UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 20152016

OR

For the transition period from    to    

Commission File Number: 0-21990

OXiGENE, INC.Mateon Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

701 Gateway Blvd, Suite 210

South San Francisco, CA 94080

(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

(650) 635-7000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Not applicable

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

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  x☒    No  ¨☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  x☒    No  ¨☐

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

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

As of November 10, 2015,2016, there were 26,544,934 shares of the Registrant’s Common Stock issued and outstanding.

OXiGENE, INC.Mateon Therapeutics, Inc.

Cautionary Factors that May Affect Future Results

This report contains “forward-looking statements,” which give management’s current expectations or forecasts of future events. You can identify these statements by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historic or current facts. They use words, such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “would,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “could,” “intend,” “target,” “project,” “contemplate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “seek,” “indicate,” or “continue” or the negative of these terms and other words and terms of similar meaning.

Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this report may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions we might make or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Consequently, no forward-looking statement can be guaranteed. Actual results may vary materially from those set forth in forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our or our management’s expectations, hopes, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future, such as our estimates regarding anticipated operating losses, future performance, future revenues and projected expenses; our liquidity and our expectations regarding our needs for and ability to raise additional capital; our ability to select and capitalize on commercially desirable product opportunities as a result of limited financial resources; our ability to manage our expenses effectively and raise the funds needed to continue our business; our ability to maintain the listing of our common stock on The NASDAQ Capital Market; our ability to retain the services of our current executive officers, directors and principal consultants; the competitive nature of our industry and the possibility that our product candidates may become obsolete; our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory approval of our product candidates and any future products we may develop; the clinical development of and the process of commercializing CA4P (combretastatin A4 phosphate or fosbretabulin) and OXi4503, the initiation, timing, progress and results of our preclinical and clinical trials, research and development programs; regulatory and legislative developments in the United States and foreign countries; the timing, costs and other limitations involved in obtaining regulatory approval for any product candidate; the further preclinical or clinical development and commercialization of our product candidates; our ability to obtain orphan drug exclusivity for some of our product candidates; the potential benefits of our product candidates over other therapies; our ability to enter into any collaboration with respect to product candidates; the performance of third parties; our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection for our product candidates and any future products we may develop and operate our business without infringing upon the intellectual property rights of others; the potential liability exposure related to our product candidates and any future products we may develop and our insurance coverage for such exposure; the size and growth of the potential markets for our products and our ability to serve those markets; the rate and degree of market acceptance of any future products; the sufficiency of potential proceeds from any financing; the potential for our restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws to deter a change of management or delay acquisition offers; the volatility of the price of our common stock; the dilutive effects of potential future equity issuances; our ability to maintain an effective system of internal controls; the payment and reimbursement methods used by private or governmental third-party payers, and our ability to maintain the listing of our securities on The NASDAQ Capital Market; and other factors discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) on March 30, 201525, 2016 or any document incorporated by reference herein or therein.

We will not update forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, unless required by law. You are advised to consult any further disclosures we make in our reports to the SEC, including our reports on Form 10-Q, 8-K and 10-K. Our filings list various important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from expected results. We note these factors for investors as permitted by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You should understand that it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors. Consequently, you should not consider any such list to be a complete set of all potential risks or uncertainties.

INDEX

PART I—I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements

OXiGENE,Mateon Therapeutics, Inc.

Condensed Balance Sheets

(All amounts in thousands, except per share data)

See accompanying notes.notes .

OXiGENE,Mateon Therapeutics, Inc.

Condensed Statements of Comprehensive Loss

(All amounts in thousands, except per share data)

(Unaudited)(unaudited)

See accompanying notes.notes .

OXiGENE,Mateon Therapeutics, Inc.

Condensed Statements of Cash Flows

(All amounts in thousands)

(Unaudited)(unaudited)

See accompanying notes.notes .

OXiGENE,Mateon Therapeutics, Inc.

Notes to Condensed Financial Statements

September 30, 20152016

(Unaudited)

Description of Business

OXiGENE,Mateon Therapeutics, Inc. (“OXiGENE”Mateon” or the “Company”) is incorporated in the state of Delaware and is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developingseeking to realize the full potential of vascular targeted therapy in oncology. Vascular targeted therapy includes vascular disrupting agents (“VDAs”) to treat cancer.(VDAs), such as the investigational drugs that Mateon is developing, and anti-angiogenic agents (AAs), a number of which are approved and widely used in oncology indications. Mateon’s VDAs selectively disrupt abnormalobstruct a tumor’s blood supply without obstructing the blood supply to normal tissues, and treatment with Mateon’s VDAs has been shown to lead to significant central tumor necrosis. The Company believes that the treatment of cancer would be significantly improved if VDAs and AAs were used together, due to their complementary mechanisms of action. In combination, the VDA would occlude the blood vessels that sustain tumors.in the interior of a tumor while the AA would prevent the formation of new tumor blood vessels. The Company has two VDA drug candidates currently being tested in clinical trials, CA4P (combretastatin A4 phosphate, or fosbretabulin) and OXi4503. The Company is dedicatedwas originally incorporated under the name OXiGENE, Inc. in 1988 in the state of New York and reincorporated in 1992 in the state of Delaware. Effective June 17, 2016, the Company amended its Certificate of Incorporation to leveragingchange its intellectual propertyname to Mateon Therapeutics, Inc. and, therapeutic development expertise to bring life-extending and life-enhancing medicines to patients.

The Company is subject to a number of risks similar to other biopharmaceutical companies that do not have approval for their product candidates, includingin connection with the need to obtain adequate additional funding, possible failure of clinical trials,name change, on June 20, 2016, the need to obtain marketing approvaltrading symbol for the Company’s investigational drugs, competitors developing new technological innovations, the needcommon stock changed from “OXGN” to successfully commercialize and gain market acceptance of the Company’s product candidates should they be approved for marketing, and protection of its proprietary technology. If the Company does not successfully commercialize or partner any of its product candidates, it will be unable to generate product revenue or achieve profitability. OXiGENE expects to incur additional operating losses over the next several years as it develops its product candidates, and will need additional capital for this development. Additional funding may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all, and if funding is not available, the Company may need to scale back or abandon its product candidates.“MATN”.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. The financial statements do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, however, all adjustments (consisting primarilyonly of normal recurring accruals)adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 20152016 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any other interim period or for the year ending December 31, 2015.2016.

The balance sheet at December 31, 20142015 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2014.2015.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles 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 and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash Equivalents

Highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less at the date of purchase are considered to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are stated at fair value.

Short-term Investments

All marketable securities have been classified as “available for sale” and are carried at fair value, based upon quoted market prices. The Company considers its available-for-sale portfolio to be available for use in current operations. Accordingly, the Company classifies certain investments as short-term marketable securities, even though the stated maturity date may be one year or more beyond the current balance sheet date. Unrealized gains and losses, net of any related tax effects, are excluded from earnings and are included in other comprehensive income and reported as a separate component of stockholders’ deficit until realized. Realized gains and losses and declines in value judged to be other than temporary, if any, on available-for-sale securities are included in other income (expense), net. The cost of securities sold is based on the specific-identification method.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

    In August 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”), issued ASU No. 2014-15, “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” This ASU requires management to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and expands footnote disclosures related to going concern matters. This ASU will be effective for the Company’s 2016 year-end financial statements and management plans to include ASU No. 2014-15 disclosures to the extent that they are applicable.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-2, “Leases.” This ASU requires substantially all leases, including operating leases, to be recognized by lessees on their balance sheet as a right-of-use asset and corresponding lease liability. This ASU is effective for the Company’s interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2019 and early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of this ASU will have on its financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting,” which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for share-based payments, including immediate recognition of all excess tax benefits and deficiencies in the income statement, changing the threshold to qualify for equity classification up to the employees’ maximum statutory tax rates, allowing an entity-wide accounting policy election to either estimate the number of awards that are expected to vest or account for forfeitures as they occur, and clarifying the classification on the statement of cash flows for the excess tax benefit and employee taxes paid when an employer withholds shares for tax-withholding purposes. This ASU is effective for the Company’s interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2017 and early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of this ASU will have on its financial statements.

Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments consisted of the following (in thousands):

As of September 30, 2016, the Company’s cash equivalents and short-term investments had a weighted-average time to maturity of less than one year, and the Company has the ability to hold its investments through their maturity dates. There have been no significant realized gains or losses on investments for the period presented.

Fair value is defined as the price at which an asset could be exchanged or a liability transferred in a transaction between knowledgeable, willing parties in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability. Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices or parameters are not available, valuation models are applied.

Assets and liabilities recorded at fair value are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their fair value. Hierarchical levels directly related to the amount of subjectivity associated with the inputs to fair valuation of these assets and liabilities, are as follows:

Level 1—Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets at the reporting date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide reasonably accurate pricing information on an ongoing basis.

Level 2—Inputs, other than quoted prices included in Level 1, that are either directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability through correlation with market data at the reporting date and for the duration of the instrument’s anticipated life.

The Company utilizes third party pricing services in developing fair value measurements where fair value is based on observable market inputs, including benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, bids, offers and other reference data. The Company uses quotes from external pricing service providers and other on-line quotation systems to verify the fair value of investments provided by third party pricing service providers.

Level 3—Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the reporting date. Consideration is given to the risk inherent in the valuation technique and the risk inherent in the inputs to the model.

Financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis are categorized in the tables below based upon the lowest level of significant input to the valuations (in thousands):

March 2015 Financing

On March 25, 2015, the Company completed a financing with institutional investors in which it raised $10.0 million, or approximately $9.2 million after deducting placement agents’ fees and other offering expenses. Investors purchased shares of the Company’s common stock at a price of $1.7125 per share and received one warrant to purchase one half of a share of the Company’s common stock at the same exercise price per share as each share of common stock purchased. A total of 5,839,420 shares of common stock and warrants for the purchase of 2,919,710 shares of common stock were issued. The warrants were exercisable immediately after issuance and expire 5 years from the date of issuance. Also, in connection with the financing, the Company issued to its placement agent and related persons warrants to purchase 233,577 shares of the Company’s common stock, which were exercisable immediately after issuance, have an exercise price of $2.13 per share and expire on March 20, 2020.

Warrants

The following is a summary of the Company’s outstanding common stock warrants as of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014:warrants:

Options and restricted stock

At the Company’s 2015 annual meeting, stockholders approved the Company’s 2015 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2015 Plan”). Under the 2015 Plan, up to 4,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock may be issued pursuant to awards granted in the form of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted and unrestricted stock awards, and other stock-based awards to employees, consultants, and directors. The 2015 Plan also allows additional shares of the Company’s common stock to be issued if awards outstanding under the Company’s 2005 Stock Plan (the “2005 Plan”) are cancelled, forfeited, surrendered, or terminated after the April 25, 2015 expiration of the 2005 Plan, provided that no more than 725,781 shares of the Company’s common stock shall be added to the 2015 Plan from the 2005 Plan.

The following is a summary of the Company’s stock option activity under the 2005 and 2015 Plans for the nine months ended September 30, 2015:its equity incentive plans:

As of September 30, 2015,2016, there was approximately $1.2$1.3 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards that is expected to be recognized as expense over a weighted average period of approximately 2.92.7 years.

The fair values for the stock options granted in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2015 were estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions:assumptions for the periods indicated:

Options issued during the nine month period ended September 30, 2015 generally vest over a three or four year period from the date of grant, except for options to purchase 75,000 shares of common stock which will only vest upon a change of control of the Company if certain other conditions are also met.

Basic and diluted net loss per share was calculated by dividing the net loss per share attributed to the Company’s common shares by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per share includes the effect of all dilutive, potentially issuable common equivalent shares as defined using the treasury stock method. All of the Company’s common stock equivalents are anti-dilutive due to the Company’s net loss position for all periods presented. Accordingly, common stock equivalents of approximately 4,049,000 stock options and 9,842,000 warrants at September 30, 2016 and 2,192,000 stock options and 9,842,000 warrants at September 30, 2015, and 642,000 stock options and 7,445,000 warrants at September 30, 2014, were excluded from the calculation of weighted average shares for diluted net loss per share.

Clinical Research Organization and Manufacturing Commitments

As of September 30, 2015, the Company has a balance of unapplied purchase orders for expenditures related to external clinical research and outsourced drug manufacturing of approximately $4.6 million, of which the Company expects to incur approximately $1.7 million over the next three months.

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis should be read together with the audited financial statements and notes, as well as our “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” that are included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014,2015, and also with the unaudited financial statements set forth in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

Overview

We are a biopharmaceutical company developingseeking to realize the full potential of vascular targeted therapy in oncology. Vascular targeted therapy includes vascular disrupting agents, or VDAs, to treat cancer.such as the investigational drugs that we are developing, and anti-angiogenic agents, or AAs, a number of which are approved and widely used in oncology indications. Our VDAs selectively disrupt abnormalobstruct a tumor’s blood supply without obstructing the blood supply to normal tissues, and treatment with our VDAs has been shown to lead to significant central tumor necrosis. We believe that the treatment of certain types of cancer would be significantly improved if VDAs and AAs were used together, due to their complementary mechanisms of action. In combination, the VDA would occlude the blood vessels that sustain tumors. VDAs work by binding to tubulin in the cells lining abnormal blood vessels and collapsing the existing blood vessels insideinterior of a tumor which “starves”while the AA would prevent the formation of new tumor and leads to necrosis of the cancer cells.blood vessels. We have two VDA drug candidates currently being tested in clinical trials, CA4P (combretastatin A4 phosphate, or fosbretabulin) and OXi4503.

Recent Developments

On June 17, 2016, we changed our name from OXiGENE, Inc. to Mateon Therapeutics, Inc. OXiGENE was named for our original founding technology of oxygen-mediated radiosensitizers. The new company name is derived from our location in San Mateo County, the birthplace of biotechnology.

On June 20, 2016, we announced new analyses from the GOG-0186I Study in recurrent ovarian cancer. This study compared the combination of CA4P and bevacizumab (CA4P-treated patients) to bevacizumab (control patients). Key new analyses, with an updated dataset as of November 2015, included median overall survival (OS), in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population of 3.2 months longer for the CA4P-treated patients compared to the control patients (25.2 vs. 22.0 months, respectively; HR=0.83, not statistically significant). The GOG-0186I Study included 81 patients (75.7% of study patients) with recurrent ovarian cancer that was deemed “measurable”, a pre-specified covariate defined by RECIST criteria, and 26 patients (24.3%) with tumors deemed “non-measurable.” Measurable disease is generally defined as primary tumor sizes greater than 1 cm in diameter, while non-measurable tumors are generally identified and monitored by increased serum CA-125 antigen levels, ascites, or other clinical signs of disease. Patients with measurable disease treated with CA4P had a 5.6 month improvement in median OS (26.8 vs. 21.2 months; 22% reduction in the risk of death; HR=0.78, not statistically significant), and a 3.7 month improvement in progression free survival, or PFS (9.8 vs. 6.1 months; HR=0.60, p=0.027), compared to control patients with measurable disease.

CA4P

Our lead investigational drug, CA4P, also known as fosbretabulin, is a reversible tubulin binding agent that selectively targets endothelial cells that make up the blood vessel walls in most solid cancer tumors, causing the endothelial cells to swell and thus obstruct the flow of blood to the tumor, which starves the tumor of vital nutrients including oxygen. This deprivation, also known as tumor hypoxia, results in rapid downstream tumor cell death.

Our primary focus for 2016 is the development of CA4P for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Approximately 22,000 women in the U.S. are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year. More than 60% of women diagnosed with ovarian cancer are in stage III or IV at the time of their diagnosis, making ovarian cancer difficult to treat and often fatal, with a five-year survival rate of approximately 45% — a rate which is largely unchanged since the 1990s. Overall, approximately 80% of patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer will relapse after first-line platinum-based and taxane-based chemotherapy. One quarter of those who relapse after initial treatment, or more than 4,300 women, will have platinum-resistant cancer, the most difficult-to-treat form of the disease. Additionally, a majority of patients who are not initially platinum-resistant and who may achieve a full remission following first-line therapy will also develop recurrent disease. There are relatively few cancer therapies that have been approved for the treatment of ovarian cancer, including platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, and new treatments are needed. We have been granted orphan drug designation in both the U.S. and the European Union for the use of CA4P in the treatment of ovarian cancer and have received Fast Track designation in the U.S. for use in the treatment of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

CA4P in Combination with Bevacizumab – Completed Phase 2 Clinical Trial with Positive Results

Genentech’s bevacizumab (Avastin^®) is an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, or VEGF, monoclonal antibody which has been approved for the treatment of ovarian cancer in the United States and elsewhere. The approval of bevacizumab in the United States in combination with Avastin^® (bevacizumab)chemotherapy (paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, or topotecan) for the treatment of women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer— Completed Phase 2 Trialcancer was based in part upon results from the phase 3 AURELIA trial, which had a primary endpoint of PFS. Bevacizumab is also currently approved in the EU in combination with different chemotherapy regimens for platinum-resistant and Planned Phase 2/3 Trialplatinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. These EU approvals were also based primarily upon PFS.

Data fromThe GOG-0186I clinical trial was conducted by Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG), part of NRG Oncology, under the sponsorship of the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and was a recently completedrandomized,two-arm phase 2 clinical trial evaluating CA4P plus bevacizumab compared to bevacizumab alone in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

The GOG-0186I clinical trial enrolled a total of 107 patients with both platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer using CA4Pat 67 clinical sites in combination with Avastin (bevacizumab) compared to Avastin alonethe United States. The results indicated a statistically significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) in the combination arm, compared to the Avastin arm, which was the primary endpoint of the trial. Thetrial, with a p-value wasof 0.049 (pre-specified analysis using a one-sided test; 10% level of significance) and the. The hazard ratio was 0.685, with a 90% 2-sided confidence interval (CI) of 0.47 ~1.00. Median PFS was 7.3 months for AvastinCA4P plus CA4Pbevacizumab (n=54), compared to 4.8 months with Avastinfor bevacizumab alone (n= 53). Patients in both arms were treated until disease progression or adverse effects prohibited further therapy. Avastin is an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, or VEGF, monoclonal antibody that is approved for the treatment of cancer in the United States and Europe in combination with chemotherapy drugs. Avastin is marketed by Genentech/Roche.

In a post-hoc subgroup analysis, data showed that patients who were platinum-resistant also had a statistically significantan even greater improvement in PFS with the combination. Among the 27 patients who were platinum-resistant, median PFS was 6.7 months for those receiving Avastin and CA4P plus bevacizumab compared to 3.4 months for those receiving Avastinbevacizumab alone, and the results were statistically significant with a p-value of 0.01. The0.01 and a hazard ratio wasof 0.57. Although the subgroup included a relatively small number of patients, theseThese findings suggest that adding CA4P to Avastinbevacizumab has a potentially greater effect in thisthe difficult-to-treat platinum-resistant patient group than it does for platinum-sensitive patients. Also inAlthough the results were stronger for the platinum-resistant patients, a post-hoc subgroup analysis while not statistically significant, among the 80 patients who were platinum-sensitive still showed a numerical improvement in PFS for the combination therapy, with a median PFS wasof 7.6 months for those receiving Avastin and CA4P plus bevacizumab compared to 6.1 months for those receiving Avastinbevacizumab alone, although the results were not statistically significant, with a p-value of 0.139 and a hazard ratio of 0.67.

AdditionalIn the clinical trial, patients with measurable disease who received the combination of CA4P and bevacizumab also achieved a higher objective response rate, or ORR, a secondary endpointsendpoint in the study included safety and overall survival. clinical trial, measured according to RECIST criteria. Although not a statistically significant result, patients receiving the combination had an ORR of 35.7% (n=42; CI 90% 23.5 ~ 49.5%) compared to 28.2% for patients on bevacizumab alone (n=39; CI 90% 16.7 ~ 42.3%). In the subgroup of platinum-resistant patients, the addition of CA4P to bevacizumab increased ORR to 40.0% (n=10) compared to 12.5% (n=8) for bevacizumab alone.

All adverse events in the studyclinical trial were manageable, with one Grade 4 event occurring in each treatment arm. Consistent with prior clinical experience with CA4P, patients in the combination arm experienced an increased incidence of Grade 3 hypertension compared to the control arm (10(18 cases for Avastinthe combination compared to 1710 cases for the combination)bevacizumab alone). One patient on the combination regimen had a Grade 3 thromboembolic event. All cases of hypertension were managed with antihypertensiveanti-hypertensive treatments, as specified in the studyclinical trial protocol.

Patients continue to be followed forFollow-up data on OS was collected by the GOG through November 2015. Among all patients enrolled in the study(Intent-to-Treat group, or ITT), the median overall survival (OS)was 3.2 months longer for the CA4P and bevacizumab treated group than for the bevacizumab only treated group (25.2 months vs. 22.0 months, respectively; HR=0.83, not statistically significant).

The GOG-0186I clinical trial included 81 patients (75.7% of study patients) with recurrent ovarian cancer that was deemed “measurable”, a pre-specified covariate defined by RECIST criteria, and 26 patients (24.3%) deemed “non-measurable.” Measurable disease is generally defined as primary tumor sizes greater than 1 cm in diameter, while non-measurable tumors are generally identified and monitored by increased serum CA-125 antigen levels, ascites, or other clinical signs of disease.

Patients with measurable disease treated with CA4P had a 5.6 month improvement in median OS (26.8 vs. 21.2 months; 22% reduction in the risk of death; HR=0.78, not statistically significant), and a 3.7 month improvement in PFS (9.8 vs. 6.1 months; HR=0.60, p=0.027) compared to control patients with measurable disease.

Additional analyses were conducted on patients with measurable disease whose tumors were larger than the median baseline tumor size (tumor size>5.7 cm; n=41). A preliminary analysis after 33 events did not demonstrateCA4P-treated patients with these tumor sizes experienced a statistically significant difference48% reduction in OS between the study arms. However, we believe that the OS data currently available is not sufficiently maturerisk of death (HR=0.52; p=0.095) and a 6.2 month improvement in median PFS (10.5 vs. 4.3 months; HR=0.55, p=0.071) compared to yield any definitive conclusions. We anticipate further analysis of this secondary endpoint will be conducted as the data matures.control patients.

CA4P in Combination with Bevacizumab and Physician’s Choice Chemotherapy – Current Phase 2/3 Clinical Trial

Based on the positive phase 2overall results we plan to initiate a phase 2/3from the GOG-0186I clinical trial in platinum-resistantrecurrent ovarian cancer withand also the goalstatistically significant results among the subgroup of determining whetherplatinum-resistant patients, we have initiated the addition of CA4P to the standard-of-care (chemotherapy plus Avastin) improves patient outcomes. Patients would be randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive either the current standard-of-care or the current standard-of-care plus CA4P. The primary endpoint will be progression-free survival (PFS). We expect to initiate the trial in the first half of 2016.

The platinum-resistant ovarian cancer trial is planned as two stage, phase 2/3 study. The first stage of the trial is designed as a randomized, investigator-blinded, placebo-controlled study with up to 80 patients, randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive either Avastin and chemotherapy or Avastin, chemotherapy and CA4P. In this stage we plan regular interim analyses of the data in order to assess the efficacy of the drug combination and to evaluate powering assumptions for the second stage of the trial. At any time, if we see clear evidence that CA4P is improving response rates and progression free survival, we will initiate the second stage of the trial, which would be a large, randomized double blind controlled trial without regular interim analyses. The second stage is designed as a confirmatory efficacy trial on which to base an application to the FDA for approval of CA4P as a treatment for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

CA4P in combination with Avastin for glioblastoma multiforme – Planned Phase 2/3 Trial

We plan to initiateFOCUS Study, a phase 2/3 clinical trial usingof CA4P and Avastin in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients who have failed first-line chemotherapy treatment, with the goal of determiningseeking to demonstrate whether CA4P improves upon the current standard-of-care, whichstandard of care for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The current standard of care for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer is treatment with Avastin.bevacizumab and chemotherapy. The combination of CA4P and Avastin, without any chemotherapy, is the same treatment regimen that ovarian cancer patients recently received in the completed phase 2 study described above. We have preclinical data showing a strong positive effect of CA4P in models of GBM, but no human clinical data. In addition to the preclinical data, we chose GBM as an additional target indication for CA4P because the unmet medical need is high, with few treatment options, and there are a limited number of other investigational drugs in development. Also, because GBM progresses rapidly, once the clinical trial begins we expect to be able to accrue data on the effect of CA4P more rapidly than we would for other indications. Finally, because CA4P exerts its effect on tumor vasculature, CA4P does not need to cross the blood/brain barrier to potentially have an effect on inhibiting tumor growth. Based on the highly vascular nature of tumors in GBM, similar to ovarian cancer tumors, we believe that CA4P can have a potentially meaningful effect in this indication.

        The GBM trial is planned as a two stage, phase 2/3 study. The first stage of the trial is designed as a randomized, investigator-blinded, placebo-controlled study with two stages – in the first stage we plan to enroll up to 80 patients randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive either Avastin or Avastin plus CA4P. In this stage we planand conduct regular interim analyses of the data in order to assess theverify efficacy of the drug combination and to evaluateconfirm powering assumptions for the second stage. In the second stage, we plan to enroll up to 356 additional patients and do not plan to conduct any interim analyses. The primary endpoint of the trial. At any time, if we see clear evidence that CA4P is improving response ratesour phase 2/3 clinical trial will be PFS, and progression free survival, we will initiatealso evaluate objective response rate, OS and other parameters. If results from the second stage of the trial, which would beclinical study meet the primary endpoint, we intend to submit a large, randomized double blind controlled trial without regular interim analyses. The second stage is designed as a confirmatory efficacy trial on which to base an applicationNew Drug Application, or NDA, to the FDA for approval of CA4P as a treatment for GBM.U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA. We began enrolling patients into this clinical trial in June 2016.

CA4P in combinationCombination with Votrient^® (pazopanib) for ovarian cancerPazopanib – OngoingCurrent Phase 1b/2 Clinical Trial

In October 2014, we enrolled the first patient in a phase 1b/2 trial of CA4P in combination with Votrient (pazopanib) compared to Votrient alone, in advanced recurrent ovarian cancer. VotrientPazopanib is an anti-angiogenic oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and soft tissue sarcoma (STS), with compelling early clinical data. Pazopanib is also approved for ovarian and other cancers in the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer. Votrient is marketedEuropean Union, and was initially developed by GlaxoSmithKline.GlaxoSmithKline, then sold to Novartis in 2015. We believe that using CA4P in combination with Votrientpazopanib may provide a clinically active yet potentially better tolerated alternative to the current standard of care, cytotoxic chemotherapy, for relapsed ovarian cancer.

In October 2014, the first patient was enrolled in a phase 1b/2 trial of pazopanib with and without CA4P in advanced recurrent ovarian cancer. The studyWe will incur limited costs for this trial, which is sponsored by The Christie, also referred to as The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and coordinated by the Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Trials Coordination Unit, or MAHSC-CTU, with additional support from The University of Manchester, the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Mount Vernon Cancer Centre (part of the East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust).

The trial design consists of a phase 1b dose escalation portion with the combination of Votrientpazopanib and CA4P, which has been completed, and then a randomized phase 2 portion comparing Votrientpazopanib alone and Votrientversus pazopanib plus CA4P in patients with recurrentrelapsed ovarian cancer. The studyclinical trial is expected to enroll approximately 128 patients at sites in the U.K. The primary endpoint of the trial is progression-free survival,PFS, and secondary endpoints include safety, overall survival,OS, objective response rate, and tumor biomarker CA125 response rate.

Data from the first 12 patients enrolled in the phase 1b portion of the study were recently presented at the 19th International Meeting of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology. Nine of these patients were evaluated for objective response using RECIST criteria, and results showed two partial responses, five stable diseases and two progressive diseases. Eight of the ten patients with evaluable data demonstrated decreases in the tumor biomarker CA125, with three achieving a response according to CGIC criteria. Safety data showed that the combination of CA4P and Votrient was generally well tolerated, with no Grade 4-5 adverse events (AEs). The most commonly reported AEs were hypertension, fatigue, and pain. Based on the positive safety data and signs of efficacy, the study is expected to move into the phase 2 portion began enrolling patients in early 2016.

CA4P for Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors – Ongoing Phase 2 monotherapy clinical trial

In September 2014, we enrolled the first patient in a phase 2 monotherapy clinical trial of CA4P in patients with gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors, or GI-NETs, with elevated biomarkers. This trial is designed to enroll 20 GI-NET patients with increased biomarker levels at five sites in the United States. The primary endpoint of the trial is a reduction in biomarkers, and secondary endpoints include symptom control and changes in quality of life as assessed by validated measures. We have recently amended the protocol for this trial to also include patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and we estimate that the trial will complete enrollment at the end of this year. Patients who participate in this trial are eligible to enroll in a rollover clinical trial which is designed to treat patients for one year after they complete the phase 2 clinical trial, if they have responded to CA4P.

This trial was initiated based on data from a preclinical study of CA4P in a transgenic mouse model of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, in which treatment with CA4P resulted in a significant and sustained decrease in circulating insulin of more than 90% over four weeks of treatment with CA4P. Treatment with CA4P was not shown to be associated with any obvious toxicity, and was shown to disrupt tumor vasculature, induce apoptosis and inhibit tumor cell proliferation.

Interim data from the first nine subjects enrolled in the study suggested that CA4P monotherapy may improve biomarkers and quality of life (QOL) measures. Additionally, CA4P appears to be relatively well tolerated by subjects in the trial. However, these results are preliminary, due to the small number of subjects analyzed at this point. Full results from this trial are expected in the second half ofJuly 2016.

OXi4503 Development Program

In addition to pursuing development of CA4P, we are also pursuing the development of a second product candidate, OXi4503, is a novel, dual-mechanism VDA. OXi4503VDA, which has not only been shown to reduce tumor blood flow andbut which also form an antiproliferativeforms a potentially anti-proliferative metabolite. We believe that this dual mechanism differentiatesof OXi4503 from other VDAs and may result in enhanced anti-tumor activity in certain tumor types compared with other VDA drug candidates.types. Based on preclinical data, we believe that OXi4503 may be particularly active in hepatocellular carcinoma, melanoma, and certain leukemias of the myeloid lineage, all of which have relatively high levels of the enzymes that facilitate the conversion of OXi4503 into a chemicalmetabolite that directly kills tumor cells. Similar to CA4P, OXi4503 has shown potent anti-tumor activity in preclinical studies of solid tumors and Acute Myelogenous Leukemia,acute myelogenous leukemia, or AML, and in two clinical studies in advanced solid tumors and liver tumors, both as a single agent and in combination with other antiproliferativeanti-proliferative agents.

AML is a relatively rare cancer of the myeloid blood cells, with approximately 10,500 new cases each year in the United States, accounting for approximately 1.2% of cancer deaths. AML is characterized by the rapid growth of abnormal white blood cells that pollute bone marrow and interfere with the production of normal blood cells. We are currently developing OXi4503 for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia – Ongoing Phase 1/2 TrialAML and have been granted orphan drug designation in the United States and European Union for the use of OXi4503 for the treatment of AML.

Prior to October 2015, OXi4503 is being studiedhad been in adevelopment in an investigator-sponsored phase 1/21 clinical trial inof patients with AML or Myelodysplastic Syndromes, or MDS, a disorder of the normal blood formation process. This open-label, dose-escalating studyIn October 2015, the investigator-sponsored clinical trial was closed, and we brought the clinical trial under our direct management and expanded the number of sites to four, with the goal of enrolling patients faster than had occurred at the single site. In December 2015, we moved this clinical trial into its second stage, whereby OXi4503 is designed to treat up to 45 patientsbeing used in the phase 1 portion (18combination with cytarabine, an FDA-approved drug for the investigator-sponsored portiontreatment of the study, and 27 for the Company-sponsored portion of the study) and will evaluate the safety profile, maximum tolerated dose and biologic activity of OXi4503. Following phase 1, the study is designed to enroll up to 78 patients in phase 2. The objectives of the study are to determine the maximum tolerated dose of OXi4503 both as a single agent and as part of a combination therapy with intermediate-dose cytarabine chemotherapy, and to collect efficacy data as determined by the overall response rate.AML

Among the first 18 patients treated at the three lowest dose levels in the investigator-sponsored portion of the trial, two patients showed stable disease, one patient had a partial remission and one patient achieved a complete bone marrow response. OXi4503 appeared to be well tolerated based on these results in patients with relapsed and refractory AML and MDS. Side effects included increases in D-dimer, which is a substance in the blood that is released when a blood clot breaks up, bone pain, fever, chills and flu-like symptoms. Biological activity associated with OXi4503 includes temporary increases in D-dimer which may be related to anti-leukemic activity of the drug.

Results of Operations

Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 20152016 and September 30, 20142015

Research and development expenses

Research and development expenses decreased for the three month period ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period in 2015 primarily due to lower consulting and employee costs. For the nine month period ended September 30, 2016, research and development costs increased primarily due to our initiation of the FOCUS Study, a phase 2/3 clinical trial evaluating whether our lead drug candidate, CA4P, improves upon the standard of care for women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The table below summarizes the most significant components of our research and development expenses (in thousands):for the periods indicated, in thousands, and provides the amount and percentage change in these components:

Expenses for clinical studies represent the most significant component of our research and development expenses. For the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2016, expenditures on clinical studies of our investigational drugs increased compared to the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2015, primarily due to our preparation for and initiation of the FOCUS Study in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in 2016. For the three month period, our increased costs for the FOCUS Study were mostly offset by a reduction in costs for the neuroendocrine tumor (NETs) study, for which patient treatment completed during the second quarter of 2016. The Company also received a vendor credit of $0.2 million recorded in the third quarter of 2016 based on newly renegotiated terms of a service agreement. Clinical study expenses include costs incurred by contract research organizations who conduct clinical trials on our behalf, patient and clinical site costs, laboratory costs and other services directly related to clinical trials. The increased clinical trial activity during 2016 was also related to our increase in employee compensation for the nine month period ended September 30, 2016, because during the second half of 2015 we hired new personnel to support the clinical programs. Following our hiring of new personnel to support the clinical trial activity, we eliminated the positions of certain previous research and development personnel, resulting in lower employee compensation expenses for the three month period ended September 30, 2016 compared to the three month period ended September 30, 2015. The changes in personnel also allowed us to reduce reliance on outside consultants, and these costs decreased for both the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 20152016 compared to the same periods in 2014, total research2015.

Drug manufacturing expenses can be highly variable and developmentare impacted by the timing of when drug product is needed for clinical trials, product expiration or re-test requirements, potential regulatory filings and scheduling of production batches based on the drug manufacturer’s generally long lead time requirements. Drug manufacturing expenses increased primarily due to higher employee-related costs resulting from additional personneldid not meaningfully change among the periods presented.

Other expenses include facility related expenses and higher external costs related to our ongoing clinical programs. These increases were partially offset by lower drug manufacturing expenses.

The increase in external services expenselicensing fees, which decreased for the threenine month period ended September 30, 20152016 compared to the same period in 2014 is primarily due to external costs related to the initiation of our OXi4503 AML Phase 1/2 clinical trial. The decrease in external services for the nine month period ending September 30, 2015 compared to the same period in 2014 is primarily due to our manufacturing less CA4P drug product in 2015 offset by the increase in external costs related to our CA4P NET Phase 2 and OXi4503 AML Phase 1/2 trials. Because we are in development and the timing and need for manufacturing runs is variable, the costs of manufacturing can vary significantly from period to period.

The increase in employee compensation and related expenses for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2015 compared to the same periods in 2014 is primarily due to the employment of additional research and development personnel to support our clinical programs. For the same reason, employee stock-based compensation increased in the 2015 periods compared to the 2014 periods.

The decrease in other expenses for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2015 compared to the same periods in 2014 is primarily due to lower licensing fees paid for rights to our drug product candidates.

Because we are planning to conduct additional clinical development of our investigational drugs, weWe expect research and development expenses to increase infor the year ending December 31, 2015balance of 2016 as compared to 2015 due to our planned additional clinical trial activity, primarily related to the year ended December 31, 2014.FOCUS Study.

General and administrative expenses

The table below summarizes the most significant components of our general and administrative expenses (in thousands):for the periods indicated, in thousands, and provides the amount and percentage changes in these components:

General and administrative expenses increased for the periods ended September 30, 2016 compared to the periods ended September 30, 2015. For the three monththree-month period ended September 30, 2015 compared to the same period in 2014, total general2016, stock-based compensation increased as a result of higher option expenses for grants made during mid-2015 and administrative expenses decreased primarily due to lowerearly 2016, while base compensation and consulting and professional services.services were fairly consistent between the periods. For the nine month period ended September 30, 2015 compared to the same period in 2014, total general and administrative expenses decreased primarily due to lower employee severance costs in 2015 following reductions in headcount which occurred in early 2014 and lower consulting and professional services.

For the three month period ending September 30, 2015,2016, employee compensation and related expensescosts increased as a result of several positions converting from part time to full time for the full 2016 period, as compared to only part of the same2015 period, as well as higher temporary housing costs associated with an employee relocation, partially offset by severance recorded in 20142015 due to additional hires. Forthe departure of a former employee. Stock-based compensation expense also increased for the nine month period endingended September 30, 2015, lower employee severance costs were partially offset by higher compensation costs related2016 due to additional hires.

Changesstock option grants made following stockholder approval of a new stock option plan in employee stock-based compensation were not significant between the periods presented.

mid-2015. Consulting and professional services were similar for the nine month periods.

Other expenses, which include facility-related expenses and insurance expenses, decreased for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2015 as compared to the same periods in 2014 primarily2016 due to reduced marketing research and legallower fees paid in several different areas, the most significant of which was for lower corporate insurance costs.

AlthoughWe expect general and administrative expenses have decreased in the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2015, whenfor 2016 to continue at increased levels compared to the same periods2015 in 2014, we do not expect such decreasesorder to continue for the balance of 2015, and general and administrative expenses maysupport our planned increase in the year ending December 31, 2015research and development activities as compared to the year ended December 31, 2014.

Other Incomewell as for additional business development and Expenses

Investment income primarily reflects interest income earned on our operating cash accounts and other income (expense) primarily reflects foreign currency exchange gains and losses. These items were not significant.investor relations efforts.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

We areOur business is developing two investigational drugs both VDAs, for the treatment of cancer and we currently have no sources of revenue. We measure liquidity by the cash and other capital we have available to fund our operations, which are primarily focused on the advancement of our VDAs. To date, we have financed our operations principally through proceeds received from the sale of equity and at one point through a strategic development arrangement which concluded in 2009. We have experienced net losses in each year since our inception, and negative cash flow from operations in nearly every year except one.also. As of September 30, 2015,2016, we had an accumulated deficit of over $260$275 million, and cashincluding a net loss of approximately $30.3$10.2 million for the first nine months of 2016 and approximately $13.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. At September 30, 2016, we had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of approximately $16.3 million, which we expect to be sufficient to fund our planned operations, for at leastincluding continued development of our investigational drugs CA4P and OXi4503, into the next twelve months.third quarter of 2017. We expect to continue to incur expenses, resulting in losses and negative cash flows from operations, over at least the next several years as we continue to develop our candidate drugs for the treatment of cancer.

We expect to incur significant additional costs over at least the next several years as a result of our plans to develop and commercialize CA4PVDAs for the treatment of ovarian cancer, glioblastoma multiforme and neuroendocrine tumors, and OXi4503 for the treatment of AML. We anticipate that this development will includeincluding continuing our currentexisting clinical trials as well as conducting new, additional clinical trials and additionalanticipated research and development expenditures.

We expect towill require additional capital in order to initiate, pursue andbefore we can complete all planned clinical trials and development of CA4P and OXi4503. Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to access additional funds when needed, we may not be able to initiate, pursue and complete all planned clinical trials or continue the development of our product candidates or we could be required to delay, scale back or eliminate some or all of our development programs and operations. Any additional equity financing, if available, may not be available on favorable terms, would most likely be dilutive to our current stockholders and debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. If we are able to access funds through collaborative or licensing arrangements, we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates that we would otherwise seek to develop or commercialize on our own, on terms that are not favorable to us.

We have filed a shelf registration statement on Form S-3 with the SEC, covering the sale from time to time of shares of our common stock and other securities, which may provide us the opportunity to raise funds when we consider it necessary or appropriate, at prices and on terms to be determined at the time of any such offering. However, pursuant to the instructions to Form S-3, we only have the ability to sell shares under the shelf registration statement, during any 12-month period, in an amount less than or equal to one-third of the aggregate market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates. Our ability to access capital when needed is not assured and, if not achieved on a timely basis, will materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our ability to raise additional capital could also be further impaired if we are unable to comply with the listing standards ofour common stock is delisted from The NASDAQ Capital Market and trades on the over-the-counter market.

We currently do not comply with the NASDAQ requirement to have a minimum $1.00 per share closing bid price. At our annual meeting held on June 1, 2016, our stockholders did not approve a proposal authorizing a reverse split of our common stock. This reverse split could have rectified our noncompliance with the NASDAQ bid-price requirement. We currently have a different reverse split proposal scheduled for stockholder vote on November 11, 2016. If this proposal is not approved and our common stock is delisted by NASDAQ, and accordingly no longer trades elsewhere.on a national stock exchange, both the price of our common stock and our ability to raise additional capital are likely to be significantly and negatively impacted. NASDAQ has provided us with a grace period through November 28, 2016 to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

There have been no changes to our critical accounting policies and significant judgments and estimates from our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, filed with the SEC on March 30, 2015.

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

There have been no changes to our market risks from our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, filed with the SEC on March 30, 2015.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

The Securities and Exchange CommissionSEC requires that as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, the Chief Executive Officer CEO,(CEO) and the Chief Financial Officer CFO,(CFO) evaluate the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and report on the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based upon that evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective, as of September 30, 20152016 to ensure that we record, process, summarize and report the information we must disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act, within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our CEO and CFO, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting, identified in connection with the evaluation of such control that occurred during the last fiscal quarter, which have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Important Considerations

The effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting is subject to various inherent limitations, including cost limitations, judgments used in decision making, assumptions about the likelihood of future events, the soundness of our systems, the possibility of human error, and the risk of fraud. Moreover, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions and the risk that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate over time. Because of these limitations, there can be no assurance that any system of disclosure controls and procedures or internal control over financial reporting will be successful in preventing all errors or fraud or in making all material information known in a timely manner to the appropriate levels of management.

PART II—OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

Not applicable.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

TheExcept as set forth below, there have been no other material changes to the risk factors as described in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, filed with the SEC on March 30, 2015, are all still relevant. We are also including the additional risk factor below.2015.

We maycurrently do not meet the continued listing standards of The NASDAQ Capital Market, which requiresrequire a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per share, and on June 1, 2016, our stockholders did not approve a reverse stock split which could have enabled us to regain compliance with these continued listing standards. Our failure to meet NASDAQ’s continued listing standards could result in the delisting of our delisting andcommon stock, negatively impact the price of our common stock and negatively impact our ability to access the capital markets.raise additional capital.

Our common stock is listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market. NASDAQ provides various continued listing requirements that a company must meet in order for its stock to continue trading on theThe NASDAQ Capital Market. Among these requirements is the requirement that the Company’s stock trades at a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per share. Our stock has recently and consistently traded below $1.00 per share, including closing bid prices below $1.00 per share. If our stock price closes withOn December 1, 2015, we received a bid price below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive trading days, we expect to receivedeficiency letter from The NASDAQ Stock Market which provided us a notice from NASDAQ providing us withgrace period of 180 calendar days, or until May 31, 2016, to regain compliance with the rule. After this 180 day period is up, if we still dominimum bid price requirement, which would require a closing bid price of at least $1.00 per share for a minimum of ten consecutive business days. We did not comply withmeet the minimum bid requirement prior to the expiration of the grace period on May 31, 2016.

At our annual stockholders’ meeting held on June 1, 2016, our stockholders failed to approve a proposal authorizing our Board of Directors to consummate a reverse stock split of our common stock in the range of 1:5 and 1:10. On June 1, 2016, we received notice that NASDAQ granted us an additional 180-day grace period (until November 28, 2016) to regain compliance with NASDAQ’s $1.00 per share minimum bid price requirement under Nasdaq Marketplace Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A). We may achieve compliance during this additional 180-day period if the closing bid price of our common stock is at least $1.00 per share for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days before November 28, 2016. We are currently seeking stockholder approval for a different reverse stock split proposal, which provides for a reverse split in the range of 1:2 to 1:4, with voting results scheduled for November 11, 2016. We can provide no assurance that our stockholders will approve this proposal. If we may be eligible for an additional 180 day periodfail to regain compliance. However,compliance on or prior to November 28, 2016, our stock will be subject to delisting by NASDAQ. Additionally, if we fail to comply with the minimum stock price of $1.00 per share or any other continued listing standards of NASDAQ, our common stock maywill also be delisted.subject to delisting. If that were to occur, our common stock would be subject to rules that impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell our securities. The additional burdens imposed upon broker-dealers by these requirements could discourage broker-dealers from effecting transactions in our common stock. This would significantly negatively affect the ability of investors to trade our securities and would significantly negatively affect the value and liquidity of our common stock. These factors could contribute to lower prices and larger spreads in the bid and ask prices for our common stock. Also, if we seek to implement a reverse stock split in order to remain listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market, the announcement and/or implementation of a reverse stock split could significantly negatively affect the price of our common stock.

Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

None.

Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities

None.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

None.

Item 5. Other Information

None.

Item 6. Exhibits

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

1617