ogen-10k_20181231.htm

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant, was approximately $2,894,038 computed based upon a last sales price of $1.38 as reported by the NYSE American as of June 30, 2018.

As of March 25, 2019, there were 46,112,303 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock outstanding.

Effective January 19, 2018, we filed an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida to effect a reverse split of our authorized and outstanding common stock at a ratio of one for ten. All historical share and per share amounts reflected in this report have been adjusted to reflect the reverse stock split.

Portions of registrant’s proxy statement relating to registrant’s 2019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Proxy Statement”) to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A, not later than 120 days after the close of the registrant’s fiscal year, are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Except with respect to information specifically incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Proxy Statement is not deemed to be filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

This report, along with other documents that are publicly disseminated by us, contains or might contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). All statements included in this report and in any subsequent filings made by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) other than statements of historical fact, that address activities, events or developments that we or our management expect, believe or anticipate will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. These statements represent our reasonable judgment on the future based on various factors and using numerous assumptions and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause our actual results and financial position to differ materially. We claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements provided in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Examples of forward-looking statements include: (i) projections of revenue, earnings, capital structure and other financial items, (ii) statements of our plans and objectives, (iii) statements of expected future economic performance, and (iv) assumptions underlying statements regarding us or our business. Forward-looking statements can be identified by, among other things, the use of forward-looking language, such as “believes,” “expects,” “estimates,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “seeks,” “plans,” “intends,” “anticipates” or “scheduled to” or the negatives of those terms, or other variations of those terms or comparable language, or by discussions of strategy or other intentions.

Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause the actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by the statements. The forward-looking information is based on various factors and was derived using numerous assumptions. Important factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from the forward-looking statements include the following risks and other factors discussed under the Item 1A “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These factors include:

We caution investors that actual results or business conditions may differ materially from those projected or suggested in forward-looking statements as a result of various factors including, but not limited to, those described above and in the Risk Factors section of this report. We cannot assure you that we have identified all the factors that create uncertainties. Moreover, new risks emerge from time to time and it is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all risks on our business or the extent to which any risk, or combination of risks, may cause actual results to differ from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Except as required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to publicly release the result of any revision of these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date they are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

This description contains certain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements as a result of certain of the risks set forth herein. We assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained herein.

We are focused on becoming a leader in developing novel antibiotics against infectious disease and on developing effective treatments for oral mucositis.

In June of 2015, we entered into a worldwide Exclusive Channel Collaboration Agreement (“Oral Mucositis ECC”) with Intrexon Corporation (“Intrexon”) and Intrexon Actobiotics NV, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Intrexon, pursuant to which we obtained certain exclusive rights to AG013 as a potential treatment of oral mucositis, or OM for cancer patients, which we intend to continue to develop. AG013, is an oral rinsing solution designed to deliver human Trefoil Factor 1 (hTFF1) to protect and regenerate damaged mucosal lining of the oral cavity.

OM results in a painful inflammation and mucosal ulceration in the lining of the oral cavity, throat and esophagus and is one of the most commonly reported adverse events associated with cancer chemotherapy. Approximately 770,000 patients annually in the US are at an increased risk of developing OM according to cancer statistics provided by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in 2017. OM has a negative effect on patient well-being and if severe, negatively affects adherence to a patient’s cancer treatment regimen. At present, we are not aware of any drug that is approved to prevent the condition broadly and current therapies are primarily palliative in nature, only addressing symptom relief but not treating the underlying causes of the condition.

In a Phase 1b clinical trial in 25 cancer patients with OM, AG013 was safe and well tolerated. Data published in the journal Cancer showed a 35% reduction of the duration of ulcerative OM in the AG013-treated patients versus the placebo-treated patients. Furthermore, close to 30% of the patients treated with AG013 were full responders while all placebo-treated patients developed ulcerative OM. Additionally, in a Phase 1 pharmacokinetic (PK) clinical trial in 10 healthy volunteers, AG013 bacteria adhered to the buccal mucosa and actively secrete protein locally, resulting in homogeneous exposure of the entire mucosal surface up to 24 hours after administration of the rinse. During the first quarter of 2016, we conducted a confirmatory animal study on AG013. AG013 has been granted Orphan Drug status in the European Union. In November of 2016, the United States Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) granted Fast Track designation for AG013, and we believe it may be eligible for Biologic License Application exclusivity as well.

We have developed a Phase 2 protocol for AG013 with the FDA under the fast track designation. The clinical trial is a double blind, placebo controlled, evaluation of daily AG013, administered three times a day, oral rinse for the duration of the cancer treatment. The clinical trial is expected to enroll between 160-180 evaluable patients receiving chemoradiation for treatment of head and neck cancer for 7 to 9 weeks. The primary endpoint is a reduction, compared to the placebo, in the number of days of severe oral mucositis. In addition, a number of secondary endpoints are being evaluated. In August of 2016, we received feedback from the FDA in response to our Type C meeting and the pursuit of a Phase 2 clinical trial on AG013 for the treatment of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients. We filed an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) update in March 2017 and we initiated the Phase 2 clinical trial with AG013 in the United States in 2017. In late 2018, we received regulatory approval to enroll patients for participation in the clinical trial in the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Germany. We began enrollment of patients in these countries in early 2019. The Phase 2 clinical trial is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm, multi-center trial in which approximately 200 patients, in order to ensure enrollment of 160-180 evaluable patients, in a 1:1 randomization block size to receive either a placebo or AG013. The clinical trial will be conducted at approximately 50-75 clinical sites across the United States and Europe. The purpose of the Phase 2 clinical trial (NCT03234465) is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of topically administered AG013 compared to placebo for reducing the incidence and severity of OM in patients undergoing traditional chemoradiation for the treatment of head and neck cancer. Key efficacy measures include collection of data regarding the duration, time to development, and overall incidence of OM (World Health Organization scale used) during the active treatment phase, beginning from the start of chemoradiation therapy until 2 weeks following its completion.

We completed enrollment of the interim analysis cohort, which included 24 randomized patients in our Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013 for the treatment OM. Nineteen of those patients were included in the unblinded safety evaluation, of which 10 received AG013. We announced positive results from our interim safety analysis in May 2018, which was requested by the

FDA on patients from our Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013 for the treatment of OM. The clinical trial provided information that, we believe, likely indicates that the overall incidence of severe OM is less than would be anticipated in the general head and neck cancer population receiving chemoradiation therapy.

Safety was evaluated on the basis of treatment-emergent adverse events, vital signs, weight, physical examinations, clinical laboratory assessments and the presence of AG013 in whole blood. Tolerability measures (taste, consistency and smell) were collected from the patient diaries. In addition, the reasons for study treatment discontinuation were also summarized. Following review of the data by an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), they concluded that the clinical trial could proceed with no changes to the study. The data analysis indicated that the distribution of adverse events was similar between AG013 and placebo. The serious adverse events reported were consistent with those commonly reported in a head and neck cancer population receiving traditional chemoradiation therapy treatments and included fevers, neutropenia, anemia, nausea and vomiting, infections and oral (mouth and throat) pain. There were no reports of bacteremia or sepsis. Of patients that discontinued participation in the clinical trial, 4 patients experienced adverse events, including 3 patients who developed nausea and vomiting, 2 patients that were non-compliant with the study procedures and 3 patients developed severe OM.

Following the clearance in May 2018, by the DSMB, we are proceeding with patient enrollment for our AGO13 clinical trial. We recently determined to expand the number of clinical sites we would conduct our trials in an attempt to accelerate enrollment. The expansion of the number of clinical sites at which we would conduct our clinical trials is expected to add to our clinical trial costs. On October 15, 2018, we received clearance from the Belgian Health Authority to activate the patient enrollment process in Belgium. Assuming we attain our patient enrollment milestones, we expect to report top-line results of the completed Phase 2 clinical trial in early 2020.

Members of our scientific team discovered that a certain bacterial strain produces MU1140, a molecule belonging to the novel class of antibiotics known as lantibiotics. Lantibiotics, such as MU1140, are highly modified peptide antibiotics made by a small group of Gram-positive bacterial species. Over 700 lantibiotics have been characterized, to date. We believe lantibiotics are generally recognized by the scientific community to be potent antibiotic agents.

In nonclinical testing, MU1140 has shown activity against all Gram-positive bacteria against which it has been tested, including those responsible for a number of healthcare associated infections, or HAIs. A high percentage of hospital-acquired infections are caused by highly resistant bacteria such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. We believe the need for novel antibiotics is increasing as a result of the increased pattern of resistance development by target pathogens to existing FDA approved antibiotics on the market.

Lantibiotics have been difficult to investigate for their clinical usefulness as therapeutic agents in the treatment of infectious diseases due to a general inability to produce or synthesize sufficient quantities of pure amounts of these molecules. Traditional fermentation methods can only produce minute amounts of the lantibiotic.

In June 2012, we entered into the Lantibiotic Exclusive Channel Collaboration agreement (“Lantibiotic ECC”) with Intrexon for the development and commercialization of the native strain of MU1140 and related homologs using Intrexon’s advanced transgene and cell engineering platforms. Through our work with Intrexon, we have been able to produce a significant increase in the fermentation titer of MU1140 compared to standard fermentation methods and have discovered a new purification process for MU1140. Our work with Intrexon generated a substantial number of homologs of MU1140, and we are continuing our research and development and collaboration efforts with Intrexon to develop potential derivatives of the MU1140 molecule using genetically modified bacteria.

In our pre-clinical studies to support a potential IND filing with the FDA, we tested a total of six homologs of MU1140 for certain compound characteristics, including but not limited to: drug activity (based on minimum inhibitory concentration or “MIC”) equal or better than “standard of care” drugs against certain drug-resistant bacteria, safety, toxicity, stability, and manufacturability. An animal study specifically evaluated homolog efficacy based on animal survival, measurable amounts of Clostridium difficile (“C. diff”) colony forming units, toxin and C diff. spore levels. Three homologs demonstrated promising results with one homolog, OG253, delivered rectally, achieving a 100% survival rate throughout the entire study in contrast to an approximately 30% survival rate for the vancomycin positive control.

Based on these early results, we selected a lead candidate, OG253, for which we had a pre-IND meeting with the FDA in November of 2015 regarding the pursuit of an IND for OG253. Following additional research and development on second generation lantibiotics, in August of 2016, we opted to select a second generation lantibiotic, OG716, for treatment of C. diff as our new lead candidate. OG716 is a new, orally-active homolog, that has exhibited positive results in an animal model for potential treatment of C. diff. Generated from our MU1140 platform, this new lantibiotic showed promising efficacy in

reducing clinically relevant C. diff infections as measured by increased animal survival and decreased relapse as well as reduced production of toxins A & B and C. diff spores when compared to a vancomycin positive control.

The timing of the filing of an IND regarding OG716 is subject to our having sufficient available capital given all of our anticipated needs and expected requirements in connection with our ongoing research and development initiatives. We currently expect the IND for a first-in-human clinical trial of OG716 to be filed with the FDA based on our ability to complete the requisite studies, contingent on sufficient funding. Based upon the funding available from our recent public offerings and the exercise of warrants we expect to conduct some of the requisite studies.

In addition to our lantibiotics and oral mucositis product candidates, we also have other candidates and technologies in the oral care and weight loss areas. We do not intend to continue to develop these potential product candidates and technologies without partnering with a third party. We out-licensed the continued research and development of our weight loss product candidate in December 2013 to, LPThera LLC, and LPThera LLC continues to work to develop a product for commercial use. Our oral care product candidate SMaRT Replacement Therapy is positioned for out-licensing opportunities.

We are currently developing our antibiotic product candidate, OG716, as well as other homolog antibiotic product candidates, researching AG013 in connection with the treatment of Oral Mucositis, and have other product candidates for outlicensing or partnering. We seek to protect our products and product candidates through patents and patent applications. Our products and product candidates are protected by three issued U.S. patents, including a patent exclusively licensed from the University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc., or UFRF. While we are the exclusive worldwide licensee to the patent for our antibiotic product candidate, MU1140, which is owned by the UFRF, that product candidate is not directly under development. We also have worldwide commercialization rights to each of these product candidates. We have an exclusive, worldwide license from Intrexon to use its technology to develop lantibiotics. We also have an exclusive worldwide license from Intrexon and its wholly owned subsidiary, Actobiotics NV (“Actobiotics”) to use their intellectual property to develop AG013 for the treatment of oral mucositis in patients undergoing treatment for cancer. Effective January 1, 2018, Intrexon assigned its interest in the license agreement to a wholly owned subsidiary, ActoBio Therapeutics, Inc.

On June 9, 2015, we entered into our Oral Mucositis ECC with Intrexon and Actobiotics, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Intrexon, through which we intend to research, develop and commercialize products, including the continued development and commercialization of AG013, for use in the treatment of oral mucositis in humans through the administration of an effector via genetically modified bacteria, but, in any case, excluding the delivery of anti-cancer effectors for the purpose of treatment or prophylaxis of cancer (collectively, the “Program”). Contemporaneously with the ECC, we also entered into a Stock Issuance Agreement (the “SIA”) with Intrexon which provided for the payment of a technology access fee and the potential future issuance by us of our common stock to Intrexon upon the achievement of designated development milestones. We issued a Convertible Note in the amount of $5,000,000 as payment of the technology access fee associated with the Oral Mucositis ECC which was payable, at our option, in cash or shares of our common stock. The convertible note, including accrued interest, was repaid in December 2015 through the issuance of 338,101 shares of our common stock.

In November of 2017 the Oral Mucositis ECC was amended to: (i) consolidate the development milestone payments into one payment of $27,500,000 being due six months after receiving FDA approval of a New Drug Application; (ii) reduce the sublicense revenue percentage we would have had to pay from 50% to 25% of sublicensing revenue; and (iii) revise the field

in which we have exclusive rights to our Oral Mucositis product candidate for the treatment of Oral Mucositis to clarify that we have an exclusive right for the treatment of Oral Mucositis in humans regardless of etiology. The November amendment superseded an amendment to the Oral Mucositis ECC in May 2017. Effective January 1, 2018, Intrexon assigned its interest in the Oral Mucositis ECC and related SIA (excluding Intrexon’s standstill obligation) to its wholly owned subsidiary, ActoBio Therapeutics, Inc.

In the United States, upwards of 770,000 patients with cancer, including breast, colorectal, non-small cell lung, head & neck, and stem cell cancers will receive cytotoxic chemotherapy and are at increased risk of developing oral mucositis (CDC, 2017). The incidence of oral mucositis in cancer populations varies based on the type of cancer and chemotherapy regimen and treatment duration used to treat the cancer. For example, oral mucositis almost always occurs in patients with head and neck cancer treated with chemotherapy and radiation therapy (greater than 80% incidence of mucositis) and is common in patients undergoing high dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic cell transplantation, where the incidence and severity of oral mucositis depends greatly on the nature of the conditioning regimen used for myeloablation.

To continue research and development through our collaboration with Intrexon and Actobiotics to develop AG013 as an effective treatment for oral mucositis.

In collaboration with Intrexon, and subject to our ability to raise additional capital to pursue further development of AG013, we expect to further the research and development of AG013 toward the goal of moving AG013 forward in its clinical development.

In a Phase 1b clinical trial in 25 cancer patients with OM, AG013 was safe and well tolerated. Data published in the journal Cancer showed a 35% reduction of the duration of ulcerative OM in the AG013-treated patients versus the placebo-treated patients. Furthermore, close to 30% of the patients treated with AG013 were full responders while all placebo-treated patients developed ulcerative OM. Additionally, in a Phase 1 pharmacokinetic (PK) clinical trial in 10 healthy volunteers, AG013 bacteria adhered to the buccal mucosa and actively secreted protein locally, resulting in homogeneous exposure to the entire mucosal surface up to 24 hours after administration of a rinse. AG013 has been granted Orphan Drug status in the European Union and we believe it may be eligible for Biologic License Application exclusivity. In November 2016, the U.S. FDA granted Fast Track designation for AG013.

In August of 2016, we received written feedback from the FDA in response to our questions discussed during our Type C meeting prior to initiation of our Phase 2 clinical trial on AG013 for the treatment of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients. We filed an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) update in March 2017 and we initiated a Phase 2 clinical trial with AG013 in the United States in 2017. In late 2018, we received regulatory approval to enroll patients for participation in the clinical trial in the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Germany. We expect to begin enrollment of patients in these countries in early 2019. The Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013 is a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that will be conducted at approximately 50-75 sites across the United States and Europe, and is expected to enroll up to 200 patients. The purpose of the trial is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of administered AG013 compared to placebo for reducing OM in patients undergoing chemo-radiation for the treatment of head and neck cancer, as measured by the duration, time to development, and overall incidence of OM. On August 31, 2017, we announced that the first patient had been dosed in the Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013 for the treatment of OM. Assuming we attain our patient enrollment milestones, we expect to report top-line results of the completed Phase 2 clinical trial in early 2020.

We use contract manufacturing firms to produce our investigational product candidate AG013 in accordance with “current good manufacturing practices” (cGMP) guidelines outlined by the International Conference of Harmonization (ICH) and FDA.

In the course of research and development, MU1140 was found to be a potent antibiotic that is naturally produced by the parent of the SMaRT strain. MU1140 shows antibacterial activity against all Gram-positive bacteria against which it has been tested, including those responsible for a variety of healthcare-associated infections, or HAIs.

On June 5, 2012, we entered into the Lantibiotic ECC with Intrexon. In November of 2017 we amended the Lantibiotic ECC to: (i) consolidate the development milestone payments into one payment of $25,000,000, being due six months after receiving FDA approval of a New Drug Application, (ii) reduce the sublicense revenue percentage we would have had to pay from 50% to 25% of sublicensing revenue, (iii) reduce the royalty rate from 25% of Product Profit to 10% of Net Sales, (iv) revise the form of milestone payments from being share based or cash at our election to only cash, and (v) commit that Diligent Efforts (as defined in the Lantibiotic ECC) in pursuing the Lantibiotic Program would be deemed satisfied in 2018 provided that at least $1,200,000 was budgeted for the advancement of the Lantibiotic Program. Through this collaboration we intend to develop lantibiotics, a novel class of broad-spectrum antibiotics, as active pharmaceutical ingredients toward the goal of commercialization for the treatment of infectious diseases in humans. We previously selected a lead candidate, OG253, and had a pre-IND meeting with the FDA in November of 2015 regarding the pursuit of an IND on OG253. Following additional research and development on second generation lantibiotics, in August of 2016, we selected a second generation lantibiotic, OG716, for treatment of C. diff. OG716 is a new, orally-active homolog, that has exhibited positive results in an animal model for potential treatment of C. diff. Generated from our MU1140 platform, this new lantibiotic showed promising efficacy in reducing clinically relevant C. diff infections as measured by increased animal survival and decreased relapse as well as reduced production of C. diff spores and toxin levels when compared to a vancomycin positive control. We had our pre-IND meeting with FDA for OG716 during the third quarter of 2017.

The most common gram (+) HAIs are caused by drug-resistant bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA; vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis, or VRE; and Clostridium difficile, or C. diff. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, HAIs are estimated to occur in approximately 5% of all acute-care hospitalizations. The CDC also estimates that the total direct medical cost to the U.S. healthcare system from HAIs is between $28.4 billion to $45 billion annually. Cubicin, a Gram positive lipopeptide antibiotic which was launched in the US market in November 2003 by the biotechnology company Cubist, had 2012 global sales of $926.4 million. In 2013, Cubist announced the acquisition of two companies Optimer and Trius each of which was for consideration over $800M. In 2015, Cubist was acquired by Merck for a total transaction value of $9.5 billion.

The need for novel antibiotics is increasing due to an increased pattern of resistance development by target pathogens to existing FDA approved antibiotics on the market. The CDC has estimated that up to 77% of certain nosocomial pathogenic bacteria are resistant to drugs of last resort (vancomycin-resistant E. faecium and vancomycin, respectively, in this example). HAIs are not exclusively a problem in the United States as the rest of the world has also seen a dramatic rise in HAIs during the last decade. We believe novel antibiotics have become increasingly scarce as major pharmaceutical companies focus more research and development resources on lifestyle drugs and fewer resources on specialty pharmaceuticals such as antibiotics. Between 1983 and 1987, 16 new antibiotics were approved by the FDA. Twenty years later, over an equivalent time period from 2003 to 2007, only five new antibiotics were approved by the FDA, of which only two possessed a novel mechanism of action. Since 2008, there have been no new antibiotics classes approved by FDA.

Lantibiotics such as MU1140 are highly modified peptide antibiotics made by a small group of Gram-positive bacterial species. Approximately 60 lantibiotics have been discovered since the first lantibiotic, nisin, was discovered. Lantibiotics are generally known to be potent antibiotic agents; however, attempts to investigate their clinical usefulness have generally met with failure due to the inability to produce sufficient pure amounts of any of these molecules to be able to test them as a therapeutic agent for the treatment of infectious diseases. Standard fermentation methods, such as those used to make a variety of other antibiotics, have historically resulted in the production of only minute amounts of the lantibiotic.

To develop homologs of MU1140 paired with high producing strains to the point of commercialization or partnership, and to develop additional lantibiotics in connection with our work on MU1140. MU1140 has demonstrated activity against a wide variety of disease-causing Gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA, VRE, C. diff, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Bacillus anthracis.

In collaboration with Intrexon, we are developing and testing recombinantly derived homologs of the native MU1140 molecule with improved therapeutic profiles and physical-chemical characteristics. The data generated in collaboration with Intrexon over the past few years enabled us to engineer hundreds of homologs of MU1140, and select those homolog candidates with improved profiles, including homologs of higher activity and stability, lower toxicity and with a scalable manufacturability. The best homolog candidates were further developed internally and through the use of several Contract Research Organizations (“CROs”). We believe that this strategy represented the best and most efficient path to produce sufficient quantities of MU1140 homologs, to support continued research, selection of a lead candidate, nonclinical studies, clinical studies and ultimately commercialization. We selected a lead candidate, OG716, in 2016 targeted toward combating C. diff infections. In addition, we intend to continue research activities to identify additional MU1140 homologs to treat other HAIs.

We have performed nonclinical testing on MU1140 which has demonstrated the molecule’s novel mechanism of action. We began additional nonclinical activities on MU1140 under the Lantibiotic ECC with Intrexon in the second half of 2013 and activities have expanded with new identified homologs as available. These nonclinical activities are expected to include toxicity results, pharmacokinetic studies, and efficacy studies in animals for selected candidates, including our lead candidate OG716 under development for Clostridium difficile associated diarrhea. This work is being done primarily through the use of outside contractors. Pursuit of clinical trials toward the goal of ultimately obtaining regulatory approval will depend upon further successful advancements in our research collaboration efforts with Intrexon and our efforts to have additional product manufactured. Developments from these efforts will dictate our regulatory path. We initially selected a lead candidate, OG253 and had a pre-IND meeting with the FDA in November of 2015 regarding the pursuit of an IND for OG253. Following additional research and development on second generation lantibiotics, in August of 2016, we selected a second generation lantibiotic homolog, OG716, for treatment of C. diff. We had a pre-IND meeting with FDA for OG716 during the third quarter of 2017. We expect to continue our research and development activities on OG716 as we move towards the filing of an IND, subject to the availability of adequate financing, in 2020.

Through our work with Intrexon, we have been able to produce a significant increase in the fermentation titer of our lead compound OG-716. We continue to improve on the manufacturing through collaborations with fermentation and purification experts and third party CROs, and through the hire of key personnel who will be able to further optimize and scale up the production/purification scheme internally and through third party vendors. The need to examine many new homologs of MU1140 has resulted in the need to reproduce the fermentation and purification steps on each individual homolog candidate being studied. Each homolog requires different optimizations for both the fermentation and purification steps and in some cases requires a new approach. As such, our work on the research and development of new lantibiotic homologs using genetically modified bacteria continues. We believe these developments represent progress toward our goal of commercial production of sufficient quantities of our MU1140 homologs, including our lead compound OG-716 and deliver a step in validating the lantibiotics platform targeting infectious diseases.

We are working with a third-party manufacturer to produce additional quantities of designated homologs including our lead compound OG716, based upon the developments achieved from our work with Intrexon and outside contractors. The production of additional quantities of designated homologs including OG716, that are needed for the consummation and pursuit of our nonclinical testing activities supporting the IND filing are currently underway.

In the course of our research efforts, our scientific team also discovered that consumption of a significant amount of LPT3-04, a naturally occurring compound which is normally consumed in the human diet in small amounts, resulted in dose-dependent weight loss in experimental animal models. In December 2013 we entered into an exclusive licensing arrangement of our LPT3-04 weight-loss product candidate for further development to LPThera LLC (“LPThera”). LPThera LLC was a newly formed entity that needs to raise capital to further pursue the opportunity presented by our LPT3-04 product candidate. LPThera LLC was formed by a former consultant to the Company who became an employee effective in April 2014 and subsequently ceased his employment in March 2016. The exclusive license agreement we granted to LPThera, provides LPThera the exclusive worldwide royalty bearing license to develop, make or have made, use, sell, offer for sale, market and promote the LPT3-04 for use under our technology. LPThera may sublicense the rights described without our written consent, but shall provide notice to us of any sublicense granted.

Under the LPT3-04 license agreement, as amended in March 2014, LPThera has agreed to achieve the following development milestones within the following time frames:

The milestones set forth above for 2015 for fundraising and formulation development were satisfactorily achieved on a timely basis in 2015. The completion of the required nonclinical, exploratory animal and GLP animal studies was completed on a timely basis in 2018. Our licensee is pursuing a strategy of weight loss in companion pets in order to be in position to commercialize a product candidate on a more accelerated basis than would apply to use in humans.

LPThera is responsible for commercializing the products containing LPT3-04 using commercially reasonable efforts. If at any time after the second anniversary of the effective date of the LPT3-04 license agreement, we believe in our reasonable opinion that LPThera has not satisfied the development milestones or commercialization responsibility, designated representatives of each party will meet to discuss areas of concern and any additional actions that should be taken to remedy the cause for our concern and we may require LPThera to take certain actions for it to comply with its diligence obligations under the LPT3-04 license agreement.

LPThera has agreed to pay us 5% of the aggregate net sales derived from the sale of products containing LPT3-04, where the manufacture, use, promotion or sale of such products is protected by a valid claim of one of our patents covered by the LPT3-04 license agreement in such country. If we do not obtain a US patent with a valid claim, LPThera has agreed to pay us 2.5% of aggregate net sales derived from the sale of products containing LPT3-04 in the US. LPThera has likewise agreed to pay us 20% of license income obtained from a sublicensee in the event of a sublicensing arrangement.

Under the LPT3-04 license agreement, LPThera has agreed to make certain payments to us upon its achievement of designated sales levels. The sales levels and amounts payable are as follows:

LPThera has agreed to indemnify and hold us harmless from any damages caused as a result of the development, manufacture, distribution, marketing, promotion or sale of the products containing LPT3-04 or its breach of a representation, warranty or obligation under the LPT3-04 license agreement.

We have agreed to indemnify and hold LPThera harmless from any damages caused as a result of the development, manufacture, distribution, marketing, promotion or sale of the products containing LPT3-04 prior to the effective date of the LPT3-04 license agreement or our breach of a representation, warranty or obligation under the LPT3-04 license agreement.

The term of the LPT3-04 license agreement expires upon the expiration of our patents covered by the LPT3-04 license agreement that contain one or more valid claims. After expiration of the royalty term for products containing LPT3-04 in each country, LPThera shall have a royalty-free, non-exclusive license to develop, make, have made, use, import, market, promote, distribute, sell, and offer for sale and otherwise exploit such products containing LPT3-04 in such country.

LPThera may voluntarily terminate the LPT3-04 license agreement upon 60 days written notice to us. Either party may terminate the LPT3-04 license agreement if one party materially breaches the LPT3-04 license agreement and fails to cure such breach within 60 days or in the case of payment defaults, 30 days. After the effective date of termination of the LPT3-04 license agreement (unless terminated by LPThera as a result of our material breach), (i) all licenses granted by us to LPThera shall terminate, (ii) LPThera will assign and transfer to us all regulatory filings related to products containing LPT3-04, (iii) LPThera will license to us on a royalty-free basis all rights to all trademarks for the products containing LPT3-04 for use with such products, (iv) LPThera shall assign to us all inventions controlled by LPThera that relate to solely the development, manufacture, use or sale of the products containing LPT3-04, but if such inventions are not solely related to, but are necessary for, the development, manufacture, use or sale of the products containing LPT3-04, then LPThera shall grant to us the exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license (with right to sublicense) to develop, manufacture, sell and use solely the products containing LPT3-04. In the event that the LPT3-04 license agreement is terminated following completion of development milestones 1, 2 and 3 described above, we have agreed to pay LPThera (i) during the royalty term a royalty on our net sales of the products containing LPT3-04 at a rate of 3% and (ii) 10% of any license income obtained from a sublicensee.

Our SMaRT Replacement Therapy is based on the creation of a genetically modified strain of bacteria that colonizes in the oral cavity and replaces native bacteria that cause tooth decay. Our SMaRT Replacement Therapy product candidate is designed to be a painless, one-time, five-minute topical treatment applied to the teeth that has the potential to offer lifelong protection against dental caries, or tooth decay. While we commenced a Phase 1b clinical trial for SMaRT Replacement Therapy during the first quarter of 2011, the very restrictive trial enrollment criteria required by the FDA made the enrollment of candidates meeting the restrictive criteria difficult. This enrollment difficulty was also present in our Phase 1a clinical trial. Due to the enrollment difficulties we encountered with our initial Phase 1a clinical trial and with our Phase 1b clinical trial, we determined to discontinue pursuit of our Phase 1b clinical trial. Our focus for the SMaRT Replacement Therapy technology is on possible partnering opportunities that may exist.

We co-own the intellectual property for certain homologs of our MU1140 and SMaRT Replacement Therapy product candidates with the Texas A&M University System. Following a review of our research and development activities and a determination to focus our financial resources on our research activities for OG716 and AG013, we provided a notice to Texas A&M of the termination of our license agreement with Texas A&M which took effect in January 2019. We retain co-ownership of the intellectual property relating to the Texas A&M license agreement. We believe the Intrexon licensed pending patent application, would allow for the continued research and development of compounds for the SMaRT Replacement Therapy.

Our Worldwide Exclusive Channel Collaboration (“ECC”) Agreements with Intrexon

On June 5, 2012, we entered into the Lantibiotic ECC with Intrexon that governs a “channel collaboration” arrangement in which we will use Intrexon’s advanced transgene and cell engineering platforms for the development and production of lantibiotics, a class of peptide antibiotics that are naturally produced in Gram-positive bacteria and contain the characteristic polycyclic thioether amino acids lanthionine and methyllanthonine (collectively, the “Lantibiotics Program”). The Lantibiotic ECC establishes committees comprised of our representatives and Intrexon representatives that will govern activities related to the Lantibiotics Program in the areas of project establishment, chemistry, manufacturing and controls matters, clinical and regulatory matters, commercialization efforts and intellectual property matters. Currently, the Joint Steering Committee has established projects for the Lantibiotics Program and established the priorities, as well as approved the budgets for such projects. In November of 2017 in connection with our Series B Preferred Financing, we amended the Lantibiotic ECC to revise the payments, we are obligated to make to Intrexon as described below.

The Lantibiotic ECC grants us an exclusive worldwide license to use patents and other intellectual property of Intrexon in connection with the research, development, use, importing, exporting, manufacture, sale, and offer for sale of drug products involving the direct administration to humans or companion animals of a lantibiotic for the prevention or treatment of infectious disease (“Oragenics Products”). Such license is exclusive with respect to any clinical development, selling, offering for sale or other commercialization of Oragenics Products, and otherwise is non-exclusive. Subject to limited exceptions, we may not sublicense the rights described without Intrexon’s written consent.

Under the Lantibiotic ECC, and subject to certain exceptions, we are responsible for, among other things, funding the further anticipated development of lantibiotics toward the goal of commercialization, conducting nonclinical and clinical development of candidate lantibiotics, as well as for other aspects of manufacturing and the commercialization of the product(s). Among other things, Intrexon is responsible for technology discovery efforts, cell-engineering development, certain aspects of the manufacturing process, and costs of filing, prosecution and maintenance of Intrexon’s patents. Under the Lantibiotic ECC Intrexon has the option to perform any manufacturing activities in connection with the Lantibiotic Program that relate to the use of Intrexon material, the manufacture of bulk drug products, the manufacturing of bulk quantities, other components of Oragenics Products, or any earlier steps in the manufacturing process for Oragenics Products. To the extent Intrexon so elects, a separate manufacturing and supply agreement may be entered into between Intrexon and the Company.

Pursuant to the terms of the Lantibiotic ECC, as amended, we are obligated to pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 10% of net sales derived in that quarter from the sale of products developed from the Lantibiotic ECC, calculated on an Oragenics Product-by-Oragenics Product basis and we will pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 25% of revenue obtained in that quarter from a sublicensor in the event of a sublicensing arrangement.

We have agreed to indemnify and hold Intrexon harmless from any damages caused as a result of (i) our negligence or willful misconduct, (ii) the use, handling, storage, or transport of Intrexon Materials (as defined in the Lantibiotic ECC), (iii) our breach of a material representation, warranty or covenant in the Lantibiotic ECC, or (iv) the design, development, manufacture, regulatory approval, handling, storage, transport, distribution, sale or other disposition of any Oragenics Product.

Intrexon may terminate the Lantibiotic ECC if we fail to use diligent efforts to develop and commercialize Oragenics Products or if we elect not to pursue the development of a Lantibiotics Program identified by Intrexon that is a “Superior Therapy” as defined in the Lantibiotic ECC. Our obligation to use diligent efforts will be deemed satisfied if from November 8, 2017 until the end of 2018, the Company has budgeted one million two hundred thousand United States dollars ($1,200,000) for manufacturing and support activities related to, and including the conduct of the required toxicology studies for the OG716 IND filing. We may voluntarily terminate the Lantibiotic ECC at any time upon 90 days written notice to Intrexon.

Upon termination of the Lantibiotic ECC, we may continue to develop and commercialize any Oragenics Product that has been, at the time of termination:

Our obligation to pay 10% of net sales, 25% of sublicensing revenue and the milestone payments described below with respect to these “retained” products as well as to use diligent efforts to develop and commercialize these “retained” Oragenics Products will survive termination of the Lantibiotic ECC.

In addition, in partial consideration for each party’s execution and delivery of the Lantibiotic ECC, we entered into a Stock Issuance Agreement with Intrexon. Pursuant to the Stock Issuance Agreement, we issued to Intrexon 439,243 shares of our common stock as an initial technology access fee, in consideration for the execution and delivery of the Lantibiotic ECC and granted Intrexon certain equity participation rights and registration rights.

The registration rights granted to Intrexon in the Stock Issuance Agreement by us consisted of “piggyback registration” rights which permit Intrexon to participate in any firm commitment underwritten offering of securities by us, subject to underwriter cutbacks and lockups. In addition, we are precluded from granting registration rights in connection with a private placement unless (i) all shares held by Intrexon are, at the time of such private placement, included on a registration statement, or (ii) we agree, in connection with such private placement, to grant Intrexon the right to include on the registration statement a number of Intrexon’s Company shares equal to one half of the number of shares to be registered on behalf of the other holders or prospective holders.

Pursuant to the Stock Issuance Agreement, Intrexon is also entitled, at its election, to participate in future securities offerings by us that constitute “qualified financings” and purchase securities equal to 30% of the number of shares of common stock or other securities sold in such offering (exclusive of Intrexon’s purchase). For this purpose, a “qualified financing” means a sale of common stock or equity securities convertible into common stock in a public or private offering, raising gross proceeds of at least $1,000,000, where the sale of shares is either registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, at the time of issuance or we agree to register the resale of such shares.

In November of 2017, the Stock Issuance Agreement was also amended. Under the terms of the amendment, we have agreed to make certain payments, in cash, to Intrexon upon our achievement of designated milestones. The milestone events and amounts payable are as follows:

On July 21, 2016, the Lantibiotics ECC was amended to revise the definition of Field in view of a provisional patent application filing between Intrexon and Oragenics and to further clarify Oragenics’ rights under the Lantibiotic ECC to genetically modified Streptococcus mutans that express Lantibiotic(s).

None of the Lantibiotic ECC milestones had been achieved as of December 31, 2018.

On June 9, 2015, we entered into an Oral Mucositis ECC with Intrexon and Actobiotics, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Intrexon, through which we intend to research, develop and commercialize products, including the continued development and commercialization of AG013, for use in the treatment of oral mucositis in humans through the administration of an effector via genetically modified bacteria, but, in any case, excluding the delivery of anti-cancer effectors for the purpose of treatment or prophylaxis of cancer (collectively, the “Program”). Contemporaneously with the Oral Mucositis ECC, we and Intrexon also entered into a Stock Issuance Agreement (the “SIA”) which authorized the issuance of the Technology Access Fee and the future stock issuance of our Common Stock to Intrexon upon the achievement of designated milestones. We issued a Convertible Note in the amount of $5,000,000 as payment of the technology access fee associated with the Oral Mucositis ECC which was payable, at our option, in cash or shares of our common stock. The convertible note, including accrued interest, was repaid in December 2015 through the issuance of 338,101 shares of our common stock. In November of 2017 we amended the Oral Mucositis ECC to revise the payments we are obligated to make to Intrexon, as described below, and we revised the field in which we have exclusive rights to our Oral Mucositis product candidate for the treatment of Oral Mucositis to clarify that we have an exclusive right for the treatment of Oral Mucositis in humans regardless of etiology.

The Oral Mucositis ECC governs the “channel collaboration” arrangement in which we will use Intrexon’s proprietary technology relating to the identification, design and production of genetically modified bacteria for the purpose of developing the Program.

The Oral Mucositis ECC provides for the establishment of committees comprised from us and Intrexon representatives that will govern activities in the areas of project establishment, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical and regulatory matters, commercialization efforts, and intellectual property.

The Oral Mucositis ECC grants us an exclusive worldwide license to utilize Intrexon’s and Actobiotics’ intellectual property to develop and commercialize products, including the continued development and commercialization of AG013, for use in the treatment of oral mucositis in humans through the administration of an effector via genetically modified bacteria, but, in any case, excluding the delivery of anti-cancer effectors for the purpose of treatment or prophylaxis of cancer (the “Field”). It also grants us an exclusive license in the Field under all Information Controlled by Actobiotics (or otherwise by Intrexon)

and existing as of the Effective Date relating to the regulatory approval of AG013, including regulatory filings, data, clinical trial reports, and rights thereunder.

Under the Oral Mucositis ECC, and subject to certain exceptions, we are responsible for, among other things, funding the further anticipated development of products toward the goal of commercialization, conducting preclinical and clinical development of candidate products, as well as for other aspects of manufacturing and the commercialization of the product(s). Among other things, Intrexon is responsible for technology discovery efforts, cell-engineering development, and certain aspects of the manufacturing process.

Pursuant to the terms of the Oral Mucositis ECC, as amended, we are obligated to pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 12% of the net sales derived from the sale of products developed from the exclusive channel collaboration. We are also obligated to pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 25% of revenue obtained in that quarter from a sublicensor in the event of a sublicensing arrangement.

We have agreed to indemnify and hold Intrexon harmless from any damages caused as a result of (i) our negligence or willful misconduct, (ii) the use, handling, storage, or transport of Intrexon Materials (as defined in the Oral Mucositis ECC) or materials that are Actobiotics IP (as defined in the Oral Mucositis ECC), (iii) our breach of a material representation, warranty or covenant in the Oral Mucositis ECC, or (iv) the design, development, manufacture, regulatory approval, handling, storage, transport, distribution, sale or other disposition of any Oragenics Product.

We may voluntarily terminate the Oral Mucositis ECC upon 90 days written notice to Intrexon. Intrexon may also terminate the Oral Mucositis ECC if we breach and fail to cure the breach within 60 days or we do not pursue development of a Superior Therapy identified by Intrexon that is a “Superior Therapy” as defined in the Oral Mucositis ECC.

Upon termination of the ECC, we may continue to develop and commercialize any Oragenics Product that, at the time of termination that satisfies at least one of the following criteria:

Our obligation to pay 12% of net sales, 25% of sublicensing revenue and the milestone payments described below with respect to these “retained” products as well as to use diligent efforts to develop and commercialize these “retained” Oragenics Products will survive termination of the Oral Mucositis ECC.

In November of 2017, the Stock Issuance Agreement was also amended. Under the terms of the amended Oral Mucositis ECC (including the May 2017 amendment which was superseded by the November amendment) and amended Stock Issuance Agreement the Company has agreed to make certain payments to Intrexon upon our achievement of designated milestones in the form of shares of our Common Stock (based upon the fair market value of the shares otherwise required to be issued) unless the issuance of such shares would reasonably likely cause Intrexon to consolidate our financial statements with Intrexon’s financial statements, or at our option make a cash payment to Intrexon. The milestone events and amounts payable are as follows:

None of the Oral Mucositis ECC milestones had been achieved as of December 31, 2018.

Effective January 1, 2018, Intrexon assigned its interest in the Oral Mucositis ECC and Stock Issuance Agreement (excluding Intrexon’s standstill obligation) to its wholly owned subsidiary, ActoBio Therapeutics, Inc.

We hold an exclusive license from the University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. (“UFRF”) for our MU1140 product candidates.

MU1140 – We have exclusively licensed the intellectual property for our MU1140 lantibiotic technology from the UFRF. The original license agreement was dated June 22, 2000 and was subsequently amended on September 15, 2000, July 10, 2002, September 25, 2002, March 17, 2003 and April 19, 2013. The amended license agreement provides us with an exclusive worldwide license to make, use and sell products and processes covered by U.S. patent number, 7,067,125. Our license is for the period of the patent, which expires in 2019 subject to the performance of terms and conditions contained therein. The product and processes covered by such patent are not directly under development by us and the expiration of the license during the year in accordance with its terms is not expected to have an effect on our operations.

In the United States, foods (including dietary supplements), drugs (including biological products), medical devices, cosmetics, tobacco products and radiation-emitting products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The FDC Act and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, the manufacture, distribution and sale of these products. These laws and regulations prescribe criminal and civil penalties that can be assessed, and violation of these laws and regulations can result in enforcement action by the FDA and other regulatory agencies.

Pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The FDC Act, and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending NDAs or BLAs, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties and criminal prosecution.

Pharmaceutical product development for a new product or certain changes to an approved product in the United States typically involves the following steps before a biological product or new drug may be marketed in the United States:

Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including good laboratory practices. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted.

A 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND is required prior to the commencement of clinical testing in humans. If the FDA has neither commented on nor questioned the IND within this 30-day period, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with good clinical practice, or GCP, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators, and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND.

The FDA may order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. The trial protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an IRB for approval. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions.

Clinical trials to support NDAs or BLAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the drug into healthy human subjects or patients, the drug is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence on effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the drug for a particular indication, dosage tolerance, and optimum dosage, and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks. If a compound demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain the additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the drug. In most cases the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug. A single Phase 3 clinical trial with other confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in rare instances where the trial is a large multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible.

The length of time and related costs necessary to complete clinical trials varies significantly and may be difficult to predict. Clinical trial results are frequently susceptible to varying interpretations that may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approvals. Additional factors that can cause delay or termination of our clinical trials, or cause the costs of these clinical trials to increase, include:

Any drug is likely to produce some toxicities or undesirable side effects in animals and in humans when administered at sufficiently high doses and/or for sufficiently long periods of time. Unacceptable toxicities or side effects may occur at any dose level, and at any time in the course of animal studies designed to identify unacceptable effects of a drug candidate, known as toxicological studies, or in clinical trials of our drug candidates. The appearance of any unacceptable toxicity or side effect could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, limit, delay or abort the development of any of our drug candidates, and could ultimately prevent their marketing approval by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for any or all targeted indications.

The FDA’s fast track and breakthrough therapy designation programs are intended to facilitate the development and expedite the review of drug candidates intended for the treatment of serious or life-threatening conditions and that demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for these conditions. Under these programs, FDA can, for example, review portions of an NDA or BLA for a drug candidate before the entire application is complete, thus potentially beginning the review process at an earlier time.

We cannot guarantee that the FDA will grant any of our requests for fast track or breakthrough therapy designations, that any such designations would affect the time of review or that the FDA will approve the NDA or BLA submitted for any of our drug candidates, whether or not these designations are granted. Additionally, FDA approval of a fast track/breakthrough product can include restrictions on the product’s use or distribution (such as permitting use only for specified medical conditions or limiting distribution to physicians or facilities with special training or experience). Approval of such designated products can be conditioned on additional clinical trials after approval.

After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA or BLA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA or BLA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the U.S. The NDA or the BLA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture and controls. The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA is substantial. The submission of most NDAs and BLAs is additionally subject to a substantial application user fee, currently exceeding $2,038,000 for fiscal year 2017, and the manufacturer and/or sponsor under an approved NDA or BLA are also subject to annual product and establishment user fees, currently exceeding $97,000 per product and $512,000 per establishment for fiscal year 2017. Although these fees were reduced from fiscal year 2016, they are typically increased annually.

The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA or BLA to determine whether the application will be filed based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. If the NDA or BLA submission is filed, the FDA reviews the NDA or BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product is safe and effective for its intended use. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs or BLAs. Most such applications for standard review drug products are reviewed within ten to twelve months; most applications for priority review drugs are reviewed in six to eight months. Priority review can be applied to drugs that the FDA determines offer major advances in treatment, or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. For biologics, priority review is further limited to drugs intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease relative to the currently approved products. The review process for both standard and priority review may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission.

The FDA may also refer applications for novel drug products, or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee – typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts – for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless compliance with cGMPs is satisfactory and the NDA or BLA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the drug is safe and effective in the indication studied.

After the FDA evaluates the NDA or BLA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing, or information, in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA or BLA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included.

An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of NDA or BLA approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use, or ETASU. ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the drug. Moreover, product approval may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the drug’s safety or efficacy. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing.

Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or BLA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA or BLA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA or BLA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs or BLAs.

The required testing, data collection, analysis and compilation of an IND and a BLA or NDA are labor intensive and costly and may take a great deal of time. Tests may have to be redone or new tests performed in order to comply with FDA requirements. It can take considerable time (e.g. 5-10 years) and resources to achieve enrollment sufficient to commence such trials and complete Phase 2 or 3 clinical trials. Moreover, there is no guarantee a product will be approved.

In Canada, the Therapeutic Products Directorate and the Biologics and Genetic Therapies Directorate of HC ensure that clinical trials are properly designed and undertaken and that subjects are not exposed to undue risk. Regulations define specific Investigational New Drug Submission (or IND) application requirements, which must be complied with before a new drug can be distributed for trial purposes. The Directorates currently review the safety, efficacy and quality data submitted by the sponsor and approve the distribution of the drug to the investigator. The sponsor of the trial is required to maintain accurate records, report adverse drug reactions, and ensure that the investigator adheres to the approved protocol. Trials in humans should be conducted according to generally accepted principles of good clinical practice. Management believes that these standards provide assurance that the data and reported results are credible and accurate, and that the rights, integrity, and privacy of clinical trial subjects are protected.

Sponsors wishing to conduct clinical trials in Phases I to III of development must apply under a 30-day default system. Applications must contain the information described in the regulations, including: a clinical trial attestation; a protocol; statements to be contained in each informed consent form, that set out the risks posed to the health of clinical trial subjects as a result of their participation in the clinical trial; an investigator’s brochure; applicable information on excipients (delivery vehicles); and chemistry and manufacturing information.

The sponsor can proceed with the clinical trial if the Directorates have not objected to the sale or importation of the drug within 30 days after the date of receipt of the clinical trial application and Research Ethics Board approval for the conduct of the trial at the site has been obtained. Additional information is available on Health Canada’s website - www. hc-sc.gc.ca .

Outside the United States and Canada, our ability to market a product is contingent upon receiving a marketing authorization from the appropriate regulatory authorities. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, marketing authorization, pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. At present, foreign marketing authorizations are applied for at a national level, although within the European Union (EU) registration procedures are available to companies wishing to market a product in more than one EU member state. If the regulatory authority is satisfied that adequate evidence of safety, quality and efficacy has been presented, a marketing authorization may be granted. This foreign regulatory approval process involves all of the risks associated with FDA approval discussed above and may also include additional risks.

The Orphan Drug Act provides incentives to manufacturers to develop and market drugs for rare diseases and conditions affecting fewer than 200,000 persons in the United States at the time of application for orphan drug designation. The first developer to receive FDA marketing approval for an orphan drug is entitled to a seven-year exclusive marketing period in the United States for the orphan drug indication. However, a drug that the FDA considers to be clinically superior to, or different from, another approved orphan drug, even though for the same indication, may also obtain approval in the United States during the seven-year exclusive marketing period.

Under the FDA Modernization Act of 1997, designation as a Fast Track product for a new drug or biological product means that the FDA will take such actions as are appropriate to expedite the development and review of the application for approval of such product.

Legislation similar to the Orphan Drug Act has been enacted in other countries outside of the United States, including the EU. The orphan legislation in the EU is available for therapies addressing conditions that affect five or fewer out of 10,000 persons, are life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions and for which no satisfactory treatment is authorized. The market exclusivity period is for ten years, although that period can be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, available evidence establishes that the product does not justify maintenance of market exclusivity.

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, NDAs, BLAs or supplements to NDAs or BLAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any drug for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.

The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, or BPCA, provides NDA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity – patent or non-patent – for a drug if certain conditions are met. For BLAs, the BPCA provides a six-month extension for non-patent exclusivity if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, the FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications under the BPCA are treated as priority applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers.

Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including drugs, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to discuss the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.

In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent with claims covering the applicant’s product or method of using the product. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA. An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active ingredients in the same strengths and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown to be bioequivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or submit results of, pre-clinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Drugs approved in this way are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug, and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug.

The ANDA applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in the FDA’s Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify that: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. The ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a section viii statement certifying that its proposed ANDA labeling does not contain (or carves out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.

A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the ANDA has been received by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification. The

filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant.

The ANDA application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired.

Exclusivity provisions under the FDC Act also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FDC Act provides a five-year period of non-patent exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to gain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity, or NCE. A drug is entitled to NCE exclusivity if it contains a drug substance no active moiety of which has been previously approved by the FDA. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an ANDA or file a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a Paragraph IV certification. The FDC Act also provides three years of market exclusivity for an NDA, including a 505(b)(2) NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example, for new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions for use associated with the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs for the original conditions of use, such as the originally approved indication. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA; however, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all the non-clinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

After NDA approval, the owner of relevant drug patent may apply for up to a five-year patent term extension. Only one patent may be extended for each regulatory review period, which is composed of two parts: a testing phase, and an approval phase. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as half of the drug’s testing phase – the time between the day the IND becomes effective and NDA submission – and all of the review phase – the time between NDA submission and approval up to a maximum of five years. The time can be shortened if the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence. The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years.

For patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office must determine that approval of the drug covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for a drug for which an NDA has not been submitted.

Most drug products obtain FDA marketing approval pursuant to an NDA or an ANDA. A third alternative is a special type of NDA, commonly referred to as a Section 505(b)(2), or 505(b)(2), NDA, which enables the applicant to rely, in part, on studies not conducted by, or for, the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference or use, such as the FDA’s findings of safety and/or effectiveness for a similar previously approved product, or published literature, in support of its application.

505(b)(2) NDAs often provide an alternate path to FDA approval for new or improved formulations or new uses of previously approved products. Section 505(b)(2) permits the filing of an NDA where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies not conducted by, or for, the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. If the 505(b)(2) applicant can establish that reliance on the FDA’s previous approval is scientifically appropriate, it may eliminate the need to conduct certain preclinical or clinical trials of the new product. The FDA may also require companies to perform additional studies or measurements to support the change from the approved product. The FDA may then approve the new product candidate for all, or some, of the label indications for which the referenced product has been approved, as well as for any new indication sought by the Section 505(b)(2) applicant.

To the extent that the Section 505(b)(2) applicant is relying on studies conducted for an already approved product, the applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in the Orange Book to the same extent that an ANDA applicant would. Thus approval of a 505(b)(2) NDA can be stalled until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired, until any non-patent exclusivity, such as exclusivity for obtaining approval of a new chemical entity, listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired, and, in the case of a Paragraph IV certification and subsequent patent infringement suit, until the earlier of 30 months, settlement of the lawsuit or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the Section 505(b)(2) applicant.

Once an NDA or BLA is approved, a product will be subject to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling.

Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports are required following FDA approval of an NDA or BLA. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, REMS, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or the FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality-control, drug manufacture, packaging and labeling procedures must continue to conform to cGMPs after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with cGMPs. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered. In addition, prescription drug manufacturers in the United States must comply with applicable provisions of the Drug Supply Chain Security Act and provide and receive product tracing information, maintain appropriate licenses, ensure they only work with other properly licensed entities, and have procedures in place to identify and properly handle suspect and illegitimate products.

Failure to comply with the applicable FDA requirements may subject manufacturers and distributors to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include, among other things, warning letters, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, civil money penalties, fines, restitution, disgorgement, or civil or criminal penalties. Further, the FDA has authority to issue mandatory recalls for medical devices and biologics, and we may need to undertake a voluntary recall for any of our products.

In addition to regulations enforced by the FDA, we are also subject to regulation under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Environmental Protection Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and other federal, state and local regulations. Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, chemicals, biological materials and radioactive compounds.

Biological products used for the prevention, treatment or cure of a disease or condition of a human being are subject to regulation under the FDC Act, except the section of the FDC Act which governs the approval of NDAs. Biological products are approved for marketing under provisions of the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, via a BLA. However, the application process and requirements for approval of BLAs are very similar to those for NDAs, and biologics are associated with similar approval risks and costs as drugs. To help reduce the increased risk of the introduction of adventitious agents, the PHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing controls for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The PHSA also provides authority to the FDA to immediately suspend licenses in situations where there exists a danger to public health, to prepare or procure products in the event of shortages and critical public health needs, and to authorize the creation and enforcement of regulations to prevent the introduction or spread of communicable diseases in the US and between states.

After a BLA is approved, the product may also be subject to official lot release as a condition of approval. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA may also perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products, such as viral vaccines, before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA conducts laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness of biological products. As with drugs, after approval of biologics, manufacturers must address any safety issues that arise, are subject to recalls or a halt in manufacturing, and are subject to periodic inspection after approval.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, creates an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be highly similar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Biosimilarity sufficient to reference a prior FDA-approved product requires that there be no differences in conditions of use, route of administration, dosage form, and strength, and no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity and potency. Biosimilarity must be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and at least one clinical trial, absent a waiver by the Secretary. A biosimilar product may be deemed interchangeable with a prior approved product if it meets the higher hurdle of demonstrating that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product and, for products administered multiple times, the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. To date, only four biosimilar products and no interchangeable products have been approved under the BPCIA. Complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the process by which such products are manufactured, particularly with respect to interchangeability, are still being evaluated by the FDA.

A reference biologic is granted twelve years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product, and no application for a biosimilar can be submitted for four years from the date of licensure of the reference product. The first biologic product submitted under the abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be interchangeable with the reference product has exclusivity against a finding of interchangeability for other biologics for the same condition of use for the lesser of (i) one year after first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable biosimilar, (ii) eighteen months after the first interchangeable biosimilar is approved if there is no patent challenge, (iii) eighteen months after resolution of a lawsuit over the patents of the reference biologic in favor of the first interchangeable biosimilar applicant, or (iv) 42 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar’s application has been approved if a patent lawsuit is ongoing within the 42-month period.

In order to market any product outside of the United States, a company must also comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of drug products. Whether or not it obtains FDA approval for a product, the company would need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before it can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries or jurisdictions. The approval process ultimately varies between countries and jurisdictions and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries and jurisdictions might differ from and be longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction may negatively impact the regulatory process in others.

The process governing approval of medicinal products in the European Union follows essentially the same lines as in the United States and, likewise, generally involves satisfactorily completing each of the following:

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity in animal studies, in order to assess the potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the preclinical tests and formulation of the compounds for testing must comply with the relevant EU regulations and requirements. The results of the preclinical tests, together with relevant manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted as part of the CTA.

Requirements for the conduct of clinical trials in the European Union including GCP are implemented in the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and the GCP Directive 2005/28/EC. Pursuant to Directive 2001/20/EC and Directive 2005/28/EC, as amended, a system for the approval of clinical trials in the European Union has been implemented through national legislation of the member states. Under this system, approval must be obtained from the competent national authority of an EU member state in which a study is planned to be conducted, or in multiple member states if the clinical trial is to be conducted in a number of member states. To this end, a CTA is submitted, which must be supported by an investigational medicinal product dossier, or IMPD, and further supporting information prescribed by Directive 2001/20/EC and Directive 2005/28/EC and other applicable guidance documents. Furthermore, a clinical trial may only be started after a competent ethics committee has issued a favorable opinion on the clinical trial application in that country.

In April 2014, the EU legislators passed the new Clinical Trials Regulation, (EU) No 536/2014, which will replace the current Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC. To ensure that the rules for clinical trials are identical throughout the European Union, the new EU clinical trials legislation was passed as a regulation that is directly applicable in all EU member states. All clinical trials performed in the European Union are required to be conducted in accordance with the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC until the new Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 becomes applicable, which will be no earlier than May 28, 2016.

The new Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 aims to simplify and streamline the approval of clinical trial in the European Union. The main characteristics of the regulation include:

Authorization to market a product in the member states of the European Union proceeds under one of four procedures: a centralized authorization procedure, a mutual recognition procedure, a decentralized procedure or a national procedure.

The centralized procedure enables applicants to obtain a marketing authorization that is valid in all EU member states based on a single application. Certain medicinal products, including products developed by means of biotechnological processes, must undergo the centralized authorization procedure for marketing authorization, which, if granted by the European Commission, is automatically valid in all 28 EU member states. The EMA and the European Commission administer this centralized authorization procedure pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004.

The centralized authorization procedure is optional for other medicinal products if they contain a new active substance or if the applicant shows that the medicinal product concerned constitutes a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or that the granting of authorization is in the interest of patients in the European Union.

Under the centralized authorization procedure, the EMA’s Committee for Human Medicinal Products, or CHMP, serves as the scientific committee that renders opinions about the safety, efficacy and quality of medicinal products for human use on behalf of the EMA. The CHMP is composed of experts nominated by each member state’s national authority for medicinal products, with an expert appointed to act as Rapporteur for the co-ordination of the evaluation with the possible assistance of a further member of the Committee acting as a Co-Rapporteur. After approval, the Rapporteur(s) continue to monitor the product throughout its life cycle. The CHMP has 210 days to adopt an opinion as to whether a marketing authorization should be granted. The process usually takes longer in case additional information is requested, which triggers clock-stops in the procedural timelines. The process is complex and involves extensive consultation with the regulatory authorities of member states and a number of experts. When an application is submitted for a marketing authorization in respect of a drug

that is of major interest from the point of view of public health and in particular from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation, the applicant may pursuant to Article 14(9) Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 request an accelerated assessment procedure. If the CHMP accepts such request, the time-limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days but it is possible that the CHMP can revert to the standard time-limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment. Once the procedure is completed, a European Public Assessment Report, or EPAR, is produced. If the opinion is negative, information is given as to the grounds on which this conclusion was reached. After the adoption of the CHMP opinion, a decision on the MAA must be adopted by the European Commission, after consulting the E.U. member states, which in total can take more than 60 days.

In specific circumstances, EU legislation (Article 14(7) Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 and Regulation (EC) No 507/2006 on Conditional Marketing Authorizations for Medicinal Products for Human Use) enables applicants to obtain a conditional marketing authorization prior to obtaining the comprehensive clinical data required for an application for a full marketing authorization. Such conditional approvals may be granted for product candidates (including medicines designated as orphan medicinal products) if (1) the risk-benefit balance of the product candidate is positive, (2) it is likely that the applicant will be in a position to provide the required comprehensive clinical trial data, (3) the product fulfills unmet medical needs and (4) the benefit to public health of the immediate availability on the market of the medicinal product concerned outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. A conditional marketing authorization may contain specific obligations to be fulfilled by the marketing authorization holder, including obligations with respect to the completion of ongoing or new studies, and with respect to the collection of pharmacovigilance data. Conditional marketing authorizations are valid for one year, and may be renewed annually, if the risk-benefit balance remains positive, and after an assessment of the need for additional or modified conditions and/or specific obligations. The timelines for the centralized procedure described above also apply with respect to the review by the CHMP of applications for a conditional marketing authorization.

Under Article 14(8) Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, products for which the applicant can demonstrate that comprehensive data (in line with the requirements laid down in Annex I of Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended) cannot be provided (due to specific reasons foreseen in the legislation) might be eligible for marketing authorization under exceptional circumstances. This type of authorization is reviewed annually to reassess the risk-benefit balance. The fulfillment of any specific procedures/obligations imposed as part of the marketing authorization under exceptional circumstances is aimed at the provision of information on the safe and effective use of the product and will normally not lead to the completion of a full dossier/approval.

In general, if the centralized procedure is not followed, there are three alternative procedures as prescribed in Directive 2001/83/EC:

A marketing authorization may be granted only to an applicant established in the European Union.

Prior to obtaining a marketing authorization in the European Union, applicants have to demonstrate compliance with all measures included in an EMA-approved Pediatric Investigation Plan, or PIP, covering all subsets of the pediatric population, unless the EMA has granted a product-specific waiver, a class waiver, or a deferral for one or more of the measures included in the PIP. The respective requirements for all marketing authorization procedures are set forth in Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006, which is referred to as the Pediatric Regulation. This requirement also applies when a company wants to add a new indication, pharmaceutical form or route of administration for a medicine that is already authorized. The Pediatric Committee of the EMA, or PDCO, may grant deferrals for some medicines, allowing a company to delay development of the medicine in children until there is enough information to demonstrate its effectiveness and safety in adults. The PDCO may

also grant waivers when development of a medicine in children is not needed or is not appropriate, such as for diseases that only affect the elderly population.

Before a marketing authorization application can be filed, or an existing marketing authorization can be amended, the EMA determines that companies actually comply with the agreed studies and measures listed in each relevant PIP.

A marketing authorization is valid for five years in principle and the marketing authorization may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk-benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the authorizing member state. To this end, the marketing authorization holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the file in respect of quality, safety and efficacy, including all variations introduced since the marketing authorization was granted, at least six months before the marketing authorization ceases to be valid. Once renewed, the marketing authorization is valid for an unlimited period, unless the European Commission or the competent authority decides, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one additional five-year renewal. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the drug on the EU market (in case of centralized procedure) or on the market of the authorizing member state within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause).

EU legislation also provides for a system of regulatory data and market exclusivity. According to Article 14(11) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, as amended, and Article 10(1) of Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended, upon receiving marketing authorization, new chemical entities approved on the basis of complete independent data package benefit from eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity prevents regulatory authorities in the European Union from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic (abbreviated) application. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic medicinal product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity. The overall ten-year period will be extended to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder, or MAH, obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. Even if a compound is considered to be a new chemical entity and the innovator is able to gain the period of data exclusivity, another company nevertheless could also market another version of the drug if such company obtained marketing authorization based on an MAA with a complete independent data package of pharmaceutical test, preclinical tests and clinical trials. However, products designated as orphan medicinal products enjoy, upon receiving marketing authorization, a period of ten years of orphan market exclusivity. Depending upon the timing and duration of the EU marketing authorization process, products may be eligible for up to five years’ supplementary protection certificates, or SPCs, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 469/2009. Such SPCs extend the rights under the basic patent for the drug.

If we obtain authorization for a medicinal product in the European Union, we will be required to comply with a range of requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products:

We will, for example, have to comply with the EU’s stringent pharmacovigilance or safety reporting rules, pursuant to which post-authorization studies and additional monitoring obligations can be imposed. Other requirements relate, for example, to the manufacturing of products and APIs in accordance with good manufacturing practice standards. EU regulators may conduct inspections to verify our compliance with applicable requirements, and we will have to continue to expend time, money and effort to remain compliant. Non-compliance with EU requirements regarding safety monitoring or pharmacovigilance, and with requirements related to the development of products for the pediatric population, can also result in significant financial penalties in the European Union. Similarly, failure to comply with the EU’s requirements regarding the protection of individual personal data can also lead to significant penalties and sanctions. Individual EU member states may also impose various sanctions and penalties in case we do not comply with locally applicable requirements.

The manufacturing of authorized drugs, for which a separate manufacturer’s license is mandatory, must be conducted in strict compliance with the EMA’s Good Manufacturing Practices, or GMP, requirements and comparable requirements of other regulatory bodies in the European Union, which mandate the methods, facilities and controls used in manufacturing, processing and packing of drugs to assure their safety and identity. The EMA enforces its current GMP requirements through mandatory registration of facilities and inspections of those facilities. The EMA may have a coordinating role for these inspections while the responsibility for carrying them out rests with the member states competent authority under whose responsibility the manufacturer falls. Failure to comply with these requirements could interrupt supply and result in delays, unanticipated costs and lost revenues, and could subject the applicant to potential legal or regulatory action, including but not limited to warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, seizure of product, injunctive action or possible civil and criminal penalties.

The marketing and promotion of authorized drugs, including industry-sponsored continuing medical education and advertising directed toward the prescribers of drugs and/or the general public, are strictly regulated in the European Union under Directive 2001/83/EC. The applicable regulations aim to ensure that information provided by holders of marketing authorizations regarding their products is truthful, balanced and accurately reflects the safety and efficacy claims authorized by the EMA or by the competent authority of the authorizing member state. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties.

In order to compensate the patentee for delays in obtaining a marketing authorization for a patented product, a supplementary certificate, or SPC, may be granted extending the exclusivity period for that specific product by up to five years. Applications for SPCs must be made to the relevant patent office in each E.U. member state and the granted certificates are valid only in the member state of grant. An application has to be made by the patent owner within six months of the first marketing authorization being granted in the European Union (assuming the patent in question has not expired, lapsed or been revoked) or within six months of the grant of the patent (if the marketing authorization is granted first). In the context of SPCs, the term “product” means the active ingredient or combination of active ingredients for a medicinal product and the term “patent” means a patent protecting such a product or a new manufacturing process or application for it. The duration of an SPC is calculated as the difference between the patent’s filing date and the date of the first marketing authorization, minus five years, subject to a maximum term of five years.

A six-month pediatric extension of an SPC may be obtained where the patentee has carried out an agreed pediatric investigation plan, the authorized product information includes information on the results of the studies and the product is authorized in all member states of the European Union.

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of products approved by the FDA and other government authorities. Sales of products will depend, in part, on the extent to which the costs of the products will be covered by third-party payors, including government health programs in the United States such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial health insurers and managed care organizations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication.

In order to secure coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for sale, a company may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of the product, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA or other comparable regulatory approvals. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Third-party reimbursement may not be sufficient to maintain price levels high enough to realize an appropriate return on investment in product development.

There has been an increased focus on drug pricing in recent years in the United States. Although there are no direct government price controls over private sector purchases in the United States, there are rebates and other financial requirements for federal and state health care programs. The Medicare Modernization Act, enacted in December 2003, established the Medicare Part D outpatient prescription drug benefit, which is provided primarily through private entities that attempt to negotiate price concessions from pharmaceutical manufacturers. The health care reform legislation enacted in 2010, known as the Affordable Care Act, requires drug manufacturers to pay 50% of the Medicare Part D coverage gap, also known as the “donut hole,” on prescriptions for branded products filled when the beneficiary reaches this coverage. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 resulted in changes to the way drug prices are reported to the government and the formula using such information to calculate the required Medicaid rebates. The Affordable Care Act increased the minimum basic Medicaid rebate for branded prescription drugs from 15.1% to 23.1% and requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay states rebates on prescription drugs dispensed to Medicaid managed care enrollees. In addition, the Affordable Care Act increased the additional Medicaid rebate on “line extensions” (such as extended release formulations) of solid oral dosage forms of branded products, revised the definition of average manufacturer price by changing the classes of purchasers included in the calculation, and expanded the entities eligible for discounted pricing under the federal 340B drug pricing program. Current orphan drugs are excluded from the expanded 340B hospitals eligible for discounts.

The Affordable Care Act imposes a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products. The fee (which is not deductible for federal income tax purposes) is based on the manufacturer’s market share of sales of branded drugs and biologics (excluding orphan drugs) to, or pursuant to coverage under, specified U. S. government programs. The Affordable Care Act also contains a number of provisions, including provisions governing the way that health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers, enrollment in federal health care programs, reimbursement changes, the increased use of comparative effectiveness research in health care decision-making, and enhancements to fraud and abuse requirements and enforcement, that are affecting existing government health care programs and will result in the development of new programs. The Affordable Care Act also contains requirements for manufacturers to publicly report certain payments or other transfers of value made to physicians and teaching hospitals. We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state health care legislation and regulations, including regulations that will be issued to implement provisions of the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act and further changes in the law or regulatory framework that reduce our revenues or increase our costs could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and cash flows.

Public and private health care payers control costs and influence drug pricing through a variety of mechanisms, including through negotiating discounts with the manufacturers and through the use of tiered formularies and other mechanisms that provide preferential access to certain drugs over others within a therapeutic class. Payers also set other criteria to govern the uses of a drug that will be deemed medically appropriate and therefore reimbursed or otherwise covered. Payers may require physicians to seek approval from them before a product will be reimbursed or covered, commonly referred to as prior authorization. In particular, many public and private health care payers limit reimbursement and coverage to the uses of a drug that are either approved by the FDA or appear in a recognized drug compendium. Drug compendia are publications that summarize the available medical evidence for particular drug products and identify which uses of a drug are supported or not supported by the available evidence, whether or not such uses have been approved by the FDA. For example, in the case of Medicare Part D coverage for oncology drugs, the Medicare Modernization Act, with certain exceptions, provides for Medicare coverage of unapproved uses of an FDA-approved drug if the unapproved use is reasonable and necessary and is supported by one or more citations in CMS-approved compendia, such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Drugs and Biologics Compendium. Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. For example, in the European Union, governments influence the price of pharmaceutical products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of such products to consumers. The approach taken varies from member state to member state. Some jurisdictions operate positive or negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. Other member states allow companies to fix their own

prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits and may limit or restrict reimbursement. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, and prescription drugs in particular, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products, as exemplified by the actions of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in the United Kingdom, which evaluates the data supporting new medicines and passes reimbursement recommendations to the government. In addition, in some countries cross-border imports from low-priced markets (parallel imports) exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country.

In the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that drug products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of our drug candidate to currently available therapies (so called health technology assessment) in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of drug products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. E.U. member states may approve a specific price for a drug product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the drug product on the market. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for drug products, but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels, including as part of cost containment measures. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various E.U. member states, and parallel distribution (arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states), can further reduce prices. Any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for drug products may not allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of drug products that are granted marketing approval. Arrangements with third-party payors and customers are subject to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. Such restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, include the following:

Some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other health care providers or marketing expenditures. State and foreign laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

We rely upon a combination of licenses, patents, trade secrets, know-how, and licensing opportunities to develop our business. Our future prospects depend on our ability to protect our intellectual property. We also need to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties.

We attempt to protect our technology and products through patents and patent applications. As of December 31, 2018, we held two U.S. issued patents, eight issued foreign patents and eleven foreign patent applications pending. In addition, as of December 31, 2018, we have licenses for one U.S. issued patent. We reassess the value of each patent at the time maintenance fees are due, and in cases where maintaining the patent is judged to be of no significant strategic value, we decline to pay the fee.

We have an exclusive, worldwide license from Intrexon to use its technology to develop lantibiotics. We also have an exclusive worldwide license from Intrexon’s wholly owned subsidiaries, ActoBio Therapeutics, Inc. and Actobiotics NV to use their intellectual property to develop AG013 for the treatment of oral mucositis.

We have exclusively licensed the intellectual property for our MU1140 antibiotic product candidate from the UFRF. Our exclusive license agreement extends through to the patent expiration date of July 2019. See “Our In-Licensed Technology Agreements.” We co-own the intellectual property for certain homologs of our MU1140 product candidate with the Texas A&M University System. Following a review of our research and development activities and a determination to focus our financial resources on our research activities for OG716 and AG013, we provided a notice to Texas A&M of the termination of our license agreement with Texas A&M which took effect in January 2019. We retain co-ownership of the intellectual property relating to the Texas A&M license agreement.

The effect of the issued patents is that they provide us with patent protection for the claims covered by the patents. While the expiration of a product patent normally results in a loss of market exclusivity for the covered product or product candidate, commercial benefits may continue to be derived from: (i) later-granted patents on processes and intermediates related to the most economical method of manufacture of the active ingredient of such product; (ii) patents relating to the use of such product; (iii) patents relating to novel compositions and formulations; and (iv) in the United States and certain other countries, market exclusivity that may be available under relevant law. The effect of patent expiration on products or product candidates also depends upon many other factors such as the nature of the market and the position of the product in it, the growth of the market, the complexities and economics of the process for manufacture of the active ingredient of the product and the requirements of new drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act or similar laws and regulations in other countries.

Our pending patent applications cover a range of technologies, including specific embodiments and applications for treatment of various medical indications, improved application methods and adjunctive utilization with other therapeutic modalities. The coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued. Accordingly, we do not know whether any of the applications we acquire or license will result in the issuance of patents, or, if any patents are issued, whether they will provide significant proprietary protection or will be challenged, circumvented or invalidated. Because unissued U.S. patent applications are maintained in secrecy for a period of eighteen months and U.S. patent applications filed prior to November 29, 2000 are not disclosed until such patents are issued, and since publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain of the priority of inventions covered by pending patent applications. Moreover, we may have to participate in opposition proceedings in a foreign patent office, or for United States patent applications filed before March 16, 2013, in interference proceedings declared by the United States Patent and Trademark Office to determine priority of invention, or in United States inter partes review or post-grant review procedures, any of which could result in substantial cost to us, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. There can be no assurance that the patents, if issued, would be held valid by a court of competent jurisdiction. An adverse outcome could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, require disputed rights to be licensed from third parties or require us to cease using such technology.

We have patents and patent applications in other countries, as well as in the European Patent Office that we believe provide equivalent or comparable protection for our product candidates in jurisdictions internationally that we consider to be key markets. Because of the differences in patent laws and laws concerning proprietary rights, the extent of protection provided by U.S. patents or proprietary rights owned by us may differ from that of their foreign counterparts.

We believe that our patents, the protection of discoveries in connection with our development activities, our proprietary products, technologies, processes and know-how and all of our intellectual property are important to our business. To achieve a competitive position, we rely on trade secrets, non-patented proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation, where patent protection is not believed to be appropriate or attainable. In addition, as outlined above, we have a

number of patent licenses from third parties, some of which may be important to our business. See “Our In-licensed Technology”. There can be no assurance that any of our patents, licenses or other intellectual property rights will afford us any protection from competition.

Our trademarks are important to our business. We currently use the following unregistered trademarks: SMaRT Replacement Therapy™, MU1140™, IVIAT™ and CMAT™, LPT3-04™, and DPOLT™. We currently have pending with the U.S. PTO, applications for registration of the mark of ORAGENICS™ (therapeutic products; anti-infectives) and a registered mark for ORAGENICS® (non-medicated oral care probiotic preparations for the care of the mouth and teeth for cosmetic purposes). We also have rights to use other names essential to our business. Federally registered trademarks have a perpetual life, as long as they are maintained and renewed on a timely basis and used properly as trademarks, subject to the rights of third parties to seek cancellation of the trademarks if they claim priority or confusion of usage. We regard our trademarks and other proprietary rights as valuable assets and believe they have significant value to us.

We attempt to protect our trade secrets, including the processes, concepts, ideas and documentation associated with our technologies, through the use of confidentiality agreements and non-competition agreements with our current employees and with other parties to whom we have divulged such trade secrets. There can be no assurance that these agreements will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach, that others will not independently develop equivalent proprietary information or that other third parties will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets and other intellectual property. If our employees or other parties breach our confidentiality agreements and non-competition agreements or if these agreements are not sufficient to protect our technology or are found to be unenforceable, our competitors could acquire and use information that we consider to be our trade secrets and we may not be able to compete effectively. Most of our competitors have substantially greater financial, marketing, technical and manufacturing resources than we have and we may not be profitable if our competitors are also able to take advantage of our trade secrets.

We may find it necessary to initiate litigation to enforce our patent rights, to protect our intellectual property or to determine the scope and validity of the proprietary rights of others. Litigation is costly and time-consuming, and there can be no assurance that our litigation expenses will not be significant in the future or that we will prevail in any such litigation.

We have previously received funding from government agencies under the National Science Foundation’s and National Institute of Health’s Small Business Innovation Research, or SBIR, grants. Eligibility of public companies to receive such grants is based on size and ownership criteria which are under review by the Small Business Administration, or SBA. As a result, our eligibility may change in the future and additional funding from this source may not be available. In addition, although we seek to protect the competitive benefits we derive from our patents, proprietary information, and other intellectual property, we may not have the right to prohibit the U.S. government from using certain technologies developed or acquired by us due to federal research grants or to prohibit third-party companies, including our competitors, from using those technologies in providing products and services to the U.S. government. The U.S. government could have the right to royalty-free use of technologies that we may develop under such grants. We may commercially exploit those government-funded technologies and may assert our intellectual property rights against other non-government users of technology developed by us, but we may not be successful in our efforts to do so.

We have six full-time employees. We enjoy good relations with our employees. None of our employees are a member of any labor union, and we are not a party to any collective bargaining agreement.

Our website is www.oragenics.com. On our website we make available at no cost our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish them to, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The information contained on our website is not a part of this annual report on Form 10-K.

An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below before making an investment decision in our securities. These risk factors are effective as of the date of this Form 10-K and shall be deemed to be modified or superseded to the extent that a statement contained in our future filings modifies or replaces such statement. All of these risks may impair our business operations. The forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K involve risks and uncertainties and actual results may differ materially from the results we discuss in the forward-looking statements. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and expect to continue to experience losses for the foreseeable future.

We have incurred significant net losses and negative cash flow in each year since our inception, including net losses of approximately $9.9 million and $6.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2018, and 2017, respectively. As of December 31, 2018, our accumulated deficit was approximately $111.4 million. We have devoted a significant amount of our financial resources to research and development, including our nonclinical development activities and clinical trials. We expect that the costs associated with our exclusive channel partnerships with Intrexon in the area of lantibiotics (“Lantibiotics Program”) and with Intrexon’s subsidiary ActoBio Therapeutics, Inc. in the area of Oral Mucositis (“Oral Mucositis Program”) and the development and commercialization of our product candidates under the Lantibiotics Program (which includes MU1140 homologs) using Intrexon’s advanced transgene and cell engineering platforms will continue to increase the level of our overall expenses significantly going forward. As a result, we expect to continue to incur substantial net losses and negative cash flow for the foreseeable future. These losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our shareholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development and commercialization, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of substantial expenses or when, or if, we will be able to generate the revenue necessary to achieve or maintain profitability.

We will need to raise additional capital in the future to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates and operate our business.

Developing and commercializing biopharmaceutical products, including conducting nonclinical studies and clinical trials and establishing manufacturing capabilities, is expensive. We anticipate that our cash resources as of December 31, 2018 coupled with the net proceeds from our March 25, 2019 underwritten public offering, will be sufficient to fund our operations as presently structured through the fourth quarter of 2020. However, changes may occur that would consume our existing capital prior to that time, including the scope and progress of our efforts to develop and commercialize our product candidates. Our actual costs may ultimately vary from our current expectations, which could materially impact our use of capital and our forecast of the period of time through which our financial resources will be adequate to support our operations. Our current cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments are not sufficient to fully implement our business strategy and sustain our operations over a longer period of time. Accordingly, we will need to seek additional sources of financing and such additional financing may not be available on favorable terms, if at all. Until we can generate a sufficient amount of product revenue, if ever, we expect to finance future cash needs through public or private equity offerings, debt financings or corporate collaboration and licensing arrangements. If we do not succeed in raising additional funds on acceptable terms, we may be unable to complete existing nonclinical and planned clinical trials or obtain approval of our product candidates from the FDA and other regulatory authorities. We expect capital outlays and operating expenditures to increase over the next several years as we expand our infrastructure, and research and development activities. Specifically, we need to raise additional capital to, among other things:

Our present and future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:

Additional capital may not be available on satisfactory terms, or at all. Furthermore, if we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, dilution to our existing stockholders could result. Any equity securities issued also may provide for rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. If we raise additional funds by issuing debt securities, these debt securities would have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock, and the terms of the debt securities issued could impose significant restrictions on our operations. If we raise additional funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements, we might be required to relinquish significant rights to our technologies or our products under development, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us, which could lower the economic value of those programs to us. If adequate funds are not available, we may have to scale back our operations or limit our research and development activities, which may cause us to grow at a slower pace, or not at all, and our business could be adversely affected.

In addition, we could be forced to discontinue product development and commercialization of one or more of our product candidates, forego sales and marketing efforts, and/or forego licensing attractive business opportunities.

Our auditor has previously expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern and absent additional financing we may be unable to remain a going concern.

In light of our recurring losses, accumulated deficit and negative cash flow as described in our notes to our audited financial statements, the report of our independent registered public accounting firm on our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2017contained an explanatory paragraph raising substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our financial statements did not include any adjustments that may have been necessary in the event we were unable to continue as a going concern. Had we been unable to establish to the satisfaction of our independent registered public accounting firm that the net proceeds from our financing efforts will be sufficient to allow for the removal of this going concern qualification, we may need to significantly modify our operational plans for us to continue as a going concern. We believe we can continue our current level of operations with the cash we have on hand, inclusive of the net proceeds we received from our March 25, 2019 underwritten public offering, without additional financing through the fourth quarter of 2020. Absent sufficient additional financing, we may be unable to remain a going concern.

If we are unable to successfully develop our product candidates, our operating results and competitive position could be harmed. Research and development involves a lengthy and complex process, and we may not be successful in our efforts to develop and commercialize our product candidates. The further development and ultimate commercialization of product candidates for lantibiotics and oral mucositis are keys to our growth strategy.

A key element of our strategy is to discover, develop, validate and commercialize a portfolio of additional antibiotic product candidates to combat multi drug resistant organism, or MDRO, outbreaks and the associated costs to patients, inpatient facilities and the health care industry and to develop, validate and commercialize a product candidate to treat oral mucositis. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully complete development of, or commercialize any of our planned future product candidates, or that they will be clinically usable. The product development process involves a high degree of risk and may take up to several years or more. Our new product development efforts may fail for many reasons, including:

Few research and development projects result in commercial products, and success in early clinical trials often is not replicated in later trials. At any point, we may abandon development of new products, or we may be required to expend considerable resources repeating clinical studies or trials, which would adversely impact the timing for generating potential revenues from those new products. In addition, as we advance the development of new products through to the commercialization stage, we will have to make additional investments in our sales and marketing operations, which may be prematurely or unnecessarily incurred if the commercial launch of a product is abandoned or delayed.

We may be unable to find a method to produce MU1140 homologs in large-scale commercial quantities. If we cannot, we will be unable to generate significant revenues from sales of our MU1140 homologs product candidate.

Our antibiotic product candidates, all homologs of MU1140, are produced by our strain of S. mutans and variants thereof. In March 2005 we successfully developed a methodology for producing MU1140 in quantities sufficient to undertake its nonclinical testing. In June of 2012 we entered into an exclusive collaboration agreement with Intrexon Corporation to use its advanced transgene and cell engineering platforms to achieve sufficient production quantities of MU1140. In 2016 we were able to transition manufacturing of OG716 to a third-party manufacturer capable of fermenting quantities sufficient to conduct nonclinical studies. If we are not able to further adequately scale up fermentation and purification methodologies for large-scale manufacture, we will be unable to partner and generate revenues from this product candidate and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected. The manufacturing of MU1140 homologs, including OG716 or any other possible antibiotic product candidates based on lantibiotics, is a highly exacting and complex process. Manufacturing MU1140 homologs, including OG716, or any other antibiotic candidates derived from lantibiotics on a commercial scale has not yet been achieved to our knowledge, so there are additional risks that such efforts will not be successful. The Intrexon technology may not be feasible to efficiently develop methodologies to enable large scale manufacturing of a MU1140 homolog or other antibiotic product candidates. Third-party manufacturers must have additional technical skills and must take multiple steps to attempt to control the manufacturing processes. If we are unable to produce MU1140 homologs in large-scale commercial quantities, we will be unable to generate significant revenues from sales of our MU1140 product candidate and our financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

Our success will depend on our ability to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates under our Lantibiotics Program and our Oral Mucositis Program and their successful commercialization.

Our product candidates under our Lantibiotics Program and Oral Mucositis Program have not received regulatory approval in any jurisdiction and they may never receive approval or, if approvals are obtained, may never be commercialized successfully. We have incurred and will continue to incur significant costs relating to the nonclinical and clinical development of our antibiotic product candidates (including MU1140 homologs we may develop) and oral mucositis product candidate, respectively. We have performed extensive nonclinical testing using native MU1140 and have since entered into an Exclusive Channel Collaboration Agreement with Intrexon. We began nonclinical activities on homologs of MU1140 in the second half of 2014. Those activities include toxicity results, physicochemical characterizations, and efficacy studies in animals. This work will be done solely by us through the use of outside contractors. If our nonclinical work is successful, we would expect the IND for a first-in-human clinical trial of OG716 to be filed with the FDA based on our ability to complete the requisite studies, contingent on sufficient funding.

We initiated a Phase 2 clinical trial on our AG013 product candidate in 2017. Even if we are able to conduct successful clinical trials or the required regulatory approvals are obtained, we may never be able to generate significant revenues from our product candidates. If our product candidates are unsuccessful, we may be unable to generate sufficient revenues to sustain and grow our business, and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

Our exclusive channel collaboration agreements with Intrexon and its wholly owned subsidiaries are based on early stage technologies in their fields.

Our exclusive channel collaboration agreements with Intrexon and its wholly owned subsidiaries contemplate the use of Intrexon’s advanced transgene and cell engineering platforms for the development and production of lantibiotics and AG013. Such technologies have a limited history of use in the design and development of active pharmaceutical ingredients and drug products involving direct administration and may therefore involve unanticipated risks or delays.

We will incur additional expenses in connection with our exclusive channel collaboration arrangements with Intrexon.

Pursuant to our exclusive channel collaborations with Intrexon under our Lantibiotics Program and Oral Mucositis Program, we are responsible for future research and development expenses of product candidates developed under such collaborations, including those incurred by Intrexon for research on our behalf as provided in the ECC Agreements with Intrexon. As a result, we expect the level of our overall research and development expenses going forward will increase. The timing and

amount of expenses under our ECCs are difficult to predict. Although all manufacturing, nonclinical studies and human clinical trials are expensive and difficult to design and implement, costs associated with the manufacturing, research and development of biologic product candidates are generally greater in comparison to small molecule product candidates. We expect to add additional personnel to support our Lantibiotics Program and Oral Mucositis Program with Intrexon.

Because our collaborations with Intrexon are in the early stage, future development costs associated with this program may be difficult to anticipate and exceed our expectations. Our actual cash requirements may vary materially from our current expectations for a number of other factors that may include, but are not limited to, unanticipated technical challenges, changes in the focus and direction of our development activities or adjustments necessitated by changes in the competitive landscape in which we operate. If we are unable to continue to financially support such collaborations due to our own working capital constraints, we may be forced to delay our activities. If we are unable to obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all, we may be forced to seek licensing partners or discontinue development, which in turn could lead to the termination of our ECC Agreements with Intrexon.

We may not be able to retain the exclusive rights licensed to us by Intrexon to develop and commercialize lantibiotic products and AG013 related products.

Under our ECCs with Intrexon we are responsible for, among other things, funding the further anticipated development of lantibiotics and AG013 toward the goal of commercialization, conducting nonclinical and clinical development of product candidates, as well as for other aspects of manufacturing and the commercialization of the product(s). Intrexon may terminate such agreements if we do not perform certain specified requirements, including developing therapies identified to us and considered superior by Intrexon. In addition, we must budget $1.2 million in development costs through the end of 2018 to retain our lantibiotic ECC. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully perform under the Oral Mucositis ECC or Lantibiotic ECC and if either ECC is terminated it would prevent us from achieving our business objectives.

Our success will depend on our ability to partner or sub-license our product candidates and their subsequent successful commercialization.

Our MU1140 homologs and AG013 product candidate are in early stage development and are expected to require partners with substantial financial resources to continue the development of each of these products to commercialization. In addition, none of these product candidates have received regulatory approval in any jurisdiction and they may never receive approval or, if approvals are obtained, may never be commercialized successfully. In addition, we do not know whether any of our clinical trials will be successful or can be completed within our current expected budget. For our MU1140 homologs and other antibiotic product candidates, we have performed extensive nonclinical testing using native MU1140 and expect to continue to pursue the nonclinical testing of our MU1140 homologs and other antibiotic product candidates during 2019 we would expect the IND for a first-in-human clinical trial of OG716 to be filed with the FDA based on our ability to complete the requisite studies, contingent on sufficient funding. Even if we are able to partner and conduct successful clinical trials or the required regulatory approvals are obtained, we may never be able to generate significant revenues from our MU1140 homologs or other antibiotic product candidates or other product candidates. If our MU1140 homologs product candidate or our other product candidates under the Lantibiotics Program and Oral Mucositis Program or otherwise are unsuccessful, we may be unable to generate sufficient revenues to sustain and grow our business, and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

Our financial results could vary significantly from quarter to quarter and are difficult to predict.

Our operating results could vary significantly from quarter to quarter due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. In addition, we may not be able to predict our future revenues or results of operations. We base our current and future expense levels on our internal operating plans and sales forecasts, and our operating costs vary to the extent of our research and development and the candidate of clinical trials. As a result, we may incur significant or unanticipated expenses associated with our research and development efforts of our product candidates under development. In addition to other risk factors discussed in this section, factors that may contribute to the variability of our quarterly results include:

As a result of these and other factors, our quarterly and annual operating results could be materially adversely affected. Moreover, our operating results may not meet the expectations of research analysts or investors, in which case the price of our common stock could decrease significantly.

If our manufacturers in general fail to meet our requirements and the requirements of regulatory authorities, our research and development may be materially adversely affected.

We do not have the internal capability to manufacture MU1140 homologs, AG013, or any other product candidates under GMPs, as required by the FDA and other regulatory agencies. In order to continue to develop and commercialize our product candidates, apply for regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will need to contract with third parties that have, or otherwise develop, the necessary manufacturing capabilities in full compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.

There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under GMPs that are capable of manufacturing MU1140 homologs and our AG013 product candidate. Manufacturing on a commercial scale has not yet been undertaken and there are additional technical skills needed for the manufacture of MU1140 homologs that will further limit the number of potential manufacturers. As such, if we are unable to enter into supply and processing contracts with any of these manufacturers or processors for our MU1140 product candidates, or our AG013 product candidate for the conduct of clinical trials on such product candidate we may incur additional costs and delays in development and commercialization.

Problems with these manufacturing processes such as equipment malfunctions, facility contamination, labor problems, raw material shortages or contamination, natural disasters, power outages, terrorist activities, or disruptions in the operations of our suppliers and even minor deviations from normal procedures, could result in product defects or manufacturing failures that result in lot failures, product recalls, product liability claims and insufficient inventory or supply of product for the conduct of clinical trials.

If we are required to find an additional or alternative source of supply, there may be additional costs and delays in the development, clinical trial timing, or commercialization of our product candidates. Additionally, the FDA and other regulatory agencies routinely inspect manufacturing facilities before approving a New Drug Application, or NDA, or Biologic License Application, or BLA, for a drug or biologic manufactured at those sites. If any of our manufacturers or processors fails to satisfy regulatory requirements, the approval and eventual commercialization of our commercial products and product candidates may be delayed.

All of our contract manufacturers must comply with the applicable GMPs, which include quality control and quality assurance requirements as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation. If our contract manufacturers do not comply with the applicable GMPs and other FDA regulatory requirements, we may be subject to product liability claims, the availability of marketed products for sale could be reduced, our product commercialization could be delayed or subject to restrictions, we may be unable to meet demand for our products and may lose potential revenues and we could suffer delays in the progress of nonclinical testing and clinical trials for products under development. We do not have control over our third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards. Moreover, while we may choose to manufacture our products ourselves in the future, we have no experience in the manufacture of pharmaceutical or biological products for clinical trials or commercial purposes. If we decide to manufacture products, we would be subject to the regulatory requirements described above. In addition, we would require substantial additional capital and would be subject to delays or difficulties encountered in manufacturing pharmaceutical or biological products. Regardless of the manufacturer of our products, we will be subject to continuing obligations regarding the submission of safety reports and other post-market information.

We rely on the significant experience and specialized expertise of our senior management and scientific team and the loss of any of our key personnel or our inability to successfully hire their successors could harm our business.

Our performance is substantially dependent on the continued services and on the performance of our senior management and scientific team, who have extensive experience and specialized expertise in our business. Our performance also depends on our ability to retain and motivate our other key employees. In June 2016, we hired Dr. Alan Joslyn as President and Chief Executive Officer and in February 2012 we hired Mr. Michael Sullivan, Certified Public Accountant as our Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Sullivan also served as our Interim Principal Executive Officer from October of 2014 through June of 2016. The loss of the services of senior management or any key employees could harm our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. We have no key man life insurance policies.

We need to hire and retain additional qualified scientists and other highly skilled personnel to maintain and grow our business.

Our future success depends on our ability to identify, attract, hire, train, retain and motivate highly skilled technical, managerial and research personnel in all areas within our organization. We plan to continue to grow our business and will need to hire additional personnel to support this growth. We believe that there are only a limited number of individuals with the requisite skills to serve in many of our key positions, and we compete for key personnel with other biotechnology companies, as well as universities and research institutions. It is often difficult to hire and retain these persons, and we may be unable to replace key persons if they leave or be unable to fill new positions requiring key persons with appropriate experience. If we fail to attract, integrate and retain the necessary personnel, our ability to maintain and grow our business could suffer significantly.

If any of our product candidates are shown to be ineffective or harmful in humans, we will be unable to generate revenues from these product candidates.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through nonclinical testing and clinical trials that our products are safe and effective for use in humans. To date the testing of the antibiotic substance MU1140 homologs has been undertaken solely in the laboratory and in animals. We have not yet conducted human trials with any MU1140 homolog. To date, available clinical data for our AG013 product candidate has been limited to a Phase 1b clinical trial. It is possible that when future lantibiotic trials are conducted in humans, they will show that our antibiotic candidates are ineffective or harmful in humans. If MU1140 homologs are shown to be ineffective or harmful in humans, we will be unable to commercialize and generate revenues from sales of this compound. It is possible that further clinical testing of our AG013 product candidates could reveal that it is ineffective. If we are unable to generate revenues from the first generation of MU1140 and homologs, or any other product candidates, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

We intend to rely on third parties to cover a portion of the costs associated with obtaining regulatory approval for, and manufacturing and marketing of, our product candidates. If we are unable to obtain agreements with third parties to fund these costs, we will have to fund such costs ourselves or we may be unable to extract any value from these technologies.

As we continue our development of product candidates, we intend to either license these product candidates to, or partner with, one or more major pharmaceutical companies at the earliest possible time in their product development. If we do so, we intend for these licensees or partners to pay the costs associated with any remaining development work, regulatory submissions, clinical trials and the manufacturing and marketing of our product candidates. If we are unable to license our product candidates or otherwise partner with third parties, we will have to fund the costs of our clinical trials ourselves or we will be unable to extract any value from these technologies. We will also have to establish our own manufacturing facilities and find our own distribution channels. This would greatly increase our future capital requirements and we cannot assure you that we would be able to obtain the necessary financing to pay these costs. If we are unable to cover the associated costs or we cannot obtain financing on acceptable terms or at all, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

Our dependence on collaborative arrangements with third parties subjects us to a number of risks. These collaborative arrangements may not be on terms favorable to us. Agreements with collaborative partners typically allow partners significant discretion in electing whether or not to pursue any of the planned activities. We cannot control the amount and timing of resources our collaborative partners may devote to products based on the collaboration, and our partners may choose to pursue alternative products. Our partners may not perform their obligations as expected. Business combinations or significant changes in a collaborative partner’s business strategy may adversely affect a partner’s willingness or ability to complete its obligations under the arrangement. Moreover, we could become involved in disputes with our partners, which could lead to delays or termination of the collaborations and time-consuming and expensive litigation or arbitration. Even if we fulfill our obligations under a collaborative agreement, our partner may be able to terminate the agreement under certain

circumstances. If any collaborative partner were to terminate or breach our agreement with it, or otherwise fail to complete its obligations in a timely manner, our chances of successfully commercializing our product candidates would be materially and adversely affected.

If our intellectual property rights do not adequately protect our products or product candidates, or if third parties claim we are infringing their intellectual property rights, others could compete against us more directly or we could be subject to significant litigation. Such results could prevent us from marketing our products or product candidates and hurt our profitability.

Our product and product candidates are protected by patents and patent applications. Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain patents or rights to patents, protect trade secrets, operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others, and prevent others from infringing on our patents, trademarks and other intellectual property rights. We will be able to protect our intellectual property from unauthorized use by third parties only to the extent that it is covered by valid and enforceable patents, trademarks and licenses. Patent protection generally involves complex legal and factual questions and, therefore, enforceability of patent rights cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. Thus, any patents that we own or license from others may not provide adequate protection against competitors. In addition, any future patent applications may fail to result in patents being issued. Also, those patents that are issued may not provide us with adequate proprietary protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar product candidates. Moreover, the laws of certain foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States.

In addition to patents and trademarks, we rely on trade secrets and proprietary know-how. We seek protection of these rights, in part, through confidentiality and proprietary information agreements. These agreements may not provide meaningful protection or adequate remedies for violation of our rights in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential and proprietary information. Failure to protect our proprietary rights could seriously impair our competitive position.

In the event of an infringement or violation, we may face litigation and may be prevented from pursuing product development or commercialization. We may receive in the future, notice of claims of infringement of other parties’ proprietary rights. We may not have the financial resources to defend against claims of infringement by other parties or to prosecute third parties for infringement of our intellectual property. Infringement or other claims could be asserted or prosecuted against us in the future and it is possible that past or future assertions or prosecutions could harm our business.

Our product candidates are subject to substantial government regulation, including the regulation of nonclinical testing and clinical trials. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will be unable to generate revenues.

The production and marketing of products which may be developed from our MU1140 homologs, from our Lantibiotics Program and Oral Mucositis Program or otherwise and our research and development, nonclinical testing and clinical trial activities are subject to extensive regulation and review by numerous governmental authorities. Most of the product candidates we are developing must undergo rigorous nonclinical testing and clinical trials and an extensive regulatory approval process before they can be marketed in the United States or internationally.

If we fail to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, we may have to cease further development. Clinical trials on our product candidates are expected to take several years to fully complete. The commencement or completion of nonclinical studies or clinical trials can be delayed or prevented for a number of reasons, including:

Clinical trials also may be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. In addition, a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA, the IRBs at the sites where the IRBs are overseeing a trial, or a data safety monitoring board, or DSMB, overseeing the clinical trial at issue, or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including:

We cannot assure you that clinical trials will demonstrate the safety or effectiveness of any of our product candidates, or will otherwise satisfy regulatory requirements. Our nonclinical studies or clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, there may be inconsistencies between early clinical trial results and results obtained in later clinical trials, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials. Moreover, nonclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in nonclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain FDA approval for their products. If we are unable to resolve the FDA’s concerns, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval for these product candidates.

The pre-marketing approval process can be particularly expensive, uncertain and lengthy, and a number of products for which FDA or other governmental regulatory approval has been sought by other companies have never been approved for marketing. In addition to testing and approval procedures, extensive regulations also govern marketing, manufacturing, distribution, labeling, and record-keeping procedures. If we do not comply with applicable regulatory requirements, such violations could result in warning letters, non-approval, suspensions of regulatory approvals or ongoing clinical trials, civil penalties and criminal fines, product seizures and recalls, operating restrictions, injunctions, and criminal prosecution.

We may encounter such delays and rejection of our product candidates by the FDA or other regulatory authority may also adversely affect our business. Such delays or rejection may be encountered due to, among other reasons, government or regulatory delays, lack of efficacy during clinical trials, unforeseen safety issues, or changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development. More stringent regulatory approval processes in product clearance and enforcement activities could result in our experiencing longer approval cycles, more uncertainty, greater risk, and higher expenses. Even if regulatory approval of a product is granted, this approval may entail limitations on uses for which the product may be labeled and promoted. It is possible, for example, that we may not receive FDA approval to market products based on our licensed, patented product candidates for different indications or to market updated products that represent extensions of our basic product candidates. In addition, we may not receive FDA approval to export our products based on our licensed, patented product candidates in the future, and countries to which products are to be exported may not approve them for import.

From time to time, legislative or regulatory proposals are introduced that could alter the review and approval process relating to our product candidates. It is possible that the applicable regulatory authority will issue additional regulations further restricting the sale of our product candidates. Any change in legislation or regulations that govern the review and approval process relating to our future product candidates could make it more difficult and costlier to obtain approval for new products based on our product candidates, or to produce, market, and distribute such products if approved.

We may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for AG013 or other early-stage product candidates under applicable regulatory requirements. The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have substantial discretion in the approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of product candidates. The delay, limitation or denial of any regulatory approval would adversely impact commercialization, our potential to generate revenue, our business and our operating results.

We are not permitted to market any of our current product candidates in the United States until we receive approval of an NDA or BLA from the FDA. We are also not permitted to market any of our current product candidates in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from the applicable regulatory authorities of such countries. Failure to obtain such regulatory approvals will delay or prevent us from commercializing any of our current or future product candidates.

To gain approval to market a new drug such as OG716, or a new biological product such as AG013, we must provide the FDA and/or foreign regulatory authorities with, among other things, extensive preclinical and clinical data that adequately demonstrates the safety and efficacy of the drug in its intended indication and information to demonstrate the adequacy of the manufacturing methods to assure the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity. The development and approval of new drug product candidates involves a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, including in Phase 3 clinical development, even after promising results in earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, observations during clinical trials regarding safety or efficacy, such as previously unreported adverse events. Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure success in later clinical trials, and the results of clinical trials by other parties may not be indicative of the results in trials we may conduct. Further, different results may be achieved depending upon whether the “per protocol”, or PP, analysis is used to report data results or whether the “modified intent-to-treat,” or MITT, approach is used. Accordingly, regardless of the outcome of any Phase 2 trials, our Phase 3 trials may not be successful.

In the case of our product candidate, AG013, because it is a biological product, in order to ensure product consistency, quality, and purity, we must ensure the manufacturing process remains substantially the same over time. The systems used to produce biological products can be sensitive to very minor changes in the manufacturing process. Small process differences can significantly affect the nature of the finished biological product, and more importantly, the way it functions in the body. We will have to tightly control the source and nature of starting materials, and consistently employ numerous process controls that assure predictable manufacturing outcomes. Our ability to ensure that the manufacturing process remains stable over time may be difficult to establish. In addition, for a novel biological product, there may be uncertainties regarding the size and design of our clinical trials to establish safety, efficacy, purity or potency, and there are no assurances that data generated in any clinical trials we might conduct will be acceptable to the FDA or foreign regulatory bodies to support marketing approval.

The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have substantial discretion in the drug approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of product candidates for many reasons. The FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory body may:

Any delay, limitation or denial of any regulatory approval would adversely impact commercialization, our potential to generate revenue, our business and our operating results.

Delays or difficulties in the enrollment of patients in clinical trials may result in additional costs and delays in our ability to generate significant revenues, and may delay or prevent our receipt of any regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize our planned and future products.

We may not be able to initiate or continue, or complete in a timely fashion clinical trials for AG013 or other product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States. In addition, some of our competitors are currently conducting clinical trials for product candidates that treat the same indications as AG013, and patients who are otherwise eligible for our clinical trials may instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ product candidates.

Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays, could require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether and could delay or prevent our receipt of necessary regulatory approvals. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, which would cause the value of our company to decline and impede our ability to obtain additional financing.

Use of Patient Reported Outcome (“PROs”) in our AG013 clinical trials may delay the development of AG013 or increase our development costs.

Due to the difficulty of objectively measuring the efficacy of AG013, PROs may have an important role in the development and regulatory approval of our AG013 product candidate. PROs involve patients’ subjective assessments of efficacy, and this subjectivity increases the uncertainty in determining clinical endpoints. Such assessments can be influenced by factors outside of our control, and can vary widely from day-to-day for a particular patient, and from patient-to-patient and site-to-site within a clinical trial. Furthermore, we intend to use PROs in our planned Phase 2 clinical program for AG013 and if the FDA does not accept or requires changes to the PRO, this could delay clinical development of AG013, increase our costs and necessitate additional clinical trials.

We have limited experience in the conduct of clinical trials and have never obtained approval of any product candidates, and may be unable to do so successfully.

As a company, we have limited experience in conducting clinical trials or progressing a product candidate through to regulatory approval. In part because of this lack of experience, our clinical trials may require more time and incur greater costs than we anticipate. We cannot be certain that planned clinical trials will begin or conclude on time, if at all. Large-scale trials would require significant additional financial and management resources, and reliance on third-party clinical investigators, CROs and/or consultants. Any performance failure on the part of such third parties could delay clinical development or delay or prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval or commercializing our current or future product candidates, depriving us of potential product revenue and resulting in additional losses.

Any product candidates that we commercialize will be subject to ongoing and continued regulatory review.

Even after we achieve U.S. regulatory approval for a product candidate, if any, we will be subject to continued regulatory review and compliance obligations. For example, the FDA may impose significant restrictions on the approved indicated uses for which our product candidates may be marketed or on the conditions of approval. A product candidate’s approval may contain requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies and surveillance, including Phase 4 clinical trials or a REMS to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product. We will also be subject to ongoing FDA obligations and continued regulatory review with respect to, among other things, the manufacturing, processing, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for our product candidates. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, continued compliance with the FDA’s good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements and good laboratory practice requirements, which are regulations and guidelines the FDA would apply to all of our product candidates in clinical and preclinical development, along with any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval, and continued compliance with the FDA’s cGMP requirements pursuant to which manufacturing facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA. To the extent that a product candidate is approved for sale in other countries, we may be subject to similar restrictions and requirements imposed by laws and government regulators in those countries.

If we, our product candidates or the manufacturing facilities for our product candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

The regulations, policies or guidance of the FDA and other applicable government agencies may change and new or additional statutes or government regulations may prevent or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates or further restrict or regulate post-approval activities. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are not able to achieve and maintain regulatory compliance, we may not be permitted to market our product candidates, which would materially and adversely affect our ability to generate revenue and achieve or maintain profitability.

Our product candidates may cause serious or undesirable side effects or possess other unexpected properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of approved labeling or result in post-approval regulatory action.

Unforeseen side effects from any of our product candidates could arise either during clinical development or, if approved, after marketing such product. Undesirable side effects caused by product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, modify, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities. Results of clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects. In such an event, trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

Additionally, if we or others identify undesirable side effects, or other previously unknown problems, caused by our product candidates after obtaining U.S. or foreign regulatory approval or other products with the same or related active ingredients, a number of potentially negative consequences could result, including:

Any of the above events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidate and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates.

If any of our product candidates are approved for marketing and we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses, or if physicians misuse our products or use our products off-label, we may become subject to prohibitions on the sale or marketing of our products, product liability claims and significant fines, penalties and sanctions, and our brand and reputation could be harmed.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the marketing and promotional claims that are made about drug products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses or indications that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. If we are found to have promoted off-label uses of any of our product candidates, we may receive warning or untitled letters and become subject to significant liability, which would materially harm our business. Both federal and state governments have levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and have enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. If we become the target of such an investigation or prosecution based on our marketing and promotional practices, we could face similar sanctions, which would materially harm our business. In addition, management’s attention could be diverted from our business operations, significant legal expenses could be incurred and our brand and reputation could be damaged. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we are deemed by the FDA to have engaged in the promotion of our products for off-label use, we could be subject to FDA regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance of an untitled letter, a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action if they determine our business activities constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including criminal, civil or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using our product candidates in ways that fall outside the scope of the approved indications, as he or she may deem appropriate in his or her medical judgment. Physicians may also misuse our product candidates or use improper techniques, which may lead to adverse results, side effects or injury and, potentially, subsequent product liability claims. Furthermore, the use of our product candidates for indications other than those cleared by the FDA and/or other regulatory agencies may not effectively treat such conditions, which could harm our brand and reputation among both physicians and patients.

We may also be subject to healthcare laws, regulation and enforcement and our failure to comply with those laws could adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition.

Certain federal and state healthcare laws and regulations pertaining to fraud and abuse and patients’ rights are and will be applicable to our business. We are subject to regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, the recently enacted ACA, among other things, amended the intent requirement of the federal anti-kickback statute and certain criminal healthcare fraud statutes. A person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it. In addition, the ACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal anti-kickback statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act.

Achieving and sustaining compliance with these laws may prove costly. In addition, any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws or regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, individual imprisonment or the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could materially and adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

Our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors and CROs may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors and CROs may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these persons could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or unauthorized activity that violates: laws or regulations, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities; manufacturing standards; federal, state and foreign healthcare fraud and abuse laws and data privacy; or laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. In particular, sales, marketing and other business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws may restrict or prohibit a wide range of business activities, including research, manufacturing, distribution, pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations, and serious harm to our reputation. In addition, federal procurement laws impose substantial penalties for misconduct in connection with government contracts and require certain contractors to maintain a code of business ethics and conduct. If any such actions are instituted against us, we may have to terminate employees or others involved and the impact of such termination can result in our experiencing delays and additional costs associated with replacing the services being provided. If we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, FDA debarment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our operating results.

Even if our current product candidates or any future product candidates obtain regulatory approval, they may fail to achieve the broad degree of physician and patient adoption and use necessary for commercial success.

The commercial success of any of our current or future product candidates, if approved, will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by physicians and patients for approved indications, and may not be commercially successful. The degree and rate of physician and patient adoption of our current or future product candidates, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, including:

If any of our current or future product candidates are approved for use but fail to achieve the broad degree of physician and patient adoption necessary for commercial success, our operating results and financial condition will be adversely affected, which may delay, prevent or limit our ability to generate revenue and continue our operations.

If we are unable to achieve and maintain coverage and adequate levels of reimbursement for any of our product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval, or any future products we may seek to commercialize, their commercial success may be severely hindered.

As to any of our product candidates that become available by prescription only, our success will depend on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement for our product from third-party payors. Patients who are prescribed medicine for the treatment of their conditions generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their prescription drugs. The availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and private third-party payors is critical to new product acceptance. Coverage decisions may depend upon clinical and economic standards that disfavor new drug products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available. If any of our product candidates fail to demonstrate attractive efficacy profiles, they may not qualify for coverage and reimbursement. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product, the resulting reimbursement payment rates might not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients are unlikely to use our prescription-only products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our products.

In addition, the market for certain of our product candidates will depend significantly on access to third-party payors’ drug formularies, or lists of medications for which third-party payors provide coverage and reimbursement. The industry competition to be included in such formularies often leads to downward pricing pressures on pharmaceutical companies. Also, third-party payors may refuse to include a particular branded drug in their formularies or otherwise restrict patient access to a branded drug when a less costly generic equivalent or another alternative is available.

Further, third-party payors, whether foreign or domestic, or governmental or commercial, are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs. In addition, in the United States, although private third-party payors tend to follow Medicare, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our product candidates to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained.

Further, we believe that future coverage and reimbursement will likely be subject to increased restrictions in both the United States and in international markets. Third-party coverage and reimbursement for any of our product candidates for which we may receive regulatory approval may not be available or adequate in either the United States or international markets, which could harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

Our product candidates, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to compete effectively may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration.

The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on developing proprietary therapeutics. Numerous companies are engaged in the development, patenting, manufacturing and marketing of healthcare products competitive with those that we are developing. We face competition from a number of sources, such as pharmaceutical companies, including generic drug companies, biotechnology companies and academic and research institutions, many of which have greater financial resources, marketing capabilities, sales forces, manufacturing capabilities, research and development capabilities, clinical trial expertise, intellectual property portfolios, experience in obtaining patents and regulatory approvals for product candidates and other resources than us. Some of the companies that offer competing products also have a broad range of other product offerings, large direct sales forces and long-term customer relationships with our target physicians, which could inhibit our market penetration efforts. In addition, certain of our product candidates, if approved, may compete with other products, for a share of some patients’ discretionary budgets and for physicians’ attention within their clinical practices.

We anticipate that, if we obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will face significant competition from other approved therapies and may need to compete with unregulated, unapproved and off-label treatments. Certain of our product candidates, if approved, will present novel therapeutic approaches for the approved indications and will have to compete with existing therapies, some of which are widely known and accepted by physicians and patients. To compete successfully in this market, we will have to demonstrate that the relative cost, safety and efficacy of our approved products, if any, provide an attractive alternative to existing and other new therapies. Such competition could lead to reduced market share for our product candidates and contribute to downward pressure on the pricing of our product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

Due to less stringent regulatory requirements in certain foreign countries, there are many more products and procedures available for use in those international markets than are approved for use in the United States. In certain international markets, there are also fewer limitations on the claims that our competitors can make about the effectiveness of their products and the manner in which they can market them. As a result, we expect to face more competition in these markets than in the United States.

We may face product liability exposure, and if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability if our insurance coverage for those claims is inadequate.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. This risk exists even if a product is approved for commercial sale by the FDA and manufactured in facilities regulated by the FDA or an applicable foreign regulatory authority. Our products and product candidates are designed to affect bodily functions and processes. Any side effects, manufacturing defects, misuse or abuse associated with our product candidates could result in injury and possibly death to a patient. An inability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage on commercially reasonable terms or otherwise to protect against potential product liability claims could inhibit our business.

In addition, a liability claim may be brought against us even if our product candidates merely appear to have caused an injury. Product liability claims may be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our product candidates, among others. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims we will incur substantial liabilities and reputational harm. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage for clinical trials, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all of our product liability-related expenses or losses and may not cover us for any expenses or losses we suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost, in sufficient amounts or upon adequate terms to protect us against losses due to product liability, particularly if any of our product candidates receive regulatory approval. Further, a successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

We may choose not to continue developing or commercializing any of our product candidates at any time during development or after approval, which would reduce or eliminate our potential return on investment for those product candidates.

At any time, we may decide to discontinue the development or commercialization of any of our products or product candidates for a variety of reasons, including inadequate financial resources the appearance of new technologies that render our product obsolete, competition from a competing product or changes in or failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements. If we terminate a program in which we have invested significant resources, we will not receive any return on our investment and we will have missed the opportunity to allocate those resources to potentially more productive uses.

Failure to obtain marketing approval in international jurisdictions would prevent our product candidates from being marketed abroad.

In order to market and sell our products in the European Union and many other jurisdictions, we or our third-party collaborators must obtain separate marketing approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. The approval procedure varies among countries and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain approval may differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The regulatory approval process outside the United States generally includes all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. In addition, in many countries outside the United States, it is required that the product be approved for reimbursement before the product can be approved for sale in that country. We or these third parties may not obtain approvals from regulatory authorities outside the United States on a timely basis, if at all. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one regulatory authority outside the United States does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions or by the FDA. We may not be able to file for marketing approvals and may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize our products in any market.

We will need to further increase the size and complexity of our organization in the future, and we may experience difficulties in executing our growth strategy and managing our growth.

Our current management, personnel, systems and facilities are not adequate to support our future growth plans. We will need to further expand our scientific, sales and marketing, operational, financial and other resources to support our planned research, development, clinical trial work, and commercialization activities.

In addition, we have utilized and continue to utilize the services of part-time outside consultants to perform a number of tasks for us, including tasks related to preclinical and clinical testing. Our growth strategy may also entail expanding our use of consultants to implement these and other tasks going forward. We rely on consultants for certain functions of our business and will need to effectively manage these consultants to ensure that they successfully carry out their contractual obligations and meet expected deadlines. There can be no assurance that we will be able to manage our existing consultants or find other competent outside consultants, as needed, on economically reasonable terms, or at all. If we are not able to manage our growth effectively and expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our use of consultants, we might be unable to implement successfully the tasks necessary to execute effectively on our planned research, development and commercialization activities and, accordingly, might fail to achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

We may be adversely affected by natural disasters and other catastrophic events, and by man-made problems such as terrorism, that could disrupt our business operations and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our corporate headquarters are located in Tampa, Florida, a hurricane zone. If a disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as enterprise financial systems, manufacturing resource planning or enterprise quality systems, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. Our contract manufacturers’ and suppliers’ facilities are located in multiple locations, where other natural disasters or similar events, such as blizzards, tornadoes, fires, explosions or large-scale accidents or power outages, could severely disrupt our operations and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects. In addition, acts of terrorism and other geo-political unrest could cause disruptions in our business or the businesses of our partners, manufacturers or the economy as a whole. All of the aforementioned risks may be further increased if we do not implement a disaster recovery plan or our partners’ or manufacturers’ disaster recovery plans prove to be inadequate. To the extent that any of the above should result in delays in the regulatory approval, manufacture, distribution or commercialization of our product candidates, our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects would suffer.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of cybersecurity/information systems risk.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, and those of our manufacturers and other third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, fire, terrorism, successful breaches, employee malfeasance, or human or technological error, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. In addition, our systems safeguard important confidential personal data regarding our subjects. If a disruption event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our drug development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of our product candidates could be delayed.

Cybersecurity incidents have increased in number and severity recently and it is expected that these trends will continue. Should we be affected by such an incident, we may incur substantial costs and suffer other negative consequences, which may include:

Changes in patent law or patent jurisprudence could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates.

The United States has recently enacted and is currently implementing wide-ranging patent reform legislation. Further, recent United States Supreme Court rulings have either narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the scope and value of patents, once obtained.

For our U.S. patent applications containing a priority claim after March 16, 2013, there is a greater level of uncertainty in the patent law. In September 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, also known as the America Invents Act, or AIA, was signed into law. The AIA includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The USPTO is currently developing regulations and procedures to govern administration of the AIA, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the AIA. It is not clear what other, if any, impact(s) the AIA will have on the operation of our business. Moreover, the AIA and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have an adverse effect on our business. One important change introduced by the AIA is that, as of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first-to-file” system for deciding which party should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications are filed by different parties claiming the same invention. A third party who files a patent application with the USPTO after such date but prior to us may therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we were the first to invent. This “first-inventor-to-file” system will require us both to remain cognizant, going forward, of the timing between invention and filing of a patent application.

Among some of the other changes introduced by the AIA are those that (i) limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and (ii) provide opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. Such changes apply to all of our U.S. patents, even those issued prior to March 16, 2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings, as compared to the evidentiary standard applied in U.S. federal courts, necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially present evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to find a claim invalid, notwithstanding that the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate a claim first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt opportunistically to use USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims.

Depending on decisions by the United States Congress, the U.S. federal courts, the USPTO or similar authorities in foreign jurisdictions, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that may weaken our and our licensors’ abilities to obtain new patents or to enforce existing patents we and our licensors or partners may obtain in the future.

If we are unable to protect our trademarks from infringement, our business prospects may be harmed.

We have applied for trademark protection for trademarks in the United States, the European Union and China. Although we take steps to monitor the possible infringement or misuse of our trademarks, it is possible that third parties may infringe, dilute or otherwise violate our trademark rights. Any unauthorized use of our trademarks could harm our reputation or commercial interests. In addition, our enforcement against third-party infringers or violators may be unduly expensive and time-consuming, and any remedy obtained may constitute insufficient redress relative to the damages we may suffer.

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly developing countries. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection insufficient to guard against such infringement. These products may compete with our products, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to pharmaceuticals. In such instances, we may be unable to enjoin or otherwise prevent infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights, generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could (i) result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, (ii) put our patents at risk of being invalidated or

interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and (iii) provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. In addition, certain countries in Europe and certain developing countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we may be unable to seek adequate remedies to address infringement and/or material diminishment of the value of our patents, which could limit our potential revenue opportunities in such jurisdictions. Accordingly, our efforts to establish or enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from our intellectual property. Finally, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in foreign intellectual property laws.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under our intellectual property license agreements with Intrexon, we could lose our license rights that are important to our business and development of our product candidates.

We are a party to two ECC agreements with Intrexon that impose various royalty and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with these obligations, Intrexon may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we may not be able to develop or market the affected product candidate. Both ECC agreements may be terminated in the event of a breach. The loss of such rights could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

If we are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, it will be costly and time-consuming and an unfavorable outcome in that litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our commercial success depends upon our ability to develop, manufacture, market, and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot guarantee that marketing and selling such candidates and using such technologies will not infringe existing or future patents. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields relating to our product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents issue, the risk increases that others may assert that our product candidates, technologies or methods of delivery or use infringe their patent rights. Moreover, it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various drugs, biologics, drug delivery systems or their methods of use, and which of these patents may be valid and enforceable. Thus, due to the large number of patents issued and patent applications filed in our fields, third parties may allege they have patent rights encompassing our product candidates, technologies or methods.

In addition, our product candidates or proprietary technologies may infringe patents owned and/or filed by third parties, or third parties may allege such infringement. Because (i) some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, (ii) patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing and (iii) publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our own and in-licensed issued patents or our pending applications. Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering our product candidates or technology similar to ours. Any such patent application may have priority over our own and in-licensed patent applications or patents, which could further require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. If another party has filed a U.S. patent application on inventions similar to those owned or in-licensed to us, we or, in the case of in-licensed technology, the licensor may have to participate, in the United States, in an interference proceeding to determine priority of invention.

We may be exposed to, or threatened with, future litigation by third parties having patent or other intellectual property rights alleging that our product candidates or proprietary technologies infringe such third parties’ intellectual property rights, including litigation resulting from filing under Paragraph IV of the Hatch-Waxman Act. Such lawsuits can be costly and could adversely affect our operating results and divert the attention of managerial and technical personnel, even if we do not infringe such patents or the patents asserted against us are later invalidated. A court may, however, decide that we are infringing the third party’s patents and order us to cease the activities covered by the patents. In addition, there is a risk that a court will order us to pay to such third-party damages for having violated the other party’s patents.

As a result of patent infringement claims, or to avoid potential claims, we may choose or be required to seek licenses from third parties. These licenses may not be available on commercially acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us might be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property, or such rights might be restrictive and limit our present and future activities. Ultimately, we or a licensee could be prevented from commercializing a product, or forced to cease some aspect of our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened patent infringement claims, we are unable to enter into licenses on acceptable terms.

In addition to possible infringement claims against us, we may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including interference, derivation, re-examination or other post-grant proceedings declared or granted by the USPTO, and similar proceedings in foreign countries, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current or future products.

There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, generally. To date, no litigation asserting infringement claims has ever been brought against us. If a third-party claims that we infringe its intellectual property rights, we may face a number of issues, including:

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could harm our ability to raise additional funds or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

Because we rely on certain third-party licensors and partners, and will continue to do so in the future, if one of our licensors or partners is sued for infringing a third party’s intellectual property rights, our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects could suffer in the same manner as if we were sued directly. In addition to facing litigation risks, we have agreed to indemnify certain third-party licensors and partners against claims of infringement caused by our proprietary technologies, and we have entered or may enter into cost-sharing agreements with some our licensors and partners that could require us to pay some of the costs of patent litigation brought against those third parties whether or not the alleged infringement is caused by our proprietary technologies. In certain instances, these cost-sharing agreements could also require us to assume greater responsibility for infringement damages than our technology alone would otherwise suggest.

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

Competitors may infringe our intellectual property, including our patent applications or the patents of our licensors. As a result, we may be required to file infringement claims to stop third-party infringement or unauthorized use. Such proceedings and/or litigation can be expensive – particularly for a company of our size – and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to enjoin the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover its technology or that the factors necessary to grant an injunction are not satisfied. An adverse determination in such case could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, interpreted narrowly or amended such that they fail to cover or otherwise protect our product candidates. Moreover, such adverse determinations could subject our patent applications to the risk that they will not issue, or issue with limited and potentially inadequate scope to cover our product candidates.

Interference, derivation or other proceedings brought at the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority or patentability of inventions with respect to our patent applications or those of our licensors or potential partners. Litigation or USPTO proceedings brought by us may fail or may be invoked against us by third parties. Even if we are successful, domestic or foreign litigation, or USPTO or foreign patent office proceedings may result in substantial costs and distraction to our management. We may not be able, alone or with our licensors or potential partners, to prevent misappropriation of our proprietary rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect such rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other proceedings, there is a risk that we may, intentionally or incidentally, disclose some of our confidential results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments or public access to related documents. If investors perceive these results to be negative, the market price for our common stock could be significantly harmed.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of failures in our internal computer systems or those of our collaborators.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our current and any future partners, contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. While we have not experienced any such material system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our development programs and our business operations. For example, the loss of manufacturing records or clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of our product candidates could be delayed.

We cannot assure you that the market and consumers will accept our products or product candidates. If they do not, we will be unable to generate significant revenues from our products or product candidates and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

The commercial success of our MU1140 homologs antibiotic product candidates, and any of our other product candidates and technologies, will depend in part on market acceptance by consumers. Biopharmaceutical companies have received substantial support from the scientific community, regulatory agencies and many governmental officials in the United States and internationally. Future scientific developments, media coverage and political events may diminish such support. Public attitudes may be influenced by claims that health products are unsafe for consumption or pose unknown risks to the environment or to traditional social or economic practices. Securing governmental approvals for, and consumer confidence in, such products poses numerous challenges, particularly outside the United States. The market success of product candidates developed by biopharmaceutical companies could be delayed or impaired in certain geographical areas as a result. Products based on our product candidates may compete with a number of traditional dental therapies and drugs manufactured and marketed by major pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. Market acceptance of products based on our product candidates will depend on a number of factors including potential advantage over alternative treatment methods. We can offer you no assurance that dentists, physicians, patients or the medical and dental communities in general will accept and utilize products developed from our product candidates. If they do not, we may be unable to generate significant revenues from our product candidates and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

If our products do not receive favorable third-party reimbursement, or if new restrictive legislation is adopted, market acceptance of our products may be limited and we may not generate significant revenues.

Our ability to commercialize our products will depend in part on the extent to which appropriate reimbursement levels for the cost of our proposed formulations and products and related treatments are obtained by governmental authorities, private health insurers and other organizations, such as Health Maintenance Organizations, or HMOs. Reimbursement from third parties depends greatly on our ability to present data which demonstrate positive outcomes and reduced utilization of other products or services as well as cost data which show that treatment costs using the new product are equal to or less than what is currently covered for other products. If our products do not receive favorable third-party reimbursement and patients are unwilling or unable to pay for our products out-of-pocket, it could limit our revenues and harm our business.

The continuing efforts of government and insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and other payers of healthcare costs to contain or reduce costs of health care may affect our future revenues and profitability, and the future revenues and profitability of our potential customers, suppliers and collaborative partners and the availability of capital. For example, in certain foreign markets, pricing or profitability of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to government control. In the United States, recent federal and state government initiatives have been directed at lowering the total cost of health care. In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Federal and state legislatures will likely continue to focus on health care reform, controlling the cost of prescription pharmaceuticals and on the reform of the Medicare and Medicaid systems. While we cannot predict whether any such legislative or regulatory proposals will be adopted, the announcement or adoption of such proposals could materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud which could subject us to regulatory sanctions, harm our business and operating results and cause the trading price of our stock to decline.

Effective internal controls required under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Sarbanes-Oxley Act, are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our business, reputation and operating results could be harmed. We have discovered, and may in the future discover, areas of our internal controls that need improvement. We cannot be certain that the measures we have taken or intend to take will ensure that we maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls or difficulties encountered in their implementation could subject us to regulatory sanctions, harm our business and operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Inferior internal controls could also harm our reputation and cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative impact on the trading price of our stock.

On December 22, 2017, U.S. federal tax legislation, commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), was signed into law, significantly reforming the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. The TCJA, among other things, includes changes to U.S. federal tax rates, limitation of the deduction for net operating losses to 80% of current year taxable income and elimination of net operating loss carrybacks. We have evaluated the effect of the TCJA on our net operating losses for the quarter and the year ending December 31, 2018. The estimated impact of the TCJA is based on our management’s current knowledge and assumptions and recognized impacts could be materially different from current estimates based on our actual results and our further analysis of the new law. The impact of the TCJA on holders of common shares is uncertain and could be adverse. This Annual Report on Form 10-K does not discuss any such tax legislation or the manner in which it might affect holders of our common stock. Investors should consult with their own tax advisors with respect to such legislation and the potential tax consequences of investing in our common stock.

We had previously received a non-compliance letter from the NYSE American and we cannot assure you that our shares will continue to be listed on the NYSE American.

The listing of our common stock on the NYSE American is contingent on our compliance with the NYSE American’s continued listing standards. On May 10, 2015, we were notified by the NYSE American (formerly known as NYSE MKT) that we were no longer in compliance with the NYSE American continued listing standards because our last reported stockholders’ equity was below continued listing standards. Specifically, we are not in compliance with Section 1003(a)(iii) (requiring stockholders’ equity of $6.0 million or more if it has reported losses from continuing operations and/or net losses in its five most recent fiscal years). As of December 31, 2015, we had stockholders’ equity of $4.7 million. We were required to submit a plan to the NYSE American by June 10, 2016 advising of actions we have taken or will take to regain compliance with the continued listing standards by November 10, 2017.

We submitted a plan by the June 10, 2016 deadline and were notified that NYSE Regulation has accepted the Company’s plan to regain compliance with the NYSE American exchange’s continued listing standards set forth in Sections 1003(a)(ii) and 1003(a)(iii) of the NYSE American Company Guide (the “Company Guide”) by November 10, 2017, subject to periodic review by the NYSE American for compliance with the initiatives set forth in the plan. On November 9, 2017, the Company filed a Form 8-K report with the Securities and Exchange Commission announcing that its Stockholders’ Equity was approximately $6,929,555 on a pro-forma basis. With this information provided, the NYSE American determined the Company had resolved the continued listing deficiency with respect to Section 1003(a)(i), Section 1003(a)(ii) and Section 1003(a)(iii) of the Guide. In a letter dated November 10, 2017, the NYSE American notified the Company that it had successfully regained compliance with the NYSE American continued listing standards.

Going forward, the Company will be subject to the NYSE American’s normal continued listing monitoring. In addition, in the event that the Company is again determined to be noncompliant with any of the NYSE American’s continued listing standards within twelve (12) months of the notice, the NYSE American will consider the relationship between the Company’s previous noncompliance and such new event of noncompliance and take appropriate action which may include implementing truncated compliance procedures or immediately initiating delisting proceedings.

A delisting of our common stock from the NYSE American could negatively affect the price and liquidity of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital in the future.

Our Series C preferred stock has a preference senior to all other classes of stock in distribution and liquidation and our Series A and Series B preferred stock, if not converted into common stock, will also have a distribution and liquidation preference senior to our common stock in liquidation either of which could negatively affect the value of our common stock and impair our ability to raise additional capital.

On November 8, 2017 we issued to Intrexon Corporation (“Intrexon”) approximately $3.4 million of equity in the form of 100 shares of Series C, Non-Voting, Non-Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series C Preferred Stock”). The shares of Series C are entitled to (payment-in-kind (“PIK”) dividends thereon at the annual rate of twelve percent (12%) (the “Initial Rate”) of its Stated Value, payable by issuing additional shares of Series C Preferred Stock within thirty days after the end of each calendar year pro-rata for partial years. The Initial Rate is subject to increase to twenty percent (20%) automatically after May 10, 2019. An increase in the Initial Rate to 20%, would result in a dividend of approximately $677,000 per year. Upon Liquidation of the Company, whether voluntary or involuntary, each holder of shares of Series C Preferred Stock is entitled to receive, in preference to the holders of Common Stock, Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and to all other equity securities issued by the Company from time to time (the “Junior Securities”), an amount of cash equal to the product of the number of shares of Series C Non-Convertible Preferred Stock then held by such holder, multiplied by the Stated Value per share of Series C Non-Convertible Preferred Stock plus any accrued but unpaid dividends (the “Series C Liquidation Amount”) and no distributions or payments shall be made in respect of any Junior Securities unless all Series C Liquidation Amounts, if any, are first paid in full. The “Stated Value” shall mean $33,847.9874 per share. In January of 2018 we paid a dividend on our Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon of 1.733 shares for the portion of the 2017 the Series C Preferred was outstanding and in January of 2019, we paid a dividend on our Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon of 12.208 shares.

On November 8, 2017, we issued $3.3 million of Series B Non-Voting, Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series B Preferred Stock”) pursuant to which upon Liquidation each holder of shares of Series B Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive, after payment to the Series C Preferred Stock, but on par with Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and in preference to the holders of Common Stock, an amount of cash equal to the greater of (i) the product of the number of shares of Series B Preferred Stock then held by such holder, multiplied by the Series B Original Issue Price; and (ii) the amount that would be payable to such holder in the Liquidation in respect of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of such shares of Series B Preferred Stock if all outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock were converted into Common Stock immediately prior to the Liquidation.

In May and July of 2017, we issued an aggregate of $3.0 million of Series A Non-Voting, Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series A Preferred Stock”) pursuant to which upon Liquidation each holder of shares of Series A Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive, after payment to the Series C Preferred Stock, but on par with Series B Convertible Preferred Stock and in preference to the holders of Common Stock, an amount of cash equal to the greater of (i) the product of the number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock then held by such holder, multiplied by the Series B Original Issue Price; and (ii) the amount that would be payable to such holder in the Liquidation in respect of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of such shares of Series A Preferred Stock if all outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock were converted into Common Stock immediately prior to the Liquidation.

As such, our Series C preferred stock is senior to all other classes of stock in distribution and liquidation and our Series A and Series B preferred stock, if not converted into common stock, will also be senior to our common stock in distribution and liquidation if such shares are not converted into common stock, which could negatively affect the value of our common stock and impair our ability to raise additional capital.

The conversion of our Series A Preferred Stock, and Series B Preferred Stock and the exercise of currently outstanding warrants could result in significant dilution to the holders of our common stock.

The holders of our Series A Preferred Stock and Series B Preferred Stock may convert their shares of preferred stock into shares of common stock. As of December 31, 2018, we had outstanding: (i) 9,417,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock outstanding, which are convertible into 941,701 shares of common stock and (ii) 6,600,000 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, which are convertible into 1,320,002 shares of common stock. In addition to our outstanding shares of preferred stock, as of December 31, 2018, there were currently outstanding warrants to purchase 7,371,925 shares of our common stock. The conversion of our Series A Preferred Stock and Series B Preferred Stock, as well as the exercise of our outstanding warrants could result in significant dilution to existing common shareholders, adversely affect the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities.

The issuance of additional equity securities by us in the future would result in dilution to our existing common shareholders.

Our board of directors has authority, without action or vote of our shareholders, to issue all or a part of our authorized but unissued shares, except where shareholder approval is required by law. Any issuance of additional equity securities by us in the future could result in dilution to our existing common shareholders. Such issuances could be made at a price that reflects a discount or a premium to the then-current trading price of our common stock. In addition, our business strategy may include expansion through internal growth by acquiring complementary businesses, acquiring or licensing additional products or brands, or establishing strategic relationships with targeted customers and suppliers. In order to do so, or to finance the cost of our other activities, we may issue additional equity securities that could result in further dilution to our existing common shareholders. These issuances would dilute the percentage ownership interest of our existing common shareholders, which would have the effect of reducing their influence on matters on which our shareholders vote, and might dilute the book value of our common stock. For example, we issued a total of 4,436,000 shares of common stock, 9,364,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock convertible into 9,364,000 shares of common stock, and total warrants to purchase 13,800,000 shares of common stock in our recent underwritten public offering that closed on July 17, 2018. As of December 31, 2018, 9,364,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock had been converted into shares of common stock and 9,505,500 warrants had been exercised, and as a result our outstanding shares of common stock has increased significantly from 2,738,283 shares as of December 31, 2012 to 29,433,135 shares as of December 31, 2018. We also issued 16,666,668 shares of common stock, short-term warrants to purchase up to 9,583,334 shares of common stock, and long-term warrants to purchase up to 9,583,334 shares of common stock, as part of our March 25, 2019 underwritten public offering.

In connection with the Oral Mucositis ECC we entered into on June 9, 2015 and which was amended in November of 2017, we will be required, at our option, to pay up to $37.5 million cash to Intrexon or issue up to $37.5 million of additional shares of our common stock to Intrexon upon meeting certain milestone events.

Certain provisions of our articles of incorporation, bylaws, executive employment agreements and stock option plan may prevent a change of control of our company that a shareholder may consider favorable.

Provisions of our articles of incorporation, bylaws, executive employment agreements and stock option plan may discourage, delay or prevent a change of control of our company that a shareholder may consider favorable. These provisions include:

As a result, these provisions could discourage bids for our common stock at a premium and limit the price that investors are willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock. However, in our articles of incorporation we expressly elected not to be governed by Sections 607.0901 and 607.0902 of the Florida Business Corporation Act, which are statutory anti-takeover provisions relating to affiliated transactions and control share acquisitions, respectively. As such, we do not have the

protection of these statutes in connection with any unwanted takeover attempts which could have the effect of encouraging an attempted change of control without first negotiating with our Board of Directors.

Our common stock commenced trading on the NYSE American (formerly the NYSE MKT) on April 10, 2013, and we are subject to certain NYSE American continued listing requirements and standards. We may also incur costs that we have not previously incurred for expenses for compliance with the rules and requirements of the NYSE American. We cannot provide any assurance that we will be able to continue to satisfy the requirements of the NYSE American’s continued listing standards. A delisting of our common stock could negatively affect the price and liquidity of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital in the future.

Our stock price has historically been volatile and the trading volume of our stock has been low.

The trading price of our common stock has historically been, and may in the future be, subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include:

Historically, the daily trading volume of our common stock has been relatively low and on some days our stock does not trade at all. An order for the purchase or sale of a large number of our shares could significantly affect the price at which the order is executed. We cannot guarantee that an active public market for our common stock will be sustained or that the average trading volume will increase. In addition, the stock market in general has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. Volatility in the market price for particular companies has often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. Broad market factors may seriously harm the market price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance. In addition, securities class action litigation has often been initiated following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities. A securities class action suit against us could result in substantial costs, potential liabilities, and the diversion of management’s attention and resources. To the extent our stock price fluctuates or remains low, it could impair our ability to raise capital through the offering of additional equity securities.

The market price of our common stock could decline as a result of sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales could occur. In addition, these factors could make it more difficult for us to raise funds through future offerings of common stock. We have recently issued a significant number of shares of common stock and the number of outstanding shares has increased from 2,738,283 shares as of December 31, 2012 to 46,112,303 as of March 25, 2019 . In addition, there were 16,017,000 shares of our Preferred stock outstanding which are convertible into 2,261,703 shares of our common stock and, as of March 25, 2019, warrants to purchase an additional 26,538,593 shares of

our common stock issuable upon exercise of warrants to investors. There were also 1,812,133 shares issuable upon exercise of options outstanding and an additional 197,117 shares available for option grants under our 2012 Equity Incentive Plan

The issuance of shares of our common stock under our 2012 Equity Incentive Plan is covered by Form S-8 registration statements we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and upon exercise of the options, such shares may be resold into the market. We have also issued shares of common stock and warrants in connection with previous private placements. Such shares are available for resale as well as certain of the shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the warrants. We have also issued shares of our common stock in the private placement and financing transaction, which are deemed to be “restricted securities,” as that term is defined in Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or Securities Act, and such shares may be resold pursuant to the provisions of Rule 144. For example, on June 30, 2016 we issued 904,568 restricted shares of our common stock to three accredited investors (Intrexon, the KFLP and our Chairman Dr. Telling) in a private placement. The resale of shares acquired from us in private transactions could cause our stock price to decline significantly. In addition, the conversion of outstanding shares of Series A and Series B convertible preferred stock issued in 2017 private placements into common stock and the subsequent sale of shares of common stock could also cause our stock price to decline significantly.

In addition, from time to time, certain of our shareholders may be eligible to sell all or some of their restricted shares of common stock by means of ordinary brokerage transactions in the open market pursuant to Rule 144, subject to certain limitations. In general, pursuant to Rule 144, after satisfying a six-month holding period: (i) affiliated shareholders, or shareholders whose shares are aggregated, may, under certain circumstances, sell within any three-month period a number of securities which does not exceed the greater of 1% of the then-outstanding shares of common stock or the average weekly trading volume of the class during the four calendar weeks prior to such sale and (ii) non-affiliated shareholders may sell without such limitations, in each case provided we are current in our public reporting obligations. Rule 144 also permits the sale of securities by non-affiliates that have satisfied a one-year holding period without any limitation or restriction.

We are unable to estimate the number of shares that may be sold because this will depend on the market price for our common stock, the personal or business circumstances of sellers and other factors.

The requirements of being a public company may strain our resources, divert management’s attention and affect our ability to attract and retain qualified members for our Board of Directors.

As a public company, we are already subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The requirements of these rules and regulations may increase our legal, accounting and financial compliance costs; may make some activities more difficult, time-consuming and costly; and may also place undue strain on our personnel, systems and resources. Our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time to comply with these requirements. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costlier. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our Board of Directors and Board committees or as executive officers.

As a public company we are also required to assess our internal control over financial reporting under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and file periodic reports with the SEC. If we are unable to comply with these requirements in a timely manner, or if material weaknesses or significant deficiencies persist, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or regulatory investigations, which could harm our business. We must perform an assessment of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that we incur substantial accounting expense and expend significant management efforts. If we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or the SEC reporting requirements in a timely manner, or if we note or identify deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources. As a smaller reporting company, we do not have to have our independent registered public accounting firm report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. If in the future we no longer meet the requirements of a smaller reporting company, our independent registered public accounting firm will have to report on our internal controls over financial reporting. There can be no assurance that our independent registered public accounting firm will not identify material weaknesses which could have an adverse effect on our stock price.

We will continue to incur significant costs as a result of and devote substantial management time to operating as a public company listed on the NYSE American.

As a public company listed on the NYSE American, we incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur before when trading on the OTCQB Marketplace. For example, we are subject to the rules and regulations required by the NYSE American, including changes in corporate governance practices and minimum listing requirements. These requirements have increased our legal and financial compliance costs and have and will continue to render some activities more time-consuming and costlier. In addition, our management and other personnel have diverted and will continue to divert attention from operational and other business matters to devote substantial time to these listing requirements and failure to meet these requirements could lead to an adverse effect on the listing of our common stock on the NYSE American.

If securities or industry analysts publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock depends in part upon the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business from time to time. If one or more of the analysts who seek to cover us downgrades our stock or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage, once commenced, or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which could cause our stock price and trading volume to decline.

We may issue debt or debt securities convertible into equity securities, any of which may be senior to our common stock as to distributions and in liquidation, which could negatively affect the value of our common stock.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by entering into debt or debt-like financing that is unsecured or secured by up to all of our assets, or by issuing additional debt or equity securities, which could include issuances of secured or unsecured commercial paper, medium-term notes, senior notes, subordinated notes, guarantees, preferred stock, hybrid securities, or securities convertible into or exchangeable for equity securities. In the event of our liquidation, our lenders and holders of our debt and securities would receive distributions of our available assets before distributions to the holders of our common stock. Because our decision to incur debt and issue securities in future offerings may be influenced by market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings or debt financings. Further, market conditions could require us to accept less favorable terms for the issuance of our securities in the future.

We are a “smaller reporting company” and, as a result of the reduced disclosure and governance requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies, our common stock may be less attractive to investors.

We are a “smaller reporting company,” meaning that we are not an investment company, an asset-backed issuer, or a majority-owned subsidiary of a parent company that is not a “smaller reporting company,” have a public float of less than $250 million and have annual revenues of less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year. As a “smaller reporting company,” we are subject to lesser disclosure obligations in our SEC filings compared to other issuers. Specifically, “smaller reporting companies” are able to provide simplified executive compensation disclosures in their filings, are exempt from the provisions of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requiring that independent registered public accounting firms provide an attestation report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and have certain

other decreased disclosure obligations in their SEC filings, including, among other things, only being required to provide two years of audited financial statements in annual reports. Decreased disclosures in our SEC filings due to our status a “smaller reporting company” may make it harder for investors to analyze our operating results and financial prospects.

We have never paid cash dividends on our capital stock, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have never paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain any future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business, and we do not expect to declare or pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Consequently, stockholders must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment.

In November of 2016, the Company entered into an amended lease for the leased office space in Tampa, FL. The amended lease is for approximately 2,207 square feet. The lease period for the office space is for thirty-six months commencing on March 1, 2017. Lease payments range from $4,138 per month to $4,392 per month inclusive of insurance, taxes and utilities. The 12-month lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2018 were approximately $56,000 which includes sublease income, insurance, taxes and utilities. Lease payments are capped during the term. The lease expires on February 29, 2020.

In addition to our Tampa location we continue to lease our research facility located at 13700 Progress Boulevard, Alachua, Florida 32615. The facility is approximately 5,300 square feet of which approximately 60% is laboratory space and the remainder is office space and common areas. The 12-month lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2018 were approximately $135,000 which includes insurance, taxes and utilities. Lease payments are capped during the term which expires in November 2019. We expect the location in Alachua, Florida to continue to be used primarily as our research and laboratory space. On July 13, 2014 we amended the lease for our Alachua, Florida facility. The lease term was extended from an expiration date of December 1, 2014 to an expiration date of November 30, 2019. The monthly lease payments are initially $10,219 per month with annual rent increases of 3%. We have the ability to terminate the lease for this facility prior to November 30, 2019 upon the payment of nine months’ rent in advance. All other terms of the original lease are unchanged and remain in effect.

Our common stock is quoted on the NYSE American under the ticker symbol “OGEN”. The last price of our common stock as reported on the NYSE American on March 18, 2019 was $0.96_ per share. As of March 18, 2019, there were approximately 28 stockholders of record of our common stock. This number does not include beneficial owners from whom shares are held by nominees in street name such as banks and brokerage firms.

To date, we have neither declared nor paid any dividends on our common stock nor do we anticipate that such dividends will be paid in the foreseeable future. Rather, we intend to retain any earnings to finance the growth and development of our business. Any payment of cash dividends on our common stock in the future will be dependent, among other things, upon our earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors which the board of directors deems relevant. In addition, restrictive covenants contained in any financing agreements entered into in the future may preclude us from paying any dividends.

We issued 100 shares of Series C, Non-Voting, Non-Convertible, Preferred Stock (“Series C Preferred Stock”) with a stated value of $33,847 per share to Intrexon in exchange for obligations we owed to Intrexon. These shares have an accruing dividend of 12% per year payable in additional shares of Series C Preferred stock. In January of 2018, we paid a dividend on our Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon of 1.733 shares for the portion of the 2017 fiscal year the Series C Preferred had been outstanding and in January of 2019, we paid a dividend on our Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon of 12.208 shares. The accruing dividend increases to 20% per year after May 10, 2019.

We recorded the issuances of the following unregistered securities during the fourth quarter of 2018 pursuant to exemptions under the Securities Act of 1933, including Section 4(2):

On November 1, 2018, the Company issued 12,500 shares of its common stock as partial consideration to CorProminence, LLC, for the acquisition of certain services.

There were no purchases of our common stock during the three months ended December 31, 2018. The Company has no publicly announced share repurchase programs.

The following information should be read in conjunction with the Financial Statements, including the notes thereto, included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. This discussion contains certain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results and the timing of certain events could differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including, but not limited to, those set forth herein and elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

We are focused on becoming a leader in developing novel antibiotics against infectious disease and on developing effective treatments for oral mucositis.

We have developed a Phase 2 protocol for AG013 with the FDA under the fast track designation. The clinical trial is a double blind, placebo controlled, evaluation of daily AG013, administered three times a day, oral rinse for the duration of the cancer treatment. The study is expected to enroll between 160-180 evaluable patients receiving chemoradiation for treatment of head and neck cancer for 7 to 9 weeks. The primary endpoint is a reduction, compared to the placebo, in the number of days of severe oral mucositis. In addition, a number of secondary endpoints are being evaluated. In August of 2016, we received feedback from the FDA in response to our Type C meeting and the pursuit of a Phase 2 clinical trial on AG013 for the treatment of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients. We filed an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) update in March 2017 and we initiated the Phase 2 clinical trial with AG013 in the United States in 2017. In late 2018, we received regulatory approval to enroll patients for participation in the study in the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Germany. We began enrollment of patients in these countries in early 2019. The Phase 2 clinical trial is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm, multi-center trial in which approximately 200 patients, in order to ensure enrollment of 160-180 evaluable patients, in a 1:1 randomization block size will receive either a placebo or AG013. The clinical trial will be conducted at approximately 50-75 clinical sites across the United States and Europe. The purpose of the Phase 2 clinical trial (NCT03234465) is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of topically administered AG013 compared to placebo for reducing the incidence and severity of OM in patients undergoing traditional chemoradiation for the treatment of head and neck cancer. Key efficacy measures include collection of data regarding the duration, time to development, and overall incidence of OM (World Health Organization scale used) during the active treatment phase, beginning from the start of chemoradiation therapy until 2 weeks following its completion.

We completed enrollment of the interim analysis cohort, which included 24 randomized patients in our Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013 for the treatment OM. Nineteen of those patients were included in the unblended safety evaluation, of which 10 received AG013. We recently announced positive results from our interim safety analysis, which was requested by the FDA

on patients from our Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013 for the treatment of OM. The study provided information that, we believe, likely indicates that the overall incidence of severe OM is less than would be anticipated in the general population.

Safety was evaluated on the basis of treatment-emergent adverse events, vital signs, weight, physical examinations, clinical laboratory assessments and the presence of AG013 in whole blood. Tolerability measures (taste, consistency and smell) were collected from the patient diaries. In addition, the reasons for study treatment discontinuation were also summarized. Following review of the data by an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), it was concluded that the clinical trial can proceed with no changes to the study. The data analysis indicated that the distribution of adverse events was similar between AG013 and placebo. The serious adverse events reported were consistent with those commonly reported in a head and neck cancer population receiving traditional chemoradiation therapy treatments and included fevers, neutropenia, anemia, nausea and vomiting, infections and oral (mouth and throat) pain. There were no reports of bacteremia or sepsis. Of patients that discontinued participation in the clinical trial, 4 patients experienced adverse events, including 3 patients who developed nausea and vomiting, 2 patients that were non-compliant with the study procedures and 3 patients developed severe OM.

In nonclinical testing, MU1140 has shown activity against all Gram-positive bacteria against which it has been tested, including those responsible for a number of healthcare associated infections, or HAIs. A high percentage of hospital-acquired infections are caused by highly resistant bacteria such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. We believe the need for novel antibiotics is increasing as a result of the growing resistance of target pathogens to existing FDA approved antibiotics on the market.

In our pre-clinical studies to support a potential IND filing with the FDA, we tested a total of six homologs of MU1140 for certain compound characteristics, including but not limited to: drug activity (based on minimum inhibitory concentration or “MIC”) equal or better than “standard of care” drugs against certain drug-resistant bacteria, safety, toxicity, stability, and manufacturability. An animal study specifically evaluated homolog efficacy in relation to survival, measurable amounts of Clostridium difficile (“C. diff”) colony forming units, and toxin levels. Three homologs demonstrated promising results with one homolog, OG253, delivered rectally, achieving a 100% survival rate throughout the entire study in contrast to an approximately 30% survival rate for the vancomycin positive control.

Completion of Underwritten Public Offering. On March 25, 2019, we announced the closing of an underwritten public offering for gross proceeds of approximately $12.5 million, which included the partial exercise of the underwriter’s over-allotment option to purchase additional shares and warrants, prior to deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. The offering is comprised of 16,666,668 shares of common stock, short-term warrants to purchase up to 8,333,334 shares of common stock, and long-term warrants to purchase up to 8,333,334 shares of common stock, at a price to the public of $0.75 per share and accompanying warrants. We granted the underwriter a 30-day option to purchase up to 2,500,000 additional shares of common stock and/or short-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock and long-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock the public offering price, less underwriting discounts and commissions. The underwriter exercised its option to purchase the short-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock and long-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock effective as of the closing. Each short-term warrant has an exercise price of $0.75 per share of common stock, is immediately exercisable, and will expire on the earlier of (1) the eighteen-month anniversary of the date of issuance and (2) twenty-one trading days following our release of top-line data related to its Phase 2 double blind, placebo controlled clinical trial of AG013. Each long-term warrant has an exercise price of $0.90 per share of common stock, is immediately exercisable and will expire five years following the date of issuance. Following the consummation of our underwritten public offering on March 25, 2019, and excluding certain offering expenses, we had approximately $29.8 in cash available to fund our AG013 research, clinical trials, pre-clinical development of the lantibiotics program, and for working capital and general corporate purposes.

Clearance For Patient Enrollment In the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Germany. In October 2018, we announced we had received clearance to enroll patients residing in Belgium from the Belgian Health Authority, The Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Product into our Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013. In November 2018, we announced we had received clearance to enroll patients residing in Germany from the Paul Erlich Institute and patients residing in the United Kingdom from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) into our Phase 2 clinical trial of AG013.

Full Conversion of Series D Preferred. 1,496,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock were issued in the Company’s July 2018 public offering (the “Public Offering”), were outstanding at September 30, 2018. As of October 3, 2018, all remaining shares of the Company’s Series D Preferred stock have been voluntarily converted by the holders to the Company’s common stock and no shares of Series D Preferred stock remain outstanding. The Company received no additional proceeds from the conversions of Series D Preferred by the holders thereof.

Warrant Exercises. In the Company’s Public Offering, the Company issued 13,800,000 warrants to acquire the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 per share (the “Public Offering Warrants”). As of November 13, 2018, 9,505,500 shares of Company common stock have been issued as a result of the voluntary exercise of such Public Offering Warrants by the holders thereof. The warrant exercises resulted in gross proceeds to the Company of $9,505,500.

Texas A&M License Termination. Following a review of our research and development activities and a determination to focus our financial resources on our research activities for OG716 and AG013, we provided a notice to Texas A&M of the termination of our license agreement with Texas A&M which took effect in January 2019.

We were incorporated in November 1996 and commenced operations in 1999. We consummated our initial public offering in June 2003. We have devoted substantially all of our available resources to our discovery efforts comprising research and development, clinical trials for our product candidates, protection of our intellectual property and the general and administrative support of these operations. We have generated limited revenues from grants and from our former consumer ProBiora3 product business, and have principally funded our operations through the sale of debt and equity securities, including the exercise of warrants issued in connection with financing transactions. In June of 2016, we completed the sale of

our consumer probiotics business to ProBiora Health, LLC and as a result, we will no longer generate revenue from sales of consumer probiotic products. Our net revenues were $0 and $464,048, for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

As of December 31, 2018, we had an accumulated deficit of $111,373,608 and we have yet to achieve profitability. We incurred net losses of $9,914,141 and $6,731,525 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. We expect to incur significant and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future as we seek to advance our product candidates through nonclinical testing and clinical trials to ultimately obtain regulatory approval and eventual commercialization. We will need to raise additional capital to fund our operations. We anticipate that our cash resources as of December 31, 2018 coupled with the net proceeds from our March 25, 2019 underwritten public offering, will be sufficient to fund our operations as presently structured through the fourth quarter of 2020. There can be no assurance that additional capital will be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all. Adequate additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. We expect that research and development expenses will increase along with general and administrative costs, as we grow and operate our business.

We did not generate any revenue for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively from the sales or licensing of our product candidates.

Research and development consist of expenses incurred in connection with the discovery and development of our product candidates. These expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses, which include salaries and benefits and attending science conferences; expenses incurred under our ECC agreements with Intrexon and under other agreements with contract research organizations, investigative sites and consultants that conduct our clinical trials and a substantial portion of our nonclinical studies; the cost of acquiring and manufacturing clinical trial materials; facilities, depreciation and other allocated expenses, which include direct and allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities and equipment, and depreciation of fixed assets; license fees, for and milestone payments related to, in-licensed products and technology; stock-based compensation expense; and costs associated with nonclinical activities and regulatory approvals. We expense research and development costs as incurred.

Our research and development expenses can be divided into (i) clinical research, and (ii) nonclinical research and development activities. Clinical research costs consist of clinical trials, manufacturing services, regulatory activities and related personnel costs, and other costs such as rent, utilities, depreciation and stock-based compensation. Nonclinical research and development costs consist of our research activities, nonclinical studies, related personnel costs and laboratory supplies, and other costs such as rent, utilities, depreciation and stock-based compensation and research expenses we incur associated with our ECC agreements with Intrexon. While we are currently focused on advancing our product development programs, our future research and development expenses will depend on the clinical success of our product candidates, as well as ongoing assessments of each product candidate’s commercial potential. In addition, we cannot forecast with any degree of certainty which product candidates may be subject to future collaborations, when such arrangements will be secured, if at all, and to what degree such arrangements would affect our development plans, research expenses and capital requirements.

Our research and development expenses were $5,971,833 and $3,539,656 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.

Our current strategy is to increase our research and development expenses in the future as we continue the advancement of our clinical trials and nonclinical product development programs for our lantibiotic product candidate and with respect to our oral mucositis product candidate. The lengthy process of completing clinical trials; seeking regulatory approval for our product candidates; and expanding the claims we are able to make, requires expenditure of substantial resources. Any failure or delay in completing clinical trials, or in obtaining regulatory approvals, could cause a delay in generating product revenues and cause our research and development expenses to increase and, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our operations. Our current product candidates are not expected to be commercially available until we are able to obtain regulatory approval from the FDA.

Our plan is to budget and manage expenditures in research and development such that they are undertaken in a cost-effective manner yet still advance the research and development efforts. While we have some control under our Lantibiotic ECC and Oral Mucositis ECC as to the planning and timing of the research and development and therefore the timing of when

expenditures may be incurred for various phases of agreed upon projects, actual expenditures can vary from period to period. Subject to available capital, we expect overall research and development expenses to fluctuate as our financial resources permit. Our research and development projects are currently expected to be taken to the point where they can be licensed or partnered with larger pharmaceutical companies.

General and administrative expenses consist principally of salaries and related costs for personnel in executive, finance, business development, marketing, information technology, legal and human resources functions. Other general and administrative expenses include facility costs not otherwise included in research and development expenses, patent filing, and professional fees for legal, consulting, auditing and tax services.

We anticipate that our general and administrative expenses may continue to increase for, among others, the following reasons:

Other income (expense) includes local business taxes, as well as interest income and expense. Interest income consists of interest earned on our cash and cash equivalents, and interest on the stock subscription receivable. The primary objective of our investment policy is capital preservation. Interest expense consists primarily of interest and costs associated with our indebtedness.

On December 22, 2017, the Jobs Act was enacted, which reforms corporate tax legislation in the United States and related laws. One of the provisions of the new tax law reduces the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. The Company remeasured certain deferred tax assets based on the rates at which they are expected to reverse in the future, which is generally 21%. However, the Company is still analyzing certain aspects of the Jobs Act and refining its calculations, which could potentially affect the measurement of this balance or potentially result in new deferred tax amounts. Any change in the Company’s reasonable estimates of the impact of the Jobs Act will be included in the reporting period in which the change is identified in accordance with SAB Topic 5 EE. The provisional amount recorded related to the remeasurement of our deferred tax balance was $10,055,163.

Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“US GAAP”). The preparation of financial statements in accordance with US GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions that

affect reported amounts and related disclosures. There are certain critical estimates that we believe require significant judgment in the preparation of our financial statements. We consider an accounting estimate to be critical if:

The principal areas of estimation reflected in the financial statements are stock-based compensation, valuation of warrants, and income tax valuation allowance.

Generally, all forms of stock-based payments, including stock option grants, warrants, and restricted stock grants are measured at their fair value on the awards’ grant date typically using a Black-Scholes pricing model. Stock-based compensation awards issued to non-employees for services rendered are recorded at the fair value of the stock-based payment. The expense resulting from stock-based payments are recorded in research and development expense or general and administrative expense in the statement of operations, depending on the nature of the services provided. Stock-based payment expense is recorded over the requisite service period in which the grantee provides services to us. To the extent the stock option grants, warrants, or restricted stock grants do not vest at the grant date they are subject to forfeiture.

U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“US GAAP”) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the financial statements based on their fair values as of the grant date. Stock-based compensation expense is recorded over the requisite service period in which the grantee provides services to us, to the extent the options do not vest at the grant date and are subject to forfeiture. For performance-based awards that do not include market-based conditions, we record share-based compensation expense only when the performance-based milestone is deemed probable of achievement. We utilize both quantitative and qualitative criteria to judge whether milestones are probable of achievement. For awards with market-based performance conditions, we recognize the grant-date fair value of the award over the derived service period regardless of whether the underlying performance condition is met.

The Company used the Black Scholes Option Pricing Model in calculating the relative fair value of any warrants that have been issued.

Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rate is recognized in operations in the period that includes the enactment date. Deferred tax assets are reduced to estimated amounts expected to be realized by the use of a valuation allowance. Based on our historical operating losses, a valuation allowance has been recognized for all deferred tax assets.

Under US GAAP, the impact of an uncertain income tax position on the income tax return must be recognized at the largest amount that is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon audit by the relevant taxing authority. An uncertain income tax position will not be recognized if it has less than a 50% likelihood of being sustained. Additionally, GAAP provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting for interim periods, disclosure and transition.

Effective December 22, 2017, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin Topic 5 EE, Income Tax Accounting Implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“SAB Topic 5 EE”). This staff accounting bulletin expresses the views of the SEC staff regarding application of ASC Topic 740 in the reporting period that includes December 22, 2017, the date on which the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Jobs Act”) was signed into law. The SEC recognizes that an entity may not have the necessary information

available, prepared, or analyzed (including computations) for certain income tax effects of the Jobs Act in order to determine a reasonable estimate to be included as provisional amounts. In circumstances in which provisional amounts cannot be prepared, the SEC stated an entity should continue to apply ASC Topic 740 (e.g., when recognizing and measuring current and deferred taxes) based on the provisions of the tax laws that were in effect immediately prior to the Jobs Act being enacted until a reasonable estimate can be determined.

In June 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update 2018-07 Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718) Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. The amendments in this Update expand the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. The requirements of Topic 718 should be applied to nonemployee awards except for specific guidance on inputs to an option pricing model and the attribution of cost (that is, the period of time over which share-based payment awards vest and the pattern of cost recognition over that period). The amendments specify that Topic 718 applies to all share-based payment transactions in which a grantor acquires goods or services to be used or consumed in a grantor’s own operations by issuing share-based payment awards. The amendments also clarify that Topic 718 does not apply to share-based payments used to effectively provide (1) financing to the issuer or (2) awards granted in conjunction with selling goods or services to customers as part of a contract accounted for under Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers.

The amendments in this Update are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within that fiscal year. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s results of operation, financial position or disclosures.

In February 2016, the FASB issued guidance to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. Previous lease accounting was criticized for failing to meet the needs of users of financial statements because it did not always provide a faithful representation of leasing transactions. In particular, it did not require lessees to recognize assets and liabilities arising from operating leases on the balance sheet. The guidance is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s results of operation, financial position or disclosures.

In July 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Updates 2018-10 Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases and 2018-11 Leases (Topic 842).

Update 2018-10 Codification Improvements to Topic 842 represent changes to clarify the Codification, correct unintended application of guidance, or make minor improvements to the Codification that are not expected to have a significant effect on current accounting practice or create a significant administrative cost to most entities. Some of the amendments make the Codification easier to understand and easier to apply by eliminating inconsistencies, providing needed clarifications, and improving the presentation of guidance in the Codification. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s results of operation, financial position or disclosures.

Update 2018-11 Leases (Topic 842) provides entities with an additional (and optional) transition method to adopt the new lease requirements by allowing entities to initially apply the requirements by recognizing a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. Consequently, an entity’s reporting for the comparative periods presented in the financial statements in which the entity adopts the new lease requirements would continue to be in accordance with current GAAP (Topic 840). An entity electing this additional (and optional) transition method must provide the required Topic 840 disclosures for all periods that continue to be in accordance with Topic 840. The amendments do not change the existing disclosure requirements in Topic 840. In preparation for the adoption of this new standard, we have implemented internal controls to enable the preparation of financial information on adoption. We expect adoption of the standard will result in right-of-use assets and liabilities for operating leases of approximately $176,000 at January 1, 2019.

There are no additional accounting pronouncements issued or effective during the twelve months ended December 31, 2018 that have had or are expected to have an impact on our financial statements.

	Year Ended December 31,
	2018			2017			Increase/Decrease			Percentage
Revenue, net	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Operating expenses:
Research, and development		5,971,833			3,539,656			2,432,177			68.71	%
General and administrative		4,022,307			3,178,662			843,645			26.54	%
Total operating expenses		9,994,140			6,718,318			3,275,822			48.76	%
Loss from continuing operations		(9,994,140	)		(6,718,318	)		(3,275,822	)		48.76	%
Other income (expense):
Interest income		86,527			10,221			76,306			746.56	%
Interest expense		(5,786	)		(216,328	)		210,542			-97.33	%
Local business tax		(1,188	)		(3,098	)		1,910			-61.65	%
Changes in derivative liability		—			188,727			(188,727	)		-100.00	%
Other income		446			7,271			(6,825	)		-93.87	%
Total other income (expense), net		79,999			(13,207	)		93,206			-705.73	%
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes		(9,914,141	)		(6,731,525	)		(3,182,616	)		47.28	%
Income tax benefit		—			—			—			0.00	%
Net loss from continuing operations		(9,914,141	)		(6,731,525	)		(3,182,616	)		47.28	%
Deemed dividend of Series D preferred stock		(1,412,041	)		—			(1,412,041	)		0.00	%
Net loss applicable to common shareholders	$	(11,326,182	)	$	(6,731,525	)	$	(4,594,657	)		68.26	%

Research and Development. Research and development expenses were $5,971,833 for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared to $3,539,656 for the year ended December 31, 2017; an increase of $2,432,177, or 68.7%. This increase was primarily due to increases in costs associated with work under the ECC’s, stock-based compensation, and bonus of costs of $2,542,222, $122,004, and $64,120, respectively. These increases were partially offset by decreases in salary, and employee benefit costs of $220,065, and $65,500, respectively.

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses were $4,022,307 for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared to $3,178,662 for the year ended December 31, 2017; an increase of $843,645, or 26.5%. This increase was primarily due to increases in bonus, non-employee stock-based compensation, stock-based compensation, insurance, travel and entertainment, and transfer agent costs of $372,473, $179,607, $158,272, $76,395, $40,161, and $23,912, respectively.

Other Income (Expense). Other income (expense) was $79,999 for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared to $(13,207) for the year ended December 31, 2017; an increase of $93,206. The increase was primarily attributable to an increase in interest income of $76,306, a decrease in interest expense of $210,542 due to decreased levels of borrowing in 2018 and a decrease in changes in a derivative liability of $188,727.

Since our inception, we have funded our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities in our initial public offering, the sale of equity securities and warrants in private placements, debt financing and grants. The following table sets forth the primary sources and uses of cash for each of the periods indicated:

During the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, our operating cash flows from operations used cash of $9,079,817 and $6,363,853 respectively. The use of cash in all periods primarily resulted from our net losses adjusted for non-cash items and

changes in operating assets and liabilities. We had working capital surplus of $20,765,707 and $6,294,650 as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.

Additional details of our financing activities for the periods reflected in this report are provided below:

On May 10, 2017 we entered into a securities purchase agreement with three accredited investors, to purchase up to $3,000,000 of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series A Preferred Stock Financing”). The sale of the Preferred Stock took place in two separate closings and at the first closing which occurred on May 10, 2017, we received gross proceeds of approximately $1,302,000. The second closing occurred on July 25, 2017 and we received gross proceeds of approximately $1,698,000, which was the balance of the Preferred Stock Financing. The full $3,000,000 of Preferred Stock, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, is convertible into one million two hundred thousand shares of our Common Stock, based on a fixed conversion price of $2.50 per share on an as-converted basis. In addition, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, we issued warrants to purchase an aggregate of 462,106 shares of Common Stock at the first closing and we issued an aggregate of 602,414 shares of Common Stock at the second closing (“Summer 17 Warrants”). The Summer 17 Warrants have a term of seven years from the date of issuance are non-exercisable until 6 months after issuance, have an exercise price of $3.10 per share. Proceeds from the Series A Preferred Stock Financing (including the exercise of any warrants for cash) will be used for general corporate purposes, including working capital.

On July 27, 2017, we entered into an agreement to amend the warrants issued in connection with the Series A Preferred Stock Financing to provide notification and objection requirements with respect to the change of control provisions. The change of control provisions in the warrants had previously caused the warrants to be treated as a derivative liability as opposed to being treated as equity on our balance sheet. The warrants have been replaced by amended and restated warrants containing such notification and objection requirements (the “Amended and Restated Common Stock Purchase Warrants”) so that the Amended and Restated Common Stock Purchase Warrants are now treated as equity on our balance sheet. All other terms of the original warrants remain unchanged by the Amended and Restated Common Stock Purchase Warrants.

In connection with the Series A Preferred Financing, we filed a Certificate of Designations of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of Series A Preferred Stock with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida, effective May 10, 2017. The number of shares of Preferred Stock designated as Series A Preferred Stock was 12,000,000.

In connection with the issuance and sale of the Series A Preferred Stock and Summer 17 Warrants, we granted certain demand registration rights and piggyback registration rights with respect to the shares of our Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Preferred Stock and exercise of the Warrants, pursuant to a Registration Rights Agreement.

Except as otherwise required by law, the Series A Preferred Stock shall have no voting rights. However, as long as any shares of Series A Preferred Stock are outstanding, we shall not, without the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Series A Preferred Stock, (a) alter or change adversely the powers, preferences or rights given to the Series A Preferred Stock or alter or amend the Certificate of Designation, (b) amend its articles of incorporation or other charter documents in any manner that adversely affects any rights of the holders of Series A Preferred Stock, (c) increase the number of authorized shares of Series A Preferred Stock, or (d) enter into any agreement with respect to any of the foregoing. Upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up by us, whether voluntary or involuntary that is not a Fundamental Transaction (as defined in the Certificate of Designation), the holders of Series A Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive out of the assets, the greater of (i) the product of the number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock then held by such holder, multiplied by the Original Issue Price; and (ii) the amount that would be payable to such holder in the Liquidation in respect of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of such shares of Series A Preferred Stock if all outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock were converted into Common Stock immediately prior to the Liquidation. The Series A Preferred Stock is classified as permanent equity.

On May 10, 2017, concurrently with the above referenced Series A Preferred Stock Financing, we entered into Note Purchase Agreement with Intrexon pursuant to which the Company issued a $2,4000,000 unsecured non-convertible promissory note to Intrexon (the “Intrexon Note”) and amended the first milestone in our Oral Mucositis exclusive channel collaboration agreement (the “May Oral Mucositis ECC Amendment”) with Intrexon. The Intrexon Note matured in two (2) years and has a simple interest rate of 12% per annum. Proceeds from the Intrexon Note were used to fund our AG013 research and clinical trials. In addition to, and as part of the Intrexon Note, we amended the first milestone payment on the Oral Mucositis ECC from a $2,000,000 payment upon first dosing of a patient to a $3,000,000 payment upon the earlier of (a) dosing of the last patient, in a Phase 2 clinical trial, and (b) the twenty-four (24) month anniversary of the dosing of the first patient in the

Phase 2 clinical trial. Simultaneously with the amendment to the Oral Mucositis ECC a similar amendment was put in place with respect to our Stock Issuance Agreement with Intrexon reflecting the milestone amendment. The Intrexon Note was subsequently repaid in November 2017 through the issuance of Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon (see below).

The full $3,300,000 of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock is convertible, after giving effect to the reverse stock split into one million three hundred and twenty thousand shares of our Common Stock, based on a conversion of one share of Series B Preferred Stock into two shares of Common Stock. The purchase price per share of the Series B Preferred Stock is represented by $2.50 per share of the Common Stock on an as converted basis. In addition, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, we issued to the investors in the private placement accompanying common stock purchase warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,064,518 shares of Common Stock (the “Fall 17 Warrants”). The Fall 17 Warrants have a term of seven years from the date of issuance, and are non-exercisable until six (6) months after issuance, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, have an exercise price of $3.10 per share.

In connection with the Series B Preferred Financing, we filed a Certificate of Designation and Rights of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida, effective November 8, 2017. The number of shares of Preferred Stock designated as Series B Preferred Stock was 6,600,000.

Except as otherwise required by law, the Series B Preferred Stock shall have no voting rights. However, as long as any shares of Series B Preferred Stock are outstanding, we shall not, without the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Series B Preferred Stock, (a) alter or change adversely the powers, preferences or rights given to the Series B Preferred Stock or alter or amend the Certificate of Designation, (b) amend its articles of incorporation or other charter documents in any manner that adversely affects any rights of the holders of Series B Preferred Stock, (c) increase the number of authorized shares of Series B Preferred Stock, or (d) enter into any agreement with respect to any of the foregoing.

The Series B Preferred Stock shall rank (i) on par with the Common Stock and Series A Preferred Stock and junior to Series C Preferred Stock as to dividend rights and (ii) junior to Series C Preferred Stock, on par with Series A Preferred Stock and senior to the Common Stock as to distribution of assets upon liquidation, dissolution or winding-up by us, whether voluntary or involuntary.

Upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up by us, whether voluntary or involuntary, the holders of Series B Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive out of the assets, after payment to the holders of Series C Preferred Stock but on par with the holders of Series A Preferred Stock and in preference to the holders of the Common Stock, an amount of cash equal to the greater of (i) the product of the number of shares of Series B Preferred Stock then held by such holder, multiplied by the Original Issue Price; and (ii) the amount that would be payable to such holder in the Liquidation in respect of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of such shares of Series B Preferred Stock if all outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock were converted into Common Stock immediately prior to the Liquidation. The Series B Preferred Stock is classified as permanent equity.

Concurrently with the Series B Preferred Stock Financing, we also entered into a Debt Conversion Agreement (the “Intrexon Debt Conversion Agreement”) with Intrexon Corporation (“Intrexon”) pursuant to which Intrexon exchanged the $2,400,000 unsecured non-convertible promissory note previously issued by us to Intrexon (the “Intrexon Note”), the accrued interest on the Intrexon Note and trade payables owed by us (collectively the “Debt”) in the aggregate amount of approximately $3,400,000 for equity in the form of 100 shares of Series C, Non-Voting, Non-Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series C Preferred Stock”) issued by us to Intrexon pursuant to the Debt Conversion Agreement which 100 shares have a stated value equal to the amount of the Debt.

In connection with the Intrexon Debt Conversion Agreement, we filed a Certificate of Designation and Rights of Series C Non-Convertible Preferred Stock with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida, to be effective November 8, 2017. The number of shares of Preferred Stock designated as Series C Preferred Stock is 1,000.

Each issued and outstanding share of Series C Preferred Stock entitles the holder of record to receive dividends at the annual rate of twelve percent (12%) (the “Initial Rate”) of its Stated Value, payable by issuing additional shares of Series C Preferred Stock within thirty days after the end of each calendar year pro-rata for partial years. The Initial Rate shall be subject to increase to twenty percent (20%) automatically after May 10, 2019.

The Series C Preferred Stock shall rank senior to the Common Stock, Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and to any other equity securities issued by us (the “Junior Securities”) as to rights upon liquidation, dissolution or winding-up by us, whether voluntary or involuntary.

Upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up by us, whether voluntary or involuntary, the holders of Series C Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive, in preference to the Junior Securities, an amount of cash equal to the product of (i) sum of (a) the number of shares of Series C Preferred Stock then held by such holder plus, (b) the number of shares of Series C Preferred Stock issuable to such holder in connection with any accrued but unpaid dividends, multiplied by (ii) the Stated Value, of $33,847.9874 per share, of Series C Preferred Stock (“the Series C Liquidation Amount”) and no distribution or payments shall be made in respect of any Junior Securities unless all Series C Liquidation Amounts, if any, are first paid in full.

On January 25, 2018 we paid a dividend on our Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon of 1.733 shares of additional Series C Preferred Stock and on January 31, 2019 we paid a dividend on our Series C Preferred Stock to Intrexon of 12.208 shares of additional Series C Preferred Stock for the portion of 2017 the Series C Preferred Stock that was outstanding.

On April 6, 2018, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with certain investors pursuant to which issued an aggregate of 900,000 shares of our common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at $2.00 per share. In a concurrent private placement, we issued to the investors who participated in the registered offering, warrants exercisable for one share of common stock for each share purchased in the registered offering for an aggregate of warrants to acquire 900,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $2.00 per share. Each warrant is exercisable beginning on the six-month anniversary of the date of its issuance and expires five years from the date of issuance.

On July 17, 2018, we closed an underwritten public offering of units for gross proceeds of approximately $13.8 million, which includes the full exercise of the underwriter’s over-allotment option to purchase additional shares and warrants, prior to deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by us.

The offering was comprised of Class A Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit consisting of one share of common stock and a seven-year warrant to purchase one share of common stock with an exercise price of $1.00 per share (each, a “Warrant” and collectively, the “Warrants”), and Class B Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit comprised of one share of series D preferred stock (the “Series D Preferred Stock”), which is convertible into one share of common stock, and a Warrant. The conversion price of the Series D Preferred Stock issued in the transaction as well as the exercise price of the Warrants are fixed and do not contain any variable pricing features or any price based anti-dilutive features. The Series D Preferred Stock issued in this transaction included a beneficial ownership blocker but has no dividend rights (except to the extent that dividends are also paid on the common stock), liquidation preference or other preferences over common stock, and, with certain exceptions, has no voting rights. The securities comprising the units were immediately separable and have been issued separately.

At the closing of our underwritten public offering, a total of 4,436,000 shares of common stock, 9,364,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock convertible into 9,364,000 shares of common stock, and warrants to acquire 13,800,000 shares of common stock were issued inclusive of the underwriter’s exercise of their over-allotment option to purchase 1,800,000 shares of common stock and warrants to acquire 1,800,000 shares of common stock at $1.00 per share.

Since the closing of our underwritten public offering all of the shares of Series D Preferred Stock that were issued have been converted into shares of our common stock in accordance with the terms for conversion and 9,505,500 warrants were exercised for cash generating approximately $9.5 million in proceeds to us.

We enter into short term financing arrangements for the payment of our annual insurance premiums for our products liability insurance and directors and officers and employment practices insurance.

On July 24, 2018, the Company entered into a short-term note payable for $215,575 bearing interest at 5.24% to finance a portion of the directors’ and officers’ liability insurance and employment practices liability insurance premiums. Principal

and interest payments on this note began August 24, 2018 and are made evenly based on a straight-line amortization over an 11-month period with the final payment being due on June 24, 2019.

On March 10, 2018, we entered into a short-term note payable for $28,915 bearing interest at 5.09% per annum to finance the product liability insurance. Principal and interest payments on this note began April 10, 2018 and are made evenly based on a straight-line amortization over a 11-month period with the final payment being made on February 12, 2019.

On March 10, 2017, we entered into a short-term note payable for $31,985 bearing interest at 6.18% per annum to finance the product liability insurance. Principal and interest payments on this note began April 10, 2017 and such payments are to be made evenly based on a straight-line amortization over a 10-month period with the final payment being made on January 2, 2018.

On July 24, 2017, we entered into a short-term note payable for $140,062 bearing interest at 5.09% to finance a portion of the directors’ and officers’ liability insurance and employment practices liability insurance premiums. Principal and interest payments on this note began August 24, 2017 and such payments are to be made evenly based on a straight-line amortization over an 11-month period with the final payment being made on June 25, 2018.

On July 24, 2016, we entered into a short-term note payable for $111,730 bearing interest at 4.89% per annum to finance a portion of the directors’ and officers’ liability insurance and employment practices liability insurance premiums. Principal and interest payments on this note begin August 24, 2016 and are made evenly based on a straight-line amortization over an 11-month period with the final payment being made on June 21, 2017.

Our capital requirements for 2019 will depend on numerous factors, including the success of our commercialization efforts and of our research and development, the resources we devote to develop and support our technologies and our success in pursuing strategic licensing and funded product development relationships with external partners. Subject to our ability to raise additional capital including through possible joint ventures and/or partnerships, we expect to incur substantial expenditures to further commercialize or develop our technologies including continued increases in costs related to research, nonclinical testing and clinical trials, as well as costs associated with our capital raising efforts and being a public company. We will require substantial funds to conduct research and development and nonclinical and Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical testing of our licensed, patented technologies and to develop sublicensing relationships for the Phase 2 and 3 clinical testing and manufacture and marketing of any products that are approved for commercial sale. Our plans include seeking both equity and debt financing, alliances or other partnership agreements with entities interested in our technologies, or other business transactions that would generate sufficient resources to ensure continuation of our operations and research and development programs.

Our current available cash and cash equivalents provide us with limited liquidity. We believe our existing cash and cash equivalents, inclusive of our net proceeds from our March 25, 2019 public offering, will allow us to fund our operating plan through the fourth quarter of 2020. We expect to continue to seek additional funding for our operations. Any such required additional capital may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all. If we were unable to obtain additional financing, we may be required to reduce the scope of, delay or eliminate some or all of our planned clinical testing, research and development and commercialization activities, which could harm our business. The sale of additional equity or debt securities may result in additional dilution to our shareholders. If we raise additional funds through the issuance of debt securities or preferred stock, these securities could have rights senior to those of our common stock and could contain covenants that would restrict our operations. We also will require additional capital beyond our currently forecasted amounts. For example, as we continue to work with Intrexon under the Lantibiotic ECC for the development of MU1140 homologs and in our Oral Mucositis ECC, we will require additional capital.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with research, development and commercialization of our product candidates, we are unable to estimate the exact amounts of our working capital requirements. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

•identifying and securing clinical sites for the conduct of human trials for our product candidates;

•the determination to redeem all or any portion of our outstanding Series C Preferred Stock;

We have based our estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong. We may need to obtain additional funds sooner or in greater amounts than we currently anticipate. Potential sources of financing include strategic relationships, public or private sales of our shares or debt and other sources. We may seek to access the public or private equity markets when conditions are favorable due to our long-term capital requirements. We do not have any committed sources of financing at this time, and it is uncertain whether additional funding will be available when we need it on terms that will be acceptable to us, or at all. If we raise funds by selling additional shares of common stock or other securities convertible into common stock, the ownership interest of our existing stockholders will be diluted. If we are not able to obtain financing when needed, we may be unable to carry out our business plan. As a result, we may have to significantly limit our operations and our business, financial condition and results of operations would be materially harmed.

As of December 31, 2018, and 2017, we have net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $102,984,000 and $93,966,000, respectively, to offset future federal and state income taxes. Federal and state tax net operating loss carryforwards generated prior to December 31, 2017 will expire through 2037. Federal tax net operating loss carryforwards generated subsequent to December 31, 2017, do not expire but are subject to a limitation of 80% of federal taxable income. The state tax loss carryforward generated subsequent to December 31, 2017, will expire through 2038, unless previously utilized. We also have research and development tax credit carryforwards of approximately $2,250,000 and $2,016,000 as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively, to offset future federal and state income taxes. Our net operating loss and research and development tax credit carryforwards will expire if not used by 2038 and 2028, respectively. Any greater than 50% change in ownership under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, or the Code, places significant annual limitations on the use of such net operating loss carryforwards and we exceeded the 50% threshold when we consummated the June 2009 private placement transaction with the Koski Family Limited Partnership, or KFLP, in June 2009. Subsequent to this event, we again exceeded the 50% threshold when we executed transactions with Intrexon in December 2013. As a result, our loss carryforwards incurred from July 2009 through December 2013 will be limited to approximately $3,540,000 per year. Our historical loss carryforwards through June 2009 will be limited to approximately $417,000 per year. We anticipate that this will effectively limit our ability to utilize our historical loss carryforwards through June 2009 to an aggregate amount of approximately $6,285,000 over such period of time, and the remaining balance of our historical loss carryforwards prior to June 2009 will expire unused. We also anticipate that this limitation will effectively cause all of our tax credit carryforwards through June 2009 to expire unused. We do not anticipate that the December 2013 limitation will cause any of our loss carryforwards or tax credits incurred July 2009 through December 2013 to expire unused. Provided that there are no future ownership changes that would trigger the limitations on loss carryforwards provided under the Code, the operating losses we experience after December 2013 are expected to add to our loss carryforwards and to be fully available to us.

At December 31, 2018 and 2017, we recorded a 100% valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets of approximately $26,224,000 and $23,732,000, respectively, as our management believes it is uncertain that they will be fully realized. If we

determine in the future that we will be able to realize all or a portion of our net operating loss carryforwards, an adjustment to our net operating loss carryforwards would increase net income in the period in which we make such a determination.

Inflation affects the cost of raw materials, goods and services that we use. In recent years, inflation has been modest. However, high energy costs and fluctuations in commodity prices can affect the cost of all raw materials and components. The competitive environment somewhat limits our ability to recover higher costs resulting from inflation by raising prices. Although we cannot precisely determine the effects of inflation on our business, it is management’s belief that the effects on revenues and operating results will not be significant. We do not believe that inflation has had a material impact on our results of operations for the periods presented, except with respect to payroll-related costs and other costs arising from or related to government-imposed regulations.

The Financial Statements are incorporated herein by reference to pages F-1 to F-27 at the end of this report and the supplementary data is not applicable.

Management’s evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act was performed under the supervision and participation of our senior management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. The purpose of disclosure controls and procedures is to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial; Officer concluded that, as of the end of such period, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2018 in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported with the time periods specified in the Securities and exchange Commission’s rules and forms. Management believes that, existing controls were effective and operating properly as designed. During 2018, management believes that the Company maintained a consistent and verifiable financial reporting organization and internal control procedures.

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has concluded there were no other significant changes in our internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during our last fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that our Disclosure Controls and internal controls will prevent all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can

occur because of a simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management or board override of the control.

The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions; over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

Appearing after the Signatures section of this report there is a Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer. The Certification is required in accordance with Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Section 302 Certifications). This Item of this report, which you are currently reading is the information concerning the evaluation referred to in the Section 302 Certification and this information should be read in conjunction with the Section 302 Certification for a more complete understanding of the topics presented.

The management of Oragenics, Inc. is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in the Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance to the Company’s management and board of directors regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The Company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal controls over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error and the circumvention of overriding controls. Accordingly, even effective internal control over financial reporting can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Our management, under the supervision of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018. In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (1992) as updated in May of 2013, (the “2013 COSO Framework”). We integrated the changes prescribed by the 2013 COSO Framework into our internal controls over financial reporting during the year ending December 31, 2015. We also used SEC guidance on conducting such assessments. Based on our assessment, we believe that, as of December 31, 2018, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of our registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by our registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit us to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

Information in response to this Item is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive proxy statement to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this annual report on Form 10-K.

We have adopted a written code of business conduct and ethics that applies to our directors, officers and employees, including our principal executive officer, principal financial and accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, known as our Company Operating Principles. Our Company Operating Principles is available on our website at www.Oragenics.com under the Corporate Governance section of our Investors page. If we make any substantive amendments to, or grant any waivers from, the code of business conduct and ethics for any officer or director, we will disclose the nature of such amendment or waiver on our website or in a current report on Form 8-K.

Exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K are submitted (or incorporated by reference) and listed in a separate section herein immediately following the F pages under the heading “Exhibit Index” and are incorporated herein by reference by reference. No exhibits in addition to those previously filed or listed in item 15(a) (3) and filed herein.

Incorporated by Reference

Exhibit

number

Exhibit description

Form

File no.

Exhibit

Filing
date

Filed
herewith

32.1

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley

Act of 2002 (Chief Executive Officer).

32.2

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chief Financial Officer).

101.INS

XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema

101.CAL

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase

101.DEF

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase

101.LAB

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase

101.PRE

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this amended report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Each of the undersigned officers and directors of Oragenics, Inc., hereby constitutes and appoints Alan Joslyn and Michael Sullivan, their true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, for them and in their name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign their name to any and all amendments to this Report on Form 10-K, and other related documents, and to cause the same to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys, full power and authority to do and perform any act and thing necessary and proper to be done in the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as the undersigned could do if personally present, and the undersigned for himself hereby ratifies and confirms all that said attorney shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Oragenics, Inc. (“Company”) as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the related statements of operations, changes in shareholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2018, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2018, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) ("PCAOB") and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

	December 31, 2018			December 31, 2017
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	20,208,301		$	6,166,143
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		1,724,975			1,027,029
Total current assets		21,933,276			7,193,172
Property and equipment, net		116,276			21,659
Total assets	$	22,049,552		$	7,214,831
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable and accrued expenses	$	1,043,356		$	818,044
Short-term notes payable		124,213			80,478
Total current liabilities		1,167,569			898,522

Shareholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, no par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; 9,417,000 and 12,000,000 Series A shares, 6,600,000 and 6,600,000 Series B shares, 101.733 and 100 Series C shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively		6,100,182			6,309,608
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 200,000,000 shares authorized 29,433,135 and 4,928,335 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively		29,433			4,928
Additional paid-in capital		126,125,976			101,402,570
Accumulated deficit		(111,373,608	)		(101,400,797	)
Total shareholders’ equity		20,881,983			6,316,309
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	22,049,552		$	7,214,831

See accompanying Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and notes to the financial statements.

	Year Ended December 31,
	2018			2017
Operating expenses:
Research and development	$	5,971,833		$	3,539,656
General and administrative		4,022,307			3,178,662
Total operating expenses		9,994,140			6,718,318
Loss from operations		(9,994,140	)		(6,718,318	)
Other income (expense):
Interest income		86,527			10,221
Interest expense		(5,786	)		(216,328	)
Local business tax		(1,188	)		(3,098	)
Changes in derivative liability		—			188,727
Other income		446			7,271
Total other income (expense), net		79,999			(13,207	)
Loss before income taxes		(9,914,141	)		(6,731,525	)
Income tax benefit		—			—
Net loss	$	(9,914,141	)	$	(6,731,525	)
Deemed dividend of Series D preferred stock	$	(1,412,041	)	$	—
Net loss applicable to common shareholders		(11,326,182	)		(6,731,525	)
Basic and diluted net loss per share	$	(0.87	)	$	(1.37	)
Shares used to compute basic and diluted net loss per share		13,039,123			4,926,275

See accompanying Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and notes to the financial statements.

	Common Stock				Preferred Stock						Stock			Additional						Total
											Subscription			Paid In			Accumulated			Shareholders’
	Shares		Amount		Shares			Amount			Receivable			Capital			Deficit			Equity
Balances at December 31, 2016		4,912,335	$	4,912		—		$	—		$	(30,563	)	$	97,660,646		$	(94,669,272	)	$	2,965,723
Repayment of stock subscription		—		—		—			—			30,563			—			—			30,563
Compensation expense relating to option issuances		—		—		—			—			—			435,216			—			435,216
Issuance of Series A preferred stock and warrants, net of expenses		—		—		12,000,000			1,245,508			—			1,619,796			—			2,865,304
Issuance of Series B preferred stock and warrants, net of expenses		—		—		6,600,000			1,679,301			—			1,573,874			—			3,253,175
Issuance of Series C preferred stock, net of expenses		—		—		100			3,384,799			—			(12,208	)		—			3,372,591
Compensation expense relating to issuance of restricted shares		—		—		—			—			—			2,062			—			2,062
Issuance of restricted common stock		16,000		16		—			—			—			123,184			—			123,200
Net loss		—		—		—			—			—			—			(6,731,525	)		(6,731,525	)
Balances at December 31, 2017		4,928,335	$	4,928		18,600,100		$	6,309,608		$	—		$	101,402,570		$	(101,400,797	)	$	6,316,309
Compensation expense relating to option issuances		—		—		—			—			-			996,038			—			996,038
Issuance of common stock - shelf takedown, net of expenses		900,000		900		—			—			—			1,509,427			—			1,510,327
Conversion of Series A preferred stock to common stock		258,300		258		(2,583,000	)		(268,096	)		—			267,838			—			—
Issuance of common stock, Series D preferred stock and warrants, net of expenses		4,436,000		4,436		9,364,000			4,464,107			—			7,963,086			—			12,431,629
Conversion of Series D preferred stock to common stock		9,364,000		9,364		(9,364,000	)		(4,464,107	)		—			4,454,743			—			—
Warrant exercises		9,505,500		9,506		—			—			—			9,495,995			—			9,505,501
Series C dividend		—		—		2			58,670			—			—			(58,670	)		—
Issuance of restricted common stock		16,000		16		—			—			—			24,304			—			24,320
Issuance of common stock in exchange for services		25,000		25		—			—			—			11,975			—			12,000
Net loss		—		—		—			—			—			—			(9,914,141	)		(9,914,141	)
Balances at December 31, 2018		29,433,135	$	29,433		16,017,102		$	6,100,182		$	-		$	126,125,976		$	(111,373,608	)	$	20,881,983

See accompanying Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and notes to the financial statements.

	Year Ended December 31,
	2018			2017
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$	(9,914,141	)	$	(6,731,525	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		30,110			65,803
Stock issued as compensation to non-employee directors		24,320			123,200
Stock-based compensation expense		996,038			437,278
Stock issued in exchange for services		12,000			—
Warrant issued in exchange for services		—			118,237
Decrease in fair value of derivative liability		—			(188,727	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		(453,456	)		(713,896	)
Accounts payable and accrued expenses		225,312			525,777
Net cash used in operating activities		(9,079,817	)		(6,363,853	)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchase of property and equipment		(124,727	)		—
Net cash used by investing activities		(124,727	)		—
Cash flows from financing activities:
Payments on short-term notes payable		(200,755	)		(157,946	)
Proceeds from issuance of note payable to shareholder		—			2,400,000
Net proceeds from issuance of common stock, convertible preferred stock, and warrants		12,431,629			—
Proceeds from issuance of common stock for warrant exercise		9,505,501			—
Net proceeds from issuance of convertible preferred stock and warrants		—			6,176,761
Proceeds from payment of stock subscription receivable		—			30,563
Net proceeds from issuance of common stock and warrants		1,510,327			—
Net cash provided by financing activities		23,246,702			8,449,378
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		14,042,158			2,085,525
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		6,166,143			4,080,618
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	20,208,301		$	6,166,143
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Interest paid	$	5,786		$	4,495
Non-cash investing and financing activities:
Borrowings under short term notes payable for prepaid expense	$	244,490		$	172,047
Par value of restricted shares issued	$	16		$	160
Stock dividend on Series C preferred stock	$	58,670		$	—
Par value of common stock issued in connection with Series A Preferred Stock conversion	$	259		$	—
Value of Series A preferred stock converted into common stock	$	268,096		$	—
Par value of common stock issued in connection with Series D Preferred Stock conversion	$	9,364		$	—
Deemed dividend on Series D preferred stock	$	1,412,041		$	—
Par value of common stock issued in exchange for services	$	25		$	—
Conversion of Series D preferred stock to common stock	$	4,464,107		$	—
Fair market value of 48,387 warrants issued for financial advisory services	$	—		$	118,237
Note payable to shareholder converted to Series C preferred stock	$	—		$	2,400,000
Accounts payable and accrued expenses converted to Series C preferred stock	$	—		$	984,799

See accompanying Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and notes to the financial statements.

Oragenics, Inc. (formerly known as Oragen, Inc.) (the “Company” or “we”) was incorporated in November, 1996; however, operating activity did not commence until 1999. We are focused on becoming a leader in developing novel antibiotics against infectious disease and on developing effective treatments for oral mucositis.

The accompanying financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“US GAAP”) including the assumption of a going concern basis which contemplates the realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business.

The Company has incurred recurring losses and negative cash flows from operations since inception. To date the Company has not generated significant revenues from operations. The Company incurred a net loss of $9,914,141 and used cash of $9,079,817 in its operating activities during the year ended December 31, 2018. As of December 31, 2018, the Company had an accumulated deficit of $(111,373,608) and cash flows from operations were negative throughout 2018.

During 2018, 2017, 2016, 2013 and 2012 the Company raised $25,105,500, $9,684,799, $4,666,667, $14,900,000 and $13,000,000 in gross proceeds respectively through the sale of its preferred and common stock, the exercise of warrants, and with the conversion of a note payable to shareholder and accrued expenses to preferred stock. In March of 2019, the Company completed an underwritten public offering of approximately $12.5 million in gross proceeds, (See Note 14 – Subsequent Events). The Company expects to incur substantial expenditures to further develop each of its technologies. The Company believes the working capital at December 31, 2018, together with the recently completed underwritten public offering, will be sufficient to meet the business objectives as presently structured through the fourth quarter of 2020, as such, there is substantial doubt that we can continue as a going concern beyond that date.

The Company’s ability to continue operations after its current cash resources are exhausted depends on its ability to obtain additional financing or achieve profitable operations, as to which no assurances can be given. Cash requirements may vary materially from those now planned because of changes in the Company’s focus and direction of its research and development programs, competitive and technical advances, or other developments. Additional financing will be required to continue operations after the Company exhausts its current cash resources and to continue its long-term plans for clinical trials and new product development. There can be no assurance that any such financing can be realized by the Company, or if realized, what the terms thereof may be, or that any amount that the Company is able to raise will be adequate to support the Company’s working capital requirements until it achieves profitable operations.

The Company intends to seek additional funding through sublicensing arrangements, joint venturing or partnering, sales of rights to technology, government grants and public or private financings. The Company’s future success depends on its ability to raise capital and ultimately generate revenue and attain profitability. The Company cannot be certain that additional capital, whether through selling additional debt or equity securities or obtaining a line of credit or other loan, will be available to it or, if available, will be on terms acceptable to the Company. If the Company issues additional securities to raise funds, these securities may have rights, preferences, or privileges senior to those of its common stock, and the Company’s current shareholders may experience dilution. If the Company is unable to obtain funds when needed or on acceptable terms, the Company may be required to curtail its current development programs, cut operating costs and forego future development and other opportunities.

In July 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Updates 2018-10 Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases and 2018-11 Leases (Topic 842).

There are no additional accounting pronouncements issued or effective during the twelve months ended December 31, 2018, that have had or are expected to have an impact on our financial statements.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with US GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The principal areas of estimation reflected in the financial statements are stock-based compensation, valuation of warrants, and income tax valuation allowance.

Cash and cash equivalents consist of all cash balances and highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less. The Company’s cash and cash equivalents are deposited in a financial institution and consist of demand deposits and overnight repurchase agreements and at times deposits are in excess of federally insured limits.

Property and equipment is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is provided on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets (three to seven years). Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the estimated useful life or the lease term of the related asset (three years).

In accordance with US GAAP, the Company is required to report segment information. As the Company only operates principally in one business segment, no additional reporting is required.

Generally, all forms of stock-based payments, including stock option grants, warrants, and restricted stock grants are measured at their fair value on the awards’ grant date typically using a Black-Scholes pricing model. Stock-based compensation awards issued to non-employees for services rendered are recorded at the fair value of the stock-based payment. The expense resulting from stock-based payments are recorded in research and development expense or selling, general and administrative expense in the statement of operations, depending on the nature of the services provided. Stock-based payment expense is recorded over the requisite service period in which the grantee provides services to us. To the extent the stock option grants, warrants, or restricted stock grants do not vest at the grant date they are subject to forfeiture.

US GAAP requires all stock-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the financial statements based on their fair values as of the grant date. Stock-based compensation expense is recorded over the requisite service period in which the grantee provides services to us, to the extent the options do not vest at the grant date and are subject to forfeiture. For performance-based awards that do not include market-based conditions, we record share-based compensation expense only when the performance-based milestone is deemed probable of achievement. We utilize both quantitative and qualitative criteria to judge whether milestones are probable of achievement. For awards with market-based performance conditions, we recognize the grant-date fair value of the award over the derived service period regardless of whether the underlying performance condition is met.

The Company used the Black Scholes Option Pricing Model in calculating the relative fair value of any warrants that have been issued.

In accordance with ASC 480-10-25 Liabilities-Distinguishing from Equity, warrants are accounted for as liabilities at their fair value during periods where they can be net cash settled in case of a change in control transaction. The warrants are accounted for as a liability at their fair value at each reporting period. The value of the derivative warrant liability will be re-measured at each reporting period with changes in fair value recorded as a change in the value of derivative liability. To derive an estimate of the fair value of these warrants, a Black Scholes Option Pricing Model is utilized.

During all periods presented, the Company had securities outstanding that could potentially dilute basic earnings per share in the future, but were excluded from the computation of diluted net loss per share, as their effect would have been antidilutive. Because the Company reported a net loss for all periods presented, basic and diluted net loss per share amounts are the same for the periods presented. Net loss per share is computed using the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding.

The Company periodically reviews their long-lived assets for impairment and reduces the carrying value to fair value whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. There were no impairment losses recorded during the years ended December 31, 2018, and 2017.

Research and development consist of expenses incurred in connection with the discovery and development of product candidates. These expenses consist primarily of the following: employee-related expenses, which include salaries and benefits and attending science conferences; costs incurred in connection with Exclusive Channel Collaboration (“ECC”) agreements with Intrexon, expenses incurred under agreements with contract research organizations, investigative sites and consultants that conduct our clinical trials and a substantial portion of nonclinical studies; the cost of acquiring and manufacturing clinical trial materials; facilities, depreciation and other allocated expenses, which include direct and allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities and equipment, and depreciation of fixed assets; license fees for and milestone payments related to in-licensed products and technology; stock-based compensation expense; and costs associated with nonclinical activities and regulatory approvals. The Company expenses research and development costs as incurred.

Under US GAAP, the impact of an uncertain income tax position on the income tax return must be recognized at the largest amount that is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon audit by the relevant taxing authority. An uncertain income tax position will not be recognized if it has less than a 50% likelihood of being sustained. Additionally, US GAAP provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting for interim periods, disclosure and transition.

Financial instruments which potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of cash and cash equivalents. The Company maintains cash accounts in commercial banks, which may, at times, exceed federally insured limits. The Company has not experienced any losses in such accounts. The Company believes it is not exposed to any significant credit risk on cash and cash equivalents. As of December 31, 2018, the uninsured portion of this balance was $19,958,301. As of December 31, 2017, the uninsured portion of this balance was $5,916,143.

Property and equipment, net consists of the following as of December 31, 2018 and 2017:

Depreciation and amortization expense for the years ending December 31, 2018 and 2017 was $30,110 and $65,803 respectively.

On July 17, 2018, the Company announced the closing of an underwritten public offering (the “Public Offering”) (see Note 7 – Shareholders’ Equity) of Class A Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit consisting of one share of common stock and a seven-year warrant to purchase one share of common stock with an exercise price of $1.00 per share, and Class B Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit comprised of one share of series D preferred stock (the “Series D Preferred Stock”), which is convertible into one share of common stock, and a warrant. The Company’s non-employee directors, Frederick Telling and Alan Dunton participated in the Public Offering through the

purchase of units consisting of 100,000 shares and 20,000 shares of common stock, respectively, and warrants to purchase 100,000 shares and 20,000 shares of common stock.

On November 8, 2017, we completed a private placement of $3,300,000 of Series B Non-Voting, Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series B Convertible Preferred Stock”) pursuant to a Securities Purchase Agreement with four existing shareholders who are accredited investors (the “Series B Preferred Stock Financing”). The investors in the private placement included a current and longstanding Company shareholder, the Koski Family Limited Partnership, or KFLP who purchased 1,500,000 shares of the Series B Convertible Preferred Stock and warrants to purchase, after giving effect to the reverse stock split, 241,936 shares of our common stock. Our director, Mr. Robert Koski is a general partner of the KFLP.

The full $3,300,000 of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock is convertible, into one million three hundred and twenty thousand shares of our Common Stock, based on a conversion of one share of Series B Preferred Stock into two shares of Common Stock. The purchase price per share of the Series B Preferred Stock is represented by $2.50 per share of the Common Stock on an as converted basis. In addition, we issued to the investors in the private placement accompanying common stock purchase warrants to purchase an aggregate, after giving effect to the reverse stock split, of 1,064,518 shares of Common Stock (the “Fall 17 Warrants”). The Fall 17 Warrants have a term of seven years from the date of issuance, and are non-exercisable until six (6) months after issuance, and have an exercise price, of $3.10 per share.

On May 10, 2017 the Company entered into a Note Purchase Agreement with Intrexon pursuant to which the Company issued a $2.4 million unsecured non-convertible promissory note to Intrexon and amended the first milestone in its Oral Mucositis ECC with Intrexon. The note matures in two (2) years and has a simple interest rate of 12% per annum. Proceeds from the note will be used to fund the Company’s AG013 research and clinical trials.

During the year ended December 31, 2018 we paid cash of $-0-, and during the year ended December 31, 2017, we paid cash of $594 and issued Series C Preferred Stock with a value of $1,188, to Intrexon under our exclusive channel collaborative (“ECC”) agreement with Intrexon (See Note 9 – Licenses and Exclusive Channel Collaboration Agreements) to develop and commercialize lantibiotics (the “Lantibiotic ECC”).

During the year ended December 31, 2018 we paid cash of $460,056, and during the year ended December 31, 2017, we paid cash of $524,026 and issued Series C Preferred Stock with a value of $763,189, to Intrexon under the ECC (See Note 9 – Licenses and Exclusive Channel Collaboration Agreements) agreement to develop and commercialize AG013 (the “Oral Mucositis ECC”).

Included in accounts payable and accrued expenses at December 31, 2018 and 2017 are $39,607 and $39,457, respectively, related to unpaid invoices received from Intrexon relating to work performed under the ECC agreements. As of December 31, 2018, and 2017 Intrexon owned approximately 5% and 32%, respectively, of our outstanding common stock.

Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following as of December 31, 2018 and 2017:

The Company had the following short-term notes payable as of December 31, 2018 and 2017:

Increase in the Number of Authorized Shares and Completion of a Reverse Stock Split

In January of 2017, we filed an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation which increased the number of authorized shares of all classes of our capital stock from 120,000,000 shares to 270,000,000 shares by increasing the number of authorized shares of common stock from 100,000,000 shares of common stock to 250,000,000 shares of common stock. The amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation was previously approved by a majority of our shareholders.

In December of 2017, we filed another amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation which increased the number of authorized shares of our common stock from 250,000,000 shares to 450,000,000. The amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation was previously approved by a majority of our shareholders.

On December 1, 2017, a majority of shareholders approved an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to effect a reverse stock split of our common stock by a ratio of not less than one-for-five and not more than one-for-ten, with the exact number to be set at a whole number within this range to be determined by our board of directors in its sole discretion and to authorize our board of directors to implement the reverse stock split at any time on or prior to December 31, 2018 by filing an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation.

On January 8, 2018, the Company announced a reverse split of its common stock, $0.001 par value, at a ratio of one-for-ten, which became effective January 19, 2018. The Company’s common stock began trading on a split-adjusted basis on January 22, 2018.

As a result of the reverse split, each 10 pre-split shares of common stock outstanding were automatically combined into one new share of common stock without any action on the part of the holders, and the number of outstanding common shares was reduced from approximately 49 million shares to approximately 4.9 million shares. The reverse split also applied to common stock issuable upon the exercise of the Company’s outstanding stock options. In addition, the Company also announced that the authorized common stock of the Company was decreased from 450 million to 45 million shares. The authorized preferred stock remains at 50,000,000 shares. The common stock issued pursuant to the reverse stock split will remain fully paid and non-assessable. The reverse stock split did not affect the par value of the common stock.

No fractional shares were issued as a result of the reverse stock split. Shareholders who otherwise would be entitled to a fractional share because they hold a number of shares not evenly divisible by the one-for-ten reverse split ratio, were automatically entitled to receive an additional fractional share of the Company’s common stock to round up to the next whole share.

At our Annual Meeting of Shareholders held on June 22, 2018, our shareholders approved an amendment to the Company’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation which increased the number of authorized shares of our Common Stock from 45,000,000 shares of Common Stock to 200,000,000 shares of Common Stock.

On April 6, 2018, the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement with certain investors pursuant to which the Company agreed to issue and sell, in a registered offering by the Company directly to the investors, an aggregate of 900,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, at an offering price of $2.00 per share. In a concurrent

private placement, the Company agreed to issue to the investors who participated in the registered offering, warrants exercisable for one share of common stock for each share purchased in the registered offering for an aggregate of warrants to purchase 900,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $2.00 per share. Each warrant is exercisable beginning on the six-month anniversary of the date of its issuance and will expire five years from the date of issuance.

The conversion price of the Series D Preferred Stock and exercise price of the warrants is subject to appropriate adjustment in the event of recapitalization events, stock dividends, dilutive issuances, stock splits, stock combinations, reclassifications, reorganizations or similar events affecting the Company’s common stock.

A total of 4,436,000 shares of common stock, 9,364,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock convertible into 9,364,000 shares of common stock, and total warrants to purchase 13,800,000 shares of common stock were issued in the Public Offering inclusive of the underwriters exercise of their over-allotment option to purchase 1,800,000 shares of common stock and warrants to purchase 1,800,000 shares of common stock at the Public Offering price per share less the underwriting discounts and commissions.

The Company’s non-employee directors, Frederick Telling and Alan Dunton participated in the Public Offering through the purchase of 100,000 shares and 20,000 shares, respectively, of the Company’s common stock and warrants to purchase 100,000 shares and 20,000 shares, respectively, of the Company’s common stock.

The net proceeds to the Company from the Public Offering, after deducting Underwriter fees and expenses and the Company’s Public Offering expenses, was approximately $12.4 million. The Company anticipates using the net proceeds from this Public Offering to continue funding development of AG013, our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial for the treatment of Oral Mucositis, our pre-clinical development of our lantibiotics program and for general corporate purposes, including research and development activities, capital expenditures and working capital.

The proceeds received in the Public Offering were allocated to each instrument on a relative fair value basis. Total proceeds of $13.8 million were allocated to warrants issued, $6.5 million, common stock, $2.3 million and Series D Preferred Stock, $5.0 million. The allocation resulted in an effective conversion price for the Series D Preferred Stock that was below the quoted market price of the Company’s common stock on the closing date. As such, the Company recognized a beneficial conversion feature equal to the intrinsic value of the conversion feature on the closing date, resulting in a deemed dividend for the Series D Preferred Stock of approximately $1.4 million recognized on the closing date.

On June 22, 2018, and in connection with, and in furtherance of, the non-employee director compensation program, the Board approved the award of 4,000 restricted shares of the Company’s common stock to each of the Company’s non-employee directors, Frederick Telling, Charles Pope, Alan Dunton, and Robert Koski under the Company’s 2012 Equity Incentive Plan. Pursuant to the terms of the award, the restricted shares were immediately vested. The Company recognized $24,320 in compensation expense relating to these awards.

On February 9, 2017, in connection with and in furtherance of the equity-based award program, the Board approved the award of 4,000 restricted shares, of Company common stock, to each of the Company’s non-employee directors, Frederick Telling, Charles Pope, Alan Dunton, and Robert Koski under the Company’s 2012 Equity Incentive Plan. A total of 4,000 restricted shares had vested as of December 31, 2017 for each of the non-employee directors. The awards were considered issued and outstanding as of the date of the grant and were eligible to be voted by the recipient. The Company recognized $123,200 in compensation expense relating to these awards.

As of December 31, 2018, the Company has issued 25,000 shares of its common stock as partial consideration for the acquisition of certain services.

As of December 31, 2018, 9,364,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock have been converted into shares of Common Stock.

As of December 31, 2018, 9,505,500 warrants issued in connection with the Public Offering have been exercised resulting in the issuance 9,505,500 of shares of Common Stock.

On March 9, 2018, a holder of 2,583,000 shares of the Company’s Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, converted the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock into 258,300 shares of the Company’s common stock.

In connection with the Series A Preferred Financing, we filed a Certificate of Designations of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of Series A Preferred Stock with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida, to be effective May 10, 2017. The number of shares of Preferred Stock designated as Series A Preferred Stock is 12,000,000.

seven years from the date of issuance, and are non-exercisable until six (6) months after issuance, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, have an exercise price of $3.10 per share.

In connection with the Series B Preferred Financing, we filed a Certificate of Designation and Rights of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida, to be effective November 8, 2017. The number of shares of Preferred Stock designated as Series B Preferred Stock is 6,600,000.

The Series C Non-Voting, Non- Convertible Preferred Stock Financing Intrexon Debt Conversion

On July 17, 2018, we announced the closing of an underwritten public offering (the “Public Offering”) of units for gross proceeds of approximately $13.8 million, which included the full exercise of the underwriter’s over-allotment option to purchase additional shares and warrants, prior to deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses.

The Public Offering was comprised of Class A Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit consisting of one share of common stock and a seven-year warrant to purchase one share of common stock with an exercise price of $1.00 per share, and Class B Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit comprised of one share of series D preferred stock, with a par value of $0.001 per share, (the “Series D Preferred Stock”), which is convertible into one share of common stock, and a warrant. The conversion price of the Series D Preferred Stock issued in the transaction as well as the exercise price of the warrants are fixed and do not contain any variable pricing features or any price based anti-dilutive features. The Series D Preferred Stock issued in this transaction included a beneficial ownership blocker but has no dividend rights (except to the extent that dividends are also paid on the common stock), liquidation preference or other preferences over common stock, and, with certain exceptions, has no voting rights. The securities comprising the units were immediately separable and were issued separately.

The net proceeds to the Company from the Public Offering, after deducting Underwriter fees and expenses and the Company’s estimated Public Offering expenses was approximately $12.4 million. The Company anticipates using the net proceeds from this Public Offering to continue funding development of AG013, our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial for the treatment of Oral Mucositis, our pre-clinical development of our lantibiotics program and for general corporate purposes, including research and development activities, capital expenditures and working capital.

In connection with the Public Offering, the Company filed a Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of the Series D Preferred Stock on July 13, 2018, with the Secretary of State of the State of Florida which became effective upon filing. The Certificate of Designation provides for the issuance of the shares of Series D Preferred Stock. With certain exceptions, the shares of Series D Preferred Stock rank on par with the shares of the Common Stock, in each case, as to dividend rights and distributions of assets upon liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Company.

With certain exceptions, as described in the Certificate of Designation, the shares of Series D Preferred Stock have no voting rights. However, as long as any shares of Series D Preferred Stock remain outstanding, the Certificate of Designation provides that the Company shall not, without the affirmative vote of holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of Series D Preferred Stock, (a) alter or change adversely the powers, preferences or rights given to the Preferred Stock or alter or amend this Certificate of Designation, (b) amend its certificate of incorporation or other charter documents in any manner that adversely affects any rights of the Holders, (c) increase the number of authorized shares of Preferred Stock, or (d) enter into any agreement with respect to any of the foregoing.

Each share of Series D Preferred Stock is convertible at any time at the holder’s option into a number of shares of Common Stock equal to one share divided by the Conversion Price. The “Conversion Price” is initially $1.00, subject to adjustment for reverse and forward stock splits, stock dividends, stock combinations and other similar transactions as specified in the Certificate of Designation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Certificate of Designation further provides that the Company shall not effect any conversion of the shares of Series D Preferred Stock, with certain exceptions, to the extent that, after giving effect to an attempted conversion, the holder of shares of Series D Preferred (together with such holder’s affiliates and any persons acting as a group together with such holder or any of such holder’s affiliates) would beneficially own a number of shares of Common Stock in excess of 4.99% of the shares of Common Stock then outstanding (or, upon election by a Holder prior to the issuance of the Warrants, 9.99%). At the holder’s option, upon notice to the Company, the holder may increase or decrease this beneficial ownership limitation not to exceed 9.99% of the shares of Common Stock then outstanding, with any such increase becoming effective upon 61 days’ prior notice to the Company.

Additionally, subject to certain exceptions and limitations, at any time prior to the three year anniversary of the issuance of the Series D Preferred Stock, the Company will have the right to cause each holder of the Series D Preferred Stock to convert all or part of such holder’s Series D Preferred Stock in the event that (i) the volume weighted average price of our common stock for each of 30 consecutive trading days exceeds $3.00 (subject to adjustment for stock splits, recapitalizations, stock dividends and similar transactions), (ii) the average daily trading volume for such measurement period exceeds $175,000 per trading day and (iii) the holder is not in possession of any information that constitutes or might constitute, material non-public information which was provided by the Company. The description of the Series D Preferred Stock is qualified by reference to the Certificate of Designation filed with our Form 8-K on July 17, 2018.

As of December 31, 2018, 9,364,000 shares of Series D Preferred Stock had converted into shares of Common Stock in accordance with the terms for conversion.

In December of 2017, we filed an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation which increased the number of authorized shares of our preferred stock from 20,000,000 shares to 50,000,000. The amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation was previously approved by a majority of our shareholders.

As of December 31, 2018, there are 7,371,925 warrants, 1,812,133 stock options, 9,417,000 shares of Series A Preferred stock, and 6,600,000 shares of Series B Preferred stock outstanding. If all warrants, stock options, and Preferred shares were exercised (other than on a net issuance basis), the total number of outstanding common shares would be 40,878,896 as of December 31, 2018.

The Company’s outstanding and exercisable warrants as of December 31, 2018 are presented below:

On July 17, 2018, the Company announced the closing of an underwritten public offering (the “Public Offering”) of Class A Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit consisting of one share of common stock and a seven-year warrant to purchase one share of common stock with an exercise price of $1.00 per share, and Class B Units, priced at a public offering price of $1.00 per unit, with each unit comprised of one share of series D preferred stock (the “Series D Preferred Stock”), which is convertible into one share of common stock, and a seven-year warrant to purchase one share of common stock with an exercise price of $1.00 per share. The exercise price of the warrants are fixed and do not contain any variable pricing features or any price based anti-dilutive features. The exercise price of the warrants is subject to appropriate adjustment in the event of recapitalization events, stock dividends, dilutive issuances, stock splits, stock combinations, reclassifications, reorganizations or similar events affecting the Company’s common stock. A total of 13,800,000 warrants to purchase 13,800,000 shares of common stock were issued in the Public Offering. As of December 31, 2018, 9,505,500 warrants issued in connection with the Public Offering have been exercised.

On April 6, 2018 (the “Closing Date”), the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement with certain institutional investors for the purchase and sale of 900,000 shares of the Company’s common stock in a registered direct offering at a purchase price of $2.00 per share. The Company also issued unregistered warrants to the investors in a concurrent private placement to purchase up to an equivalent number of shares of the Company’s common stock with an exercise price of $2.00 per share. The warrants are exercisable six months following the Closing Date and will expire five years from the date of issuance.

The Company originally adopted the Oragenics, Inc. 2002 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “Stock Incentive Plan”) in September 2002 which was subsequently amended on several occasions until it was amended and restated as the Company’s 2012 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2012 Incentive Plan”). In May 2017, the 2012 Incentive Plan was amended to increase the available number of shares authorized for issuance under the 2012 Incentive Plan by 1,500,000 shares of common stock from 4,000,000 shares of common stock to 5,500,000 shares of common stock. In December 2017, the 2012 Incentive Plan was amended to increase the available number of shares authorized for issuance under the 2012 Incentive Plan by 2,000,000 shares of common stock from 5,500,000 shares of common stock to 7,500,000 shares of common stock.

On January 8, 2018, the Company announced a reverse split of its common stock, $0.001 par value, at a ratio of 1 for 10, which became effective January 19, 2018. The reverse split also applied to common stock issuable upon the exercise of the Company’s outstanding stock options.

At the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders held on June 22, 2018, the shareholders approved an amendment to the Company’s 2012 Incentive Plan solely to increase the shares available for awards thereunder by 1,500,000 shares. The aggregate number of shares of the Company’s common stock currently authorized pursuant to its 2012 Incentive Plan, as amended is 2,250,000 and the Company’s 2012 Incentive Plan, as amended (the “Plan”) continues to provide that the

maximum number of shares that may be subject to stock options and stock appreciation rights granted to any individual in a calendar year is 1,000,000 shares. The Plan also provides that the maximum number of shares that may be subject to awards (other than stock options and stock appreciation rights) intended to qualify as “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code that may be granted to any individual in one calendar year is 1,000,000 shares (however, the exception for “performance-based compensation” under Code Section 162(m) was repealed in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, unless the awards intended to qualify for such exception were granted before November 2, 2017).

To date, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, 240,750 shares have been issued under the 2012 Incentive Plan. As a result of such issuances, and after giving effect to the reverse stock split, as of December 31, 2018 there is currently an aggregate of 2,009,250 shares available for issuance under the 2012 Incentive Plan, of which 1,812,133 shares are covered by outstanding option awards and 197,117 shares are available for future awards under the 2012 Incentive Plan.

The purpose of the 2012 Incentive Plan is to advance the interests of the Company by affording certain employees and directors of the Company and key consultants and advisors an opportunity to acquire or increase their proprietary interests in the Company. The 2012 Incentive Plan authorizes the grant of stock options (incentive and non-statutory), stock appreciation rights and restricted stock. Options are granted at the fair market value of the Company’s stock on the date of grant. Options can generally vest either immediately or over a period of up to three years from their respective grant dates and expire 10 years from the date of grant. As of December 31, 2018, and 2017, the Company had not awarded any stock appreciation rights under the 2012 Incentive Plan.

Recipients of stock awards under our 2012 Incentive Plan become the owner of record of the stock immediately upon grant, which may be subject to certain restrictions. The balance of unvested restricted stock will be forfeited and automatically transferred back to us at no cost upon the termination of the recipient’s employment. Upon vesting of restricted stock that is made to recipients who are employees, the recipient has the option to settle minimum withholding taxes by electing to have us withhold otherwise deliverable shares having a fair market value equal to the required tax obligations (“net-settlement”). The net-settlement shares are then immediately cancelled and retired and reduce the shares available for issuance under the Company’s 2012 Incentive Plan.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to estimate the fair value of stock-based awards on the date of grant. The assumptions employed in the calculation of the fair value of share-based compensation expense were calculated as follows for all years presented:

The following table summarizes the assumptions used to estimate the fair value of stock options granted during the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017:

Total compensation cost related to stock options was $996,038 and $435,218 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. As of December 31, 2018, there was $496,448 of unrecognized compensation costs related to stock options, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.1 years.

The following table represents stock option activity as of and for the two years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively:

The total grant date fair value of options vested during the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 was $652,885 and $445,589, respectively.

The Company has the following material Exclusive Channel Collaboration (“ECC”) agreements:

On June 5, 2012, the Company entered into the Lantibiotic ECC with Intrexon that governs a “channel collaboration” arrangement in which the Company will use Intrexon’s advanced transgene and cell engineering platforms for the development and production of lantibiotics, a class of peptide antibiotics that are naturally produced in Gram-positive bacteria and contain the characteristic polycyclic thioether amino acids lanthionine and methyllanthonine (collectively, the “Lantibiotics Program”). The Lantibiotic ECC grants the Company an exclusive worldwide license to use patents and other intellectual property of Intrexon in connection with the research, development, use, importing, exporting, manufacture, sale, and offer for sale of drug products involving the direct administration to humans or companion animals of a lantibiotic for the prevention or treatment of infectious disease (“Oragenics Products”). Such license is exclusive with respect to any clinical development, selling, offering for sale or other commercialization of Oragenics Products, and otherwise is non-exclusive. Subject to limited exceptions, the Company may not sublicense the rights described without Intrexon’s written consent. The Lantibiotic ECC establishes committees comprised of Company and Intrexon representatives that will govern activities related to the Lantibiotics Program in the areas of project establishment, chemistry, manufacturing and controls matters, clinical and regulatory matters, commercialization efforts and intellectual property matters. The Company has agreed to indemnify and hold Intrexon harmless from any damages caused as a result of (i) our negligence or willful misconduct, (ii) the use, handling, storage, or transport of Intrexon Materials (as defined in the Lantibiotic ECC), (iii) our breach of a material representation, warranty or covenant in the Lantibiotic ECC, or (iv) the design, development, manufacture, regulatory approval, handling, storage, transport, distribution, sale or other disposition of any Oragenics Product.

Intrexon may terminate the Lantibiotic ECC if we fail to use diligent efforts to develop and commercialize Oragenics Products or if we elect not to pursue the development of a Lantibiotics Program identified by Intrexon that is a “Superior Therapy” as defined in the Lantibiotic ECC. We may voluntarily terminate the Lantibiotic ECC at any time upon 90 days written notice to Intrexon. Upon termination of the Lantibiotic ECC, the Company may continue to develop and commercialize any Oragenics Product that has been, at the time of termination:

The Company has ongoing obligations and commitments with respect to the Lantibiotic ECC. See Note 12 — Commitments and Contingencies.

On June 9, 2015, the Company entered into an the Oral Mucositis ECC with Intrexon and Intrexon Actobiotics NV (“Actobiotics”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Intrexon, through which the Company intends to research, develop and commercialize products, including the continued development and commercialization of AG013, for use in the treatment of oral mucositis in humans through the administration of an effector via genetically modified bacteria, but, in any case, excluding the delivery of anti-cancer effectors for the purpose of treatment or prophylaxis of cancer (collectively, the “Program”). Contemporaneously with the Oral Mucositis ECC, the Company and Intrexon also entered into a Stock Issuance Agreement (the “SIA”) which authorized the issuance of the Technology Access Fee and the future stock issuance of our Common Stock to Intrexon upon the achievement of designated milestones. The ECC governs the “channel collaboration” arrangement in which we will use Intrexon’s proprietary technology relating to the identification, design and production of genetically modified bacteria (the “Technology”) for the purpose of developing the Program. The Oral Mucositis ECC provides for the establishment of committees comprised from us and Intrexon representatives that will govern activities in the areas of project establishment, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical and regulatory matters, commercialization efforts, and intellectual property. The Company has agreed to indemnify and hold Intrexon harmless from any damages caused as a result of (i) our negligence or willful misconduct, (ii) the use, handling, storage, or transport of Intrexon Materials (as defined in the Oral Mucositis ECC) or materials that are Actobiotics IP (as defined in the Oral Mucositis ECC), (iii) our breach of a material representation, warranty or covenant in the Oral Mucositis ECC, or (iv) the design, development, manufacture, regulatory approval, handling, storage, transport, distribution, sale or other disposition of any Oragenics Product.

The Oral Mucositis ECC grants the Company an exclusive worldwide license to utilize Intrexon’s and Actobiotics’ intellectual property to develop and commercialize products, including the continued development and commercialization of AG013, for use in the treatment of oral mucositis in humans through the administration of an effector via genetically modified bacteria, but, in any case, excluding the delivery of anti-cancer effectors for the purpose of treatment or prophylaxis of cancer (the “Field”). It also grants us an exclusive license in the Field under all Information Controlled by Actobiotics (or otherwise by Intrexon) and existing as of the Effective Date relating to the regulatory approval of AG013, including regulatory filings, data, clinical trial reports, and rights thereunder. Under the Oral Mucositis ECC, and subject to certain exceptions, we are responsible for, among other things, funding the further anticipated development of products toward the goal of commercialization, conducting preclinical and clinical development of candidate products, as well as for other aspects of manufacturing and the commercialization of the product(s).

The Company may voluntarily terminate the Oral Mucositis ECC upon 90 days written notice to Intrexon. Intrexon may also terminate the Oral Mucositis ECC if the Company breaches and fails to cure the breach within 60 days or the Company does not pursue development of the Superior Therapy identified by Intrexon that is a “Superior Therapy” as defined in the Oral Mucositis ECC. Upon termination of the Oral Mucositis ECC, the Company may continue to develop and commercialize any Company Product that, at the time of termination that satisfies at least one of the following criteria:

Among other things, Intrexon is responsible for technology discovery efforts, cell-engineering development, and certain aspects of the manufacturing process. See Note 12 — Commitments and Contingencies.

The Company has a defined contribution Simple Individual Retirement Arrangement plan, which covers all employees and provides for a Company match of up to 3% of all employee compensation to the plan. Total matching contributions made by the Company for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $29,946 and $34,097, respectively.

The components of the provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 are as follows:

At December 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company had temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and their respective income tax bases, as measured by enacted state and federal tax rates, as follows:

The following is a reconciliation of tax computed at the statutory federal rate to the income tax benefit in the statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017:

In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income, and tax planning strategies in making this assessment. Based upon the levels of historical taxable income and projections of future taxable income over which the deferred tax assets are deductible, the Company believes that it is more likely than not that it will not be able to realize the benefits of some of these deductible differences.

Accordingly, a valuation allowance of $26,224,363 and $23,731,971 has been provided in the accompanying financial statements as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The 2018 net change in valuation allowance related to deferred tax assets was an increase of $2,492,392 primarily relating to net operating loss carryforwards. The 2017 net change in

valuation allowance related to deferred tax assets was a decrease of $10,055,163 primarily relating to net operating loss carryforwards and a change in the effective tax rate.

At December 31, 2018, the Company has federal and state tax net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $102,984,000. Federal and state tax net operating loss carryforwards generated prior to December 31, 2017 will expire through 2037. Federal tax net operating loss carryforwards generated subsequent to December 31, 2017, do not expire but are subject to a limitation of 80% of federal taxable income. The state tax loss carryforward generated subsequent to December 31, 2017, will expire through 2038, unless previously utilized. The Company also has federal research and development tax credit carryforwards of approximately $2,250,000. The federal tax credit carryforward will expire through 2028, unless previously utilized.

Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service Code Sections 382 and 383, use of the Company’s net operating losses and credit carryforwards are limited due to a cumulative change in ownership of more than 50% that occurred in 2009 and in 2013. As a result of these 50% changes in ownership, the annual amount of pre-change net operating losses that may be used in periods subsequent to the change in ownership is approximately $417,000 for losses incurred through June 2009, and $3,540,000 for losses incurred through December 2013. The impact of this limitation is factored into management’s valuation allowance placed against the Company’s deferred tax assets.

For the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company incurred $233,944 and $140,313, respectively, of additional unrecognized tax benefits that related to research and development credits. The entire amount of this unrecognized tax benefit, if recognized, would result in an increase to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance, and would not have an impact on the effective tax rate.

The Company files its income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction and in Florida. With few exceptions, the Company is no longer subject to federal or state income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 2014.

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:

Included in the balance at December 31, 2018 and 2017, are $2,249,594 and $2,015,650, respectively, of tax positions for which there is uncertainty about the validity of certain credits. The disallowance of the credits would impact the amount of gross deferred tax assets reflected in the accompanying footnotes.

During the years 2018 and 2017 the Company did not recognize any interest and penalties. Due to the potential offset of the Company’s operating loss carryforward for any future activity, the amount attributed to interest and penalties would be immaterial.

Lab Facility-Alachua. The Company’s Alachua facility is being leased from a real estate developer for a term of three years under a lease that expired in December 2014. The Company signed a new lease agreement for the same facility with the same real estate developer in July 2014 with an effective date of December 2014 for a five year term. Under the new agreement, the rental payments range from $9,641 per month to $10,851 per month. Total rental expense for the Alachua facility during the year ended December 31, 2018 was approximately $135,000. The lease may be terminated prior to its stated expiration date upon the payment of nine months rent.

Corporate Office-Tampa. In October of 2013, the Company renewed the leased office space for corporate, sales, and marketing personnel located in Tampa, FL. The lease is for approximately 4,168 square feet. The lease period for the office space is for thirty-nine months. Lease payments range from $6,426 per month to $6,818 per month inclusive of insurance, taxes and utilities. The lease expired on February 28, 2017.

In November of 2016, the Company entered into an amendment for the leased office space for corporate personnel located in Tampa, FL. The amended lease is for approximately 2,207 square feet. The lease period for the office space is for thirty-six months commencing on March 1, 2017. Lease payments range from $4,138 per month to $4,392 per month inclusive of insurance, taxes and utilities. The lease expires on February 29, 2020. Rent expense under this lease was approximately $56,000 for the year ended December 31, 2018.

Future annual minimum payments under all non-cancelable operating leases are as follows as of December 31, 2018:

UFRF-MU1140 License. In the Company’s UFRF amended license agreement for MU1140, the Company is obligated to pay 5% of the selling price of any products developed from the UFRF licensed technology that the Company may sell as royalty to the UFRF. In addition, if the Company sublicenses any rights granted by the amended license agreement, the Company is obligated to pay to the UFRF 22% of all revenues received from the sublicenses, excluding monies received solely for development costs. The Company is also obligated to make the following payments to UFRF as follows: a one-time commercialization fee, post-commercialization minimum royalty payments, and a one-time cumulative royalty payment. The one-time commercialization fee would be due on the first anniversary of first commercial sale and is calculated at $5,000 per month between (1) April 1, 2013 for the MU1140 license agreement and (2) the month of the first anniversary of a commercial sale. The post-commercialization minimum royalty payments of $50,000 annually would be due following payment of a commercialization fee. The one-time additional royalty payment would be due when total cumulative royalties paid to UFRF exceed $2.0 million, upon which we would be obligated to make a one-time additional payment to UFRF of 10% of the total royalties due to UFRF in the calendar year in which cumulative royalties exceeded $2.0 million.

The Company is required to make minimum annual maintenance payments to the UFRF for the term of the amended license agreement in the amount of $10,000 for the license agreement. The aggregate minimum annual payments are required to be paid in advance on a quarterly basis (i.e. $2,500 per quarter) for the license. The Company must also pay all patent costs and expenses incurred by the UFRF for the preparation, filing, prosecution, issuance and maintenance of the patents.

The patent the Company had previously exclusively licensed from UFRF for its Replacement Therapy expired in June 2015 and the resulting license was terminated. The patent the Company exclusively licensed from UFRF for MU1140 expires in July 2019 and the resulting license will be terminated. The product candidate covered by that license is not directly under development.

The Company entered into an exclusive license agreement with Texas A&M University System (College Station, TX) (“Texas A&M”) in December 2011 for access to new homologs of the lantibiotic MU1140 and other lantibiotics with improved pharmacological properties and structural features. Following a review of our research and development activities and a determination to focus our financial resources on our research activities for OG716 and AG013, we provided a notice to Texas A&M of the termination of our license agreement with Texas A&M which took effect in January 2019. We have no further financial obligations to Texas A&M with respect to this license agreement.

Under the Lantibiotic ECC, and subject to certain exceptions, the Company is responsible for, among other things, funding the further anticipated development of lantibiotics toward the goal of commercialization, conducting nonclinical and clinical development of candidate lantibiotics, as well as for other aspects of manufacturing and the commercialization of the product(s). Among other things, Intrexon is responsible for technology discovery efforts, cell-engineering development, certain aspects of the manufacturing process, and costs of filing, prosecution and maintenance of Intrexon’s patents.

In November of 2017 the Lantibiotic ECC was amended to: (i) consolidate the development milestone payments into one payment of $25,000,000, being due six months after receiving FDA approval of a New Drug Application, (ii) reduce the sublicense revenue percentage we would have had to pay from 50% to 25% of sublicensing revenue, (iii) reduce the royalty rate from 25% of Product Profit to 10% of Net Sales, (iv) revise the form of milestone payments from being share based or cash at the Company’s election to only cash, and (v) commit that Diligent Efforts (as defined in the Lantibiotic ECC) in

pursuing the Lantibiotic Program would be deemed satisfied in 2018 provided that at least $1,200,000 was expended for the advancement of the Lantibiotic Program.

In November of 2017, the Stock Issuance Agreement was also amended. Under the terms of the amendment, the Company has agreed to make certain payments, in cash, to Intrexon upon our achievement of designated milestones. The milestone events and amounts payable are as follows:

Pursuant to the terms of the amendment, we will also pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 10% of Net Sales derived in that quarter from the sale of products developed from the Lantibiotic ECC, calculated on an Oragenics Product-by-Oragenics Product basis and we will pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 25% of revenue obtained in that quarter from a sublicensor in the event of a sublicensing arrangement.

None of the Lantibiotic ECC milestones had been achieved as of December 31, 2018.

Under the Oral Mucositis ECC, and subject to certain exceptions, the Company is responsible for, among other things, funding the further anticipated development of products toward the goal of commercialization, conducting preclinical and clinical development of candidate products, as well as for other aspects of manufacturing and the commercialization of the product(s). Among other things, Intrexon is responsible for technology discovery efforts, cell-engineering development, and certain aspects of the manufacturing process.

In November of 2017 the Company amended the Oral Mucositis ECC to: (i) consolidate the development milestone payments into one payment of $27,500,000 being due within six months after receiving FDA approval of a New Product Application; (ii) reduce the sublicense revenue percentage from 50% to 25% of sublicensing revenue; and (iii) revise the field in which the Company has exclusive rights to its Oral Mucositis product candidate for the treatment of Oral Mucositis to clarify that the Company has an exclusive for the treatment of Oral Mucositis in humans regardless of etiology.

Pursuant to the terms of the Oral Mucositis ECC, as amended, we are obligated to pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis 12% of the net sales derived from the sale of products developed from the exclusive channel collaboration. We are also obligated to pay Intrexon on a quarterly basis, 25% of revenue obtained in that quarter from a sublicensor in the event of a sublicensing arrangement.

In November of 2017, the Stock Issuance Agreement and Oral Mucositis ECC were amended. Under the terms of the amendment, the Company has agreed to make certain payments to Intrexon upon our achievement of designated milestones in the form of shares of our Common Stock (based upon the fair market value of the shares otherwise required to be issued) unless the issuance of such shares would reasonably likely cause Intrexon to consolidate our financial statements with Intrexon’s financial statements, or at our option make a cash payment to Intrexon. The milestone events and amounts payable are as follows:

None of the Oral Mucositis ECC milestones had been achieved as of December 31, 2018.

The Oral Mucositis ECC provides that in the event (i) Oragenics is required to make a milestone payment in cash as an issuance of shares would cause Intrexon to consolidate the Company’s financial statements with Intrexon’s financial statements, and (ii) Oragenics reasonably concludes that a cash milestone payment would have an adverse effect on its working capital needs over the next twelve (12) months, then such cash payment shall be in the form of an interest bearing promissory note with a maturity date of less than twelve (12) months and include other conventional market terms that would not be expected to unreasonably have an adverse effect on Oragenics working capital needs over such twelve (12) month period.

The quarterly interim financial information shown below has been prepared by the Company’s management and is unaudited. It should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements appearing herein.

In January of 2019, the Company issued 12.208 shares of the Company’s Series C Preferred Stock as a dividend to the holder of the Series C Preferred Stock.

On March 25, 2019, the Company announced the closing of an underwritten public offering for gross proceeds of approximately $12.5 million, which included the partial exercise of the underwriter’s over-allotment option to purchase additional shares and warrants, prior to deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by the Company.

The offering is comprised of 16,666,668 shares of common stock, short-term warrants to purchase up to 8,333,334 shares of common stock, and long-term warrants to purchase up to 8,333,334 shares of common stock, at a price to the public of $0.75 per share and accompanying warrants. The Company granted the underwriter a 30-day option to purchase up to 2,500,000 additional shares of common stock and/or short-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock and long-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock of the Company at the public offering price, less underwriting discounts and commissions. The underwriter exercised its option to purchase the short-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock and long-term warrants to purchase 1,250,000 shares of common stock effective as of the closing.

Each short-term warrant has an exercise price of $0.75 per share of common stock, is immediately exercisable, and will expire on the earlier of (1) the eighteen-month anniversary of the date of issuance and (2) twenty-one trading days following the Company’s release of top-line data related to its Phase 2 double blind, placebo controlled clinical trial of AG013. Each long-term warrant has an exercise price of $0.90 per share of common stock, is immediately exercisable and will expire five years following the date of issuance.

The Company intends to use the net proceeds of the offering to fund its AG013 research, clinical trials, pre-clinical development of the lantibiotics program, and for working capital and general corporate purposes.


Florida		59-3410522
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(IRS Employer Identification No.)

4902 Eisenhower Blvd., Suite 125 Tampa, FL		33634
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)


Title of each class		Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock $0.001 par value per share		NYSE AMERICAN


FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND CERTAIN CONSIDERATIONS		ii

PART I
ITEM 1.	BUSINESS	1
ITEM 1A.	RISK FACTORS	29
ITEM 1B.	UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS	57
ITEM 2.	PROPERTIES	57
ITEM 3.	LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	57
ITEM 4.	MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES	57

PART II
ITEM 5.	MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES	58
ITEM 6.	SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA	58
ITEM 7.	MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS	59
ITEM 7A.	QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK	72
ITEM 8.	FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA	72
ITEM 9.	CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE	72
ITEM 9A	CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES	72
ITEM 9B.	OTHER INFORMATION	73

PART III
ITEM 10.	DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE	74
ITEM 11.	EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION	74
ITEM 12.	SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS	74
ITEM 13.	CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE	74
ITEM 14.	PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES	74

PART IV
ITEM 15.	EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES	75
ITEM 16.	FORM 10-K SUMMARY	75

SIGNATURES		80
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM		F-2
BALANCE SHEETS		F-3
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS		F-4
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY		F-5
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS		F-6
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS		F-7–F-26


Product/Candidate	Description	Application	Status
AG013	Treatment of Oral Mucositis	Treatment of oral mucositis in cancer patients	Ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial

OG716	A homolog of MU1140: Member of lantibiotic class of antibiotics	Healthcare-associated infections	Nonclinical testing

LPT3-04	Naturally occurring chemical agent	Weight loss	Exclusively out-licensed

SMaRT Replacement Therapy	Genetically modified strain of S. mutans that does not produce lactic acid	Dental carries-tooth decay	Positioned for partnership opportunities


Development Milestones		Completion date
1.	Fundraising to support nonclinical and animal studies		Q2 2015
2.	Formulation development		Q3 2015
3.	Complete required nonclinical, exploratory animal and GLP animal studies		Q3 2018
4.	Complete required Investigational New Drug (“IND”) human clinical studies		Q3 2020
5.	First Regulatory Approval (as defined in the LPT3-04 license agreement)		Q3 2021
6.	First Commercial Sale (as defined in the LPT3-04 license agreement)		Q3 2021

☐	Large accelerated filer	☐	Accelerated filer
☒	Non-accelerated filer	☒	Smaller reporting company
		☐	Emerging growth company

Calendar Year Net Sales	Sales Milestone
$ 1,000,000	$	50,000
$ 10,000,000	$	500,000
$ 100,000,000	$	5,000,000

	Years ended December 31,
	2018			2017
Net cash used in operating activities	$	(9,079,817	)	$	(6,363,853	)
Net cash used by investing activities		(124,727	)		—
Net cash provided by financing activities		23,246,702			8,449,378
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	$	14,042,158		$	2,085,525

		Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit number	Exhibit description	Form		File no.	Exhibit		Filing date	Filed herewith

1.1	Placement Agency Agreement dated as of April 6, 2018.	8-K	001-32188			1.1	4/10/18

1.2	Form of Underwriting Agreement.	S-1/A	333-224950			1.1	7/9/18

1.3	Underwriting Agreement dated March 21, 2019.	8-K		001-32188	1.1		3/25/19

3.1	Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation as amended prior to December 29, 2017 (including certificates of designation of Series A, B and C Preferred Stock)	8-K		001-32188	3.1		12/29/17

3.2	Articles of Amendment to Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation dated effective December 29, 2017	8-K		001-32188	3.2		12/29/17

3.3	Articles of Amendment to Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation effective January 19, 2018	8-K		001-32188	3.1		1/19/18

3.4	Articles of Amendment to Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation.	8-K		001-32188	3.4		6/26/18

3.5	Form of Certificate of Designation of Series D Preferred Stock.	S-1/A		333-224950	4.1		7/9/18

3.6	Bylaws	SB-2		333-100568	3.2		10/16/02

3.7	First Amendment to Bylaws	8-K		001-32188	3.1		6/9/10

3.8	Second Amendment to Bylaws	8-K		001-32188	3.1		8/24/10

4.1	Specimen Stock Certificate							X

4.2	Form of Investor Warrant.	8-K	001-32188			4.1	4/10/18

4.3	Form of Warrant to purchase shares of Common Stock.	S-1/A	333-224950			4.2	7/9/18

4.4	Form of Series 1 Warrant	8-K		001-32188	4.1		3/25/19

4.5	Form of Series 2 Warrant	8-K		001-32188	4.2		3/25/19

10.1	Standard Exclusive License Agreement with Sublicensing Terms between the Company and the University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. effective June 22, 2000 (the “MU1140 License Agreement”)	SB-2		333-100568	10.5		10/16/02

10.2	First Amendment to the MU1140 License Agreement dated September 15, 2000	SB-2		333-100568	10.6		10/16/02


*	Confidential treatment has been granted as to certain portions of this exhibit pursuant to Rule 406 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or Rule 24b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
+	Executive management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.



ORAGENICS, INC.

By:		/s/ Alan Joslyn
		Alan Joslyn
		President and Chief Executive Officer


Signature	Title	Date

/s/ Alan Joslyn	President and Chief Executive Officer	March 29, 2019
Alan Joslyn

/s/ Michael O. Sullivan	Chief Financial Officer (Principal	March 29, 2019
Michael O. Sullivan	Accounting and Financial Officer)	March 29, 2019

/s/ Robert C. Koski	Director	March 29, 2019
Robert C. Koski

/s/ Frederick W. Telling	Chairman and Director	March 29, 2019
Frederick W. Telling

/s/ Charles L. Pope	Director	March 29, 2019
Charles L. Pope

/s/ Alan W. Dunton	Director	March 29, 2019
Alan W. Dunton

Index to Financial Statements		F-1

Report of Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C., Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		F-2

Audited Financial Statements

Balance Sheets		F-3

Statements of Operations		F-4

Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity		F-5

Statements of Cash Flows		F-6

Notes to Financial Statements		F-7–F-26

	2018			2017
Furniture and fixtures	$	20,742		$	20,742
Laboratory equipment		936,041			812,215
Leasehold improvements		487,871			487,871
Office and computer equipment		286,227			285,326
		1,730,881			1,606,154
Accumulated depreciation and amortization		(1,614,605	)		(1,584,495	)
Property and equipment, net	$	116,276		$	21,659

	2018		2017
Accounts payable trade	$	828,706	$	618,360
Intrexon Collaboration Agreements		39,607		39,457
Professional fees		46,775		45,000
Vacation		123,268		106,722
Consulting fees		5,000		5,000
Other		—		3,505
Total accounts payable and accrued expenses	$	1,043,356	$	818,044

	2018		2017
Product liability insurance financing of $28,915 and $31,985, due in monthly installments of $2,696 and $3,290 including principal and interest at 5.09% and 6.18% through February 10, 2019 and January 10, 2018, respectively	$	5,295	$	3,273
Directors’ and officers’ liability insurance financing of $215,575 and $140,062 due in monthly installments of $20,115 and $13,059 including principal and interest at 5.24% and 5.09% through June 24, 2019 and June 24, 2018, respectively		118,918		77,205
Total short-term notes payable	$	124,213	$	80,478

Exercise Price		Total Warrants Outstanding		Exercisable Warrants Outstanding		Expiration Date
$	3.10		48,387		48,387	9/19/2022
$	3.10		462,106		462,106	5/10/2024
$	3.10		602,414		602,414	7/25/2024
$	3.10		1,064,518		1,064,518	11/8/2024
$	2.00		900,000		900,000	4/10/2023
$	1.00		4,294,500		4,294,500	7/17/2025
			7,371,925		7,371,925

	2018	2017

Expected dividend yield	0%	0%
Weighted-average expected volatility	161-163%	143%
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate	2.90% - 3.06%	2.15%
Expected life of options	10 Years	10 Years

	Number of Options			Option Price Per Share	Weighted Average Exercise Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2016		162,153		$5.50 – 104.00	$	12.80
Forfeited		(7,120	)	6.20 – 54.00		16.50
Granted		105,600		3.70		3.70
Outstanding at December 31, 2017		260,633		$3.70 – 104.00	$	9.00
Forfeited		(1,500	)	104.00		104.00
Granted		1,553,000		0.73 -1.52		0.80
Outstanding at December 31, 2018		1,812,133		$0.73 - 100.00	$	1.89
Exercisable at December 31, 2018		1,034,127		$0.73 - 100.00	$	2.57

	2018			2017
Current	$	—		$	—
Deferred		2,492,392			(10,055,163	)
Valuation Allowance		(2,492,392	)		10,055,163
Total provision for income taxes	$	—		$	—

	2018			2017
Deferred tax assets (liabilities):
Net operating loss carryforward	$	25,628,753		$	23,343,153
Accrued vacation		30,051			26,286
Non-qualified stock compensation		566,367			334,655
Restricted stock		(808	)		27,877
Total deferred tax assets, net		26,224,363			23,731,971
Less valuation allowance		(26,224,363	)		(23,731,971	)
Total net deferred taxes	$	—		$	—

	2018			2017
Income tax benefit computed at statutory federal rate of 21% and 34%, respectively	$	(2,081,970	)	$	(2,288,791	)
State income tax benefits, net of federal expense/benefit		(430,770	)		(244,362	)
Change in valuation allowance		2,492,392			(10,055,163	)
Effect of new tax rate		—			12,461,939
Non-deductible expenses		121,487			126,377
Other		(101,139	)		—
Total	$	—		$	—

Balance as of December 31, 2016	$	1,875,337
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year		140,313
Additions for the tax positions of prior years		—
Reductions for the tax positions of prior years		—
Balance as of December 31, 2017	$	2,015,650
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year		233,944
Additions for the tax positions of prior years		—
Reductions for the tax positions of prior years		—
Balance as of December 31, 2018	$	2,249,594

	2018
	First			Second			Third			Fourth
Revenues	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Total operating expenses		2,121,704			2,283,549			2,764,341			2,824,546
Net Loss		(2,119,397	)		(2,281,289	)		(2,757,835	)		(2,755,620	)
Net Loss applicable to common shareholders		(2,119,397	)		(2,281,289	)		(4,169,876	)		(2,755,620	)
Loss per share:
Basic and diluted net loss per share from continuing operations	$	(0.42	)	$	(0.38	)	$	(0.35	)	$	(0.09	)