls and did not receive light activation. CA013 was conducted in Europe by a corporate partner of Miravant. Beyond these differences and those device differences noted above. We believe there were no other substantive differences between the studies and that all studies enrolled similar patients.

Table of Phase 2 and/or 3 Miravant CMBC Studies

(Note: SnET2 is now called REM-001.)

19

The primary endpoints for studies CA008 and CA009 were objective tumor response rate, quality-of-life change, device performance and patient safety. Our review of the tumor response rate and quality-of-life endpoints indicated they were defined as follows:

The following table shows the results of these two endpoints for studies CA008 and CA009 as calculated by Miravant. In some cases, patients dropped out of the study before lesion responses could be assessed or they did not complete their quality of life questionnaires. The Eligible Patients column in this and the following tables refers to the number of patients in each case for which sufficient data is available to calculate the relevant endpoint.

The FDA typically requires a p value of 0.05 or less for approval. Based on the above results, it appears that the Paired Response endpoint achieved statistical significance in both the CA008 and CA009 studies. However, it is our understanding that FDA questions the strength of this data, in part due to the small number of patients involved as well as the fact that each patient had only two control lesions.

Following discussions with the FDA, an endpoint called Clinical Success was added as an additional measure of tumor response. This was defined as follows:

The clinical success rates for studies CA008 and CA009 as calculated by Miravant are provided in the following table:

No significant device failures were observed in either study. Secondary endpoints in CA008 and CA009 were patient disease burden, duration of response and patient pain assessment. Miravant’s analysis indicated, for patients for which data was available, there was a treatment benefit in disease burden (p = 0.0017 for CA008, p = 0.0020 for CA009) and duration of response (p < 0.001 for CA008, not significant in CA009) when comparing treated and control lesions. In terms of pain, there was no significant change in pain in CA008 and a treatment related increase in pain at 4 Weeks post-treatment in CA009. Treatment related pain, particularly during the first month after treatment, was the most commonly reported adverse event and was often treated with analgesics.

20

Studies CA013 and CA019 used similar endpoints with one notable exception. Tumor Response as Measured by Paired Response was not possible in these studies since this measurement relies on control lesions and CA013 and CA019 did not include controls. Miravant did not conduct an efficacy analysis of these two studies but we have conducted an analysis of the Quality of Life and Clinical Success endpoints used in the pivotal CA008 and CA009 studies. Results from that analysis are shown in the following table:

We have not attempted any further analysis of the endpoints included in these two studies.

The most common adverse events seen in these four studies (CA008, CA009, CA013, CA019) were pain and photosensitivity, both of which are expected with this therapy. In the four studies there were a total of 17 serious adverse events (SAE’s) that were judged by investigators to be possibly, probably or definitely related to treatment. None of these were classified by the investigator as life threatening and none resulted in death. Of these, 17 SAE’s, eight were related to necrosis of the treated lesions, three were related to treatment field infection, 4 were treatment related pain, one was a photosensitivity skin reaction and one was an allergic reaction.

We believe that the data from these studies show that REM-001 Treatment is a promising therapy for CMBC. However, because there are no approved therapies for CMBC, we have no basis for comparing these results to existing therapies. Based on the FDA’s March 3, 2017 response, we believe the FDA will view these results as supportive data and our plan is to conduct a new pivotal Phase 3 study to support a new drug application.

The figure below shows the results of this initial preliminary analysis of Miravant clinical data and depicts the percentage of evaluable lesions in each Miravant CMBC Study for which there was a complete response; i.e. where all visible clinical evidence of the tumor is gone after treatment with REM-001 Therapy.

Clinical Development Plans

CMBC

Our initial product goal is to achieve marketing approval of REM-001 Therapy for the treatment of CMBC. We conducted a preliminary analysis of existing REM001 Therapy clinical study data for CMBC from the Miravant CMBC Studies. This analysis was overseen by regulatory experts who have expertise in interacting with the Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”). The consultants we have engaged are either former FDA employees with directly related experience in reviewing similar oncology treatments who are now acting as independent consultants or individuals who have provided senior regulatory guidance to major pharmaceutical or medical device companies in situations that led to regulatory approval. For this first analysis, we had submitted questions to FDA under a Type C format to review the technology and results and determine the anticipated requirements for regulatory approval. On March 3, 2017, we received FDA’s written response to our questions. Based on that response, we believe our

21

plans to manufacture REM-001 by revising the prior quality standards to meet the currently recommended regulatory standards will be acceptable. The FDA also indicated our plans for utilizing light delivery devices that have been shown to be functionally equivalent to the devices used by Miravant will be acceptable. In October 2017, we held a Type B face-to-face guidance meeting with the FDA that was primarily focused on the design of a Phase 3 study in CMBC. In May 2018, we held a Type B end-of-phase 2 meeting with the FDA that focused on our plans for addressing CMC and device topics related to our CMBC effort. In these interactions the FDA provided guidance on a number of clinical parameters they would like us to measure in our planned clinical study and on our CMC and device plans. Based on FDA’s responses, our plan is to conduct a Phase 3 clinical study in CMBC to test the safety and efficacy of REM-001 Therapy for marketing approval. In June 2018, we submitted to FDA a Phase 3 protocol and statistical analysis plan incorporating feedback received from the FDA at our October 2017 meeting. We have also undertaken extensive discussions with clinical research organizations to carry out this study and has received detailed proposals from five of these organizations. Since our May 2018 meeting, we have engaged a contract manufacturer who has manufactured the starting material for our active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), manufactured two API lots under GMP and has stability testing underway. We are currently working to undertake GMP manufacture of finished drug product for use in our clinical study.

At this time, we estimate the necessary study design will be a pivotal Phase 3 multi-center study that would enroll approximately 100-150 CMBC patients who have received prior radiation therapy and chemotherapy. This study has been designed with input from the FDA with the goal of gaining expedited development and review through one or more of the FDA’s expedited programs. Following our meeting with the FDA, we undertook further analysis of the original Miravant study data and concluded that the data may support use of a lower dose than Miravant used in its original study design. Use of such a lower dose may have potential benefits including faster post-treatment healing and response assessment and lower drug exposure. Based on this analysis and discussions with regulatory and clinical consultants, including prior FDA employees or consultants, and clinical research organizations, we plan to add a preliminary confirmatory element to our Phase 3 study. This confirmatory element anticipates treating up to 15 patients at a lower dose than used by Miravant. Patients treated in this confirmatory phase will not be included in the pivotal study efficacy population but their results should provide an indication that a lower dose may be as effective as the original Miravant dose and they may be used to provide a further preliminary confirmation of the potential of REM-001 Therapy in CMBC and if the results are sufficiently compelling we may use them as guidance for the use of a slightly lowered dose in the pivotal study. This confirmatory phase was included in the protocol submitted to FDA in June 2018 and we have not received comment on this from FDA although based on guidance from our regulatory consultants we believe the FDA will be supportive of this design.

We have also been in ongoing discussions with the FDA seeking an orphan drug designation for REM-001 in the treatment of CMBC. Our research indicates that CMBC prevalence is less than 200,000 in the United States, thus we believe we should qualify for an orphan drug designation. However, to-date, the FDA has not accepted this rationale. At this time, we can offer no assurances that FDA will grant an orphan drug designation for REM-001 in CMBC. Our request is based on existing clinical data in CMBC patients. The FDA also grants five years data of exclusivity to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity (“NCE”). A drug is an NCE if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active ingredient. We believe that REM-001 would also qualify for this form of exclusivity. There is no guarantee that we will receive an orphan drug designation or NCE exclusivity for REM-001.

Manufacturing

VAL-083

VAL-083 is a small-molecule chemotherapeutic. Chemical synthesis of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) was initially established by the NCI. We have made improvements to this process and have obtained patents on these improvements. The current manufacturing process involves fewer than five synthetic steps.

VAL-083 drug product is a lyophilized (freeze-dried) formulation that is reconstituted for intravenous injection. We anticipate that overall cost of goods for an eventual commercial product will be similar to other injectable, small-molecule pharmaceuticals.

For our clinical study being conducted in China, the supply of VAL-083 has been provided through our collaboration with Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company. Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company as a manufacturer has established a commercial-scale manufacturing process based on the North American process originally developed for the NCI that has been licensed by the CFDA for commercial supply of VAL-083 in China. However, to-date, they have not achieved the quality of systems necessary to meet FDA manufacturing standards.

To address the need to meet FDA standards, we have engaged third-party contract manufacturers with the capabilities to establish the processes, procedures and quality systems necessary to meet U.S., Canadian, E.U. and other international manufacturing requirements in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”) regulations. We have now received drug supply manufactured under full cGMP conditions. We intend to use this drug supply for all future clinical studies.

22

We have developed and patented certain intellectual property related to quality controls that are used in the release of VAL-083 for our clinical studies in the United States. This intellectual property is also required for product release under CFDA guidelines and we have granted access to our intellectual property for this purpose.

REM-001

The manufacturing process for the API in REM-001 was developed over a ten-year period and we believe is now well established and suitable for commercial scale production. This process was also included as part of Miravant’s prior NDA for the use of REM-001 to treat an aspect of AMD, which underwent an FDA review where an approvable letter was granted. The final REM-001 drug product is a lipid-based formulation and was previously produced at a commercial scale by a contract manufacturer for use in Miravant’s past clinical studies and commercialization activities. We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities for the production of REM-001, nor the laser light source, light delivery device for use with REM-001 Therapy. We will depend on third-party suppliers and manufacturing organizations for both commercial and clinical study supplies of all of our raw materials, the REM-001 drug substance, drug product and the REM-001 Therapy, laser light source, and light delivery device. We have engaged a contract manufacturer who has manufactured the starting material for our API and then manufactured two API lots under GMP and has stability testing underway. We are currently working to finalize agreements with a GMP manufacturer of finished drug product for use in our planned clinical study. With the feedback from the FDA that we could utilize the existing supply of laser systems or devices that were functionally equivalent, an in-depth assessment was made to determine which pathway would be appropriate. It has been determined that the existing lasers that were utilized in the previous clinical studies will not be used in the current clinical studies. We have identified several laser manufactures that could be used as third-party contract medical product manufacturers to build new units, train the clinical staff in the use of the units, provide regulatory support for the devices, and maintain the devices while being used in the study. In the case of the light delivery device, we will also need to obtain these from a third-party contract medical device manufacturer and a supplier has been identified. We believe there are readily available supplies of all raw materials needed for the manufacture of REM-001 and the related required light device components.

Research and Development Collaborations

Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company

Pursuant to a memorandum of understanding and collaboration agreement, dated October 25, 2012, we have established a strategic collaboration with Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company, a subsidiary of publicly traded Guangxi Wuzhou Zhongheng Group Co., Ltd. (SHG: 600252) (the “Guangxi Agreement”). VAL-083 is approved for the treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (“CML”) and lung cancer in China and Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company is the only manufacturer licensed by the CFDA to produce the product for the China market. Through the Guangxi Agreement, we have been provided drug product for our ongoing Phase 2 study in China as well as for certain clinical studies in the United States. In addition, we have secured certain commercial rights in China.

Pursuant to the Guangxi Agreement, we have granted to Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company a royalty-free license to certain of our intellectual property for use in China as it relates to quality control and drug production methods for VAL-083. In addition, subject to successful agreement on definitive commercial terms, we have agreed that Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company will be our exclusive supplier of VAL-083 for clinical studies and commercial sales, subject to Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company obtaining and maintaining cGMP certification by the FDA, EMA or other applicable regulatory agencies, and Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company being able to meet volumes ordered by us. To-date, Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company has not achieved cGMP certification with respect to the manufacturing of VAL-083.

This Guangxi Agreement also provides us with certain exclusive commercial rights related to drug supply. Specifically, the Guangxi Agreement establishes an exclusive supply relationship between us and Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company for the Chinese market and all markets outside China. Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company agreed that it may not sell VAL-083 for markets outside of China to any other purchaser other than us, provided that, during the first three years following regulatory clearance for marketing of VAL-083 in a particular country or region, we meet proposed sales volumes set by Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company for the country or region. In addition, Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company granted us a pre-emptive right in China (subject to our acceptance of proposed sales volume and prices) to purchase VAL-083 produced by Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company.

With respect to the Phase 3, or registration study, for GBM to be undertaken in China in order to ultimately commercialize VAL-083 in China, we are not under an obligation to participate in such a study. However, our participation in such a study in China, for the Chinese market, would be part of a larger negotiation process between us and Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company to determine how such a study would be conducted. We plan to execute a Phase 3 study and to seek approval for VAL-083 outside of China and we have no dependency or obligations to Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company with respect to studies we plan to conduct outside of China.

23

The term of the Guangxi Agreement (except as it relates to the exclusive rights in the China market) is indefinite, subject to termination upon written agreement of all parties, or if either party breaches any material term and fails to remedy such breach within 30 days of receipt of notice of the breach, or if any action to be taken thereunder is not agreed to by both parties, provided that such matter is referred to the chief executive officer of both parties, and they are unable to resolve such matter within 90 days. No payments have been made to date under the Guangxi Agreement to, or from, either Kintara or Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Company.

St. Cloud Asset Purchase Agreement

Adgero acquired certain Miravant assets, including the REM-001 Therapy and the associated technology and intellectual property, through an asset purchase agreement with St. Cloud Investments, LLC (“St. Cloud”), dated November 26, 2012, as amended (the “St. Cloud Agreement”). In conjunction with the merger with Adgero which closed on August 19, 2020, we assumed the St. Cloud Agreement.  St. Cloud was previously a Miravant creditor and acquired these Miravant assets pursuant to a foreclosure process St. Cloud completed under California law. Pursuant to the terms of the St. Cloud Agreement, we are obligated to make certain payments under the agreement. The amounts paid or owed under that agreement are as follows:

With respect to the $300,000 and $700,000 potential milestone payments referenced above (each a “Milestone Payment”), if either such Milestone Payment becomes payable, and in the event we elect to pay either such Milestone Payment in shares of our common stock, the value of the common stock will equal the price per share of the most recent financing, or, if we are considered to be a publicly-traded company, the average of the closing price per share of our common stock over the twenty (20) trading days following the first public announcement of the applicable event described above.

In addition, we must pay to St. Cloud and Steven Rychnovsky, PhD, in the aggregate, a royalty fee of six percent (6%) of net sales during the royalty term on a country-by-country and product-by-product basis with St. Cloud receiving a royalty rate of four and eight tenths percent (4.8%) and Steven Rychnovsky, PhD, receiving a royalty of one and two tenths percent (1.2%). The royalty term for a product commences on the first commercial sale of the product, such as REM-001 Therapy, in any country, and the royalty fee must be paid within 30 days of each calendar quarter during which revenue is collected. The royalty term terminates on the later of (i) the invalidation, revocation, lapse or expiration of the last to expire valid claim on any patent acquired in the St. Cloud Agreement that would be infringed by the sale of the product in the country where the commercial sale takes place or (ii) the expiration of the period for which we hold exclusive marketing rights of the product in the country, if we were granted those rights under the St. Cloud Agreement.

Patents and Proprietary Rights

Our success will depend in part on our ability to protect our existing product candidates and the products we acquire or license by obtaining and maintaining a strong proprietary position. To develop and maintain our position, we intend to continue relying upon the validity and enforceability of our patents patent protection, orphan drug status, Hatch-Waxman exclusivity, trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovations and licensing opportunities. 

There is no guarantee that patents will be granted with respect to any patent applications we may submit, own or license in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents we may own or license in the future will be useful in protecting our technology.

24

VAL-083

We have filed patent applications claiming the use of, and improvements related to VAL-083. Our patent filings also include proposed treatment regimens, improvements to the manufacturing process, formulation and composition of the active pharmaceutical ingredient, and finished dosage forms of VAL-083. We are prosecuting our patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions which we deem important for the potential commercial success of VAL-083.

Our patents and patent applications for VAL-083 can be summarized in fourteen series as follows:

25

26

27

One of the inventors listed in our Series IX applications is an employee of the University of California, San Francisco. If a patent issues from a patent application in this series with a claim that the University of California employee conceived of, in whole or in part, then the Regents of the University of California will share ownership of any such patent with us. Our research agreements with the University of California address this issue by providing us with an exclusive option, for a limited period of time, to negotiate a royalty-bearing exclusive license for commercialization of the invention covered by that patent.

In addition to patent protection, we may also seek orphan drug status whenever it is available. If a product which has an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan exclusivity, meaning that the applicable regulatory authority may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in very limited circumstances, for a period of seven years in the U.S. and Canada, and 10 years in the E.U. Orphan drug designation does not prevent competitors from developing or marketing different drugs for the same indication or the same drug for a different clinical indication.

VAL-083 has been granted protection under the Orphan Drug Act by the FDA and the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of gliomas, including GBM. The FDA has also granted Orphan Drug protection to VAL-083 for the treatment of medulloblastoma and ovarian cancer.

In February 2012, the FDA granted orphan drug status to VAL-083 for the treatment of glioma. In January 2013, the EMA also granted orphan drug protection to VAL-083 for the treatment of glioma. In the spring of 2016, the FDA Office of Orphan Products Development granted orphan drug designations to VAL-083 for the treatment of ovarian cancer and medulloblastoma.

In addition to our patents and orphan drug protection, we intend to rely on the Hatch-Waxman Amendments for five years of data exclusivity for VAL-083.Under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, newly approved drugs and indications benefit from a statutory period of non-patent marketing exclusivity. These amendments provide five-year data exclusivity to the first applicant to gain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity, meaning that the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active ingredient. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments prohibit the approval of an abbreviated new drug application, also known as an ANDA or generic drug application, during the five-year exclusive period if no patent is listed. If there is a patent listed and the ANDA applicant certifies that the NDA holder’s listed patent for the product is invalid or will not be infringed, the ANDA can be submitted four years after NDA approval. Protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments will not prevent the filing or approval of another full NDA; however, the applicant would be required to conduct its own pre-clinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical studies to demonstrate safety and effectiveness. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments also provide three years of data exclusivity for the approval of NDAs with new clinical studies for previously approved drugs and supplemental NDAs, for example, for new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug, if new clinical investigations were conducted by or on behalf of the sponsor and were essential to the approval of the application. This three-year exclusivity covers only the new changes associated with the supplemental NDA and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the original active ingredient.

We also rely on trade secret protection for our confidential and proprietary information. We believe that the substantial costs and resources required to develop technological innovations, such as the manufacturing processes associated with VAL-083, will help us to protect the competitive advantage of our product candidate.

The protection of intellectual property rights in China (where VAL-083 is manufactured pursuant to a collaboration agreement with the only manufacturer presently licensed by the CFDA to produce the product for the China market, and where VAL-03 is approved for the treatment of CML and lung cancer) is relatively weak compared to the United States, which may negatively affect our ability to generate revenue from VAL-083 in China.

Our policy is to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information developed or made known to the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. In the case of employees and consultants, the agreements provide that all inventions conceived by the individual shall be our exclusive property.

28

REM-001

Our intellectual property and product pipeline for REM-001 is based on technology we acquired that was originally developed by Miravant. We acquired this intellectual property through an asset purchase agreement and our retention of the intellectual property is dependent on us meeting the terms of that agreement, most of which are milestone and royalty-based payments. The acquired intellectual property includes scientific and regulatory data, product know-how and eight issued US Utility patents, some of which have expired or are nearing expiration. Two of the patents contain process claims that pertain specifically to REM-001 and its production with one of these having expired in August 2020 and the other set to expire in March 2021. Two of the patents are for light delivery devices intended to deliver light to internal body surfaces. The first of these having device and process claims expired in August 2020. The other has device claims and is set to expire in September 2024. Of the other four patents, two contain method of use claims that pertain to cardiovascular PDT with one of these set to expire in November 2021 and the other set to expire in May 2021. The one remaining patent is a composition of matter patent for a next generation photosensitizer drugs that we believe may be useful in a range of diseases and is set to expire in November 2021. The proprietary regulatory data we own includes two INDs for use of REM-001 in oncology and ophthalmology, and one NDA for use of REM-001 to treat an aspect of AMD.

We do not hold any patents covering the DD series laser light source or the ML2-0400 light delivery device. However, we believe there are readily available market supplies of lasers and related required light device components for use in our planned studies.

The FDA granted our request that tin ethyl etiopurpurin (the active pharmaceutical ingredient in REM-001) be designated as an orphan drug for treatment of BCCNS.  We also hold an orphan drug designation that was initially awarded to Miravant for tin ethyl etiopurpurin for the prevention of access graft disease in hemodialysis patients.

Government Regulation and Product Approval

Regulation by governmental authorities in the U.S. and other countries is a significant factor, affecting the cost and time of our research and product development activities, and will be a significant factor in the manufacture and marketing of any approved products. Our product candidates will require regulatory approval by governmental agencies prior to commercialization. In particular, our products are subject to rigorous preclinical and clinical testing and other approval requirements by the FDA and similar regulatory authorities in other countries. Various statutes and regulations also govern or influence the manufacturing, safety, reporting, labeling, transport and storage, record keeping and marketing of our products. The lengthy process of seeking these approvals, and the subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, require the expenditure of substantial resources. Any failure by us to obtain, or any delay in obtaining, the necessary regulatory approvals could harm our business.

The regulatory requirements relating to the testing, manufacturing and marketing of our products may change from time to time and this may impact our ability to conduct clinical studies and the ability of independent investigators to conduct their own research with support from us.

The clinical development, manufacturing and marketing of our products are subject to regulation by various authorities in the U.S., the E.U. and other countries, including, in the U.S., the FDA, in Canada, Health Canada, and, in the E.U., the EMA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act in the U.S. and numerous directives, regulations, local laws and guidelines in Canada and the E.U. govern the testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, labeling, storage, record keeping, approval, advertising and promotion of our products. Product development and approval within these regulatory frameworks takes a number of years and involves the expenditure of substantial resources.

Regulatory approval will be required in all the major markets in which we seek to develop our products. At a minimum, approval requires the generation and evaluation of data relating to the quality, safety, and efficacy of an investigational product for its proposed use. The specific types of data required and the regulations relating to this data will differ depending on the territory, the drug involved, the proposed indication and the stage of development.

In general, new chemical entities are tested in animals until adequate evidence of safety is established to support the proposed clinical study protocol designs. Clinical studies for new products are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the pharmaceutical into either healthy human volunteers or patients with the disease (20 to 50 subjects), the emphasis is on testing for safety (adverse effects), dosage tolerance, metabolism, distribution, excretion and clinical pharmacology. Phase 2 involves studies in a limited patient population (50 to 200 patients) to determine the initial efficacy of the pharmaceutical for specific targeted indications, to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. Once a compound shows preliminary evidence of some effectiveness and is found to have an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 studies are undertaken to more fully evaluate clinical outcomes in a larger patient population in adequate and well-controlled studies designed to yield statistically sufficient clinical data to demonstrate efficacy and safety.

29

In the U.S., specific preclinical data, manufacturing and chemical data, as described above, need to be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND application, which, unless the FDA objects, will become effective 30 days following receipt by the FDA. Phase 1 studies in human volunteers may commence only after the application becomes effective. Prior regulatory approval for human healthy volunteer studies is also required in member states of the E.U. Currently, in each member state of the E.U., following successful completion of Phase 1 studies, data are submitted in summarized format to the applicable regulatory authority in the member state in respect of applications for the conduct of later Phase 2 studies. The regulatory authorities in the E.U. typically have between one and three months in which to raise any objections to the proposed study, and they often have the right to extend this review period at their discretion. In the U.S., following completion of Phase 1 studies, further submissions to regulatory authorities are necessary in relation to Phase 2 and 3 studies to update the existing IND.

Authorities may require additional data before allowing the studies to commence and could demand that the studies be discontinued at any time if there are significant safety issues. In addition to the regulatory review, studies involving human subjects must be approved by an independent body. The exact composition and responsibilities of this body will differ from country to country. In the U.S., for example, each study will be conducted under the auspices of an independent institutional review board (IRB) at each institution at which the study is conducted. The IRB considers among other things, the design of the study, ethical factors, the privacy of protected health information as defined under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, the safety of the human subjects and the possible liability risk for the institution. Equivalent rules to protect subjects’ rights and welfare apply in each member state of the E.U. where one or more independent ethics committees, which typically operate similarly to an IRB, will review the ethics of conducting the proposed research. Other regulatory authorities around the rest of the world have slightly differing requirements involving both the execution of clinical studies and the import/export of pharmaceutical products. It is our responsibility to ensure we conduct our business in accordance with the regulations of each relevant territory.

In order to gain marketing approval, we must submit a dossier to the relevant authority for review, which is known in the U.S. as a new drug application (NDA) and in the E.U. as a marketing authorization application (MAA). The format is usually specific and laid out by each authority, although in general it will include information on the quality of the chemistry, manufacturing and pharmaceutical aspects of the product as well as the nonclinical and clinical data. Once the submitted NDA is accepted for filing by the FDA, it undertakes the review process that currently takes on average 10 months, unless an expedited priority review is granted which takes six months to complete. Approval can take several months to several years, if multiple 10-month review cycles are needed before final approval is obtained, if at all.

The approval process can be affected by a number of factors. The NDA may require additional preclinical, manufacturing data or clinical studies which may be requested at the end of the 10-month NDA review cycle, thereby delaying approval until additional data are submitted and may involve substantial unbudgeted costs.

In addition to obtaining approval for each product, in many cases each drug manufacturing facility must be approved. The regulatory authorities usually will conduct an inspection of relevant manufacturing facilities, and review manufacturing procedures, operating systems and personnel qualifications. Further inspections may occur over the life of the product. An inspection of the clinical investigation sites by a competent authority may be required as part of the regulatory approval procedure. As a condition of marketing approval, the regulatory agency may require post-marketing surveillance to monitor for adverse effects or other additional studies as deemed appropriate. After approval for the initial indication, further clinical studies may be necessary to gain approval for any additional indications. The terms of any approval, including labeling content, may be more restrictive than expected and could affect the marketability of a product.

The FDA offers a number of regulatory mechanisms that provide expedited or accelerated approval procedures for selected drugs in the indications on which we are focusing our efforts. These include accelerated approval under Subpart H of the agency’s NDA approval regulations, fast track drug development procedures, breakthrough drug designation and priority review. At this time, we have not determined whether any of these approval procedures will apply to our current drug candidates.

By leveraging existing preclinical and clinical safety and efficacy data, we seek to build upon an existing knowledge base to accelerate our research. In addition, through our focus on end-stage population which has no current treatment options, regulatory approval for commercialization may sometimes be achieved in an accelerated manner. Accelerated approval by the FDA in this category may be granted on objective response rates and duration of responses rather than demonstration of survival benefit. As a result, studies of drugs to treat end-stage refractory cancer indications have historically involved fewer patients and generally have been faster to complete than studies of drugs for other indications. We are aware that the FDA and other similar agencies are regularly reviewing the use of objective endpoints for commercial approval and that policy changes may impact the size of studies required for approval, timelines and expenditures significantly.

30

The U.S., E.U. and other jurisdictions may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a “rare disease or condition,” which, in the U.S., is generally a disease or condition that affects no more than 200,000 individuals. In the E.U., orphan drug designation can be granted if: the disease is life threatening or chronically debilitating and affects no more than 50 in 100,000 persons in the E.U.; without incentive, it is unlikely that the drug would generate sufficient return to justify the necessary investment; and no satisfactory method of treatment for the condition exists or, if it does, the new drug will provide a significant benefit to those affected by the condition. If a product that has an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan exclusivity, meaning that the applicable regulatory authority may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in very limited circumstances, for a period of seven years in the U.S. and 10 years in the E.U. Orphan drug designation does not prevent competitors from developing or marketing different drugs for the same indication or the same drug for different indications. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA or MAA. After orphan drug designation is granted, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are publicly disclosed. Orphan drug designation does not convey an advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the review and approval process. However, this designation provides an exemption from marketing and authorization fees charged to NDA sponsors under the Prescription Drug Act (PDUFA Fees).

Maintaining substantial compliance with appropriate federal, state and local statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Drug manufacturers are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and after approval, the FDA and these state agencies conduct periodic unannounced inspections to ensure continued compliance with ongoing regulatory requirements, including cGMPs. In addition, after approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval. The FDA may require post-approval testing and surveillance programs to monitor safety and the effectiveness of approved products that have been commercialized. Any drug products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including:

In addition, the FDA strictly regulates labeling, advertising, promotion and other types of information on products that are placed on the market. There are numerous regulations and policies that govern various means for disseminating information to health-care professionals as well as consumers, including to industry sponsored scientific and educational activities, information provided to the media and information provided over the Internet. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label.

The FDA has very broad enforcement authority and the failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in administrative or judicial sanctions being imposed on us or on the manufacturers and distributors of our approved products, including warning letters, refusals of government contracts, clinical holds, civil penalties, injunctions, restitution and disgorgement of profits, recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, withdrawal of approvals, refusal to approve pending applications, and criminal prosecution resulting in fines and incarceration. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability. In addition, even after regulatory approval is obtained, later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market.

Sales of our product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, on the extent to which such products will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health care programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly limiting coverage or reducing reimbursements for medical products and services. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any drug candidates that we develop will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. Each payor determines whether or not it will provide coverage for a therapy, what amount it will pay the manufacturer for the therapy, and on what tier of its formulary it will be placed. The position on a payor’s list of covered drugs, or formulary, generally determines the

31

co-payment that a patient will need to make to obtain the therapy and can strongly influence the adoption of such therapy by patients and physicians. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our net revenue and results. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for our product candidates or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover our product candidates could reduce physician usage of our product candidates, once approved, and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition.

Because of our current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, principal investigators, consultants, customers and third-party payors, we will also be subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we will conduct our business, including our clinical research, proposed sales, marketing and educational programs. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil penalties, criminal penalties, or both. The U.S. laws that may affect our ability to operate, among others, include: the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, which governs the conduct of certain electronic healthcare transactions and protects the security and privacy of protected health information; certain state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts; the federal healthcare programs’ Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for or to induce 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 healthcare programs such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs; federal false claims laws which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payors that are false or fraudulent; federal criminal laws that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters; the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics, and medical supplies to report annually to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members; and state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers.

In addition, many states have similar laws and regulations, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Additionally, to the extent that our product is sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

We are also subject to numerous environmental and safety laws and regulations, including those governing the use and disposal of hazardous materials. The cost of compliance with and any violation of these regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Although we believe that our safety procedures for handling and disposing of these materials comply with the standards prescribed by state and federal regulations, accidental contamination or injury from these materials may occur. Compliance with laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment has not had a material effect on our capital expenditures or our competitive position. However, we are not able to predict the extent of government regulation, and the cost and effect thereof on our competitive position, which might result from any legislative or administrative action pertaining to environmental or safety matters.

Competition

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We expect that we will face significant competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide with respect to VAL-083 and REM-001 and any other product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. Specifically, due to the large unmet medical need, global demographics and relatively attractive reimbursement dynamics, the oncology market is fiercely competitive and there are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of product candidates for the treatment of cancer. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing technologies and drug products that are more effective, have fewer or more tolerable side effects or are less costly than any product candidates that we are currently developing or that we may develop, which could render our product candidates obsolete and noncompetitive.

All of the top ten global pharmaceutical companies and many of the mid-size pharmaceutical companies have a strong research and development and commercial presence in oncology. Smaller companies also focus on oncology, including companies such as ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc., BIND Therapeutics, Inc., Clovis Oncology, Inc., Endocyte, Inc., Epizyme, Inc., ImmunoGen, Inc., Incyte Corporation, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Inc., MacroGenics, Inc., Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OncoMed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Onconova Therapeutics, Inc., Pharmacyclics, Inc., Puma Biotechnology, Inc., Seattle Genetics, Inc. and TESARO, Inc.

32

Several companies are marketing and developing oncology immunotherapy products. Companies with approved marketed oncology products for GBM are Merck (Temodar ^®) and Genentech (Avastin ^®). Companies with oncology immunotherapy product candidates in clinical development for GBM include, but are not limited to, Northwest Biotherapeutics (DCVax-L), Celldex Therapeutics (Rindopepimut (CDX-110)) and ImmunoCellular Therapeutics (ICT-107).

We are not aware of any therapies specifically approved for CMBC in the US. IGEA Medical S.p.A. is developing an electro-chemotherapy treatment for CMBC. Pinnacle Biologics Inc., a subsidiary of Advanz Pharma Healthcare Corp., sells Photofrin, a first-generation PDT product for treatment of certain endobronchial non-small-cell lung cancers and esophageal cancers. Photofrin is currently in Phase 2 studies in recurrent glioma. To our knowledge, there is no reported development program for Photofrin in CMBC. Rogers Sciences Inc. is a medical device company that is developing a light delivery device for use with PDT treatment of cutaneous cancers that they are currently clinically testing in a Phase 2 study in CMBC patients.

There are numerous therapies currently used to treat CMBC patients including chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgical excision, hyperthermia, cryotherapy, electro-chemotherapy, topical drugs and intra-lesional chemotherapy injections, but, to our knowledge, there are no PDT therapies currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of CMBC or similar cutaneous cancers. Some topical PDT agents have been approved by the FDA for actinic keratosis which is a precancerous skin condition and they have been approved in some other countries for some conditions that we believe pose low medical risk such as basal cell cancer and acne.

In the BCCNS field we are aware of approved drugs in the U.S., including vismodegib (Eviredge), Odomzo (sonidegib), imiquimod and topical fluorouracil that are sometimes use off-label. PellePharm also recently completed a Phase 3 study in BCCNS but, to our knowledge, has not received marketing approval.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other marketing approval for their products before we are able to obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

Many of our existing and potential future competitors have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical studies, obtaining marketing approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical study sites and patient registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

We expect that our ability to compete effectively will depend upon our ability to:

Failure to do one or more of these activities could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Corporate History

We are a Nevada corporation formed on June 24, 2009 under the name Berry Only Inc. On January 25, 2013, we entered into and closed an exchange agreement (the “Exchange Agreement”), with Del Mar Pharmaceuticals (BC) Ltd. (“Del Mar (BC)”), 0959454 B.C. Ltd. (“Callco”), and 0959456 B.C. Ltd. (“Exchangeco”) and the security holders of Del Mar (BC). Upon completion of the Exchange Agreement, Del Mar (BC) became a wholly-owned subsidiary of ours (the “Reverse Acquisition”).

33

On August 19, 2020, we acquired Adgero Biopharmaceuticals Holdings Inc. (“Adgero”) and changed our name from DelMar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to Kintara Therapeutics, Inc. We are the parent company to the following entities:

On May 8, 2019, we effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split (the “Reverse Stock Split”) of our issued and outstanding and authorized common stock. All per share amounts and number of shares of common stock in this report on Form 10-K reflect the Reverse Stock Split. The Reverse Stock Split does not affect the our authorized preferred stock of 5,000,000 shares; except that, pursuant to the terms of the Certificate of Designations of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock for the issued and outstanding shares of our Series B Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Series B Preferred Stock”), the conversion price at which shares of Series B Preferred Stock may be converted into shares of common stock will be proportionately adjusted to reflect the Reverse Stock Split.

On June 26, 2019, we amended our articles of incorporation, as amended, to increase the number of authorized shares of common stock from 7,000,000 to 95,000,000 shares.

Research and Development

During the years ended June 30, 2020 and 2019, we recognized $3,630,025 and $3,662,056, respectively, in research and development expenses.

Employees

We have four full-time employees and retain the services of approximately 15 persons on an independent contractor/consultant and contract-employment basis. As such, we currently operate in a “virtual” corporate structure in order to minimize fixed personnel costs.

Available Information

We maintain an internet website at www.kintara.com. We do not incorporate the information on our website into this report and you should not consider it part of this report.

34