QuickLinks -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 5,18, 2006

Registration No. 333-128827



SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549


AMENDMENT NO. 23 TO
FORM S-1
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933


ACORDA THERAPEUTICS, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Delaware 2836 13-3831168
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
 (Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
 (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

15 Skyline Drive
Hawthorne, New York 10532
(914) 347-4300
(Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number,
Including Area Code, of Registrant's Principal Executive Offices)

Ron Cohen
Chief Executive Officer
15 Skyline Drive
Hawthorne, New York 10532
(914) 347-4300
(Name, Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number,
Including Area Code, of Agent For Service)


Copy To:

Ellen B. Corenswet
Covington & Burling
1330 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019
(212) 841-1000
 Danielle Carbone
Shearman & Sterling LLP
599 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10022
(212) 848-4000

        Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public:    As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

        If the securities being registered on this form are being offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box. o

        If this form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

        If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

        If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

        If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434 under the Securities Act, please check the following box. o


        The registrant hereby amends this registration statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this registration statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, or until this registration statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.




The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and is not soliciting offers to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is not permitted.

SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED JANUARY 5,18, 2006

Prospectus

             Shares

LOGO

Common Stock


        Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. is offering            shares of common stock. This is our initial public offering, and no public market currently exists for our shares. We anticipate that the initial public offering price will be between $        and $        per share. After the offering, the market price for our shares may be outside this range.


        We will apply to list our common stock on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol "ACOR."


        Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. See "Risk Factors" beginning on page 9.


 
 Per Share
 Total

Offering price $  $ 

Discounts and commissions to underwriters $  $ 


Offering proceeds to Acorda Therapeutics, Inc., before expenses

 

$

 

 

$

 

        Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved these securities or determined if this prospectus is accurate or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

        We have granted the underwriters the right to purchase up to            additional shares of common stock to cover any over-allotments. The underwriters can exercise this right at any time within 30 days after the offering. The underwriters expect to deliver the shares on or about                       , 2006.

Banc of America Securities LLC


 Lazard Capital Markets 
       Piper Jaffray 
 SG Cowen & Co. 

                  , 2006


        You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized anyone to provide you with different information. We are not making offers to sell or seeking offers to buy these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. You should assume that the information contained in this prospectus is accurate as of the date on the front of this prospectus only. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed since that date.



TABLE OF CONTENTS

 
 Page
Summary 1
Risk Factors 9
Forward-Looking Statements 25
Use of Proceeds 26
Dividend Policy 26
Capitalization 27
Dilution 29
Selected Consolidated Financial Data 31
Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 34
Business 58
Management 92
Summary Compensation Table 9899
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions 104105
Principal Stockholders 107108
Description of Capital Stock 110111
Shares Eligible for Future Sale 114115
Certain United States Federal Income and Estate Tax Consequences to Non-U.S. Holders 116117
Underwriting 119120
Legal Matters 125126
Experts 125126
Where You Can Find Additional Information 125126

i



SUMMARY

        This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this prospectus. You should read the entire prospectus carefully before making an investment decision.


Overview

        We are a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the identification, development and commercialization of novel therapies that improve neurological function in people with multiple sclerosis, or MS, spinal cord injury, or SCI, multiple sclerosis, or MS, and other disorders of the central nervous system, or CNS. Our marketed product, Zanaflex Capsules, is FDA-approved for the management of spasticity. Our lead product candidate, Fampridine-SR, is in a Phase 3 clinical trial for the improvement of walking ability in people with MS. Our preclinical programs also target MS and SCI, as well as other CNS disorders, including stroke and traumatic brain injury.

        Approximately 650,000 people in the United States suffer from MS or SCI and the combined annual cost of treatment for these conditions exceeds $13 billion. It is estimated that a total of approximately 10 million people live with the long-term consequences of traumatic brain injury and stroke.

        Our goal is to continue to grow as a fully-integrated biopharmaceutical company by commercializing pharmaceutical products, developing our product candidates and advancing our preclinical programs for these large and underserved markets. We plan to accomplish this through our sales and marketing infrastructure, our extensive scientific and medical network, our partnerships and our clinical and management experience.


Our Product Pipeline

Zanaflex

        Our products, Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets, are FDA-approved for the management of spasticity, a symptom of conditions such as MS and SCI that is commonly characterized by stiffness and rigidity, restriction of movement and painful muscle spasms. Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets contain tizanidine hydrochloride, or tizanidine, one of the two leading treatments currently used for the management of spasticity. We acquired Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets from a wholly-owned subsidiary of Elan Corporation, plc, or Elan, in July 2004. This strategic acquisition provided us with the opportunity to build a commercial infrastructure, develop sales and marketing expertise and create a foundation for future product launches, in addition to generating product revenue.

        In April 2005, we launched Zanaflex Capsules, a new capsule formulation of tizanidine. This product is protected by an issued U.S. patent. Zanaflex tablets lost compound patent protection in 2002 and both products now compete with 11 generic versions of tizanidine tablets.

        We believe that Zanaflex Capsules offer important benefits over Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets. When taken with food, Zanaflex Capsules have a different blood absorption profile, referred to as pharmacokinetic profile, than Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets, generally resulting in a lower level and more gradual rise of peak levels of tizanidine in a patient's blood. As a result of this different pharmacokinetic profile, Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets are not therapeutically equivalent, or AB-rated, with Zanaflex Capsules. Therefore, under state pharmacy laws, prescriptions written for Zanaflex Capsules may not properly be filled by the pharmacist with Zanaflex tablets or generic tizanidine tablets. Zanaflex Capsules are also available in a higher dose, which gives patients and prescribers an additional choice in dosing and an opportunity to reduce the number of pills a person must take daily. In addition, people who have difficulty swallowing may find Zanaflex Capsules easier to take.



        To support our commercialization of Zanaflex Capsules, we have established a sales and marketing infrastructure consisting of our internal specialty sales force, a contract sales force and a pharmaceutical telesales group. Our internal specialty sales force currently consists of 14 sales professionals who call on neurologists and other prescribers specializing in treating patients with conditions that involve spasticity. Members of this sales force also call on managed care organizations, pharmacists and wholesale drug distribution customers. We plan to expand our specialty sales force to approximately 30 sales professionals in the first quarter of 2006. Our contract sales force is provided by Cardinal Health PTS, LLC, or Cardinal Health, and consists of approximately 160 sales representatives who market Zanaflex Capsules to primary care physicians.physicians, on a non-exclusive basis. We also have a contract with Access Worldwide Communications to provide a small, dedicated sales force of pharmaceutical telesales professionals to contact primary care physicians, specialty physicians and pharmacists. Our current sales and marketing infrastructure enables us to reach virtually all high-volume prescribers of Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine. We believe that these prescribers are also potential high-volume prescribers for our lead product candidate, Fampridine-SR, if approved.

Fampridine-SR

        Fampridine-SR is currently in a Phase 3 clinical trial for the improvement of walking ability in people with MS. The trial is being conducted pursuant to a Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA, with the FDA. The FDA has agreed that, if successful, this trial could qualify as one of the pivotal efficacy studies required for drug approval. Fampridine-SR is a small molecule drug contained in a sustained release oral tablet form. Laboratory studies have shown that fampridine, the active molecule in Fampridine-SR, improves impulse conduction in nerve fibers in which the insulating outer layer, called the myelin sheath, has been damaged. This damage may be caused by the body's own immune system, in the case of MS, or by physical trauma, in the case of SCI.

        More than 800 people have been treated with Fampridine-SR in over 25 clinical trials, including nine clinical trials in MS and 11 clinical trials in SCI. In six Phase 2 clinical trials, treatment with Fampridine-SR has been associated with a variety of neurological benefits in people with MS or SCI. In our most recently completed Phase 2 clinical trial, there was a trend toward improvement in the primary endpoint of walking speed and, when analyzed using the same methodology that the FDA has now agreed to in the SPA for our Phase 3 clinical trial, these results would have beenare statistically significant. We expect the recruitment period for the current Phase 3 clinical trial, which began in June 2005, to require approximately six to eight months.end in February 2006. The treatment period is 14 weeks and the subjects are involved in trial procedures for approximately five months. We expect to be able to evaluate data from this clinical trial in the third quarter of 2006.

        We believe Fampridine-SR is the first potential therapy in late-stage clinical development for MS that seeks to improve the function of damaged nerve fibers, rather than only treating the symptoms of MS or slowing the progression of disease. To our knowledge, there are no current drug therapies that improve walking ability in people with MS. We plan to commercialize Fampridine-SR, if approved, ourselves in the United States, and possibly Canada, and with partners in various markets throughout the rest of the world.


Preclinical programs

        We have three preclinical programs focused on novel approaches to repair damaged components of the CNS:

        We believe that all of our preclinical therapies have the potential to address conditions for which no effective treatment currently exists. In addition to applicability in MS, SCI and various other CNS disorders, we believe that our preclinical programs also may have applicability in such fields as orthopedics, cardiology, oncology and ophthalmology.


Our Strategy

        Our strategy is to continue to grow as a fully-integrated biopharmaceutical company focused on the identification, development and commercialization of a range of nervous system therapeutics. We are using our scientific and clinical expertise in MS and SCI as strategic points of access to additional CNS markets, including stroke and traumatic brain injury. Key aspects of our strategy are to:

        We have established an advisory team and network of well-recognized scientists, clinicians and opinion leaders in the fields of MS and SCI. Depending on their expertise, these advisors provide assistance in trial design, conduct clinical trials, keep us apprised of the latest scientific advances and help us identify and evaluate business development opportunities. In addition, we have recruited over 35 MS centers and 80 SCI rehabilitation centers in the United States and Canada to conduct our clinical trials. Our clinical management team has extensive experience in the areas of MS and SCI and works closely with this network.


Risks Associated with our Business

        Our business is subject to numerous risks, as more fully described in the section entitled "Risk Factors" immediately following this prospectus summary. We may be unable, for many reasons, including those that are beyond our control, to implement our current business strategy. Those reasons



could include failure to successfully promote Zanaflex Capsules and any other future marketed products; delays in obtaining, or a failure to obtain, regulatory approval for our product candidates; and failure to maintain and to protect our proprietary intellectual property assets, among others. The information about our preclinical and clinical trials may be useful to you in evaluating our company's current stage of development and our near-term and long-term prospects; however, you should note that of the large number of drugs in development only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA regulatory approval process and are commercialized.

        We have a limited operating history and, as of September 30, 2005, had an accumulated deficit of approximately $198.5 million. We expect to incur losses for at least the next several years. We had net losses of $26.0 million and $44.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and for the year ended December 31, 2004, respectively. We are unable to predict the extent of future losses or when we will become profitable, if at all. Even if we succeed in promoting Zanaflex Capsules and developing and commercializing one or more of our product candidates, we may never generate sufficient sales revenue to achieve and sustain profitability.


Corporate Information

        We were incorporated in 1995 as a Delaware corporation. Our principal executive offices are located at 15 Skyline Drive, Hawthorne, New York 10532. Our telephone number is (914) 347-4300. Our website iswww.acorda.com. The information on our website is not part of this prospectus.

        "Acorda Therapeutics" is a registered trademark that we own and "Zanaflex" is a registered trademark that we exclusively license. We have pending U.S. trademark applications for our logo and "Zanaflex Capsules." Other trademarks, trade names and service marks used in this prospectus are the property of their respective owners.



THE OFFERING

Common stock offered              shares

Common stock outstanding after this offering

 

            shares

Use of proceeds

 

We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering for sales and marketing activities, clinical and preclinical development programs and for general corporate purposes. See "Use of Proceeds."

Proposed Nasdaq National Market symbol

 

ACOR

Risk factors

 

See "Risk Factors" and the other information included in this prospectus for a discussion of factors you should carefully consider before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock.

        The number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after this offering is based on the number of shares outstanding as of September 30, 2005 and reflects or assumesexcludes the following:

        Unless we specifically state otherwise, all information in this prospectus, including the number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after this offering:

        In the table above, the number of shares of common stock outstanding after this offering excludes, as of September 30, 2005:



SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

        The following table presents a summary of our historical financial information. You should read this information in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes and the information under "Selected Consolidated Financial Data" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" included elsewhere in this prospectus. We changed our fiscal year end from June 30 to December 31, beginning with the six months ended December 31, 2003.

        Pro forma amounts in the following table reflect the conversion of our outstanding convertible and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock into 13,338,279 shares of common stock upon completionon the closing of this offering, assuming that shares of our preferred stock were outstanding for the entire periods presented.

 
  
  
  
  
  
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
 
 
  
  
  
 Six Months Ended December 31,

  
 
 
 Year Ended June 30,
 Year Ended December 31,

 
 
 2004
 2005
 
 
 2001
 2002
 2003
 2003
 2004
 (unaudited)
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 (in thousands, except per share data)

 
Statement of Operations Data:                      
Gross sales—Zanaflex $ $ $ $ $ $ $3,239 
 Less: discounts and allowances          (4,417) (144) (992)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net sales          (4,417) (144) 2,247 
Grant revenue  462  132  474  382  479  445  184 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total net revenue  462  132  474  382  (3,938) (301) 2,431 
 Less: cost of sales          (885) (363) (2,274)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gross profit  462  132  474  382  (4,823) (62) 157 

Operating expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Research and development  6,142  11,147  17,527  16,743  21,999  18,621  9,652 
 Research and development—related party  2,223  4,687  2,265  3,343       
 Sales and marketing          4,662  2,793  9,657 
 General and administrative  3,489  6,636  6,388  17,069  13,283  11,034  6,339 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Total operating expenses  11,854  22,470  26,180  37,155  39,944  32,448  25,648 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Operating loss  (11,392) (22,338) (25,706) (36,773) (44,767) (32,510) (25,491)

Other income (expense):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Interest and amortization of debt discount expense      (78) (38) (385) (297) (824)
 Interest and amortization of debt discount expense—related party  (443) (408) (369) (184)      
  Interest income  1,824  984  393  276  409  329  347 
  Other income      26  7  2  2  1 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Total other income (expense)  1,381  576  (28) 61  26  34  (476)
Minority interest—related party  699  580           
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle              3 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Net loss  (9,313) (21,181) (25,734) (36,712) (44,741) (32,476) (25,964)

Beneficial conversion feature, accretion of issuance costs, preferred dividends, and fair value of warrants issued to convertible preferred stockholders

 

 

(36

)

 

(55

)

 

(24,320

)

 

(11,985

)

 

(24,746

)

 

(18,496

)

 

(18,636

)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Net loss allocable to common stockholders $(9,349)$(21,236)$(50,054)$(48,697)$(69,487)$(50,972)$(44,600)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted $(50.81)$(111.90)$(261.38)$(252.87)$(351.76)$(259.22)$(221.17)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
  
  
  
  
  
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
 
 
  
  
  
 Six Months Ended December 31,

  
 
 
 Year Ended June 30,
 Year Ended December 31,

 
 
 2004
 2005
 
 
 2001
 2002
 2003
 2003
 2004
 (unaudited)
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted (unaudited)         $(9.63)  $(1.92)
          
   
 
Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding used in computing net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted 184 190 191 193  198 197  202 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding used in computing pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted (unaudited)          13,536    13,547 
          
   
 

        The following table sets forth our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments and capitalization as of September 30, 2005:



 As of September 30, 2005
 As of September 30, 2005
 

 Actual
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
As Adjusted
(unaudited)

 Actual
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
As Adjusted
(unaudited)

 

 (in thousands)

 (in thousands)

 
Balance Sheet Data:             
Cash and cash equivalents $3,581 $14,879   $3,581 $14,879   
Restricted cash 261 261   261 261   
Short-term investments 5,160 5,160   5,160 5,160   
Working capital (12,203) (10,506)  (12,203) (14,207)  
Capitalized transaction costs—PRF transaction  500   
Total assets 25,543 37,342   25,543 37,842   
Deferred product revenue—Zanaflex Capsules 4,960 4,960   4,960 4,960   
Deferred product revenue—Zanaflex tablets 10,686 10,686   10,686 10,686   
Current portion of notes payable 2,347 1,150   2,347 1,150   
Revenue interest liability—PRF transaction  11,299    14,600   
Put/call option liability—PRF transaction  400   
Long-term portion of notes payable 3,534 1,731   3,534 1,731   
Long-term convertible notes payable—principal amount plus accrued interest, less unamortized debt discount—related party 8,695 8,695   8,695 8,695   
Mandatorily redeemable preferred stock 85,000    85,000    
Total stockholders' (deficit) (101,669) (16,869)  (101,669) (16,869)  


RISK FACTORS

        An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should consider carefully the following risk factors and the other information contained in this prospectus before you decide to purchase our common stock. Additional risks that are not currently known or foreseeable to us may materialize at a future date. The trading price of our common stock could decline if any of these risks or uncertainties occur and you might lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Related To Our Business

We have a history of operating losses and we expect to continue to incur losses and may never be profitable.

        As of September 30, 2005, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $198.5 million. We had net losses of $26.0 million and $44.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, and the year ended December 31, 2004, respectively. We have had operating losses since inception as a result of our significant clinical development, research and development, general and administrative, sales and marketing and business development expenses. We expect to incur losses for at least the next several years as we expand our sales and marketing capabilities and continue our clinical trials and research and development activities.

        Our prospects for achieving profitability will depend primarily on how successful we are in executing our business plan to:

        If we are not successful in executing our business plan, we may never achieve or may not sustain profitability.

We will be substantially dependent on sales of one product, Zanaflex Capsules, to generate revenue for the foreseeable future.

        We currently derive substantially all of our revenue from the sale of Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets, which are our only FDA-approved products. Although we currently distribute Zanaflex tablets, our marketing efforts are focused on Zanaflex Capsules and we do not, and do not intend to, actively promote Zanaflex tablets. As a result, prescriptions for Zanaflex tablets have declined and we expect that they will continue to decline. Our goal is to convert sales of Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets to sales of Zanaflex Capsules. We believe that sales of Zanaflex Capsules will constitute a significant portion of our total revenue for the foreseeable future. If we are unable to convert tablet sales to capsule sales or are otherwise unable to increase our revenue from the sale of this product, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

If we are unable to successfully differentiate Zanaflex Capsules from both Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets we may not be able to increase sales of Zanaflex Capsules.

        There are currently 11 generic versions of tizanidine tablets on the market and they are significantly cheaper than either Zanaflex Capsules or Zanaflex tablets. In 2004, these generic versions of tizanidine tablets constituted 95% of tizanidine sales in the United States. Although Zanaflex Capsules have a different pharmacokinetic profile when taken with food and are available in a higher dose than Zanaflex tablets and their generic equivalents, we may be unsuccessful in convincing prescribers, patients and third-party payors that these differences justify the higher price of Zanaflex Capsules. Prescribers may prescribe generic tizanidine tablets instead of Zanaflex Capsules, and third-party payors may establish unfavorable reimbursement policies for Zanaflex Capsules or otherwise seek



to encourage patients and prescribers to use generic tizanidine tablets instead of Zanaflex Capsules. In



addition, although the FDA has determined that neither Zanaflex tablets nor generic tizanidine tablets are therapeutically equivalent, or "AB-rated," to Zanaflex Capsules, it is possible that pharmacists may improperly fill prescriptions with generic tizanidine tablets or may seek to influence patients or physicians to change prescriptions from Zanaflex Capsules to generic tizanidine tablets. If we are unable to successfully differentiate Zanaflex Capsules from Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets in the minds of prescribers, pharmacists, patients and third-party payors, our ability to generate meaningful revenue from this product will be adversely affected.

Our company has limited sales and marketing experience and we may not be successful in building an effective sales and marketing organization to market Zanaflex Capsules to specialty physicians.

        As a company, we have limited sales and marketing experience, having only launched Zanaflex Capsules in April 2005. In order to successfully commercialize Zanaflex Capsules or any other products that we may bring to market, we will need to have adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. OurAlthough we plan to expand our internal specialty sales force of 14 persons to approximately 30 persons in the first quarter of 2006, we may need to be significantly expandedfurther expand that sales force in the future. We may not be able to attract and train skilled sales and marketing personnel, in a timely manner or at all, or integrate and manage a growing sales and marketing organization.

Returns of Zanaflex tablets may adversely affect our results of operations.

        Prior to the launch of generic tizanidine tablets in June 2002, wholesalers established larger than normal inventories of Zanaflex tablets. These inventories had expiration dates that extended to June 2005. Our return policy is to accept returns for six months before and 12 months after the product's expiration date. According to our Zanaflex asset purchase agreement with Elan, we are responsible for all returns of Zanaflex tablets after January 17, 2005. Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan can be returned to us through June 2006. In the year ended December 31, 2004, we took a $4.1 million charge to establish a reserve for expected returns of Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan. This charge is an estimate. If returns for products not sold by us are higher than we have estimated, we will have to record additional charges, which will adversely affect our results of operations.

Our product candidates must undergo rigorous clinical testing, the results of which are uncertain and could substantially delay or prevent us from bringing them to market.

        Before we can obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, we must undertake extensive clinical testing in humans to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA and other regulatory agencies. Clinical trials of new product candidates sufficient to obtain regulatory marketing approval are expensive and take years to complete, and the outcome of such trials is uncertain.

        Clinical development of any product candidate that we determine to take into clinical trials may be curtailed, redirected, delayed or eliminated at any time for some or all of the following reasons:




        A delay in or termination of any of our clinical development programs could have an adverse effect on our business.

If our Phase 3 clinical trials of Fampridine-SR are unsuccessful, or if we are unable to obtain regulatory approval for this product candidate or any approval is unduly limited in scope, our business prospects will be adversely affected.

        In June 2005, we initiated a Phase 3 clinical trial for Fampridine-SR for the improvement of walking ability in patients with MS. In April 2004, we released results from a Phase 2 clinical trial designed to assess the relative safety and efficacy of varying doses of Fampridine-SR in MS. Our results did not reach statistical significance for the primary endpoint in this trial. Although we have designed the current Phase 3 clinical trial to address the difficulties we encountered in interpreting the patient data from the earlier trial, we cannot be sure that the results from our current clinical trial will be statistically significant.

        To achieve the primary endpoint in our current Phase 3 clinical trial for MS, we need to show statistical improvement in the walking speed of the patients in the trial and that this improvement is both sustained and clinically meaningful to these patients. If we fail to achieve the primary endpoint in this clinical trial or the results are ambiguous, we will have to determine whether to re-design our MS trial and protocols and continue with additional testing, or cease development activities in this area. Redesigning the program could be extremely costly and time-consuming. Even if we are able to achieve the primary endpoint, we will need positive results from at least one other clinical trial to support the filing of a new drug application, or NDA, with the FDA. We cannot predict how long the second trial, or any additional trial that might be required by the FDA, will take or what the cost will be.

        Our Phase 3 clinical trial for Fampridine-SR in MS is being conducted pursuant to a special protocol assessment, or SPA, with the FDA and the FDA has agreed that, if successful, this trial could qualify as one of the pivotal trials needed to support regulatory approval. This SPA may not be changed by either us or the FDA. However, if the FDA determines that a substantial scientific issue essential to determining the safety or efficacy of Fampridine-SR is identified after the trial began, the FDA may alter its conclusion on the adequacy of the protocol. In addition, even if the SPA remains in place and the trial meets its primary endpoint, the FDA could determine that the overall balance of risks and benefits for Fampridine-SR is not adequate to support approval, or only justifies approval for a narrow set of uses or approval with restricted distribution or other burdensome post-approval requirements and limitations. If the FDA denies approval of Fampridine-SR in MS, FDA approval is substantially delayed, approval is granted on a narrow basis or with restricted distribution or other burdensome post-approval requirements, or if the Fampridine-SR program is terminated, our business prospects will be adversely affected.

        In March 2004, we completed two Phase 3 clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI in which our results failed to reach their primary endpoints. We expect to resume development of Fampridine-SR for SCI after we have completed further development of the drug for MS. We cannot predict whether future clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI will achieve their primary endpoints, how long these clinical trials will take or how much they will cost.



Our other drug development programs are in early stages of development and may never be commercialized.

        All of our development programs other than Fampridine-SR are in the preclinical phase. Our future success depends, in part, on our ability to select promising product candidates, complete preclinical development of these product candidates and advance them to clinical trials. These product candidates will require significant development, preclinical studies and clinical trials, regulatory clearances and substantial additional investment before they can be commercialized.



        Our preclinical programs may not lead to commercially viable products for several reasons. For example, we may fail to identify promising product candidates, our product candidates may fail to be safe and effective in preclinical tests or clinical trials, or we may have inadequate financial or other resources to pursue discovery and development efforts for new product candidates. In addition, because we have limited resources, we are focusing on product candidates that we believe are the most promising. As a result, we may delay or forego pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates. From time to time, we may establish and announce certain development goals for our product candidates and programs; however, given the complex nature of the drug discovery and development process, it is difficult to predict accurately if and when we will achieve these goals. If we are unsuccessful in advancing our preclinical programs into clinical testing or in obtaining regulatory approval, our long-term business prospects will be harmed.

The pharmaceutical industry is subject to stringent regulation and failure to obtain regulatory approval will prevent commercialization of our product candidates.

        Our research, development, preclinical and clinical trial activities, as well as the manufacture and marketing of any products that we may successfully develop, are subject to an extensive regulatory approval process by the FDA and other regulatory agencies abroad. The process of obtaining required regulatory approvals for drugs is lengthy, expensive and uncertain, and any regulatory approvals may contain limitations on the indicated usage of a drug, distribution restrictions or may be conditioned on burdensome post-approval study or other requirements, including the requirement that we institute and follow a special risk management plan to monitor and manage potential safety issues, all of which may eliminate or reduce the drug's market potential. Post-market evaluation of a product could result in marketing restrictions or withdrawal from the market.

        The results of preclinical and Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical studies are not necessarily indicative of whether a product will demonstrate safety and efficacy in larger patient populations, as evaluated in Phase 3 clinical trials. Additional adverse events that could impact commercial success, or even continued regulatory approval, might emerge with more extensive post-approval patient use. Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage result in the submission of an NDA to the FDA and even fewer are approved for commercialization.

        In order to conduct clinical trials to obtain FDA approval to commercialize any product candidate, an IND application must first be submitted to the FDA and must become effective before clinical trials may begin. Subsequently, an NDA must be submitted to the FDA, including the results of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials demonstrating, among other things, that the product candidate is safe and effective for use in humans for each target indication. In addition, the manufacturing facilities used to produce the products must comply with current good manufacturing practices and must pass a pre-approval FDA inspection. Extensive submissions of preclinical and clinical trial data are required to demonstrate the safety, efficacy, potency and purity for each intended use. The FDA may refuse to accept our regulatory submissions for filing if they are incomplete.

        Clinical trials are subject to oversight by institutional review boards and the FDA to ensure compliance with the FDA's good clinical practice requirements, as well as other requirements for the protection of clinical trial participants. We depend, in part, on third-party laboratories and medical institutions to conduct preclinical studies and clinical trials for our products and other third-party organizations to perform data collection and analysis, all of which must maintain both good laboratory


and good clinical practices required by regulators. If any such standards are not complied with in our clinical trials, the resulting data from the clinical trial may not be usable or we, an institutional review board or the FDA may suspend or terminate such trial, which would severely delay our development and possibly end the development of such product candidate. We also depend upon third party manufacturers of our products to qualify for FDA approval and to comply with good manufacturing practices required by regulators. We cannot be certain that our present or future manufacturers and suppliers will comply with current good manufacturing practices. The failure to comply with good


manufacturing practices may result in the termination of clinical studies, restrictions in the sale of, or withdrawal of the products from the market. Compliance by third parties with these standards and practices is outside of our direct control.

        In addition, we are subject to regulation under other state and federal laws, including requirements regarding occupational safety, laboratory practices, environmental protection and hazardous substance control, and may be subject to other local, state, federal and foreign regulations. We cannot predict the impact of such regulations on us, although it could impose significant restrictions on our business and additional expenses to comply with these regulations.

Our products and product candidates may not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients and the medical community, thereby limiting our potential to generate revenue.

        Market acceptance of our products and product candidates will depend on the benefits of our products in terms of safety, efficacy, convenience, ease of administration and cost effectiveness and our ability to demonstrate these benefits to physicians and patients. We believe market acceptance also depends on the pricing of our products and the reimbursement policies of government and third-party payors, as well as on the effectiveness of our sales and marketing activities. Physicians may not prescribe our products, and patients may determine, for any reason, that our products are not useful to them. For example, physicians may not believe that the benefits of Zanaflex Capsules outweigh their higher cost in relation to Zanaflex tablets or generic tizanidine tablets. The failure of any of our products or product candidates, once approved, to achieve market acceptance would limit our ability to generate revenue and would adversely affect our results of operations.

Our potential products may not be commercially viable if we fail to obtain an adequate level of reimbursement for these products by Medicaid, Medicare or other third-party payors.

        Our commercial success will depend in part on third-party payors, such as government health administrative authorities, including Medicaid and Medicare, private health insurers and other such organizations, agreeing to reimburse patients for the cost of our products. Significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly-approved healthcare products. Our business would be materially adversely affected if the Medicaid program, Medicare program or other third-party payors were to deny reimbursement for our products or provide reimbursement only on unfavorable terms. Our business could also be adversely affected if the Medicaid program, Medicare program or other reimbursing bodies or payors limit the indications for which our products will be reimbursed to a smaller set of indications than we believe is appropriate.

        Third-party payors frequently require that drug companies negotiate agreements with them that provide discounts or rebates from list prices. At present we do not have any such agreements with private third-party payors and only a small number of such agreements with government payors. If sales of Zanaflex Capsules increase we may need to offer larger discounts or discounts to a greater number of third-party payors to maintain acceptable reimbursement levels. If we were required to negotiate such agreements, there is no guarantee that we would be able to negotiate them at price levels that are profitable to us, or at all. If we are unsuccessful in maintaining reimbursement for our products at acceptable levels, our business will be adversely affected. In addition, if our competitors reduce the prices of their products, or otherwise demonstrate that they are better or more cost effective than our products,



this may result in a greater level of reimbursement for their products relative to our products, which would reduce our sales and adversely affect our results of operations.

We may experience pressure to lower prices on our approved products due to new and/or proposed federal legislation.

        Federal legislation enacted in December 2003 added an outpatient prescription drug benefit to Medicare, effective January 2006. In the interim, Congress has established a discount drug card program for Medicare beneficiaries. Both benefits will be provided primarily through private entities,



which will attempt to negotiate price concessions from pharmaceutical manufacturers. These negotiations may increase pressure to lower prescription drug prices. While the new law specifically prohibits the U.S. government from interfering in price negotiations between manufacturers and Medicare drug plan sponsors, some members of Congress are pursuing legislation that would permit the U.S. government to use its enormous purchasing power to demand discounts from pharmaceutical companies, thereby creating de facto price controls on prescription drugs. In addition, the new law contains triggers for Congressional consideration of cost containment measures for Medicare in the event Medicare cost increases exceed a certain level. These cost containment measures could include limitations on prescription drug prices. This Medicare prescription drug coverage legislation, as well as additional healthcare legislation that may be enacted at a future date, could reduce our sales and adversely affect our results of operations.

If our competitors develop and market products that are more effective, safer or more convenient than our approved products, or obtain marketing approval before we obtain approval of future products, our commercial opportunity will be reduced or eliminated.

        Competition in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries is intense and is expected to increase. Composition of matter patents on tizanidine, the active ingredient in Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets, expired in 2002. There are currently 11 generic versions of tizanidine tablets on the market. To the extent that we are not able to differentiate Zanaflex Capsules from Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets and/or pharmacists improperly substitute generic tizanidine tablets when filling prescriptions for Zanaflex Capsules, we may be unable to convert a meaningful amount of sales of Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets to Zanaflex Capsules and our ability to generate revenue from this product will be adversely affected. Although no other FDA-approved capsule formulation of tizanidine exists, another company could develop a capsule or other formulation of tizanidine that competes with Zanaflex Capsules.

        Many biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, as well as academic laboratories, are involved in research and/or product development for various neurological diseases, including MS and SCI. We are aware of a company developing a sodium/potassium channel blocker and a second company developing an immediate release form of fampridine, both of which may compete with Fampridine-SR, if approved. In certain circumstances, pharmacists are not prohibited from formulating certain drug compounds to fill prescriptions on an individual patient basis. We are aware that at present compounded fampridine is used by some people with MS or SCI and it is possible that some people will want to continue to use compounded formulations even if Fampridine-SR is approved. Several companies are engaged in developing products that include novel immune system approaches and cell transplant approaches to remyelination for the treatment of people with MS. These programs are in early stages of development and may compete in the future with Fampridine-SR or our preclinical candidates.

        Our competitors may succeed in developing products that are more effective, safer or more convenient than our products or the ones we have under development or that render our approved or proposed products or technologies noncompetitive or obsolete. In addition, our competitors may achieve product commercialization before we do. If any of our competitors develops a product that is more effective, safer or more convenient for patients, or is able to obtain FDA approval for



commercialization before we do, we may not be able to achieve market acceptance for our products, which would adversely affect our ability to generate revenues and recover the substantial development costs we have incurred and will continue to incur.

        Our products may be subject to competition from lower-priced versions of such products and competing products imported into the United States from Canada, Mexico and other countries where there are government price controls or other market dynamics that make the products lower priced.



Our operations could be curtailed if we are unable to obtain any necessary additional financing on favorable terms or at all.

        On September 30, 2005, on a pro forma as-adjusted basis after giving effect to this offering and our entry into our revenue interest assignment arrangement with PRF, we would have had approximately $         million in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. Although we anticipate this will be sufficient to fund our operations for approximately the next 24 months, we have several product candidates in various stages of development, and all will require significant further investment to develop, test and obtain regulatory approval prior to commercialization. We will likely need to seek additional equity or debt financing or strategic collaborations to continue our product development activities, and could require substantial funding to commercialize any products that we successfully develop. We may also require additional financing to support and expand our commercialization of Zanaflex Capsules. We do not currently have any funding commitments or arrangements with third parties to provide funding. We may not be able to raise additional capital on favorable terms or at all.

        To the extent that we are able to raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities, the issuance of those securities would result in dilution to our stockholders. Holders of such new equity securities may also have rights, preference or privileges that are senior to yours. If additional capital is raised through the incurrence of indebtedness, we may become subject to various restrictions and covenants that could limit our ability to respond to market conditions, provide for unanticipated capital investments or take advantage of business opportunities. To the extent funding is raised through collaborations or intellectual property-based financings, we may be required to give up some or all of the rights and related intellectual property to one or more of our products, product candidates or preclinical programs. If we are unable to obtain sufficient financing on favorable terms when and if needed, we may be required to reduce, defer or discontinue one or more of our product development programs or devote fewer resources to marketing Zanaflex Capsules.

Under our financing arrangement with PRF, upon the occurrence of certain events, PRF may require us to repurchase the right to receive revenues that we assigned to it or may foreclose on certain assets that secure our obligations to PRF. Any exercise by PRF of its right to cause us to repurchase the assigned right or any foreclosure by PRF could adversely affect our results of operations and our financial condition.

        On December 23, 2005, we entered into a Revenue Interests Assignment Agreementrevenue interests assignment agreement with PRF pursuant to which we assigned to PRF the right to receive a portion of our net revenues from Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and any future Zanaflex products. To secure our obligations to PRF, we also granted PRF a security interest in substantially all of our assets related to Zanaflex.

        Under our arrangement with PRF, upon the occurrence of certain events, including if we experience a change of control, undergo certain bankruptcy events, transfer any of our interests in Zanaflex (other than pursuant to a license agreement, development, commercialization, co-promotion, collaboration, partnering or similar agreement), transfer all or substantially all of our assets, or breach certain of the covenants, representations or warranties under the Revenue Interests Assignment Agreement,revenue interests assignment agreement, PRF may (i) require us to repurchase the rights we assigned to it at the "put/call price" in effect on the date such right is exercised or (ii) foreclose on the Zanaflex assets that secure our obligations to PRF. Except in the case of certain bankruptcy events, if PRF exercises its right to cause us to repurchase the rights we assigned to it, PRF may not foreclose unless we fail to pay the put/call price as required. The put/call price on a given date is the greater of (i) 150% of all payments made by



PRF to us as of such date, less all payments received by PRF from us as of such date, and (ii) an amount that would generate an internal rate of return to PRF of 25% on all payments made by PRF to us as of such date, taking into account the amount and timing of all payments received by PRF from us as of such date.

        If PRF were to exercise its right to cause us to repurchase the right we assigned to it, we cannot assure you that we would have sufficient funds available to pay the put/call price in effect at that time. Even if we have sufficient funds available, we may have to use funds that we planned to use for other purposes and our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected. If PRF were to foreclose on the Zanaflex assets that secure our obligations to PRF, our results of operations and



financial condition could also be adversely affected. Because PRF's right to cause us to repurchase the rights we assigned to it is triggered by, among other things, a change in control, transfer of any of our interests in Zanaflex (other than pursuant to a license agreement, development, commercialization, co-promotion, collaboration, partnering or similar agreement) or transfer of all or substantially all of our assets, the existence of that right could discourage us or a potential acquirer from entering into a business transaction that would result in the occurrence of any of those events.

The loss of our key management and scientific personnel may hinder our ability to execute our business plan.

        Our success depends on the continuing contributions of our management team and scientific personnel, and maintaining relationships with our scientific and medical network and the network of centers in the United States and Canada that conducts our clinical trials. We are highly dependent on the services of Dr. Ron Cohen, our President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as the other principal members of our management and scientific staff. Our success depends in large part upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified personnel. We face intense competition in our hiring efforts with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as universities and nonprofit research organizations, and we may have to pay higher salaries to attract and retain qualified personnel. With the exception of Dr. Ron Cohen, we do not maintain "key man" life insurance policies on the lives of our officers, directors or employees. The loss of one or more of our key employees, or our inability to attract additional qualified personnel, could substantially impair our ability to implement our business plan.

We face an inherent risk of liability in the event that the use or misuse of our products results in personal injury or death.

        If the use or misuse of Zanaflex Capsules or any other FDA-approved products we may sell in the future harms people, we may be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, third-party payors or others. The use of our product candidates in clinical trials could also expose us to product liability claims. We currently maintain a product liability insurance policy that includes coverage of our clinical trials. This insurance policy has a $10 million per claim limit and the aggregate amount of claims under the policy is also capped at $10 million. We cannot predict all of the possible harms or side effects that may result from the use of our products or the testing of product candidates and, therefore, the amount of insurance coverage we currently have may not be adequate to cover all liabilities or defense costs we might incur. A product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could give rise to a substantial liability that could exceed our resources. Even if claims are not successful, the costs of defending such claims and potential adverse publicity could be harmful to our business.

We are subject to various federal and state laws regulating the marketing of Zanaflex Capsules and, if we do not comply with these regulations, we could face substantial penalties.

        Our sales, promotion and other activities related to Zanaflex Capsules, or any of our other products under development following their regulatory approval, are subject to regulatory and law enforcement authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Federal Trade Commission, the



Department of Justice, and state and local governments. We are subject to various federal and state laws pertaining to health care "fraud and abuse," including both federal and state anti-kickback laws. Anti-kickback laws make it illegal for a prescription drug manufacturer to solicit, offer, receive or pay any remuneration as an inducement for the referral of business, including the use, recommendation, purchase or prescription of a particular drug. The federal government has published regulations that identify "safe harbors" or exemptions for certain payment arrangements that do not violate the anti-kickback statutes. Although we seek to comply with these statutes, it is possible that our practices, or those of our contract sales force, might be challenged under anti-kickback or similar laws. Violations of fraud and abuse laws may be punishable by civil or criminal sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, and future exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs.



We may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with post-approval legal and regulatory requirements and our products could be subject to restrictions or withdrawal from the market.

        Any product for which we currently have or may obtain marketing approval, along with the associated manufacturing processes, any post-approval clinical data that we might be required to collect and the advertising and promotional activities for the product, are subject to continual recordkeeping and reporting requirements, review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory bodies. Regulatory approval of a product may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to other restrictive conditions of approval that limit our ability to promote, sell or distribute a product. Furthermore, any approval may contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product.

        We have an outstanding commitment with the FDA, inherited from Elan, to evaluate Zanaflex Capsules for pediatric use by December 2005February 2007, in accordance with the requirements of the Pediatric Research Equity Act. We intendAct, or PREA. The NDA for Zanaflex Capsules was approved with a plan to discuss this matter withaddress the FDA and seek a deferral or waiverrequirements of the requirementPREA through a pediatric pharmacokinetic study. We have submitted a proposed design for this pharmacokinetic study to conduct pediatric studies. Without a waiver,the FDA. Depending on the FDA's response to our submission or the outcome of this study, we willmay be required to conduct a pediatric study of Zanaflex Capsulesadditional studies. These studies could be more extensive and incurmore costly than the related costs of this clinical trial.currently-planned study.

        Our advertising and promotion are subject to stringent FDA rules and oversight. In particular, the claims in our promotional materials and activities must be consistent with the FDA approvals for our products, and must be appropriately substantiated and fairly balanced with information on the safety risks and limitations of the products. Any free samples we distribute to physicians must be carefully monitored and controlled, and must otherwise comply with the requirements of the Prescription Drug Marketing Act, as amended, and FDA regulations. We must continually review adverse event information that we receive concerning our drugs and make expedited and periodic adverse event reports to the FDA and other regulatory authorities.

        In addition, the research, manufacturing, distribution, sale and promotion of drug and biological products are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Justice and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments. For example, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs must comply with the anti-kickback and fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, as amended, the False Claims Act, as amended, the privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and similar state laws. Pricing and rebate programs must comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended, and the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, as amended. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. All of these activities are also potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

        We may be slow to adapt, or we may not be able to adapt, to changes in existing regulatory requirements or adoption of new legal or regulatory requirements or policies. Later discovery of



previously unknown problems with our products, manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in:



        In addition, the FDA or another regulatory agency may conduct periodic unannounced inspections. If they determine that we are not in compliance with applicable requirements, they may issue a notice of inspectional observations. If the observations are significant, we may have to devote significant resources to respond and undertake appropriate corrective and preventive actions, which could adversely affect our business prospects. For example, the FDA recently completed an inspection relating to our adverse event and product complaint handling and reporting for Zanaflex. The FDA has informed us that there are several observations that they will be including in a Form 483, Inspectional Observations. We have completed or expect to complete shortly all necessary corrective actions. The cost of the corrective actions is not expected to be material.

State pharmaceutical marketing compliance and reporting requirements may expose us to regulatory and legal action by state governments or other government authorities.

        In recent years, several states, including California, Vermont, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico and West Virginia, have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical companies to establish marketing compliance programs and file periodic reports with the state on sales, marketing, pricing and other activities. For example, California has enacted a statute requiring pharmaceutical companies to adopt a comprehensive compliance program that is in accordance with the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human ServicesCompliance Program Guidance for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers. This compliance program must include policies for compliance with the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of AmericaCode on Interactions with Healthcare Professionals, as well as a specific annual dollar limit on gifts or other items given to individual healthcare professionals in California. The law requires posting policies on a company's public web site along with an annual declaration of compliance.

        Vermont, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, and West Virginia have also enacted statutes of varying scope that impose reporting and disclosure requirements upon pharmaceutical companies pertaining to drug pricing and payments and costs associated with pharmaceutical marketing, advertising and promotional activities, as well as restrictions upon the types of gifts that may be provided to healthcare practitioners. Similar legislation is being considered in other states. Many of these requirements are new and uncertain and the penalties for failure to comply with these requirements are unclear. We are not aware of any companies against which fines or penalties have been assessed under these state reporting and disclosure laws to date. We are currently in the process of developing a formal compliance infrastructure and standard operating procedures to comply with such laws. Unless we are in full compliance with these laws, we could face enforcement action and fines and other penalties, and could receive adverse publicity.

If we seek to market our products in foreign jurisdictions, we will need to obtain regulatory approval in these jurisdictions.

        In order to market our products in the European Union and many other foreign jurisdictions, we must obtain separate regulatory approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional clinical testing. The time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. Should we decide to market our products abroad, we may fail to obtain foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. We may not be able to file for, and may not receive, necessary regulatory approvals to commercialize our products in any foreign market, which could adversely affect our business prospects.


If we use biological and hazardous materials in a manner that causes injury, we may be liable for damages.

        Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of potentially harmful biological materials, hazardous materials and chemicals that are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations governing their use, storage, handling and disposal. These materials include ketamine, buprinex,buprenophine, sodium peantabarbitol,pentobarbital, ether, acetonitrile, hexanes, chloroform, xylene, dehydrated alcohol, xylene petroleum, ether methanol, ethyl alcohol, acetonitrile UV, hexanes, chloroform, alcohol-propyl, alcohol isopropylisopropanol and ether formaldehyde solution 37%.formaldehyde. We cannot completely eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from the use, storage, handling or disposal of these materials. If we fail to comply with environmental regulations, we could be subject to criminal sanctions and/or substantial liability for any damages that result, and any substantial liability could exceed our resources. We currently maintain a general liability insurance policy that has a $2 million per claim limit and also caps aggregate claims at $2 million. In addition, we have an umbrella insurance policy that covers up to $9 million of liability in excess of the general liability policy's $2 million limit. This amount of insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover all liabilities or defense costs we might incur. In addition, the cost of compliance with environmental and health and safety regulations may be substantial.

Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties

We currently have no manufacturing capabilities and are substantially dependent upon Elan, Novartis and other third party suppliers to manufacture Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and Fampridine-SR.

        We do not own or operate, and currently do not plan to own or operate, manufacturing facilities for production of Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets or Fampridine-SR. We rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties for the production of our products and clinical trial materials.

        We rely on a single manufacturer, Elan, for the supply of Zanaflex Capsules. Zanaflex Capsules are manufactured using Elan's proprietary SODAS (spheroidal oral drug absorption system) multiparticulate drug delivery technology. Elan is obligated, in the event of a failure to supply Zanaflex Capsules, to use commercially reasonable efforts to assist us in either producing Zanaflex Capsules ourselves or in transferring production of Zanaflex Capsules to a third-party manufacturer, provided that such third-party manufacturer is not a technological competitor of Elan. In the event production is transferred to a third party, the FDA may require us to demonstrate through bioequivalence studies and laboratory testing that the product made by the new supplier is equivalent to the current Zanaflex Capsules before we could distribute products from that supplier. The process of transferring the technology and qualifying the new supplier could take a year or more.

        Under our supply agreement with Elan, we provide Elan with monthly written 18-month forecasts and with annual written two-year forecasts of our supply requirements for Zanaflex Capsules. In each of the five months following the submission of our written 18-month forecast we are obligated to purchase the quantity specified in the forecast, even if our actual requirements are greater or less. Elan is not obligated to supply us with quantities in excess of our forecasted amounts, although it has agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to do so. Because we have a limited history of selling Zanaflex Capsules, our forecasts of our supply requirements may be inaccurate. As a result, we may have an excess or insufficient supply of Zanaflex Capsules.

        The Elan facility located in Gainesville, Georgia, which is responsible for bottling Zanaflex Capsules, has been operating under a court-ordered consent decree and injunction since 2001, which were imposed following adverse FDA inspections and FDA allegations that the facility was failing to comply with current good manufacturing requirements. These prior issues were not related to the manufacture of our products. If, however, Elan fails to comply with the requirements of the consent decree and injunction, it could be held in contempt and the facility could be shut down and the manufacturing of our products halted or interrupted.

        We currently rely on Novartis for our supply of Zanaflex tablets and tizanidine, the active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, in both Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets. Under a supply



agreement we assumed from Elan, Novartis is responsible for manufacturing Zanaflex tablets and



tizanidine for us through February 2007. This includes the tizanidine that Elan uses to manufacture Zanaflex Capsules for us. Novartis currently produces tizanidine, but has arranged with another party to formulate Zanaflex tablets. We have arranged for another company, Sharp Corporation, ("Sharp"), to package and bottle Zanaflex tablets. Novartis has informed us that it intends to discontinue production of tizanidine by the end of 2005.the first quarter of 2006. It is our understanding that Novartis is currently in the process of qualifying an alternativetransferring the methods of manufacturing tizanidine manufacturer.to Rohner, a manufacturer in Pratteln, Switzerland. We have established relationshipsalso identified an alternate source for tizanidine in collaboration with the companies that currently formulate, bottle and package the tablets, however, weElan but do not have a relationshipan agreement with anthat alternative manufacturer of tizanidine.source or any other alternate manufacturer. By the expiration of our contract with Novartis in 2007, we will need to have established a direct relationship with an alternative supplier of tizanidine.tizanidine for Zanaflex tablets if we want them to continue to be manufactured.

        We also rely exclusively on Elan to supply us with our requirements for Fampridine-SR. Elan relies on a third-party manufacturer to supply fampridine, the API in Fampridine-SR. Under our supply agreement with Elan, we are obligated to purchase at least 75% of our yearly supply of Fampridine-SR from Elan, and we are required to make compensatory payments if we do not purchase 100% of our requirements from Elan, subject to certain exceptions. We and Elan have agreed that we may purchase up to 25% of our annual requirements from Patheon, Inc., a mutually agreed-upon and qualified second manufacturing source, without compensatory payment.

        Our dependence on others to manufacture our marketed products and clinical trial materials may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our products on a timely and competitive basis.

If third-party contract research organizations do not perform in an acceptable and timely manner, our preclinical testing or clinical trials could be delayed or unsuccessful.

        We do not have the ability to conduct all aspects of our preclinical testing or clinical trials ourselves. We rely and will continue to rely on clinical investigators, third-party contract research organizations and consultants to perform some or all of the functions associated with preclinical testing or clinical trials. The failure of any of these vendors to perform in an acceptable and timely manner in the future, including in accordance with any applicable regulatory requirements, such as good clinical and laboratory practices, or preclinical testing or clinical trial protocols, could cause a delay or otherwise adversely affect on our preclinical testing or clinical trials and ultimately on the timely advancement of our development programs.

We rely on a third party to provide the sales representatives to market Zanaflex Capsules to primary care physicians.

        We recently entered into a contract with Cardinal Health pursuant to which it provides us with approximately 160 sales representatives who market Zanaflex Capsules to primary care physicians. These sales representatives are not our employees and we do not have control over their performance or compliance with applicable laws. Their failure to increase prescriptions for Zanaflex Capsules from the targeted primary care physicians would negatively impact our sales growth, and their failure to comply with applicable laws could subject us to liability.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we cannot protect our intellectual property, our ability to develop and commercialize our products will be severely limited.

        Our success will depend in part on our and our licensors' ability to obtain, maintain and enforce patent protection for the technologies, compounds and products, if any, resulting from our licenses and development programs. Without protection for the intellectual property we use, other companies could offer substantially identical products for sale without incurring the sizable discovery, development and



licensing costs that we have incurred. Our ability to recover these expenditures and realize profits upon the sale of products could be diminished.



        We have in-licensed or are the assignee of more than 25 U.S. patents, more than 60 foreign patents and over 65 patent applications pending in the United States or abroad for our own technologies and for technologies from our in-licensed programs. The process of obtaining patents can be time consuming and expensive with no certainty of success. Even if we spend the necessary time and money, a patent may not issue or it may not have sufficient scope or strength to protect the technology it was intended to protect or to provide us with any commercial advantage. We may never be certain that we were the first to develop the technology or that we were the first to file a patent application for the particular technology because U.S. patent applications are confidential until they are published, and publications in the scientific or patent literature lag behind actual discoveries. The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights will remain uncertain if our pending patent applications are not approved for any reason or if we are unable to develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable. Furthermore, third parties may independently develop similar or alternative technologies, duplicate some or all of our technologies, design around our patented technologies or challenge our issued patents or the patents of our licensors.

        We may initiate actions to protect our intellectual property and in any litigation in which our patents or our licensors' patents are asserted, a court may determine that the patents are invalid or unenforceable. Even if the validity or enforceability of these patents is upheld by a court, a court may not prevent alleged infringement on the grounds that such activity is not covered by the patent claims. In addition, effective intellectual property enforcement may be unavailable or limited in some foreign countries. Any litigation, whether to enforce our rights to use our or our licensors' patents or to defend against allegations that we infringe third party rights, would be costly, time consuming, and may distract management from other important tasks.

        As is commonplace in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry, we employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. To the extent our employees are involved in research areas that are similar to those areas in which they were involved at their former employers, we may be subject to claims that such employees and/or we have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Litigation may be necessary to defend against such claims, which could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and which could have an adverse effect on us, even if we are successful in defending such claims.

        We also rely in our business on trade secrets, know-how and other proprietary information. We seek to protect this information, in part, through the use of confidentiality agreements with employees, consultants, advisors and others. Nonetheless, those agreements may not provide adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information and prevent their unauthorized use or disclosure. To the extent that consultants, key employees or other third parties apply technological information independently developed by them or by others to our proposed products, disputes may arise as to the proprietary rights to such information which may not be resolved in our favor. The risk that other parties may breach confidentiality agreements or that our trade secrets become known or independently discovered by competitors, could adversely affect us by enabling our competitors, who may have greater experience and financial resources, to copy or use our trade secrets and other proprietary information in the advancement of their products, methods or technologies. Policing unauthorized use of our or our licensors' intellectual property is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and we may be unable to determine the extent of any unauthorized use. Adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure.



If third parties successfully claim that we infringed their patents or proprietary rights, our ability to continue to develop and successfully commercialize our product candidates could be delayed.

        Third parties may claim that we or our licensors or suppliers are infringing their patents or are misappropriating their proprietary information. In the event of a successful claim against us or our



licensors or suppliers for infringement of the patents or proprietary rights of others relating to any of our marketed products or product candidates, we may be required to:

        In addition, from time to time, we become aware of third parties who have, or claim to have, intellectual property rights covering matters such as methods for doing business, conducting research, diagnosing diseases or prescribing medications that are alleged to be broadly applicable across sectors of the industry, and we may receive assertions that these rights apply to us. The existence of such intellectual property rights could present a risk to our business.

        A license required under any patents or proprietary rights held by a third party may not be available to us, or may not be available on acceptable terms. If we or our licensors or suppliers are sued for infringement we could encounter substantial delays in, or be prohibited from developing, manufacturing and commercializing our product candidates and advancing our preclinical programs.

We are dependent on our license agreements and if we fail to meet our obligations under these license agreements, or our agreements are terminated for any reason, we may lose our rights to our in-licensed patents and technologies.

        We are dependent on licenses for intellectual property related to Zanaflex, Fampridine-SR and all of our preclinical programs. Our failure to meet any of our obligations under these license agreements could result in the loss of our rights to this intellectual property. If we lose our rights under any of these license agreements, we may be unable to commercialize a product that uses licensed intellectual property.

        We could lose our rights to Fampridine-SR under our license agreement with Elan in countries in which we have a license, including the United States, if we fail to file regulatory approvals within a commercially reasonable time after completion and receipt of positive data from all preclinical and clinical studies required for the related NDA, or any NDA-equivalent. We could also lose our rights under our license agreement with Elan if we fail to launch a product in such countries, within 180 days of NDA or equivalent approval. Elan could also terminate our license agreement if we fail to make payments due under the license agreement. If we lose our rights to Fampridine-SR our prospects for generating revenue and recovering our substantial investment in the development of this product would be materially harmed.

Risks Relating To The Offering

There is no existing market for our common stock. An active trading market may not develop and you may not be able to resell your shares at or above the initial offering price.

        Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our common stock. We cannot predict the extent to which trading will lead to the development of an active and liquid trading market in our common stock. The initial public offering price of our common stock was determined by negotiations between the representatives of the underwriters and us and may not be indicative of future market



prices. The market price for our common stock may decline below the initial offering price. Our stock price could fluctuate significantly due to a number of factors, including:


        Many of these factors are beyond our control. In addition, the stock markets in general, and the Nasdaq National Market and the market for biopharmaceutical companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations recently. These fluctuations often have been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. These broad market and industry factors may adversely affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.

As a new investor, you will experience immediate and substantial dilution in the net tangible book value of your investment and may experience further dilution in the future.

        The initial public offering price for this offering is substantially higher than the pro forma net tangible book value per share of our outstanding common stock. Investors purchasing shares of our common stock in this offering will pay more for their shares than the amount paid by existing stockholders who acquired shares prior to this offering. Accordingly, if you purchase common stock in this offering, you will incur immediate dilution in pro forma net tangible book value of approximately $        per share. If the holders of outstanding options or warrants exercise these options or warrants, you will incur further dilution. Investors purchasing shares of our common stock in this offering will contribute approximately        % of the total amount we have raised since our inception, but will own only approximately        % of our total common stock immediately following the completion of this offering.

Future sales of our common stock could cause our stock price to decline.

        Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market after this offering, or the possibility of those sales or other distributions, could put downward pressure on the market price of our common stock. After the consummation of this offering, our current stockholders will be subject to a 180-day lock up on the sale of their shares. After the lock-up expires, based on the number of shares outstanding as of December 31, 2005, 19,698,104 shares of common stock will be eligible for sale subject to Rule 144, Rule 144(k) or Rule 701. The remaining 913,155 shares held by existing stockholders will be eligible for sale from time to time in the future under Rule 144, Rule 144(k) or Rule 701 and holders of 13,338,279 shares of our common stock will have rights to cause us to file a registration statement on their behalf and to include their shares in registration statements that we may file on our behalf or on behalf of other stockholders. By exercising their registration rights and selling a large number of shares, these holders could cause the price of our common stock to decline.



If our officers, directors and largest stockholders choose to act together, they may be able to control the outcome of a stockholder vote.

        After this offering, our officers, directors and holders of 5% or more of our outstanding common stock will beneficially own approximately        % of our common stock. Moreover, a majority of our directors are principals or representatives of entities that own substantial amounts of our common stock. As a result, these stockholders, acting together, will be able to significantly influence all matters requiring approval by our stockholders, including the election of directors and the approval or mergers or other business combination transactions. The interests of this group of stockholders may not always



coincide with the interests of other stockholders, and they may act in a manner that advances their best interests and not necessarily those of other stockholders.

Certain provisions of Delaware law, our certificate of incorporation and our by-laws may delay or prevent an acquisition of us that stockholders may consider favorable or may prevent efforts by our stockholders to change our directors or our management, which could decrease the value of your shares.

        Following this offering, our certificate of incorporation and by-laws will contain provisions that could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, and may have the effect of preventing or hindering any attempt by our stockholders to replace our current directors or officers. These provisions include:

        As a Delaware corporation, we are also subject to certain anti-takeover provisions of Delaware law. Under Delaware law, a corporation may not engage in a business combination with any holder of 15% or more of its capital stock unless the holders has held the stock for three years or, among other things, the board of directors has approved the transaction. Our board of directors could rely on Delaware law to prevent or delay an acquisition of us, which could have the effect of reducing your ability to receive a premium on your common stock.

Because we do not intend to pay dividends, you will benefit from an investment in our common stock only if it appreciates in value.

        We have not paid cash dividends on any of our classes of capital stock to date, and we currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, we do not expect to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The success of your investment in our common stock will depend entirely upon any future appreciation. There is no guarantee that our common stock will appreciate in value after the offering or even maintain the price at which you purchased your shares.



FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

        This prospectus, including the sections entitled "Summary," "Risk Factors," "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations," and "Business," contains forward-looking statements. These statements relate to future events or to our future financial performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the use of words such as "may," "could," "expect," "intend," "plan," "seek," "anticipate," "believe," "estimate," "predict," "potential," "continue," or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, since they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond our control and which could materially affect actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations, which we describe in more detail elsewhere in this prospectus under the heading "Risk Factors," include, but are not limited to:

        If one or more of these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if our underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may vary significantly from what we projected. Any forward-looking statement you read in this prospectus reflects our current views with respect to future events and is subject to these and other risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to our operations, results of operations, growth strategy and liquidity. We assume no obligation to publicly update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, or to update the reasons actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future.

        The safe harbor for forward-looking statements contained in the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 protects companies from liability for their forward looking statements if they comply with the requirements of the Act. The Act does not provide this protection for initial public offerings.



USE OF PROCEEDS

        We estimate that we will receive approximately $         million in net proceeds from the sale of our common stock in this offering, or approximately $         million if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full, based on an assumed initial public offering price of $        per share (the midpoint of the estimated price range shown on the cover of this prospectus) after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us.

        We intend to use the proceeds of this offering as follows:

        Under our revenue interest assignment arrangement with PRF, if this offering results in our having a total market capitalization in excess of $150.0 million, we will have the option, for 180 days, to repurchase PRF's rights at the "put/call price" in effect on the date such right is exercised. The put/call price on a given date is the greater of (i) 150% of the payments made by PRF to us as of such date, less all payments received by PRF from us as of such date, and (ii) an amount that would generate an internal rate of return to PRF of 25% of all payments made by PRF to us as of such date, taking into account the amount and timing of all payments received by PRF from us as of such date. We do not currently intend to exercise this option if it becomes exercisable, but we may reevaluate whether we would exercise the option during the 180-day period. If we do exercise any such option, we would use a portion of the proceeds from this offering to make the repayment. Unless earlier terminated, the revenue interest assignment arrangement will expire on December 31, 2015. We entered into our revenue interest assignment arrangement with PRF in order to provide additional immediate funding to support the commercialization of Zanaflex Capsules. All funds from the PRF transaction must be used for the commercialization and other activities and obligations related specifically to our Zanaflex operations. We currently intend to use $3 million of the PRF proceeds to pay a Zanaflex Capsules sales-based milestone due to Elan on March 31, 2006.

        We expect that the proceeds of this offering will allow us to complete our current Fampridine-SR Phase 3 clinical trial. The amount and timing of our actual expenditures on sales and marketing and our research and development programs will depend on numerous factors, including the progress of our research and development activities, the progress of our clinical trials and regulatory approval process, the number and breadth of our product development programs, our success in marketing Zanaflex Capsules, and any in-licensing and acquisition activities. Our research programs are in an early stage of development and it is difficult to predict what advances, if any, we will make in our research activities using the proceeds of this offering. Accordingly, we will retain broad discretion in the allocation and use of the proceeds of this offering. Currently we have no specific plans or commitments related to any acquisitions or licenses.

        Pending application of the net proceeds, we intend to invest them in short-term, investment-grade, interest-bearing instruments.


DIVIDEND POLICY

        We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to finance the further development and expansion of our business and do not intend to pay cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any future determination to pay dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, restrictions contained in current or future financing instruments and other factors our board of directors deems relevant.



CAPITALIZATION

        The following table sets forth our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments and capitalization as of September 30, 2005:




 As of September 30, 2005

 As of September 30, 2005


 Actual
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
As Adjusted
(unaudited)


 Actual
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
(unaudited)

 Pro Forma
As Adjusted
(unaudited)



 (in thousands)


 (in thousands)

Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investmentsCash, cash equivalents and short-term investments $8,741 $20,039 $ Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments $8,741 $20,039 $ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Current portion of notes payableCurrent portion of notes payable 2,347 1,150  
Revenue interest liability—PRF transactionRevenue interest liability—PRF transaction  14,600  
Put/call option liability—PRF transactionPut/call option liability—PRF transaction  400  
Long-term portion of notes payableLong-term portion of notes payable 3,534 1,731  Long-term portion of notes payable 3,534 1,731  
 
 
 
Long-term convertible notes payable—principal amount plus accrued interest, less unamortized debt discount—Related partyLong-term convertible notes payable—principal amount plus accrued interest, less unamortized debt discount—Related party 8,695 8,695  Long-term convertible notes payable—principal amount plus accrued interest, less unamortized debt discount—Related party 8,695 8,695  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mandatorily Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value: 7,472,612 shares of Series E convertible preferred stock authorized, issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 10,204,047 shares of Series I convertible preferred stock authorized, issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 112,790,246 shares of Series J convertible preferred stock authorized, 112,790,233 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 1,533,330 shares of Series K convertible preferred stock authorized, 1,533,327 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 0 shares issued and outstanding on a pro forma and pro forma as adjusted basis 85,000   
Mandatorily Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value: 7,472,612 shares of Series E convertible preferred stock authorized, issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 10,204,047 shares of Series I convertible preferred stock authorized, issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 112,790,246 shares of Series J convertible preferred stock authorized, 112,790,233 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 1,573,330 shares of Series K convertible preferred stock authorized, 1,533,327 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 0 shares issued and outstanding on a pro forma and pro forma as adjusted basisMandatorily Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value: 7,472,612 shares of Series E convertible preferred stock authorized, issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 10,204,047 shares of Series I convertible preferred stock authorized, issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 112,790,246 shares of Series J convertible preferred stock authorized, 112,790,233 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 1,573,330 shares of Series K convertible preferred stock authorized, 1,533,327 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005; 0 shares issued and outstanding on a pro forma and pro forma as adjusted basis 85,000   
 
 
 
 
 
 
             


Stockholders' equity (deficit):Stockholders' equity (deficit):      Stockholders' equity (deficit):      
Non-redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value: 1,306,068 shares of Series A convertible preferred stock; 900,000 shares of Series B convertible preferred stock; 333,333 shares of Series C convertible preferred stock; 0 shares of Series D preferred stock; 2,300,000 shares of Series F convertible preferred stock; 0 shares of Series G preferred stock; 1,575,229 shares of Series H convertible preferred stock; 0 shares issued and outstanding on a pro forma and pro forma as adjusted basis 6   Non-redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value: 1,306,068 shares of Series A convertible preferred stock; 900,000 shares of Series B convertible preferred stock; 333,333 shares of Series C convertible preferred stock; 0 shares of Series D preferred stock; 2,300,000 shares of Series F convertible preferred stock; 0 shares of Series G preferred stock; 1,575,229 shares of Series H convertible preferred stock; 0 shares issued and outstanding on a pro forma and pro forma as adjusted basis 6   
Common stock, $.001 par value; 260,000,000 shares authorized at September 30, 2005 and 80,000,000 shares authorized on a pro forma and on a pro forma as adjusted basis; 208,766 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005, issued and outstanding on a pro forma basis and on a pro forma as adjusted basis, respectively  13  Common stock, $.001 par value; 200,000,000 shares authorized at September 30, 2005 and 80,000,000 shares authorized on a pro forma and on a pro forma as adjusted basis; 208,766 shares issued and outstanding at September 30, 2005, issued and outstanding on a pro forma basis and on a pro forma as adjusted basis, respectively  13  
Additional paid-in capitalAdditional paid-in capital 96,808 181,801  Additional paid-in capital 96,806 181,801  
Accumulated deficitAccumulated deficit (198,475) (198,677)  Accumulated deficit (198,475) (198,677)  
Other comprehensive lossOther comprehensive loss (6) (6)  Other comprehensive loss (6) (6)  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total stockholders' (deficit)Total stockholders' (deficit) (101,669) (16,869)  Total stockholders' (deficit) (101,669) (16,869)  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total capitalizationTotal capitalization $(4,438)$(6,444)  Total capitalization $(2,093)$9,707 $ 
 
 
 
 
 
 

        The table above excludes, as of September 30, 2005:



DILUTION

        Our net tangible book deficit attributable to common stockholdersvalue as of September 30, 2005 was approximately $123.0$(123.0) million, or approximately $(9.08)$          per share based on 13,547,022            shares of common stock outstanding as of September 30, 2005, calculated after giving effect to the automatic conversion of all of our outstanding convertible preferred stock and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock into 13,338,279 shares of common stock upon the closing of this offering. Net tangible book deficit per share represents our total tangible assets reduced by our total liabilities, mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, deferred offering costs and the liquidation value of our convertible preferred stock and divided by the number of shares of common stock outstanding. Dilution per share to new investors represents the difference between the amount per share that you pay in this offering and the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share immediately after this offering.

        Our pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value as of September 30, 2005, would have been approximately $             million, or approximately $            per share, after giving effect to:

        Net tangible book value per share represents our total tangible assets reduced by usour total liabilities, mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, deferred offering costs and the liquidation value of our convertible preferred stock and divided by the number of shares of common stock outstanding. Dilution per share to new investors represents the difference between the amount per share that you pay for our common stock in this offering and the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share of our common stock immediately after this offering.

        Our pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value as of September 30, 2005, would have been approximately $       million, or approximately $      per share, after giving further effect to our sale of            shares in this offering, assuming an initial public offering price of $        per share (the midpoint of the estimated price range shown on the cover of this prospectus), after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses; and

a 1-for-1.3 reverse stock split that we intend to effect prior to the effective date of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part.

expenses. This represents an immediate increase in net tangible book value of $      per share to existing stockholders and an immediate decrease in net tangible book value per share of $      to you. The following table illustrates the dilution.

Assumed initial public offering price per share    $ 
 
NetPro forma net tangible book deficitvalue per share as of September 30, 2005

 

$

 

 

 

 
 
Pro forma as adjusted increase in net tangible book value per share attributable to conversion of convertible preferred stock and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stockthis offering


$





Pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after this offering

 

 

 

 

 


Increase in net tangible book value per share attributable to existing stockholders







Pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after the offering 
     
Dilution per share to new investors    $ 
     

        If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full, the pro forma net tangible book value per share after the offering would be $        per share, the increase in net tangible book value per share to existing stockholders would be $        per share and the dilution to new investors would be $        per share.



        The following table sets forth, as of September 30, 2005, on a pro forma as adjusted basis, (i) the difference between existing stockholders and new investors with respect to thetotal number of shares of common stock purchased from us, after giving effect to this offering and the reverse stock split and automatic conversion of our outstanding preferred stock described above,



(ii) the total consideration paid to us, and (iii) the average price per share paid.paid by the existing stockholders and by new investors purchasing shares in this offering.

 
 Shares Purchased
 Total Consideration
  
 
 Average Price Per Share
 
 Number
 %
 Amount
 %
Existing stockholders 13,547,022       % $        % $ 
New investors(1)            
  
 
 
 
   
Total   100.0% $  100.0%   
  
 
 
 
   

(1)
Before the underwriters' commissions and our expenses.

        The table above assumes no exercise of stock options or warrants outstanding as of September 30, 2005. At September 30, 2005, there were 1,816,518 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options and warrants at a weighted average exercise price of $5.13 per share. To the extent that outstanding options or warrants are exercised in the future, there will be further dilution to new investors. To the extent all of such outstanding options and warrants had been exercised as of September 30, 2005, pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after this offering would be $        and total dilution per share to new investors would be $        .

        The issuance of additional common stock will result in further dilution to new investors.

        If the underwriters' over-allotment option is exercised in full, the number of shares of our common stock held by existing stockholders will be reduced to        % of the aggregate number of shares of our common stock outstanding after this offering, and the number of shares of common stock held by new investors will be increased to            or         % of the aggregate number of shares of common stock outstanding after this offering.



SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

        The selected consolidated statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2001, 2002 and 2003, six month period ended December 31, 2003, and the year ended December 31, 2004 and the selected consolidated balance sheet data presented below as of June 30, 2001, 2002 and 2003, and December 31, 2003 and 2004, set forth below are derived from, and are qualified by reference to, our consolidated financial statements other than the pro forma financial information, which have been audited by KPMG LLP, our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, and that are included elsewhere in this prospectus for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2003, six months ended December 31, 2003 and year ended 2004.

        We changed our fiscal year end from June 30 to December 31, effective for the six months ended December 31, 2003. The selected consolidated statement of operations data presented below for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2005, and selected consolidated balance sheet data presented below as of September 30, 2005, have been derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The unaudited consolidated financial information include, in the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal and recurring adjustments, that management considers necessary for a fair presentation, in all material respects, of its consolidated results for those periods. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in the future periods and the results for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, should not be considered indicative of results expected for the full year.

        This data should be read in conjunction with our "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" and our Consolidated Financial Statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

        Pro forma per share amounts in the following table reflect the conversion of our outstanding convertible and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock into 13,338,279 shares of common stock upon completionon the closing of this offering, assuming that shares of our preferred stock were outstanding for the entire periods presented. Pro forma balance sheet data amounts in the following table reflect the conversion of our outstanding convertible and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, as well as our entry into a revenue interest assignment arrangement with PRF on December 23, 2005, including (i) our receipt at signing of a payment in the amount of $15.0 million, (ii) our use of approximately $3.0 million of that payment to repay a portion of the amount we owe to GE Capital and approximately $700,000 of that payment to pay fees and expenses related to the transaction, including expenses incurred by PRF, and (iii) our recognition of a short-termrevenue interest liability of approximately $11.3 million.$14.6 million, (iv) our recognition of a put/call option liability of approximately $400,000, and (v) our capitalization of approximately $500,000 in fees and expenses related to the transaction.


 
  
  
  
  
  
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
 
 
  
  
  
 Six Months Ended December 31,

  
 
 
 Year Ended June 30,
 Year Ended December 31,

 
 
 2004
 2005
 
 
 2001
 2002
 2003
 2003
 2004
 (unaudited)
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 (in thousands, except per share data)

 
Statement of Operations Data:                      
Gross sales—Zanaflex $ $ $ $ $ $ $3,239 
 Less: discounts and allowances          (4,417) (144) (992)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net sales          (4,417) (144) 2,247 
Grant revenue  462  132  474  382  479  445  184 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total net revenue  462  132  474  382  (3,938) (301) 2,431 
 Less: cost of sales          (885) (363) (2,274)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gross profit  462  132  474  382  (4,823) (62) 157 

Operating expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Research and development  6,142  11,147  17,527  16,743  21,999  18,621  9,652 
 Research and development—related party  2,223  4,687  2,265  3,343       
 Sales and marketing          4,662  2,793  9,657 
 General and administrative  3,489  6,636  6,388  17,069  13,283  11,034  6,339 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Total operating expenses  11,854  22,470  26,180  37,155  39,944  32,448  25,648 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Operating loss  (11,392) (22,338) (25,706) (36,773) (44,767) (32,510) (25,491)

Other income (expense):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 Interest and amortization of debt discount expense      (78) (38) (385) (297) (824)
 Interest and amortization of debt discount expense—related party  (443) (408) (369) (184)      
  Interest income  1,824  984  393  276  409  329  347 
  Other income      26  7  2  2  1 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Total other income (expense)  1,381  576  (28) 61  26  34  (476)
Minority interest—related party  699  580           
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle              3 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net loss  (9,313) (21,181) (25,734) (36,712) (44,741) (32,476) (25,964)

Beneficial conversion feature, accretion of issuance costs, preferred dividends, and fair value of warrants issued to convertible preferred stockholders

 

 

(36

)

 

(55

)

 

(24,320

)

 

(11,985

)

 

(24,746

)

 

(18,496

)

 

(18,636

)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Net loss allocable to common stockholders $(9,349)$(21,236)$(50,054)$(48,697)$(69,487)$(50,972)$(44,600)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted $(50.81)$(111.90)$(261.38)$(252.87)$(351.76)$(259.22)$(221.17)
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
  
  
  
  
  
 Nine Months
Ended
September 30,

 
 
  
  
  
 Six Months Ended December 31,

  
 
 
 Year Ended June 30,
 Year Ended December 31,

 
 
 2004
 2005
 
 
 2001
 2002
 2003
 2003
 2004
 (unaudited)
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted (unaudited)(1)         $(9.63)  $(1.92)
          
   
 
Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding used in computing net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted 184 190 191 193  198 197  202 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding used in computing pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders—basic & diluted (unaudited)(1)(2)          13,536    13,547 
          
   
 

(1)
The pro forma net loss per share and weighted average shares of common stock used in computing pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders for the year ended December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended September 30, 2005 are calculated as if all our convertible preferred stock and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock were converted into common stock as of the beginning of the year ended December 31, 2004 or from their respective dates of issuance, if issued after the beginning of the year ended December 31, 2004. The pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders for the year ended December 31, 2004 has been computed assuming the offering was completed at the beginning of the fiscal year presented and has been adjusted to give effect to the following: (a) recognition of the unamortized portion of a beneficial conversion charge of $67.9 million; (b) recognition of the unamortized portion of issuance costs relating to Series E, Series I, Series J and Series K preferred stock of $379,000; and (c) reversal of accrued preferred dividends on Series J and Series K preferred stock of $7.4 million (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements). The pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders for the nine month period ended September 30, 2005 reflects the reversal of the accrued preferred dividend of $4.0 million, amortized beneficial conversion charge of $14.5 million and amortized issuance cost of $81,000 assuming that the automatic conversion occurred as of the beginning of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.

(2)
The weighted average shares of our common stock outstanding used in computing the pro forma net loss per share allocable to common stockholders is calculated based on (a) Series A through Series J equivalent shares of common stock from the beginning of the fiscal year; and (b) Series K equivalent shares of common stock issuable from the date of issuance of the Series K preferred stock.


 As of June 30,
 As of December 31,
 As of September 30,
 Pro Forma
As of
September 30,

  As of June 30,
 As of December 31,
 As of September 30,
 Pro Forma
As of
September 30,

 

 2001
 2002
 2003
 2003
 2004
 2005
 2005
  2001
 2002
 2003
 2003
 2004
 2005
 2005
 

 (in thousands)

 (unaudited)

  (in thousands)

 (unaudited)

 
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:                                            
Cash and cash equivalents $48,083 $27,012 $48,319 $8,965 $11,729 $3,581 $14,879  $48,083 $27,012 $48,319 $8,965 $11,729 $3,581 $14,879 
Restricted cash  243  250  253  254  257  261  261   243  250  253  254  257  261  261 
Short-term investments    2,836  12,250  32,250  9,397  5,160  5,160     2,836  12,250  32,250  9,397  5,160  5,160 
Capitalized transaction costs—PRF transaction              500 
Working capital  46,115  27,097  58,975  35,375  9,067  (12,203) (10,506)  46,115  27,097  58,975  35,375  9,067  (12,203) (14,207)
Total assets  50,349  33,597  64,807  45,960  30,982  25,543  37,342   50,349  33,597  64,807  45,960  30,982  25,543  37,842 
Deferred grant revenue      95  48             95  48       
Deferred product revenue—Zanaflex Capsules            4,960  4,960             4,960  4,960 
Deferred product revenue—Zanaflex tablets          6,668  10,686  10,686           6,668  10,686  10,686 
Current portion of notes payable      310  324  302  2,347  1,150       310  324  302  2,347  1,150 
Non-current portion of notes payable      612  447  145  3,534  1,731       612  447  145  3,534  1,731 
Revenue interest liability              11,299 
Revenue interest liability—PRF transaction              14,600 
Put/call option liability—PRF transaction              400 
Long-term convertible notes payable—related party  7,131  7,538  7,907  8,091  8,422  8,695  8,695   7,131  7,538  7,907  8,091  8,422  8,695  8,695 
Mandatorily redeemable preferred stock  59,604  59,659  18,187  30,171  66,364  85,000     59,604  59,659  18,187  30,171  66,364  85,000   
Total stockholders' (deficit)  (19,041) (36,910) 35,328  (130) (60,571) (101,669) (16,869)  (19,041) (36,910) 35,328  (130) (60,571) (101,669) (16,869)


MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

        The following discussion and analysis of our consolidated financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this prospectus. This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, but not limited to, those discussed under "Risk Factors" and elsewhere in this prospectus, that could cause our actual results, performance, prospects or opportunities to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, these forward-looking statements. See "Forward-Looking Statements."

Background

        Since we commenced operations in 1995, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to the identification, development and commercialization of novel therapies that improve neurological function in people with MS, SCI and other disorders of the CNS. Our marketed drug, Zanaflex Capsules, is FDA-approved for the management of spasticity. Our lead product candidate, Fampridine-SR, is in a Phase 3 clinical trial for the improvement of walking ability in people with MS. Our preclinical programs also target MS and SCI, as well as other CNS disorders, including stroke and traumatic brain injury.

        From 1995 until mid-2004, we were engaged almost exclusively in the in-licensing of compounds and the preclinical and clinical development of these compounds. We licensed the rights to Fampridine-SR from Elan for the treatment of SCI in 1997. In 1998, we formed a joint venture, MS Research & Development Corporation, or MSRD, with Elan International Services, Ltd., or EIS, a subsidiary of Elan, to develop Fampridine-SR for the treatment of MS under an exclusive worldwide license from Elan.

        In September 2003, we entered into a termination and assignment agreement with Elan, EIS and MSRD, pursuant to which MSRD assigned to us its assets, including the license from Elan for Fampridine-SR for MS. We paid MSRD approximately $11.5 million for all of the assets and assumed all of the liabilities of MSRD, and MSRD distributed to us approximately $9.5 million as our pro rata portion of the purchase price. From the time of establishment of MSRD until the sale of MSRD's assets to us, Elan was considered to be a related party under generally accepted accounting principles. In conjunction with the termination and assignment, we entered into an amended license agreement with Elan that granted us exclusive worldwide rights to Fampridine-SR in return for the payment of royalties and milestones. In addition, we entered into a supply agreement under which Elan provides Fampridine-SR based upon an agreed upon price schedule.

        In September 2003, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., or Teva, to jointly develop and promote in the United States products containing valrocemide, pursuant to which we made an initial payment to Teva of $2.1 million. We and Teva amicably terminated this collaboration agreement in June 2005 and in connection with the termination we paid Teva approximately $3.1 million. We and Teva have no further obligations to each other under this collaboration agreement.

        We have expended a significant portion of our funds on a number of clinical trials for Fampridine-SR, our most advanced product candidate, including two Phase 3 clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI and a Phase 2 clinical trial in MS, the results of which were announced in March 2004. An earlier Phase 2 clinical trial in MS was completed in 2001. In mid-2004, we decided to put our clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI on hold, and refocused our efforts on our ongoing Fampridine-SR in MS program, leading to our current Phase 3 clinical trial of Fampridine-SR for improvement of walking ability in people with MS. We may resume our clinical development of Fampridine-SR for SCI following completion of our MS clinical program, or sooner.



        In July 2004, we acquired all of Elan's research, development, distribution, sales and marketing rights to Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets in the United States. These products are FDA-approved for the management of spasticity. We made an upfront payment to Elan of $2.0 million and are obligated to pay royalties on sales and to make milestone payments upon achievement of specified sales levels. To date, we have achieved two milestones, the first triggering a payment of $1.5 million, 50% of which was paid in the first quarter of 2005 and 50% of which is due in the first quarter of 2006. The second milestone of $3.0 million is due in the first quarter ofon March 31, 2006. As part of our Zanaflex acquisition, we entered into a long-term supply agreement with Elan under which Elan provides us with Zanaflex Capsules. Elan also assigned us its rights under an agreement with Novartis for the supply of tizanidine and Zanaflex tablets.

        Our marketing efforts are focused on Zanaflex Capsules, which we launched in April 2005. Zanaflex tablets lost compound patent protection in 2002 and both Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets compete with 11 generic tizanidine products. Although we currently distribute Zanaflex tablets, we do not, and do not intend to, actively promote Zanaflex tablets. As a result, prescriptions for Zanaflex tablets have declined and we expect that they will continue to decline. Our goal is to convert as many sales of Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets to sales of Zanaflex Capsules as possible. We believe that sales of Zanaflex Capsules will constitute a significant portion of our total revenue for the foreseeable future.

        In late 2004, we began establishing our own specialty sales force in the United States, which consisted of 14 sales professionals as of September 30, 2005. This sales force targets neurologists and other prescribers who specialize in treating people with conditions that involve spasticity. Members of this sales force also call on managed care organizations, pharmacists and distribution customers. We plan to expand our specialty sales force to approximately 30 sales professionals in the first quarter of 2006. We have also entered into an agreement with Cardinal Health, under which, since August 2005, they have provided approximately 160 sales representatives to market Zanaflex Capsules, on a non-exclusive basis, to primary care physicians in the United States. We have retained Access Worldwide Communications to provide a small, dedicated sales force of pharmaceutical telesales professionals to contact primary care, specialty physicians and pharmacists. We expect to expand this sales and marketing infrastructure in the future, as appropriate.

        In February 2004, we changed our fiscal year end from June 30 to December 31, effective for the six months ended December 31, 2003.

        In December 2005, we entered into a Revenue Interests Assignment Agreementrevenue interests assignment agreement with PRF pursuant to which we assigned PRF the right to receive a portion of our net revenues (as defined in the agreement) from Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and any future Zanaflex products. The agreement covers all Zanaflex net revenues generated from October 1, 2005 through and including December 31, 2015, unless the agreement is terminated earlier. In consideration for the assignment, PRF paid us $15.0 million at signing. We used approximately $3.0 million of that payment to repay a portion of the amount we owe to GE Capital, $200,000 of that payment for expenses associated with such repayment and $500,000 of that payment to reimburse PRF for expenses it incurred in the transaction. Under our agreement with PRF, we are required to use the remainder of the amount we received at signing and any other amounts we receive under the agreement to support commercialization, sales, marketing, clinical and regulatory activities and other financial obligations related specifically and solely to our Zanaflex operations. At our election, PRF is also required to pay us (i) an additional $5.0 million if our Zanaflex net revenues in 2005 equal or exceed $11.0 million and our Zanaflex net revenues in the first six months of 2006 equal or exceed $16.0 million, and (ii) an additional $5.0 million if our Zanaflex net revenues in 2006 equal or exceed $33.5 million. If we meet these milestones and decide to borrow these additional funds, we would be required to pay PRF $5.0 million on December 1, 2009 in the case of the first additional payment and $5.0 million on December 1, 2010 in the case of the second additional payment. For more information regarding our agreement with PRF, see "—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Financing Arrangements."



Product Revenue and Returns

Ongoing Zanaflex Capsule and Tablet Sales

        Product revenue consists of sales of Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets. Under SFAS 48,Revenue Recognition When the Right of Return Exists, we are not permitted to recognize revenue until we can reasonably estimate the likely return rate for our products. Since we have only limited sales history with Zanaflex Capsules and due to generic competition and customer conversion from Zanaflex tablets to Zanaflex Capsules, we cannot reasonably determine a return rate. As a result, we account for sales of these products using a deferred revenue recognition model. At a future point in time, which could be in a number of years, when we are able to reasonably estimate product returns we will begin to recognize revenue based on shipments of product to our wholesale drug distributors.

        Under our deferred revenue model, we do not recognize revenue upon shipment of product to our wholesale drug distributors. Instead, we record deferred revenue at gross invoice sales price, and classify the cost basis of the inventory held by the wholesaler as a component of inventory. We recognize revenue when prescriptions are filled to end-users because once prescriptions are filled the product cannot be returned. We use monthly prescription data that we purchase from NDC Health, a leading provider of healthcare data, to determine the amount of revenue to be recognized. When we receive the prescription data, we use the number of units of product prescribed to record gross sales. We then reduce deferred revenue and record cost of goods sold. We began receiving end-user prescription data in March 2005 which enabled us to begin recognizing revenue from Zanaflex tablet sales. We began marketing Zanaflex Capsules in April 2005 and began receiving prescription data and recognizing revenue in the same month. Through September 30, 2005, we have recognized $2.1 million in revenue from Zanaflex tablets and $1.1 million from Zanaflex Capsules.

        Under our Revenue Interests Assignment Agreementrevenue interests assignment agreement with PRF, PRF is entitled to a portion of our net revenues from Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and any future Zanaflex products. The agreement covers all Zanaflex net revenues generated from October 1, 2005 through and including December 31, 2015, unless the agreement terminates earlier. Under the agreement, PRF is entitled to the following portion of Zanaflex net revenues:

Notwithstanding the foregoing, once PRF has received and retained payments under the agreement that are at least twice the aggregate amount PRF has paid us under the agreement, PRF will only be entitled to 1% of Zanaflex net revenues.

        We accept returns of products for six months prior to and 12 months after their expiration date. Returns of products sold by us are charged directly against deferred revenue, reducing the amount of deferred revenue that we may recognize.

Sale of Zanaflex Tablet Inventory Acquired From Elan

        When we acquired Zanaflex from Elan, we also acquired Elan's inventory of Zanaflex tablets. This inventory included partial lots with expiration dating of less than 12 months and full lots with expiration dating greater than 12 months. We have deferred recognition of any revenue from sales of the partial lot inventory until the return period for the product expires in June 2006, and will recognize revenue



then only to the extent that deferred revenues exceed returns. We cannot use prescription data to recognize revenue associated with the partial lot inventory acquired from Elan because we cannot determine whether the prescription was filled with product that Elan sold prior to our acquisition of Zanaflex or with product we sold.

        All Zanaflex tablet partial lot inventory that we acquired from Elan has either been sold or is no longer being sold by us. As a result, after the return period expires in June 2006, there will no longer be deferred revenue associated with the Zanaflex tablet partial lot inventory acquired from Elan.

        In July 2005 we began to recognize revenue from the full lots based on prescriptions filled for Zanaflex tablets. All of the Zanaflex tablet inventory sold by Elan prior to our acquisition reached expiration in June 2005, therefore any prescriptions filled for Zanaflex tablets subsequent to June 2005 must be from the full inventory lots acquired by and sold by us.

        We are uncertain about the amount of returns that we may receive on these products, for a number of reasons including our limited historical returns experience. Returns of Zanaflex tablet inventory acquired from Elan and sold by us are charged against deferred revenue, reducing the amount of deferred revenue that we may recognize.

Returns of Zanaflex Tablets sold by Elan

        As part of the acquisition of Zanaflex, we agreed to accept returns of Zanaflex tablets that were returned subsequent to January 17, 2005, including returns of product that was originally sold by Elan. Product returns prior to January 17, 2005, were the responsibility of Elan. We have recorded a charge of $4.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2004, for the estimated returns of Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan. To the extent that returns exceed the estimated charge, we will be required to record further charges. The return period for Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan ends in June 2006, after which time we do not anticipate any further charges resulting from Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan.

Discounts and Allowances

        Discounts and allowances consist of estimated reserves for cash discounts, rebates and chargebacks. At the time product is shipped to wholesalers an allowance is recorded for these discounts and allowances. Allowances are established on a product-by-product basis. These allowances are established by management as its best estimate based on each product's historical experience adjusted to reflect known changes in the factors that impact such reserves. Reserves for chargebacks, rebates and discounts are established based on the contractual terms with customers, analysis of historical levels of discounts, chargebacks and rebates, communications with customers and the levels of inventory remaining in the distribution channel as well as expectations about the market for each product and anticipated introduction of competitive products.

Grant Revenue

        Grant revenue is recognized when the related research expenses are incurred and our performance obligations under the terms of the respective contract are satisfied. To the extent expended, grant revenue related to purchase of equipment is deferred and amortized over the shorter of its useful life or the life of the related contract.

Cost of Sales

        Cost of sales consists of cost of inventory, royalty expense and milestone amortization of intangible assets associated with the Zanaflex acquisition, packaging costs, freight and required inventory stability testing costs. Our inventory costs, royalty obligations and milestone obligations are set forth in the agreements entered into in connection with our Zanaflex acquisition. The Company does not expect



any payments it makes to PRF in connection with the revenue interests assignment transaction entered into in December 2005 to constitute royalty expense or otherwise affect the Company's cost of sales or other operating expenses. See "—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Financing Arrangements."

Research and Development Expenses

        Research and development expenses consist primarily of salaries and related expenses for personnel, fees paid to professional service providers in conjunction with independently monitoring our clinical trials and acquiring and evaluating data from our clinical trials, costs of contract manufacturing services, costs of materials used in clinical trials and research and development, depreciation of capital resources used to develop our products, costs of facilities and the legal costs of pursuing patent protection of our intellectual property. We expense research and development costs as incurred. We expect our research and development expenses to increase as we continue to develop our product candidates and preclinical programs.

        The following table summarizes our research and development expenses for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2001, 2002, 2003, the six months ended December 31, 2003, the year ended December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Included in this table are our external research and development costs, consisting largely of clinical trial and research services provided by outside laboratories and vendors recognized in connection with each product candidate currently in clinical development and all preclinical programs as a group. Many of our internal research and development costs, including personnel costs, related benefits and stock-based compensation, are not attributable to any individual project because we use these resources across several development projects. Compensation expense for option grants is classified between clinical development and preclinical research and development based on employee job function.

 
  
  
  
  
  
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
 
 Year Ended June 30,
 Six Months
Ended
December 31,
2003

  
 
 Year Ended
December 31,
2004

 
 2001
 2002
 2003
 2004
 2005
 
  
  
  
  
  
 (unaudited)

 
 (in thousands)

Clinical development:                     
Contract expense—SCI $1,557 $3,359 $5,777 $4,266 $5,853 $5,630 $30
Contract expense—MS  649  908  1,613  2,116  2,850  2,205  2,296
Other contract expense      1,015  1,388  4,945  4,292  3,729
Operating expense  695  1,518  2,356  1,789  2,652  2,108  951
Licensing expense—Teva        2,000      
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total clinical development  2,901  5,785  10,761  11,559  16,300  14,235  7,006
Preclinical research & development:                     
Research contracts  586  617  271  412  628  469  68
Contract expense    213  1,441  216  113  47  62
Operating expense  2,655  4,531  5,054  4,556  4,958  3,870  2,516
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total preclinical research & development  3,241  5,361  6,766  5,184  5,699  4,386  2,646
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total research & development  6,142  11,146  17,527  16,743  21,999  18,621  9,652
Research & development—related party expense  2,223  4,687  2,265  3,343      
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total $8,365 $15,833 $19,792 $20,086 $21,999 $18,621 $9,652
  
 
 
 
 
 
 

Research and Development—Related Party

        In cooperation with Elan, we have conducted a series of clinical trials during the past eight years evaluating Fampridine-SR. Elan was considered to be a related party during the period from April,



1998 when MSRD, our jointly-owned venture with Elan to develop Fampridine-SR in MS, was formed until September 2003, when Elan's interest in MSRD was sold to us (see Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus). Related party research and development or sales and marketing expenses have been included as a separate line item in our financial statements for this period and in the table above. These expenses consisted of the contracted development and supply of our lead product candidate, Fampridine-SR, license fees and expenses associated with our acquisition of Elan's interest in MSRD.

Sales and Marketing Expenses

        Sales and marketing expenses includes the costs of salaries for our sales and marketing personnel and the cost of our advertising, promotion and education programs. Sales and marketing expenses include the cost of our contract sales force provided by Cardinal Health and our contract pharmaceutical telesales services provided by Access Worldwide.

General and Administrative Expenses

        General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and other related costs for personnel serving executive, finance, business development, legal, information technology and human resource functions. Other costs include facility costs not otherwise included in research and development or sales and marketing expense and professional fees for legal and accounting services. We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase as we add personnel and become subject to the reporting obligations applicable to public companies.

Stock-Based Compensation

        We have accounted for options and restricted stock granted to employees and directors in accordance with SFAS No. 123,Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, and related interpretations. As such, compensation expense is recorded on stock option and restricted stock grants based on the fair value of the restricted stock and options granted, which is estimated on the date of grant using an option-pricing model and it is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. Compensation expense for options and restricted stock granted to employees amounted to $643,000, $1.3 million, $1.6 million, $13.2 million, $9.0 million, and $3.5 million for the years ended June 30, 2001, 2002 and 2003, the six months ended December 31, 2003, the year ended December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Compensation expense for options and restricted stock granted to employees are classified between research and development and general and administrative expense based on employee job function.

        We have accounted for stock options granted to non-employees on a fair-value basis in accordance with SFAS No. 123,Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, Emerging Issues Task Force ("EITF") Issue No. 96-18,Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services, and FASB Interpretations No. 28,Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans an Interpretation of APB Opinion No. 15 and 25. As a result, the non-cash charge to operations for non-employee options with vesting or other performance criteria is affected each reporting period by changes in the fair value of our common stock. Compensation expense for options granted to non-employees amounted to $94,000, $75,000, ($7,000), $8,000, $15,000 and $47,000 for the years ended June 30, 2001, 2002 and 2003, the six months ended December 31, 2003, the year ended December 31, 2004 and the nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively. The amount of compensation expense to be recorded in the future for options granted to non-employees is subject to change each reporting period based upon changes in the fair value of our common stock, estimated volatility and risk free interest rate until the non-employee completes performance under the option agreement.



        We may record additional deferred stock-based compensation if we grant additional options or change the terms of the options granted to our employees.



Beneficial Conversion Feature

        In May 2003, we completed a private placement of 112,790,233 shares of Series J convertible preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $55.3 million. As a result of this financing, our Series A through Series I preferred stockholders' original conversion prices were reduced due to anti-dilution adjustments, which resulted in a beneficial conversion of $80.7 million in accordance with EITF No. 98-5,Accounting for Convertible Securities with Beneficial Conversion Features or Contingently Adjustable Conversion Ratios and EITF No. 00-27,Application of Issue No. 98-5 to Certain Convertible Instruments. The beneficial conversion of $20.9 million was recorded as an immediate charge to additional paid-in capital, relating to our Series A, Series B, Series C, Series F and Series H convertible preferred stock, which are not mandatorily redeemable and may be converted to common stock at any time at the option of the holders. The remaining beneficial conversion of $59.9 million, relating to our Series E and Series I convertible preferred stock, which are mandatorily redeemable at any time on or after June 30, 2008, is being accreted ratably over the mandatory redemption period. Such accretion amounted to $1.7 million, $5.8 million, $11.6 million and $8.7 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, the six months ended December 31, 2003, the year ended December 31, 2004, and the nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively, and is charged to additional paid-in capital.

        The issuance of Series J mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock resulted in a beneficial conversion amounting to $40.0 million in accordance with EITF No. 98-5. The beneficial conversion is calculated based on the estimated fair value of our common stock price per share at the date of issuance of Series J preferred stock of approximately $10.14 per share of common stock, which was calculated based on the estimated projected midpoint of the range of our initial public offering price per common share, which was planned in the fourth calendar quarter of 2003, and the stock price appreciation in comparable public companies from May 2003 to August 2003. The beneficial conversion feature is being accreted ratably over the mandatory redemption period, with a charge to additional paid-in capital of $1.1 million, $3.9 million, $7.8 million and $5.8 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, the six months ended December 31, 2003, the year ended December 31, 2004, and the nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively.

        The unamortized portion of the beneficial conversion at September 30, 2005 was $53.3 million. Upon the closing of this offering, we will recognize a one time non-cash charge to additional paid in capital, reflecting the unamortized portion of the beneficial conversion feature as a result of the automatic conversion of all outstanding convertible preferred stock and mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock to common stock upon completion of this offering.

Other Income (Expense)

        Interest income consists of interest earned on our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. Interest expense consists of interest expense on our GE Capital notes. Interest expense-related party consists of amortization of debt discount and accrued interest on our $7.5 million aggregate principal amount of EIS convertible notes, outstanding as of September 30, 2005. Other income consists primarily of unrealized gains from our investment securities. In future periods, we expect to recognize higher levels of interest expense in connection with the revenue interests assignment arrangement we entered into with PRF in December 2005. In addition, we expect to recognize a net liability associated with the fair value of PRF's put option and our call option under the revenue interests assignment arrangement. This liability will be revalued on a quarterly basis to reflect any changes in the fair value and we will recognize a gain or loss based on that revaluation. See "—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Financing Arrangements."


Results of Operations

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2005 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2004

Product Sales

        We recognized revenue from the sale of Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets of $3.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, as compared to $0 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004. We recognize product sales using a deferred revenue recognition model meaning that product sales are recorded as deferred revenue when shipped to the wholesaler and only recognized as revenue when end-user prescriptions of the product are filled. Product sales in the nine months ended September 30, 2005, consist of Zanaflex tablet sales beginning in March 2005, which is



when we began receiving prescription data for tablets containing a code clearly identifying these prescriptions as having been filled with product we sold, and Zanaflex Capsules prescription data beginning after our launch of the product in April 2005.

        Deferred revenue from Zanaflex Capsules was $5.0 million as of September 30, 2005, as compared to $0 as of September 30, 2004. The increase in deferred revenue of Zanaflex Capsules was a result of our launch of the product in April 2005. We expect deferred revenue from Zanaflex Capsules to increase in the future as our sales and marketing efforts ramp up, and prescription data continues to lag wholesaler orders made in anticipation of demand.

        Deferred revenue from Zanaflex tablets was $10.7 million as of September 30, 2005, an increase of $4.0 million since December 31, 2004, as compared to $2.8 million as of September 30, 2004. The increase in deferred revenue of Zanaflex tablets was a result of continued sales of the product and the fact that we are not recognizing any of the deferred revenue from Zanaflex tablet inventory acquired from Elan that had an expiration date of less than twelve months at the date of acquisition until after the return period expires in June 2006. With respect to the $10.7 million of deferred revenue at September 30, 2005, approximately $2.5 million relates to product that we acquired from Elan that had an expiration date of less than 12 months at the time we sold it during 2004. We believe there is a high likelihood that this product will be returned, which would result in our inability to recognize revenue related to these sales. We expect deferred revenue from Zanaflex tablets to decline over time as we attempt to convert Zanaflex tablet sales to Zanaflex Capsules sales.

Discounts and Allowances

        We recorded discounts and allowances of $992,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 as compared to $144,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004. Discounts and allowances are recorded when Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets are shipped to wholesalers. We began shipping Zanaflex tablets after our acquisition from Elan in July 2004 and Zanaflex Capsules in April 2005. Discounts and allowances for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 consisted of $683,000 in cash discounts and $308,000 in reserves for chargebacks and rebates. Discounts and allowances for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, consisted of $55,000 in cash discounts and $89,000 for chargebacks and rebates. As part of our April 2005 launch of Zanaflex Capsules, in April, May and September 2005 we extended a 6% promotional cash discount over and above the standard 2% discount provided to drug wholesalers and a 4% rebate on products resold by the wholesalers to pharmacies, hospitals and other third parties. We expect cash discounts to decrease in future periods as a percentage of sales.

Grant Revenue

        Grant revenue for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was $184,000 compared to $445,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004. Grant revenue is recognized when the related research expenses are incurred and our performance obligations under the terms of the respective contract are satisfied.

Cost of Sales

        We recorded cost of sales of $2.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 as compared to $363,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004. Cost of sales for the nine



months ended September 30, 2005, consisted of $1.2 million in royalty fees, $249,000 in milestone amortization of intangible assets, $561,000 in inventory costs and $275,000 in costs related to packaging, freight, and stability testing. Cost of sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, consisted of $261,000 in royalty fees, $37,000 in milestone amortization of intangible assets and $65,000 in inventory costs. We began incurring cost of sales upon the acquisition of Zanaflex in July 2004.



Research and Development

        Research and development expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, were $9.7 million as compared to $18.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, a decrease of approximately $8.9 million, or 47.8%. The decrease in research and development expenses was primarily attributable to completion of two Phase 3 clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI, and one Phase 2 clinical trial of Fampridine-SR in MS, during the first quarter of 2004. The SCI clinical development program expense decreased from $5.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 to $30,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, due to our decision to put the program on hold. The MS clinical development program expense increased from $2.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 to $2.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, an increase of 4.5%. We expect that expenses associated with our MS clinical development program will increase as we continue our Phase 3 clinical trial.

        Other contract expenses decreased to $3.8 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005, from $4.3 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2004, a decrease of 11.6%. This decrease is primarily due to a $3.1 million decrease in expenses for the manufacture of clinical supplies from the period ended September 30, 2004, offset by a $2.2 million increase in expenses related to the valrocemide collaboration, primarily due to expenses of $3.1 million related to the termination of that collaboration in the nine months ended September 30, 2005.

        Operating expenses for clinical development and preclinical research and development decreased to $3.3 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005, from $6.0 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2004, a decrease of $2.5 million, or 41.7%. This decrease was a result of a $1.1 million decrease in preclinical salaries and benefits due to a staff reduction in early 2005. These expenses also include non-cash stock-based compensation expense of $465,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, and $1.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004.

Sales and Marketing

        Sales and marketing expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, were $9.7 million compared to $2.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, an increase of approximately $6.9 million or 246.4%. This increase was primarily attributable to $3.3 million for marketing and distribution and sales administration expense related to the launch of Zanaflex Capsules and the distribution of Zanaflex tablets and $3.0 million in salaries and benefits related to our Zanaflex Capsules specialty sales force.

General and Administrative

        General and administrative expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, were $6.3 million compared to $11.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, a decrease of approximately $4.7 million, or 42.7%. Total general and administrative expenses include non-cash stock based compensation expense of $2.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, as compared to $5.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, primarily attributable to the repricing in the first quarter of 2004 of options granted prior to 2004. In addition, the nine months ended September 30, 2004, included approximately $1.2 million in outside NDA preparation services related to our Phase 3 trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI.

Other Income (Expense)

        Other income (expense) decreased to a loss of $476,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, from a gain of $34,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2004, a decrease of $510,000.



Interest expense increased by $527,000 primarily related to a $6.0 million secured term loan with GE Capital entered into in January 2005. The increase in interest expense was offset by an increase in interest income of $18,000 during the nine months ended September 30, 2005.



Beneficial Conversion Feature, Accretion of Issuance Costs, Preferred Dividends and Fair Value of Warrants Issued to Convertible Preferred Stockholders

        Charges related to preferred stock remained relatively flat at $18.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, and $18.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004. These charges primarily comprised accretion of issuance costs on Series E, Series I and Series J mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, accrual of preferred dividend of on Series J and Series K mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, accretion of beneficial conversion feature on Series A through Series I preferred stock for reset in conversion price and accretion of beneficial conversion feature on Series J preferred stock (see Notes 3, 8 and 11 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus).

Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2003(1)

 
 Twelve Months
Ended
December 31, 2003

 Year Ended
December 31, 2004

 
 
 (unaudited)

  
 
 
 (in thousands)

 
Gross sales—Zanaflex $ $ 
 Less: discounts and allowances    (4,417)
  
 
 
Net sales    (4,417)
Grant revenue  764  479 
  
 
 
Total net revenue  764  (3,938)
 Less: cost of sales    (885)
  
 
 
Gross profit  764  (4,823)
Operating expenses:       
 Research and development  26,228  21,999 
 Research and development—related party  4,016   
 Sales and marketing    4,662 
 General and administrative  21,220  13,283 
  
 
 
  Total operating expenses  51,464  39,944 
  
 
 
Operating loss  (50,700) (44,767)
Other income (expense):       
 Interest and amortization of debt discount expense  (82) (385)
 Interest and amortization of debt discount
expense—related party
  (445)  
  Interest income  417  409 
  Other income  30  2 
  
 
 
  Total other income (expense)  (80) 26 
  
 
 
  Net loss  (50,780) (44,741)
Beneficial conversion feature, accretion of issuance costs, preferred dividends, and fair value of warrants issued to convertible preferred stockholders  (36,277) (24,746)
  
 
 
 Net loss allocable to common stockholders $(87,057)$(69,487)
  
 
 

(1)
We changed our fiscal year end from June 30 to December 31, effective for the six months ended December 31, 2003. Accordingly, these amounts are derived from our books and records and represent the accumulation of the period January 1, 2003 to June 30, 2003 and July 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003.

Product Sales

        We did not record product sales from the sale of either Zanaflex Capsules or Zanaflex tablets in the year ended December 31, 2004, or the twelve months ended December 31, 2003.

        We did not record deferred revenue from Zanaflex Capsules in either period, as the product was not launched until April 2005. Deferred revenue from Zanaflex tablets was $6.7 million as of December 31, 2004, as compared to $0 as of December 31, 2003. With respect to the $6.7 million of deferred revenue at December 31, 2004, approximately $3.6 million related to product that we acquired from Elan that had an expiration date of less than 12 months at the time we sold it during 2004. We believe there is a high likelihood that this product will be returned, which would result in our inability to recognize revenue related to these sales.

Discounts and Allowances

        We recorded discounts and allowances of $4.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $0 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. Discounts and allowances for the year ended December 31, 2004, consisted of $128,000 in cash discounts and $207,000 for chargebacks and rebates. Additionally, in the year ended December 31, 2004, we took a $4.1 million charge to establish a reserve for expected returns of Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan prior to our acquisition of Zanaflex. As part of the acquisition of Zanaflex, we agreed to accept any returns of Zanaflex tablets that were returned subsequent to January 17, 2005, including returns of product that was originally sold by Elan.

Grant Revenue

        Grant revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004, was $479,000 compared to $764,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. Grant revenue is recognized when the related research expenses are incurred and our performance obligations under the terms of the respective contract are satisfied.

Cost of Sales

        We recorded cost of sales of $885,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared with $0 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. Cost of sales for the year ended December 31, 2004, consisted of $519,000 in royalty fees, $114,000 in milestone amortization of intangible assets and $252,000 in inventory costs related to the sale of Zanaflex tablets. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, we had no product sales and, as a result, no cost of sales.

Research and Development

        Research and development expense for the year ended December 31, 2004, was $22.0 million, as compared to $26.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of approximately $4.2 million, or 16.0%. Contributing to this decrease was completion of two Phase 3 clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI, and one Phase 2 clinical trial of Fampridine-SR in MS, during the first quarter of 2004. The SCI clinical development program expense decreased to $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $7.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of $1.3 million, or 18.1%. The MS clinical development program expense decreased to $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $3.3 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of $400,000, or 12.1%. We expect that expenses associated with our MS clinical development program will increase as we continue our Phase 3 clinical trial. Our licensing expense decreased to $0 for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $2.0 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. This expense was attributable to an initial payment to Teva for our collaboration agreement for valrocemide.



        Other contract expenses increased to $5.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $1.9 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, an increase of $3.1 million, or 163.2%. This increase is primarily the result of the inclusion of costs related to the drug development and supply of Fampridine-SR in other contract expenses for the year ended December 31, 2004. Prior to the termination of the joint venture with Elan in September 2003, this cost was included in Research and development—related party expense. Also contributing to this increase was a cost of $914,000 relating to a terminated development program.

        Operating expense for clinical development and preclinical research and development decreased to $7.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $11.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of $3.6 million, or 32.1%. This decrease was partly attributable to a decline in non-cash stock-based compensation expense to $1.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $3.0 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. The decrease was also attributable to other expenses in the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, which included $508,000 of NDA expense and a $452,000 bonus accrual. In addition, research and development lab expense for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $277,000, as compared to $557,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of $280,000.

        Research and development—related party expenses for the year ended December 31, 2004, were $0, as compared to $4.0 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. This decrease was attributable to the termination of our MSRD joint venture with Elan in September 2003, after which all MSRD-related research and development expenses were included in clinical development expenses. Research and development—related party expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003 also included $2.0 million related to termination of the joint venture and $2.0 million in drug development and supply cost.

Sales and Marketing

        Sales and marketing expense was $4.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $0 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. This increase was attributable to the beginning of our commercial efforts after our acquisition of the Zanaflex products in July 2004 and included $2.1 million in expense for marketing, distribution, and sales administration, $1.2 million in salaries and benefits, approximately $765,000 in non-cash stock-based compensation expense, and approximately $600,000 in additional sales and marketing overhead expenses.

General and Administrative

        General and administrative expense decreased to $13.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, from $21.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of approximately $7.9 million, or 37.3%. This decrease was partly attributable to a decrease in non-cash stock based compensation expense to $6.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $11.8 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, a decrease of approximately $5.3 million, or 44.9%. In addition, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, we had an additional $1.4 million in financing-related expenses as compared to the year ended December 31, 2004.

Other Income (Expense)

        Other income (expense) increased to a gain of $26,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to a loss of $80,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, an increase of $106,000. Interest expense decreased by $142,000 due to a decrease in interest expense on our EIS convertible promissory notes, offset by an increase in interest expense from our GE Capital notes, and a decrease of $8,000 in interest income for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the twelve months ended December 31, 2003.


Beneficial Conversion Feature Accretion of Issuance Costs, Preferred Dividends and Fair Value of Warrants Issued to Convertible Preferred Stockholders

        Charges related to preferred stock decreased to $24.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, from $36.3 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003. For the year ended December 31, 2004, charges were primarily comprised of beneficial conversion charges of $19.5 million on Series E, Series I and Series J convertible preferred stock, accretion of issuance costs of $106,000, and preferred dividends of $5.2 million (see Notes 3 and 8 to our consolidated financial statements in this prospectus). For the twelve months ended December 31, 2003, charges were primarily comprised of beneficial conversion charges of $33.9 million on Series A, B, C, F and H convertible preferred stock, and Series E, I and J mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, accretion of issuance costs of $86,000, and preferred dividends of $2.8 million (see Notes 3, 8 and 11 to our consolidated financial statements in this prospectus).

Year Ended June 30, 2003 Compared to Year Ended June 30, 2002

Grant Revenue

        Grant revenue for the year ended June 30, 2003, was $474,000 compared to $132,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002. For the year ended June 30, 2003, we deferred approximately $95,000 in grant revenue since it related to funding for the purchase of equipment.

Research and Development

        Research and development expense for the year ended June 30, 2003, was $17.5 million, as compared to $11.1 million for the year ended June 30, 2002, an increase of approximately $6.4 million, or 57.7%. The increase was primarily attributable to acceleration in patient enrollment for both the Phase 2 clinical trial of Fampridine-SR in MS, as well as two Phase 3 clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in SCI. The SCI study expenses increased to $5.8 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $3.4 million for the year ended June 30, 2002, an increase of $2.4 million, or 70.6%. The MS study expense increased to $1.6 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $900,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002.

        Operating and other contract expense for clinical development and preclinical research and development increased to $8.4 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $6.0 million for the year ended June 30, 2002, an increase of $2.4 million, or 40.0%. These expenses include a non-cash stock-based compensation expense of $478,000 for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $455,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002. This increase is also attributable to increased staffing and support required for the new clinical trials.

        Research and development-related party expenses were $2.3 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $4.7 million for the year ended June 30, 2002, a decrease of $2.4 million, or 51.1%. This decrease in expense was due to reduced development activities by Elan related to Fampridine-SR during the year ended June 30, 2003.

General and Administrative

        General and administrative expense of $6.4 million remained relatively flat for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $6.6 million for the year ended June 30, 2002. The decrease in general and administrative expense was primarily due to management's decision to defer spending for market research and medical communications during the year ended June 30, 2003. General and administrative expenses also include non-cash stock based compensation expense of $1.1 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $950,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002, an increase of approximately $150,000, or 15.8%.



Other Income (Expense)

        Other income (expense) decreased to a loss of $28,000 for the year ended June 30, 2003, compared to a gain of $576,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002, a decrease of $604,000. This decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease in interest income of $591,000 due to lower average cash balances and lower interest earned on cash balances during the year ended June 30, 2003.

Minority Interest

        Minority interest decreased to $0 for the year ended June 30, 2003, compared to $580,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002. Elan's previous ownership interest in MSRD, a joint venture that was owned approximately 83% by Acorda and approximately 17% by Elan and another minority stockholder, was reflected as minority interest in our consolidated financial statements. In the year ended June 30, 2003, Elan ceased funding its share of the joint venture's expenses, and therefore there is no minority interest for the year ended June 30, 2003. The assets of this joint venture were transferred to us as of September 2003.

Beneficial conversion feature, accretion of issuance costs, preferred dividends and fair value of warrants issued to convertible preferred stockholders

        Charges related to preferred stock increased to $24.3 million for the year ended June 30, 2003, as compared to $55,000 for the year ended June 30, 2002. For the year ended June 30, 2003, charges were primarily comprised of accretion of issuance costs of $66,000 on Series E, Series I and Series J mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, accrual of preferred dividend of $630,000 on Series J mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock, accretion of beneficial conversion feature of $23.6 million on Series A through Series J preferred stock for reset in conversion price and accretion of beneficial conversion feature of $1.1 million on Series J preferred stock (see Notes 3, 8 and 11 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus). For the year ended June 30, 2002, charges were primarily comprised of accretion of issuance costs on Series E and Series I mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock (see Note 3 and 8 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus).

Liquidity and Capital Resources

        We have incurred annual operating losses since inception, and, as of September 30, 2005, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $198.5 million. We have financed our operations primarily through private placements of our securities, and, to a lesser extent, from loans, government grants and, more recently, our financing arrangement with PRF.

Financing Arrangements

        From our inception through September 30, 2005, we raised aggregate net proceeds of $147.9 million through private placements of equity securities. In January 1997, EIS loaned us an aggregate of $7.5 million pursuant to two convertible promissory notes to partly fund our research and development activities, all of which was outstanding as of June 30, 2005. In August and September 2002, we financed certain of our fixed assets through two financing agreements with General Electric Capital Corporation, or GE Capital, in the aggregate amount of approximately $1.2 million, of which $194,000 was outstanding as of September 30, 2005. In January 2005, we entered into a $6.0 million senior secured term loan, which is collateralized by all of our personal property and fixtures, other than the property that secures our revenue interests assignment arrangement with PRF.

        On December 23, 2005, we entered into a Revenue Interests Assignment Agreementrevenue interests assignment agreement with PRF, a dedicated healthcare investment fund, pursuant to which we assigned to PRF the right to a portion of our net revenues (as defined in the agreement) from Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and any



future Zanaflex products. To secure our obligations to PRF, we also granted PRF a security interest in substantially all of our assets related to Zanaflex. Our agreement with PRF covers all Zanaflex net revenues generated from October 1, 2005 through and including December 31, 2015, unless the agreement terminates earlier. Under the agreement, PRF is entitled to the following portion of Zanaflex net revenues:


Notwithstanding the foregoing, once PRF has received and retained payments under the agreement that are at least twice the aggregate amount PRF has paid us under the agreement, PRF will only be entitled to 1% of Zanaflex net revenues. In connection with the transaction, we recognizedexpect to record a short-termliability, referred to as the revenue interest liability, of approximately $11.3 million.$14.6 million in accordance with EITF 88-18,Sales of Future Revenues. We will also impute interest expense associated with this liability using the effective interest rate method and will record a corresponding accrued interest liability. The effective interest rate is calculated based on the rate that would enable the debt to be repaid in full over the life of the arrangement. The interest rate on this liability may vary during the term of the agreement depending on a number of factors, including the level of Zanaflex sales. We currently estimate that the imputed interest rate associated with this liability will be approximately 8.9%. Payments made to PRF as a result of Zanaflex sales levels will reduce the accrued interest liability and the principal amount of the revenue interest liability.

        In consideration for our assignment of the right to receive a portion of Zanaflex net revenues, PRF paid us $15.0 million at signing of the agreement. We used approximately $3.0 million of the signing payment to repay a portion of the amount we owe to GE Capital, approximately $400,000$200,000 of the signing payment for fees and expenses associated with such repayment and $500,000 of the signing payment to reimburse PRF for expenses it estimated it incurred in the transaction. If $500,000 exceeds the actual amount of expenses PRF incurred in the transaction, PRF is required to pay us the excess within 90 days of the signing date. Under our agreement with PRF, we are required to use the remainder of the amount we received at signing and any other amounts we receive under the agreement to support commercialization, sales, marketing, clinical and regulatory activities and other financial obligations related specifically and solely to our Zanaflex operations. We may not use any proceeds from our agreement with PRF to support any of our other products unless such use is ancillary to the support of commercialization of Zanaflex.

        At our election, PRF is also required to pay us (i) an additional $5.0 million if our Zanaflex net revenues in 2005 equal or exceed $11.0 million and our Zanaflex net revenues in the first six months of 2006 equal or exceed $16.0 million, and (ii) an additional $5.0 million if our Zanaflex net revenues in 2006 equal or exceed $33.5 million. If we meet these milestones and decide to borrow these additional funds, we would be required to pay PRF $5.0 million on December 1, 2009 in the case of the first additional payment and $5.0 million on December 1, 2010 in the case of the second additional payment.

        Upon the occurrence of certain events, including if we experience a change of control, undergo certain bankruptcy events, transfer any of our interests in Zanaflex (other than pursuant to a license agreement, development, commercialization, co-promotion, collaboration, partnering or similar agreement), transfer all or substantially all of our assets, or breach certain of the covenants, representations or warranties we make under the agreement, PRF may (i) require us to repurchase the rights we sold them at the "put/call price" in effect on the date such right is exercised or (ii) foreclose on the Zanaflex assets that secure our



obligations to PRF. Except in the case of certain bankruptcy events, if PRF exercises its right, which we refer to as PRF's put option, to cause us to repurchase the rights we assigned to it, PRF may not foreclose unless we fail to pay the put/call price as required. If we experience a change of control or complete an initial public offering of shares of our common stock that results in our having a total market capitalization in excess of $150.0 million, we have the right, which we refer to as our call option, to repurchase the rights we sold to PRF at the "put/call price" in effect on the date such right is exercised. If our call option becomes exercisable as a result of this offering, we will have a period of 180 days during which to exercise the option. We do not currently intend to exercise our call option if it becomes exercisable as a result of this offering but we may reevaluate whether we would exercise the option during the 180-day period. If we do exercise our call option, we would use a portion of the proceeds from this offering to make the repayment. See "Use of Proceeds." The put/call price on a given



date is the greater of (i) 150% of all payments made by PRF to us as of such date, less all payments received by PRF from us as of such date, and (ii) an amount that would generate an internal rate of return to PRF of 25% on all payments made by PRF to us as of such date, taking into account the amount and timing of all payments received by PRF from us as of such date. We have determined that PRF's put option and our call option meet the criteria to be considered an embedded derivative and should be accounted for as such. Therefore, we expect to record a net liability of approximately $400,000 related to the put/call option to reflect its estimated fair value as of the date of the agreement, in accordance with SFAS No. 133,Accounting for Derivatives Instruments and Hedging Activities. This liability will be revalued on a quarterly basis to reflect any changes in the fair value and any gain or loss resulting from the revaluation will be recorded in earnings.

        During any period during which PRF has the right to receive 15% of Zanaflex net revenues, then 8% of the first $30.0 million in gross product revenues (as defined in the agreement) for Zanaflex we receive in any fiscal year will be distributed to PRF on a daily basis. Following the end of each fiscal quarter, if the aggregate amount actually received by PRF during such quarter exceeds the amount of net revenues PRF was entitled to receive, PRF will remit such excess to us. If the amount of net revenues PRF was entitled to receive during such quarter under the first paragraph above exceeds the aggregate amount actually received by PRF during such quarter, we will remit such excess to PRF.

        PRF also has the right to appoint a representative to receive all notices and materials provided to our board of directors and to attend as an observer all meetings of our board of directors, subject to certain exceptions. This right will terminate on the earlier to occur of the fourth anniversary of the completion of an initial public offering of shares of our common stock or termination of the Revenue Interests Assignment Agreement.revenue interests assignment agreement.

Investment Activities

        At September 30, 2005, cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments were approximately $8.7 million, as compared to $23.6 million at September 30, 2004. Our cash and cash equivalents consist of highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less at date of purchase and consist of time deposits and investments in money market funds with commercial banks and financial institutions and high-quality government and investment grade corporate bonds. Also, we maintain cash balances with financial institutions in excess of insured limits. We do not anticipate any losses with respect to such cash balances. Our short-term investments consist of corporate debt securities with original maturities greater than three months and less than one year. The balance of these investments was $5.2 million as of September 30, 2005, as compared to $18.7 million as of September 30, 2004. As of September 30, 2005, our cash and cash equivalents were $3.6 million, and our short-term investments were $5.2 million, as compared to $4.9 million and $18.7 million respectively, as of September 30, 2004.

Net Cash Used by Operations

        Net cash used by operations was $18.1 million, $24.3 million, and $26.9 million for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2003 and the year ended December 31, 2004, respectively, and $25.8 million and $16.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2005, respectively. Cash used by



operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was primarily attributable to a net loss of $26.0 million, an increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $1.5 million, a decrease in return-related liabilities of $2.1 million and an increase in inventory of $4.5 million attributable to the launch of Zanaflex Capsules. Cash used in operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, was offset by stock compensation expense of $3.5 million, an increase in deferred revenue of $9.0 million from Zanaflex sales, and a $2.7 million increase in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities. Amounts classified as royalty payable as of December 31, 2004, are included in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities as of September 30, 2005, due to their reclassification as a current liability.

        Cash used by operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, of $25.8 million was primarily due to a net loss of approximately $32.5 million, an increase in accounts receivable of $1.6 million due to the acquisition of Zanaflex and a decrease in accounts payable of $2.4 million due to timing of our payments. The cash used in operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2004,



was offset by stock compensation expense of $7.3 million and an increase in deferred revenue of $2.8 million due to Zanaflex sales.

        Cash used by operations for the year ended December 31, 2004, of $26.9 million was due to a net loss of $44.7 million, a $1.9 million increase in accounts receivable from Zanaflex sales and a $3.4 million decrease in accounts payable; accrued expenses and other current liabilities, primarily due to a $1.1 million decrease in bonus accruals. Cash used by operations for the year ended December 31, 2004, was offset by stock compensation expense of $9.1 million, depreciation and amortization expense of $1.2 million; an increase in deferred product revenue of $6.7 million; an increase in returns liability of $4.1 million; amortization of discount on short-term investments of $1.7 million; and an increase in royalty payable of $750,000 for Zanaflex sales.

        Cash used by operations for the year ended June 30, 2003, of $24.3 million was due to a net loss of $25.7 million; a reduction in amounts due to Elan of $593,000, primarily due to lower drug development charges; an increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $402,000; a $154,000 increase in interest receivable on our short term investments and an increase in other receivables and an increase in grant receivable of $214,000. The cash used in operations for the year ended June 30, 2003 was offset by stock compensation expense of $1.6 million, depreciation and amortization expense of $740,000 and amortization of debt discount relating to our $7.5 million aggregate principal amount convertible notes payable to EIS of $219,000.

        Cash used by operations for the year ended June 30, 2002, of $18.1 million was due to a net loss of approximately $21.2 million and minority interest of $580,000. The cash used in operations for the year ended June 30, 2002, was partially offset by stock compensation expenses of $1.4 million; expensing of warrants and beneficial conversion charge of $618,000 on Series C preferred stock issued to Elan, an increase of $580,000 primarily due to increased drug development charges from Elan, depreciation and amortization expense of $417,000, amortization of debt discount relating to our $7.5 million aggregate principal amount of convertible promissory notes payable to EIS of $258,000, increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses and other current liabilities of $224,000 due to higher expenses incurred as research and development projects progress.

Net Cash Used in/Provided by Investing

        Net cash provided by investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, was $3.2 million, primarily due to $4.1 million in net proceeds received from maturities of short-term investments. In addition, we purchased property and equipment of $142,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Net cash provided by investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was offset by $750,000 in purchases of intangible assets relating to the Zanaflex milestone accrual. Net cash provided by investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, was $10.5 million, primarily due to $12.9 million in net proceeds received from maturities of short-term investments. Net cash provided by investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2004,



was offset by $2 million in purchases of intangible assets related to the acquisition of Zanaflex and $463,000 in purchases of property and equipment. We had no material commitments to purchase property and equipment as of September 30, 2005.

        Net cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004, was $18.6 million, primarily due to $21.1 million in net proceeds received from maturities of short-term investments. Net cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004, was offset by $2.0 million in purchases of intangible assets related to the acquisition of Zanaflex and $532,000 in purchases of property and equipment.

        Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended June 30, 2003 was $10.4 million, primarily due to the net reinvestment of $9.7 million of surplus cash into marketable securities and purchase of property and equipment of $748,000. Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended June 30,



2002 was $5.1 million and was primarily due to purchase of short-term investment of $2.8 million and purchase of purchased property and equipment of $2.2 million in the year ended June 30, 2002. We incurred significant expenses in acquiring property and equipment in the year ended June 30, 2002 as a result of the expansion of our office and laboratory facilities.

Net Cash Used in/Provided by Financing

        Net cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, was $5.6 million, primarily due to $5.8 million in proceeds received from the GE Capital senior secured loan and $215,000 in proceeds received from issuance of warrants to GE Capital in conjunction with the issuance of the GE Capital senior secured loan, offset by approximately $429,000 in repayments of notes payable.

        Net cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, was $11.2 million, primarily due to proceeds from issuance of preferred stock. In March 2004, we completed a private placement of 1,533,327 shares of Series K mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock at $7.50 per share for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $11.5 million. Issuance costs of $55,000 related to this financing were netted against proceeds received. Net cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, was offset by $240,000 in repayments of notes payable to GE Capital.

        Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004, was $11.1 million, primarily due to proceeds from issuance of the Series K preferred stock. Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004, was offset by $324,000 in repayments of notes payable to GE Capital.

        Net cash provided by financing activities in the years ended June 30, 2003, and 2002 was $55.9 million and $2.1 million, respectively. The cash provided in the year ended June 30, 2003, was primarily due to proceeds of $55.3 million from the issuance of Series J mandatorily redeemable stock. Issuance costs of $334,000 related to this financing were netted against proceeds received. In the year ended June 30, 2003, also we entered into two financing agreements with GE Capital and received aggregate proceeds in the amount of $1.2 million. In the year ended June 30, 2002, we received proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock of approximately $1.3 million. Proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock primarily consisted of the issuance of 150,000 Series B preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of $300,000 and 333,333 Series C preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of $1.0 million to Elan as part of our January 1997 License and Supply Agreement.

Future Capital Needs

        Our future capital requirements will depend on a number of factors, including the amount of revenue generated from sales of Zanaflex Capsules, the continued progress of our research and development activities, the timing and outcome of regulatory approvals, the amount and timing of milestone or other payments made under collaborative agreements, the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patent claims and other intellectual property



rights and the acquisition of licenses to new products or compounds. We expect to incur losses from operations for at least the next several years as we continue to expand our sales and marketing infrastructure and increase our marketing efforts to support the commercialization of Zanaflex Capsules, continue our clinical development of Fampridine-SR and advance our preclinical programs.

        We believe our existing cash and cash equivalents and short-term investment, together with the net proceeds from our financing arrangement with PRF and this offering, will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses, debt repayments and capital equipment requirements for approximately the next 18 months from the date of this prospectus.24 months. To the extent our capital resources are insufficient to meet future operating requirements, we will need to raise additional capital or incur indebtedness to fund



our operations. We may be unable to obtain additional debt or equity financing on acceptable terms, if at all. If adequate funds are not available, we may be required to curtail our sales and marketing efforts, delay, reduce the scope of or eliminate some of our research and development programs or obtain funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or others that may require us to relinquish rights to certain product candidates that we might otherwise seek to develop or commercialize independently.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

        In January 2005, we entered into a $6.0 million senior secured term loan with GE Capital. In December 2005, we used a portion of the initial payment we received under our revenue interest assignment arrangement with PRF to repay approximately $3.0 million of this loan. We are required to pay monthly installments until February 2008, with interest-only payments for the first six months followed by principal and interest payments for the remaining 29 months. Interest is fixed at the rate of 9.93% per annum. The loan is secured by all of our personal property and fixtures, other than the property that secures our financing arrangement with PRF.

        In 2002, we entered into two financing agreements with GE Capital for an aggregate amount of approximately $1.2 million, to finance the purchase of certain property and equipment. One note is for $766,781 and bears an annual fixed interest rate of 8.88%. The second note is for $386,731 and bears an annual fixed interest rate of 8.57%. These financing arrangements are secured by certain of our property and equipment and do not include any debt covenants. We are required to pay monthly installments until October 2006. The aggregate principal payments required subsequent to June 30, 2005 are $129,115 in 2005, and $144,654 in 2006.

        In January 1997, EIS loaned us an aggregate of $7.5 million pursuant to two convertible promissory notes. One promissory note in the principal amount of $5.0 million bears interest at a rate of 3% which began on the first anniversary of the note. The other promissory note in the amount of $2.5 million is non-interest bearing. The unpaid principal of $5.0 million note is convertible into shares of our Series D preferred stock at a conversion price of $12.50 per share. The $2.5 million promissory note is convertible after January 22, 1999, into either shares of Series B preferred stock at a conversion price of $2.00 per share or into an undesignated series of preferred stock at a conversion price equal to 80% of the most recently completed equity financing, whichever conversion price is greater. If our preferred stock is no longer outstanding, these notes will be convertible into shares of our common stock. Principal and interest are repayable, if not converted, ratably over a seven-year period, beginning one year after we receive regulatory approval for certain products to be developed, subject to limitations related to gross margin on product sales. If we and Elan determine that regulatory approval will not likely occur, the $5.0 million promissory note will automatically convert into the underlying common stock. If our license and supply agreements with Elan are terminated for any other reason, the principal and interest is repayable ratably over 15 years. Both promissory notes restrict our ability to incur indebtedness that is senior to the notes, subject to certain exceptions, including for our revenue interests assignment arrangement with PRF.

        Under our Zanaflex purchase agreement with Elan, we are obligated to make milestone payments to Elan of up to $19.5 million based on cumulative gross sales of Zanaflex tablets and Zanaflex Capsules. As of September 30, 2005, we have made or accrued $4.5 million of these milestone



payments in the consolidated financial statements. Under our Zanaflex supply agreement with Elan, we are required to provide to Elan an 18-month rolling forecast at the beginning of each month and a two-year forecast not later than July 1 of each year. We are bound to order one hundred percent of the forecast required quantities for each five month period immediately following each monthly forecast report. At September 30, 2005, the forecast requirement for the five month period following September 30, 2005 amounted to approximately $4.9 million.

        Under our Fampridine-SR license agreement with Elan, we are obligated to make milestone payments to Elan of up to $15.0 million over the life of the contract and royalty payments as a



percentage of product sales. In addition, under our various other research, license and collaboration agreements we are obligated to make milestone payments of up to an aggregate of approximately $16.8 million over the life of the contracts.

        The following table summarizes our minimum contractual obligations as of December 31, 2004. This table does not reflect contingent milestone or royalty payments that may result in future periods from our collaborations, alliances and/or license agreements. This table should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes to our consolidated financial statements:

Twelve Month Period Ending December 31,

 Notes
Payable(1)

 Operating
Leases

 
 (in thousands)

2005 $1,202 $642
2006  2,462  642
2007  2,558  642
2008  225  53
  
 
Total $6,447 $1,979
  
 

(1)
The notes payable represents the principal and interest payable on the GE Capital notes payable and does not include the $7.5 million aggregate principal amount of convertible notes payable to EIS or milestone payments under our license agreements as these amounts are payable on contingent events. In December 2005, we used a portion of the initial payment we received from our financingrevenue interests assignment arrangement with PRF to repay approximately $3.0 million of the GE Capital notes payable. In connection with the PRF transaction, we incurredrecognized a short-term obligationrevenue interest liability of approximately $1.3 million.$14.6 million and a put/call option liability of approximately $400,000. The payment to GE Capital changed the aggregate principal payments to GE required subsequent to December 31, 2004 to: $3,858,654 in 2005; $890,521 in 2006; $1,062,180 in 2007; and $187,645 in 2008. The related interest payments required subsequent to December 31, 2004 are: $524,687 in 2005; $163,196 in 2006; $76,683 in 2007; and $2,332 in 2008.

        Under the terms of the employment agreement with our chief executive officer, Ron Cohen, we are obligated to pay severance under certain circumstances. If the employment agreement is terminated by us or by our chief executive officer for reasons other than for cause, we must pay (i) an amount equal to the base salary the chief executive officer would have received during the fifteen month period immediately following the date of termination, plus (ii) bonus equal to last annual bonus received by chief executive officer multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the number of days in the calendar year elapsed as of the termination date and the denominator of which shall be 365.

        Under the terms of the employment agreements with our Chief Scientific Officer,chief scientific officer, Andrew Blight, our Chief Operating Officer,chief operating officer, Mary Fisher, our Chief Financial Officer,chief financial officer, David Lawrence and our General Counsel,general counsel, Jane Wasman, we are obligated to pay severance under certain circumstances. In the event we terminate our employment agreement with Dr. Blight, Ms. Fisher, Mr. Lawrence or Ms. Wasman without cause, or if one of them voluntarily terminates his or her agreements with good reason, we are obligated to make severance payments equal to nine months base annual salary, in the case of Dr. Blight and Ms. Fisher, and seven months base annual salary, in the case of Mr. Lawrence and Ms. Wasman, as well as COBRA premium payments for the severance period. In such event, all options, stock appreciation rights awards and restricted stock awards that have vested as of the termination date shall remain exercisable for 90 days following such date. All unvested options, stock



appreciation rights awards and stock awards will be cancelled on the date of termination. If Dr. Blight, Ms. Fisher, Mr. Lawrence or Ms. Wasman voluntarily terminates his or her employment without good reason or if we terminate his or her employment without cause within 18 months after a change in control, we are obligated to make severance payments equal to one year's base annual salary, in the case of Dr. Blight and Ms. Fisher, and nine months base annual salary, in the case of Mr. Lawrence and Ms. Wasman, in each case paid in a lump sum within 30 days after termination, as well as COBRA premium payments for the severance period plus a bonus equal to the prior year's bonus pro rated for the number of days worked prior to termination. We are also obligated to pay salary earned but not



paid, vacation and sick leave days that have accrued, and reimbursable business expenses incurred through the date of termination. In such event, not less than 50% of the unvested options, stock appreciation rights and restricted or other stock awards shall become immediately and full vested and shall remain exercisable for 18 months following such date. All options that have vested as of the termination date shall remain exercisable for 90 days following such date. All unvested options, stock appreciation rights awards and stock awards will be cancelled on the date of termination.

Subsequent Events

        For a discussion of material events that have taken place subsequent to September 30, 2005, please refer to Note 17 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

        Our financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, grant receivable, notes payable, convertible notes payable and accounts payable. The estimated fair values of all of our financial instruments, excluding convertible notes payable to EIS, approximate their carrying amounts at September 30, 2005. The terms of these notes are disclosed at Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements.

        We have cash equivalents and short-term investments at September 30, 2005, which are exposed to the impact of interest rate changes and our interest income fluctuates as our interest rates change. Due to the short-term nature of our investments in money market funds and corporate debt securities, the carrying value of our cash equivalents and short-term investments approximate their fair value at September 30, 2005.

        We maintain an investment portfolio in accordance with our investment policy. The primary objectives of our investment policy are to preserve principal, maintain proper liquidity to meet operating needs and maximize yields. Although our investments are subject to credit risk, our investment policy specifies credit quality standards for our investments and limits the amount of credit exposure from any single issue, issuer or type of investment. Our investments are also subject to interest rate risk and will decrease in value if market interest rates increase. However, due to the conservative nature of our investments and relatively short duration, interest rate risk is mitigated. We do not own derivative financial instruments. Accordingly, we do not believe that there is any material market risk exposure with respect to derivative or other financial instruments.

Effects of Inflation

        Our most liquid assets are cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. Because of their liquidity, these assets are not directly affected by inflation. Because we intend to retain and continue to use our equipment, furniture and fixtures and leasehold improvements, we believe that the incremental inflation related to replacement costs of such items will not materially affect our operations. However, the rate of inflation affects our expenses, primarily employee compensation and contract services, which could increase our level of expenses.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

        The following discussion of critical accounting policies identifies the accounting policies that require application of management's most difficult, subjective or complex judgments, often as a result



of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain and may change in subsequent periods. It is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all of our significant accounting policies, which are more fully described in Note 2 of the notes to the consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus. In many cases, the accounting treatment of a particular transaction is specifically dictated by generally accepted accounting principles, with no need for management's



judgment in their application. There are also areas in which the selection of an available alternative policy would not produce a materially different result. We have identified the following as our areas of critical accounting policies: sales revenue recognition, research and development, income taxes, and stock-based compensation.

Revenue Recognition

        We apply the revenue recognition guidance in SFAS No. 48,Revenue Recognition When the Right of Return Exists, which among other criteria requires that future returns can be reasonably estimated in order to recognize revenue. Under SFAS 48 we are not permitted to recognize revenue until we can reasonably estimate the likely return rate for our products. Since we have only limited sales history with Zanaflex Capsules and due to generic competition and customer conversion from Zanaflex tablets to Zanaflex Capsules, we do not believe we can reasonably determine a return rate. As a result, we account for sales of these products using a deferred revenue recognition model. At a future point in time, which could be in a number of years, when we are able to reasonably estimate product returns we will begin to recognize revenue based on shipments of product to our wholesale drug distributors.

        Under our deferred revenue model, we do not recognize revenue upon shipment of product to our wholesale drug distributors. Instead, we record deferred revenue at gross invoice sales price, and classify the cost basis of the inventory shipped as a component of inventory. We recognize revenue when prescriptions are filled to an end-user because once a prescription is filled the product cannot be returned. We use monthly prescription data that we purchase from NDC Health, a leading provider of healthcare data, to determine the amount of revenue to be recognized. We receive this data approximately 45 days after the end of a given month. We estimate prescription sales until the NDC data becomes available, at which time adjustments are made to revenue and cost of sales to account for any differences between our estimates and the actual data. To date such differences have been immaterial. The estimated prescription sales are based on assumed monthly prescription growth rates of 0% for Zanaflex tablets and an amount equal to the prior month's prescription growth rate for Zanaflex Capsules. The method for estimating prescription growth for Zanaflex Capsules will be reevaluated as more prescription data becomes available. When we receive the prescription data, we use the number of units of product prescribed to record gross sales. We then reduce deferred revenue and record cost of goods sold. We began receiving end-user prescription data in March 2005 which enabled us to begin recognizing revenue from Zanaflex tablet sales. We began marketing Zanaflex Capsules in April 2005 and began receiving prescription data and recognizing revenue in the same month.

        In addition to the prescription data we receive from NDC Health, we also receive data that we use to monitor ex-wholesalertrends in sales trends.from wholesalers to their customers. We receive this data from an outside vendor on a monthly basis. This data includes bottles shipped from certain wholesalers to their accounts/customers. We also periodically compare our ex-factory shipments to wholesalers to prescription reports to further assess inventory in the distribution channel.channel on a monthly basis. We use the wholesaler sales trend data and the wholesaler vs. prescription comparison to better understand market conditions, but not as a basis for recognizing revenue.

        We accept returns of products for six months prior to and 12 months after their expiration date. Returns of products sold by us are charged directly against deferred revenue, reducing the amount of deferred revenue that we may recognize.



Sale of Zanaflex Tablet Inventory Acquired From Elan

        When we acquired Zanaflex from Elan, we also acquired Elan's inventory of Zanaflex tablets. This inventory included partial lots with expiration dating of less than 12 months and full lots with expiration dating greater than 12 months. We have deferred recognition of any revenue from sales of the partial lot inventory until the return period for the product expires in June 2006, and will recognize revenue then only to the extent that deferred revenues exceed returns. We cannot use prescription data to recognize revenue associated with the partial lot inventory acquired from Elan because we cannot determine whether the prescription was filled with product that Elan sold prior to our acquisition of Zanaflex or with product we sold.



        All Zanaflex tablet partial lot inventory that we acquired from Elan has either been sold or is no longer being sold by us. As a result, after the return period expires in June 2006, there will no longer be deferred revenue associated with the Zanaflex tablet partial lot inventory acquired from Elan.

        In July 2005 we began to recognize revenue from the full lots based on prescriptions filled for Zanaflex tablets. All of the Zanaflex tablet inventory sold by Elan prior to our acquisition reached expiration in June 2005, therefore any prescriptions filled for Zanaflex tablets subsequent to June 2005 must be from the full inventory lots acquired by and sold by us.

        We are uncertain about the amount of returns that we may receive on these products, for a number of reasons including our limited historical returns experience. Returns of Zanaflex tablet inventory acquired from Elan and sold by us are charged against deferred revenue, reducing the amount of deferred revenue that we may recognize.

        At December 31, 2004, and September 30, 2005, we had deferred revenue from Zanaflex tablets of $6.6 million and $10.7 million (unaudited), respectively, of which $3.6 million and $2.5 million (unaudited), respectively, was related to product acquired from Elan that had an expiration date of less than 12 months at the time it was sold during 2004. We believe there is a high likelihood that this product will be returned, which would result in our inability to recognize related revenue.

Returns of Zanaflex Tablets sold by Elan

        As part of the acquisition of Zanaflex, we agreed to accept any returns of Zanaflex tablets that were returned subsequent to January 17, 2005, including returns of product that was originally sold by Elan. Product returns prior to January 17, 2005, were the responsibility of Elan. We have recorded a charge of $4.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2004, for the estimated returns of Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan. To the extent that returns exceed the estimated charge, we will be required to record further charges. The return period for Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan ends in June 2006, after which time we do not anticipate any further charges resulting from Zanaflex tablets sold by Elan.

Research and Development

        Research and development expenses include the costs associated with our internal research and development activities including, salaries and benefits, occupancy costs, and research and development conducted for us by third parties, such as sponsored university-based research, and clinical trial vendors. In addition, research and development expenses include expenses related to grant revenue and the cost of clinical trial drug supply shipped to our clinical study vendors. We account for our clinical study costs by estimating the total cost to treat a patient in each clinical trial and recognizing this cost as we estimate when the patient receives treatment, beginning when the patient enrolls in the trial. This estimated cost includes payments to the trial site and patient-related costs, including laboratory costs related to the conduct of the trial. Cost per patient varies based on the type of clinical trial, the site of the clinical trial, and the length of the treatment period for each patient. As actual costs become known to us, we adjust our accrual; such changes in estimate may be a material change in our clinical study accrual, which could also materially affect our results of operations.



Income Taxes

        As part of the process of preparing our financial statements we are required to estimate our income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which we operate. We account for income taxes by the liability method. Under this method, deferred income taxes are recognized for tax consequences in future years of differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their financial reporting amounts at each year-end, based on enacted laws and statutory tax rates applicable to the periods in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are provided if, based upon the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.



        We have not recorded any tax provision or benefit for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2003 and December 31, 2004 and for the nine months ended September 30, 2005. We have provided a valuation allowance for the full amount of our net deferred tax assets since realization of any future benefit from deductible temporary differences and net operating loss carry-forwards cannot be sufficiently assured at September 30, 2005.

        As of September 30, 2005, we had available net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $63.5 million for federal and state income tax purposes, which are available to offset future federal and state taxable income, if any, and expire between 2009 and 2024 and research and development tax credit carry-forwards of approximately $1.5 million for federal income tax reporting purposes which are available to reduce federal income taxes, if any, through 2018. Since our inception, we have incurred substantial losses and expect to incur substantial and recurring losses in future periods. The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, the Code, provides for a limitation of the annual use of net operating loss and research and development tax credit carry forwards (following certain ownership changes, as defined by the Code) that could significantly limit our ability to utilize these carry-forwards. We have experienced various ownership changes, as defined by the Code, as a result of past financings. Accordingly, our ability to utilize the aforementioned carry-forwards may be limited. Additionally, because U.S. tax laws limit the time during which these carry forwards may be applied against future taxes we may not be able to take full advantage of these attributes for federal income tax purposes.

Stock-Based Compensation

        We account for options and restricted stock granted to employees and directors in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 123,Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, and related interpretations. As such, compensation expense is recorded on stock option grants based on the fair value of the options granted, which is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model and it is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. Compensation expense for restricted stock granted is based on the fair value of the restricted stock granted and is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. We account for stock options granted to non-employees on a fair-value basis in accordance with SFAS No. 123, Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 96-18,Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services, and FASB Interpretations No. 28,Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans an Interpretation of APB Opinion No. 15 and 25. As a result, the non-cash charge to operations for non-employee options with vesting or other performance criteria is affected each reporting period by changes in the estimated fair value of our common stock. The two factors which most affect charges or credits to operations related to stock-based compensation are the fair value of the common stock underlying stock options for which stock-based compensation is recorded and the volatility of such fair value. If our estimates of the fair value of these equity instruments change, it would have the effect of changing compensation expenses. Because shares of our common stock have not been publicly traded, we estimate the fair value of our common stock considering, among other factors, the most recent previous sale of convertible preferred stock (pro forma for the 1-for-1.3 reverse split that we intend to effect on or about the date of this prospectus)January 11, 2006). We do not discount the issuance price of our preferred stock in estimating the fair value of our common stock.



BUSINESS

        Acorda Therapeutics is a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the identification, development and commercialization of novel therapies that improve neurological function in people with multiple sclerosis, or MS, spinal cord injury, or SCI, multiple sclerosis, or MS, and other disorders of the central nervous system, or CNS. Our marketed drug, Zanaflex Capsules, is FDA-approved for the management of spasticity. Our lead product candidate, Fampridine-SR, is in a Phase 3 clinical trial for the improvement of walking ability in people with MS. Our preclinical programs also target MS and SCI as well as other CNS disorders, including stroke and traumatic brain injury.

        Approximately 650,000 people in the United States suffer from MS or SCI and the combined annual cost of treatment for these conditions exceeds $13 billion. In addition, it is estimated that a total of approximately 10 million people live with the long-term consequences of traumatic brain injury and stroke in the United States. Our goal is to continue to grow as a fully-integrated biopharmaceutical company by commercializing therapeutic products, developing our product candidates and advancing our preclinical programs for these large and underserved markets.

Company Highlights


Background and Market Opportunity

The Challenge of Nervous System Disorders

        The spinal cord and brain together comprise the CNS. The billions of nerve cells that make up the CNS, in conjunction with the nerve bundles that run through all parts of the body, which is calledmake up the peripheral nervous system, transmit the electrical impulses necessary to sustain, regulate and monitor every aspect of human life. The spinal cord serves as the master link between the brain and the body and carries information that regulates movement, sensation and involuntary functions, such as breathing, blood pressure, temperature control, and bladder, bowel and sexual functions.

        Nerve impulses travel within and between the brain and spinal cord via long, thin fibers, or axons, that transmit information to other nerve cells through microscopic junctions called synapses. When axons are damaged or lost, they do not normally regenerate, and there is only very limited adaptability, or plasticity, of the surviving axons that allow them to take over the role of damaged or lost axons. The myelin sheath that surrounds axons in the brain and spinal cord provides insulation that facilitates the transmission of nerve impulses. We refer to the axon and its surrounding myelin sheath as a nerve fiber. The myelin sheath is composed of multiple layers of tightly packed cell membrane and is vulnerable to damage in conditions like MS and SCI. Once damaged, it is often not effectively repaired. Although nerve fibers can survive in a demyelinated state, their ability to conduct nerve impulses may be completely lost or severely compromised.

Our Approach to the Market for CNS Disorders

        We are focused on identifying, developing and commercializing novel pharmaceutical products that address large and underserved CNS markets. We view MS and SCI as the primary markets for our



products as well as strategic points of access to a broad range of additional neurological conditions for the following reasons:

        For people with MS, SCI and similar chronic neurological conditions, even relatively small and incremental improvements in CNS function can produce meaningful benefits in their quality of life.

        Spasticity refers to the often painful involuntary tensing, stiffening or contracting of muscles. Spasticity is not a disease but a symptom of other conditions, such as MS, SCI, stroke, traumatic brain injury and cerebral palsy, where portions of the nervous system that control voluntary movement have been damaged. This damage results in the nerve cells in the spinal cord becoming disconnected from controlling centers in the brain and, as a result, transmitting unregulated impulses to the muscles. People who have spasticity may not experience it all the time—it may be triggered by a stimulus, such as pain, pressure sores, cold weather or a urinary tract infection. Up to 75% of people with chronic SCI, and the majority of people with MS, experience some form of spasticity. We Move, a non-profit organization dedicated to movement disorders, estimates that spasticity affects approximately 500,000 people in the United States and over 12 million worldwide.

        Current treatments for spasticity are focused on reducing spasm frequency, pain or irritating stimuli that can provoke spasticity. Treatment of spasticity often involves a combination of physical therapy and oral medications. Baclofen and tizanidine, the active ingredient in the Zanaflex products, are the two most frequently prescribed oral medications for spasticity. For more intractable spasticity, treatments sometimes include surgical or chemical destruction of nerve roots in the affected area.

        The National Multiple Sclerosis Society, or NMSS, currently estimates that 400,000 people in the United States have multiple sclerosis. The NMSS estimates that the medical costs associated with treating MS in the United States were approximately $6.2 billion in 2004. Medications accounted for approximately $3.5 billion of these costs. MS is more prevalent in Caucasians and women and is generally diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 50.

        MS is a degenerative CNS disorder in which the immune system attacks and damages the insulating myelin sheath. This damage, which can occur at multiple sites in the CNS, blocks or diminishes conduction of electrical impulses. People with MS may suffer impairments in any number of neurological functions. These impairments vary from individual to individual and over the course of time, depending on which parts of the brain and spinal cord are affected, and often include difficulty walking, spasticity, fatigue, lack of stamina and loss or disturbance of vision. They may also include loss of sensation, loss of bowel and bladder control, sexual dysfunction, depression, neuropathic pain,



muscle paralysis, dizziness, tremors and cognitive difficulties. Individuals vary in the severity of the impairments they suffer on a day-to-day basis, with impairments becoming better or worse depending on the activity of the disease on a given day. An individual with MS may function normally one day and experience one or more symptoms of MS the next.

        MS is generally classified by how the disease progresses. The most common classification is relapsing-remitting MS, in which people go through periods during which their disease is relatively stable or in remission, only to experience a recurrence of their disease, known as a relapse, which creates additional damage and loss of function. Approximately 10% of MS cases in the United States. are diagnosed as primary progressive MS, which does not involve distinct attacks but rather a steady worsening of symptoms. Secondary progressive MS involves an initial period of relapsing-remitting disease followed by a steady worsening that is punctuated by more severe flare-ups and partial remissions. Most people with relapsing-remitting disease will eventually convert to secondary progressive disease, though this may not occur for many years.

        There are no current treatments that address the weakness and loss of mobility that is a major aspect of the progressive disability experienced by people with MS. Existing treatments are classified as relapse management, disease course management and symptom relief.

        Relapse Management.    The majority of neurologists treating people with MS use intravenous high-dose corticosteroids for the treatment of sudden and severe relapses. Generally, people experiencing a severe relapse receive a four-day course of steroids on either an in-patient or out-patient basis. This treatment may shorten the time required for recovery from such a relapse.

        Disease Course Management.    Drugs that modify the immune reactions associated with nerve damage in MS include Avonex, Betaseron, Copaxone and Rebif. These drugs are approved only for the relapsing-remitting form of the disease. Other drugs that suppress the immune system include drugs initially approved to treat cancer, such as Novantrone, which is approved for the treatment of relapsing or secondary progressive MS, and methotrexate. These medications produce a reduction in relapse rate, rather than a halting or reversal of the disease process. They do not restore lost neurological function.

        Symptom Relief.    Doctors also prescribe a number of drugs to address the secondary disabilities, or symptoms, associated with MS. These include treatments for spasticity, fatigue, bladder and bowel control, depression and pain. Baclofen and tizanidine are the most frequently prescribed drugs for spasticity. Commonly prescribed drugs for other symptoms include Ditropan or Detrol for bladder dysfunction, Provigil for fatigue, fluoxetine for depression, and amitriptyline for pain.

        According to the National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center, approximately 250,000 people in the United States live with the long-term consequences of SCI and approximately 11,000 new spinal cord injuries occur each year, typically in young men. The majority of people with SCI are injured under the age of 30 and live with permanent disability and multiple related medical conditions for more than 40 years after their injury. The National Spinal Cord Injury Database at the University of Alabama estimates that the average lifetime costs directly attributable to SCI for an individual injured at age 25 varies from approximately $600,000 to $2.8 million depending on the severity of the injury.

        The spinal cord can be injured by physical trauma that bends the neck or body violently, such as vehicular or diving accidents, or by objects that penetrate or impact the spinal cord, such as a bullet or a knife. The spinal cord can also be injured by loss of blood flow due to damage to major blood vessels or during surgical procedures. When an area of the spinal cord is damaged, motor and sensory function are impaired throughout those parts of the body that are below the level of the injury.



        Until recently, SCI was considered an untreatable and incurable condition. Within the last two decades, researchers have shown that the spinal cord is not severed in most people with SCI. Rather, stretching or compression of the cord causes nerve fibers and blood vessels to tear and unleashes a secondary process of bleeding, loss of blood flow and inflammation that causes more tissue damage. The majority of people with spinal cord injury have some axons that survive within or around the site of injury. Because of these surviving axons, approximately 50% of people with SCI have some motor and/or sensory function remaining below the level of the injury and are said to have incomplete SCI. Those with no detectable function below the injury level are said to have complete SCI. Researchers have also shown that many axons that survive trauma are damaged and permanently lose part of their myelin sheath.

        In addition to the impact of paralysis on mobility and independence, chronic SCI is often associated with several life-altering conditions that vary depending on the individual and the extent of injury. These include spasticity, as well as persistent pain, loss of control of bowel and bladder functions, loss of sexual function, compromised breathing, loss of sensation, and unstable control of blood pressure, heart rate and body temperature. There is no cure for SCI and no treatment available that is capable of improving neurological function. Methylprednisolone, a high-dose steroid, is currently the standard of care in the United States. Methylprednisolone is a one-time treatment administered to the patient immediately following an injury to prevent secondary tissue damage. There are several treatments for the symptoms of SCI, many of which are the same treatments used to address the symptoms of MS. We believe that novel therapies that offer even an incremental improvement in these conditions would have a meaningful impact on the quality of life for people with SCI.

        Neurological injuries and degenerative diseases of the CNS, including stroke, traumatic brain injury, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease, are among the most devastating and costly of human ailments. These conditions are most often chronic and historically have been extremely difficult to treat. These disorders, like MS and SCI, involve damage to nerve cells and nerve fibers and would likely benefit from similar approaches to tissue protection and repair. For example, the inflammation process that occurs naturally after many types of tissue injury may damage both injured and healthy CNS cells. As with MS and SCI, these conditions could be treated with interventions that replace nerve cells, stimulate new nerve fiber growth, or increase the adaptability of connections within the nervous system.

Our Strategy

        Our strategy is to continue to grow as a fully-integrated biopharmaceutical company focused on the identification, development and commercialization of a range of nervous system therapeutics. We are using our scientific, clinical and commercial expertise in MS and SCI as strategic points of access to additional CNS markets, including stroke and traumatic brain injury. Key aspects of our strategy are:


Our Product Pipeline

Name

 Primary Indication
 Status
 Marketing Rights
Zanaflex Capsules Spasticity FDA-approved U.S.

Zanaflex (tablets)

 

Spasticity

 

FDA-approved

 

U.S.

Fampridine-SR

 

MS

 

Phase 3

 

Worldwide

Chondroitinase Program

 

SCI

 

Preclinical

 

Worldwide

Neuregulin Program

 

MS

 

Preclinical

 

Worldwide

Remyelinating Antibody Program

 

MS

 

Preclinical

 

Worldwide

Zanaflex Products

        Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets are short-acting drugs approved by the FDA for the management of spasticity. We acquired all of Elan's U.S. sales, marketing and distribution rights to Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets in July 2004. These products contain tizanidine, one of the two leading treatments for the management of spasticity. Zanaflex tablets were approved by the FDA in 1996 and lost compound patent protection in 2002. There are currently 11 generic versions of tizanidine tablets on the market. However, substantial brand loyalty remains in the prescriber community for the Zanaflex brand. Approximately 90% of all prescriptions for tizanidine are written as "Zanaflex," although most are switched automatically at the pharmacy for a generic tizanidine tablet. Zanaflex Capsules were approved by the FDA in 2002, but were never marketed by Elan. We began marketing Zanaflex Capsules in April 2005.

        Clinical trials conducted by Elan demonstrated that Zanaflex Capsules, when taken with food, produce average peak levels of tizanidine in a person's blood that are lower and rise more gradually compared to the peak levels following a similar dose of the tablet form. The FDA recognizes these differences and has determined that Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets are not



therapeutically equivalent and are not AB-rated to Zanaflex Capsules. As a result, under state pharmacy laws, prescriptions written for Zanaflex Capsules may not be filled by the pharmacist with Zanaflex tablets or generic tizanidine tablets, although some substitution does take place in practice. Zanaflex Capsules are available in 2 mg, 4 mg and 6 mg doses, while tablet formulations are only available in 2 mg and 4 mg doses. The 6 mg capsule gives patients and physicians an additional dosing choice and an opportunity to reduce the number of pills a patient must take daily. In addition, many patients may find capsules easier to swallow than tablets. In addition, people who have difficulty swallowing may open the capsule and sprinkle it on food. The pharmacokinetic effect of sprinkling contents of the capsule on food, however, is different from when the intact capsule is taken with food.

        In 2004, retail sales of Zanaflex tablets and generic equivalents of Zanaflex tablets totaled approximately $300 million in the United States, with Zanaflex tablets accounting for about $15 million of that amount. The vast majority of prescriptions for these products are written by a relatively small group of prescribers. In 2004, over 117,000 physicians wrote one or more prescriptions for generic tizanidine or Zanaflex tablets. However, 78% of all such prescriptions were generated by approximately 9,200 prescribers. We believe that our internal specialty sales force, contract sales force and contract telesales group, will be able to reach virtually all of these high-volume prescribers.

        To support our commercialization of Zanaflex Capsules, we have established a sales and marketing infrastructure consisting of an internal specialty sales force, a contract sales force and a pharmaceutical telesales group. Our internal specialty sales force currently consists of 14 sales professionals who call on neurologists and other prescribers specializing in treating patients with conditions that involve spasticity. Members of our internal sales force also call on managed care organizations, pharmacists and distribution customers. We plan to expand our specialty sales force to approximately 30 sales professionals in the first quarter of 2006. In addition, Cardinal Health provides us with a contract sales force of approximately 160 sales representatives to market Zanaflex Capsules, on a non-exclusive basis, to primary care physicians who currently prescribe Zanaflex tablets or generic tizanidine tablets. We use a pharmaceutical telesales group to contact primary care physicians, specialty physicians and pharmacists to provide information regarding Zanaflex Capsules or determine their interest in receiving samples of Zanaflex Capsules or a visit from a sales representative.

        After the introduction of generic tizanidine tablets in June 2002, Elan discontinued promotional and educational support for Zanaflex tablets. To our knowledge, none of the distributors of generic tizanidine or baclofen, the other leading spasticity treatment, which is also generic, has engaged in any educational programs on the treatment of spasticity. Concurrent with our launch of Zanaflex Capsules in April 2005, we initiated a sampling program as well as a number of educational, promotional and drug safety monitoring programs for prescribers and patients. In addition to our programs for prescribers and patients, we also have a number of programs in place to educate pharmacists about Zanaflex Capsules and the pharmacokinetic differences between tizanidine tablets, including generic tizanidine tablets and Zanaflex tablets, and Zanaflex Capsules.

        Since April 2005, we have seen continued growth in monthly prescriptions of Zanaflex Capsules. We believe that this trend will continue as we extend our reach into the population of high-volume prescribers of tizanidine. We are seeking FDA approval of improvements in labeling and we will also explore the potential for new indications.


        Although tizanidine, the active ingredient in Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets, is the same, there are some important differences between the capsule and tablet formulations. To establish the differences between Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets, Elan conducted a single dose clinical trial with 96 healthy volunteers. That trial demonstrated that Zanaflex Capsules, when taken with food, resulted, on average, in a more gradual rise in tizanidine levels in the blood and a lower peak concentration. By contrast, the trial demonstrated that Zanaflex Capsules taken without food resulted in essentially the same pharmacokinetic effect as the tablet formulation of tizanidine. The results of the trial are illustrated in Figure 1 below.


Figure 1. Average Blood Concentration Over Time

GRAPHIC

        As a result of this difference in absorption rate and blood level when taken with food, the FDA has determined that neither Zanaflex tablets nor generic tizanidine tablets are therapeutically equivalent or AB-rated, to Zanaflex Capsules. Therefore, under state pharmacy laws, pharmacists cannot fill prescriptions written for Zanaflex Capsules with Zanaflex tablets or generic tizanidine tablets. The FDA-approved package insert for Zanaflex Capsules contains the following language regarding the differences between the products: "Food has complex effects on tizanidine pharmacokinetics, which differ with different formulations. These pharmacokinetic differences may result in clinically significant differences when (1) switching administration of the tablet between the fed or fasted state, (2) switching administration of the capsule between the fed or fasted state, (3) switching between the tablet and capsule in the fed state, or (4) switching between the intact capsule and sprinkling the contents of the capsule on applesauce. These changes may result in increased adverse events or delayed/more rapid onset of activity, depending on the nature of the switch. For this reason, the prescriber should be thoroughly familiar with the changes in kinetics associated with these different conditions."

        The most frequent adverse events associated with the use of tizanidine include dry mouth, drowsiness, fatigue and dizziness. These events are generally mild to moderate and are believed to be dose-related. In one single-dose study where patients were not titrated, two-thirds of patients experienced hypotension. Zanaflex Capsules have a short-acting effect, and patients are advised to take it at the times during the day when they most need relief from spasticity.



Fampridine-SR

        Fampridine-SR, our lead product candidate, is currently in a Phase 3 clinical trial for the improvement of walking ability in people with MS pursuant to an SPA issued by the FDA. The FDA has agreed that this trial, if successful, could qualify as one of the pivotal efficacy studies required for drug approval. Fampridine-SR is a small molecule drug contained in a sustained-release tablet form. Laboratory studies have shown that fampridine, the active ingredient in Fampridine-SR, improves impulse conduction in nerve fibers in which the myelin sheath has been damaged. Fampridine is not currently FDA-approved for use in MS or any other indications. We believe that Fampridine-SR could represent a fundamental shift in the treatment of people with MS because it may improve neurological function rather than treating the symptoms or slowing the progression of disease, as current treatments do. We have obtained Orphan Drug designations from the FDA for Fampridine-SR in both MS and incomplete SCI.

        In MS, the myelin sheath is damaged by the body's own immune system, causing areas of myelin sheath loss, also known as demyelination. When a nerve fiber is demyelinated after injury, large numbers of the specialized potassium channels on the surface of the axon that are normally hidden or covered by the myelin sheath are exposed and leak potassium ions, causing the nerve fiber to short circuit its electrical impulses. Fampridine blocks these exposed channels, thereby permitting the nerve fiber to transmit impulses again, even in a demyelinated state. Fampridine may also serve to amplify electrical signals at sites of contact or synapses between nerve cells by blocking the same channels in the tips of the nerve fiber, thereby improving the function of surviving tissue in the injured nervous system. Fampridine-SR is a sustained release formulation of fampridine that we believe enables safer and more effective blood levels to be maintained throughout the day, which cannot be easily accomplished with an immediate-release formulation.

        We have a worldwide, exclusive license from Elan for all of its rights to, among other things, develop, promote, distribute, use and sell Fampridine-SR in all human clinical indications, and to develop, promote, distribute, use and sell other patented sustained-release formulations of the drug. Elan also manufactures Fampridine-SR for us.

        We believe there are compelling reasons to develop Fampridine-SR as a new therapy for improving walking ability in people with MS:

        Clinical Trials of Fampridine-SR

        We have conducted a series of clinical trials to establish the safety, pharmacokinetics and optimal dosing of Fampridine-SR in MS and SCI, as well as to assess its efficacy. More than 800 people have been treated with Fampridine-SR in over 25 clinical trials, including nine clinical trials in MS and 11 clinical trials in SCI.

        Current Phase 3 Trial.    Our current Phase 3 clinical trial, MS-F203, was initiated in June 2005, after we reached agreement with the FDA on the protocol design and received a Special Protocol Assessment from the FDA Division of Neuropharmacological Drug Products. The FDA has agreed that this trial, if successful, could qualify as one of the pivotal efficacy studies required for drug approval.


        MS-F203 is a double-blind clinical trial designed to enroll 240 people at up to 35 MS centers in the United States and Canada. Subjects will complete a Timed 25-Foot Walking Test at each visit during the clinical trial. This test involves timing the subject's completion of a 25-foot walk as fast as he or she can do so safely. Such a test is relevant as a measure of the subject's ability to perform tasks that are required in daily life, such as crossing the street in the time period allotted by a traffic light. In addition, subjects will also be asked to fill out a 12-item questionnaire known as the MS Walking Scale or MSWS-12. The MSWS-12 is a subjective measure of the degree to which walking disability impacts the subject's daily life.

        Trial results will be analyzed using our proprietary responder analysis, for which we have applied for a patent. A subject will be deemed to be a responder if his or her score on the 25-foot walk was better during the majority of his or her visits in the treatment phase of the trial, than the best visit during the non-treatment phase. The primary endpoint of the trial will be the comparison of the percentage of responders in the Fampridine-SR group to the percentage of responders in the placebo group. To validate the clinical importance of improvements in the timed walk measurements, the MSWS-12 scores of the responders will be compared against those of non-responders. This analysis is designed to ensure that being deemed a responder is clinically meaningful to the subject. In addition, the trial will also test for significant improvement in walking ability in the Fampridine-SR-treated responder group at the last treatment visit versus the placebo group. This analysis is designed to ensure that the improvements seen by responders are maintained over the duration of the trial. As a secondary endpoint, the trial will also measure lower extremity muscle strength, as assessed by the modified British Medical Research Council manual muscle testing procedures, referred to as the Lower Extremity Manual Muscle Test or LEMMT.

        The design of our Phase 3 clinical trial was closely modeled on the design of the preceding Phase 2 clinical trial, MS-F202, and builds on our clinical trial experience in measuring improvements in neurological function against the variability in function that is inherent in people with MS. Individuals who suffer from MS vary in the severity of the impairments they experience on a day-to-day basis, depending on the activity of the disease on a given day. As a result, from one clinical trial visit to the next, a subject's walking ability can vary significantly. This variability makes it difficult to distinguish treatment-related changes in walking ability from disease-related changes in walking ability. Our review of MS-F202 data demonstrated that a responder form of analysis helps overcome the effect of the inherent variability of disease activity that people with MS experience.

        We expect the recruitment period for the current trial, which began in June 2005, to require approximately six to eight months.end in February 2006. The treatment period is 14 weeks and each subject is involved in trial procedures for approximately five months overall. We currently expect to be able to evaluate data from this clinical trial in the third quarter of 2006, if patient recruitment proceeds as planned.

        Phase 2 Clinical Trials.    Our most recently completed Phase 2 clinical trial, MS-F202, was designed to compare 10 mg, 15 mg and 20 mg doses of Fampridine-SR taken twice per day and to assess their relative safety and efficacy over a stable treatment period of 12 weeks. The pre-specified primary endpoint of the clinical trial was an improvement in average walking speed using the Timed 25-Foot Walk. The clinical trial was initiated in early 2003 and completed enrollment of 211 subjects in 24 major MS centers in August 2003. The clinical trial was designed to give us a clear indication of optimal dose and the number of subjects that we would need to establish efficacy in a subsequent Phase 3 trial. The overall design of our MS-F202 Phase 2 clinical trial is illustrated in Figure 2 below.


Figure 2. Design of Fampridine-SR MS-F202 Phase 2 clinical trial.

LOGO

        The efficacy results, based on the prospective analysis plan of MS-F202, indicated a trend for improvement from baseline in walking ability (using the Timed 25-Foot Walk test) in the Fampridine-SR-treated subjects, relative to the placebo-treated subjects. Statistical significance was not reached on the primary efficacy analysis, which was defined as the percentage change from baseline in average walking speed during the 12 weeks of stable double-blind treatment. Statistical significance was obtained for the secondary outcome measure of lower extremity muscle strength, as assessed by LEMMT. All three Fampridine-SR dose groups showed greater mean increases from baseline in LEMMT scores relative to the placebo group and the differences were statistically significant for the 10 mg and 15 mg Fampridine-SR groups (p< 0.05). A p-value is a statistical term that indicates the probability that a difference between treatment groups is random. The smaller the p-value, the lower the likelihood that the difference was random. Generally a p-value of less than 0.05 is considered to represent a statistically significant difference.

        Our analysis of the data led us to believe that part of the reason that statistical significance was not achieved on the primary endpoint was related to the disease-related variability of walking ability for a subject from visit to visit, together with the fact that not all subjects are expected to respond to the treatment. We believe this variability in walking ability, much of which is contributed by subjects who do not respond, made it difficult to establish the significance of treatment-related improvements using the average walking speed measure that had been prospectively defined as the endpoint of the trial. In order to try to reduce the effect of this variability, we developed an analysis designed to classify subjects as responders only if they demonstrated consistent improvement during the treatment period, when subjects were taking either Fampridine-SR or placebo. Subjects were deemed to be responders if their Timed 25-Foot Walk test results were better during at least three of the four treatment visits than their best score during the non-treatment period. When examined using this form of analysis, all three of the groups receiving Fampridine-SR had a statistically significant increase in the number of responders compared to placebo, as shown in Figure 3.


Figure 3. Responder rates for treatment groups in MS-F202.

LOGO

        Since the differences in responder rates among the three doses examined were small, more detailed analyses were performed comparing the pooled Fampridine-SR-treated groups against the placebo-treated group. The difference in responder rate between the pooled Fampridine-SR-treated subjects and the placebo-treated subjects was statistically significant (p-value<0.001), as shown below.

Status
 Placebo
 Fampridine-SR Pooled
 
 (N=47)

 (N=158)


Responders

 

  8.5%

 

36.7%

Non-responders

 

91.5%

 

63.3%

        The responder analysis allows characteristics of the response to be appreciated in more detail. The improvement in walking in responders appeared to be substantial and sustained. The average increase in walking speed of responders was more than 25%, as compared to approximately 2% for non-responders. This was consistent over the 3-month period of treatment and was statistically significant at every visit, as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The average percent change from baseline in walking speed.

LOGO

The graph depicts the average change in walking speed during the treatment period for study MS-F202, comparing Fampridine-SR-treated responders to the placebo-treated group. Differences between the groups were statistically significant (p<0.001) at all visits.


        In MS-F202, subjects were required to fill out the MSWS-12 questionnaire. When the results of this questionnaire were analyzed for all evaluable subjects, the average improvement, or reduction in score, during the treatment period was greater for responders than for non-responders, in each case including those subjects on placebo, and the difference was statistically significant. We believe this result demonstrates that being a timed-walk responder is clinically meaningful to patients. These results are shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Average change in MS Walking Scale Score.

LOGO

Histogram to show the average change in score for the MS Walking Scale for responders and non-responders between the baseline and stable treatment periods. A reduction in score represents a subject's perception that there has been improvement in the effect of walking disability on activities of daily life.

        This analysis of the MS-F202 clinical trial served as the basis for the design of the Phase 3 MS-F203 clinical trial. The results of MS-F202 using this analysis showed that there was a statistically significant increase in the number of people being treated who experienced a consistent increase in walking ability, compared to placebo, and that this improvement was sustained and clinically meaningful to patients. These data also show that the benefit was maintained for the full 14 weeks of treatment. These results are similar whether the pooled Fampridine-SR-treated subjects or just those subjects receiving the current target dose of 10 mg twice a day are compared with the placebo-treated group.

        In 2001, we completed a smaller double-blind Phase 2 clinical trial of Fampridine-SR, MS-F201. This clinical trial was designed to determine the optimal dose range of Fampridine-SR and to evaluate possible ways in which to measure the effect of the drug on symptoms of the disease, including motor strength, timed walking and self-reported fatigue. The clinical trial involved a total of 36 MS subjects in four major academic MS research centers. A total of 25 subjects received Fampridine-SR in doses increasing from 10 mg to 40 mg twice per day during seven weeks of treatment and 11 subjects were given placebo during the same period. This treatment period was preceded by a series of baseline evaluations during the course of four weeks to allow the subjects to become adjusted to the clinic visits and allow the various measurements to stabilize. A one-week blinded treatment with placebo tablets preceded the first drug administration to look for potential placebo effects on the various outcome measures.

        The clinical trial demonstrated that doses up to 25 mg twice a day were well tolerated and were associated with statistically significant improvements in walking ability and leg muscle strength. All the improvement in strength and walking ability was apparent within these first four weeks of the



treatment, at doses from 10 mg to 25 mg twice a day. The placebo-treated subjects showed some tendency to improve or worsen in walking ability, mostly within 20% of their baseline average. However, the Fampridine-SR-treated group showed a marked tendency for improvement in walking speed, with 9 of 25 subjects improving more than 20% from baseline and two with greater than 50% improvement. These findings were consistent with the results of an earlier, small, crossover study sponsored by Elan, using doses of 17.5 mg twice a day for one week, which was published in the journalNeurology in 1997.

        We re-examined the data from the MS-F201 clinical trial using an equivalent responder analysis in which we defined a responder as a subject who showed walking ability on the 25-Foot Walk that was faster in a majority of treatment visits than the fastest speed recorded during the non-treatment period. In MS-F201, this meant that four or more of the seven treatment visits had to show faster walking than the visits during the non-treatment period. We found that the responder rates in this trial were 40% (10 of 25) for the Fampridine-SR-treated subjects and 9.1% (1 of 11) for the placebo-treated subjects. Hence, the response rate by this measurement was similar to that seen in the MS-F202 clinical trial. We did not incorporate the MSWS-12 measure in the MS-F201 clinical trial.

        Recent clinical research using imaging and post-mortem studies has shown that the majority of people with SCI do not have severed spinal cords and maintain some nerve fibers that cross the site of injury. However, these surviving nerve fibers are often damaged and lose their myelin sheath. A series of preclinical studies and clinical trials have indicated that fampridine can potentially improve conduction in nerve fibers injured by spinal cord injury and improve function in people with spinal cord injury.

        Phase 3 Clinical Trials.    In March 2004, we released results from two Phase 3 double-blind clinical trials of Fampridine-SR in people with SCI. The trials did not reach statistical significance in their primary endpoints, which were reduction of spasticity, as measured by the Ashworth scale, and improvement of patients' Subject Global Impression, or SGI. The Ashworth scale is a validated, 5-point clinician assessment of an individual's spasticity. The SGI is a seven-point scale in which trial participants rate how they feel about the overall effect of the trial drug. In one of the SCI trials, the data showed a positive trend (p=0.069) toward improvement on the Ashworth scale when analyzed across all observations during the double-blind trial treatment period, which was the trial's pre-specified plan of analysis. When analyzed based on the subjects' last observation carried forward, a commonly used method of analysis, the improvement in, or reduction of, Ashworth score in that trial was statistically significant (p=0.006). The drug groups in both trials showed a progressive mean improvement on the Ashworth score during the double-blind treatment period. However, the placebo group in one of the trials showed a more pronounced reduction in Ashworth Score than expected.

        The design of these Phase 3 clinical trials was based on a series of earlier Phase 2 clinical trials in which the most consistent finding was a greater reduction in spasticity in Fampridine-SR-treated subjects relative to placebo-treated subjects, as measured by the Ashworth Score. Other benefits observed in the Phase 2 trials were improved motor, bowel, bladder and sexual function. Unlike the design of our Phase 3 clinical trials, our Phase 2 clinical trials did not require a minimum spasticity level for enrollment and the treatment period was from one to four weeks rather than 14 weeks. These changes were made in the Phase 3 trials because the FDA required minimum twelve week duration of treatment for approval of a long-term therapy of this kind and because adequate measurement of benefit required a certain degree of spasticity at baseline.

        Based on the entire body of data in clinical trials of fampridine in people with SCI and the new approaches to evaluating response to the drug that we have learned in MS trials, we expect to resume



development of Fampridine-SR for SCI after we have completed further development of the drug for MS.

        To date, Fampridine-SR has been tested in over 800 subjects. The adverse events most commonly experienced in all double blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 and Phase 3 studies were insomnia, numbness or tingling in the extremities, dizziness and nausea. These events were generally mild to moderate and are believed to have been dose-related. Seizures have also been observed in some prior trials of Fampridine-SR with higher doses of the drug. No seizures have been reported to date in patients with the dose that we have selected for our Phase 3 clinical trial. We are carefully monitoring the potential for seizure as a side effect, including the possibility of interaction with other drugs that are known to lower the threshold for seizure in susceptible subjects. We are also aware that people with MS are reported to have a higher incidence of seizures than the unaffected population. We have excluded from these trials subjects at known risk for seizures because of previous experience or abnormal electroencephalogram indicative of such risk.

        As part of our continuing evaluation of safety, we have established extension studies that allow subjects in earlier clinical trials to receive Fampridine-SR on an unblinded, or open-label basis, with their progress followed for at least a year and the potential for continuing treatment until the drug is approved. By their open-label design, these studies will allow us to gain some additional knowledge of the longer term efficacy and safety of the drug, albeit limited by the lack of a placebo control group. These studies are intended primarily to gain sufficient subject experience to satisfy the regulatory guidelines for long-term and overall safety assessments. As of September 2005, approximately 176 subjects from MS-F202 have beenwere enrolled in an extension trial and 37 remain137 remained active in the trial, with approximately 42 subjects who havehad taken the drug for over a year. A new extension study for subjects of the current Phase 3 clinical trial is expected to enroll a majority of the MS-F203 trial subjects, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2005.

        Only limited data are yet available from these ongoing safety studies, since no interim analysis of the data is planned, but there have been two incidences of seizures in subjects enrolled in the MS-F202 extension. These seizures occurred in subjects who had been taking the drug at a dose of 15 mg twice a day for six months and five months respectively, before the adverse event. The protocol has now been amended to restrict doses to 10 mg twice a day in order to gather more safety data at the dose that we are examining in the current Phase 3 trial and for which we intend to seek approval. To date, we have had no report of seizure at the 10 mg twice a day dose.

Other Research and Development Programs

        We have developed a program based on the concept of breaking down the matrix of scar tissue that develops as a result of an injury to the CNS. Published research has demonstrated that this scar matrix is partly responsible for limiting the regeneration of nerve fibers in the CNS and restricting their ability to modify existing neural connections, which is the process known as plasticity. This scar matrix may also inhibit repair of the myelin sheath by restricting the movements of the myelinating cells into the area of damage.

        Major components of the scar matrix, known as proteoglycans, consist of a combination of protein and sugar molecules. Chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans, or CSPGs, are the specific types of proteoglycans found in the scar matrix. Cell culture studies and a number of animal studies have shown that these CSPGs inhibit the growth of nerve fibers and are likely to be key factors in the failure of the spinal cord or brain to regenerate and repair. Studies also have shown that bacterial enzymes produced



by the body called chondroitinases break down the CSPG molecules, thereby reducing their inhibitory activity.



        Four independent laboratories have published animal studies showing that application of chondroitinase results in recovery of function following injuries to various areas of the brain or spinal cord. These functions have included walking, forelimb grasping, sensation, and visual and bladder function. We have produced a recombinant version of naturally-occurring Chondroitinase ABC-I and successfully tested its ability to improve function in an animal model of spinal cord injury. These studies were recently published in the Journal of Neurotrauma. In these studies, rats that sustained a spinal cord injury were treated with either chondroitinase or an ineffective enzyme control and evaluated over 10 weeks of recovery. Animals treated with chondroitinase showed significant improvements both in motor function of the limbs and in bladder function, compared to those treated with the control enzyme.

        We are conducting a research program, which has been funded in part by federal and state grants, to develop second generation approaches to overcoming the proteoglycan matrix. These include novel enzyme molecules and alternative approaches to blocking matrix formation. We are now exploring research grants from the NIH and potential partnerships with other companies for completing our preclinical program in chondroitinase. In 2003, we obtained an exclusive worldwide license to certain patents and technology from Cambridge University Technical Services Limited and King's College London related to our chondroitinase program. We are also building our intellectual property position with respect to this technology with patent applications around uses of the known compound and new chemical structures.

        Our remyelination programs include two distinct therapeutic approaches to stimulate repair of the damaged myelin sheath in MS, Glial Growth Factor 2, or GGF-2, and remyelinating antibodies. These two approaches address remyelination by different and potentially complementary routes. Both programs require finalizing production of clinical-grade material and completion of preclinical toxicology tests before moving into clinical development. We believe a therapy that could permanently repair myelin sheaths has the potential to restore substantial neurological function to those affected by demyelinating conditions.

        GGF-2 is a member of the neuregulin family of growth factors related to epidermal growth factor. The neuregulins bind to erbB receptors, which translate the growth factor signal to the cell and cause changes in cell growth, protein production and gene expression. The molecule was shown in published studies to stimulate remyelination in animal models of MS and to have a range of other effects in neural protection and repair. In 2002, we obtained from CeNeS an exclusive worldwide license to its neuregulin patents and related technology, including GGF-2. We initially plan to develop GGF-2 for the treatment of MS.

        Neuregulins covered in the portfolio from CeNeS have additional potential applications in treatment of heart disease and cancer. Neuregulins and their erbB receptors are essential for cardiac development and have been shown to protect cardiac muscle cells from stressors that model congestive heart failure and myocardial infarction. Additionally, GGF-2 has been shown to protect the heart and brain from the toxicity of commonly used chemotherapeutic agents, such as cisplatin. The neuregulins may also have the potential, when coupled with toxins, to target erbB receptor positive tumors such as those found in certain types of breast cancers.


        Our remyelinating antibodies program is based on more than 15 years of research performed at Mayo Clinic. Under a license agreement entered into with Mayo Clinic in September 2000, we have exclusive worldwide rights to patents and other intellectual property for these antibodies related to use and treatment of CNS disorders. Studies have demonstrated the ability of this family of antibodies to stimulate repair of the myelin sheath in three different animal models of MS. In particular, these antibodies were found to react with molecules on the surface of the cells that make the myelin sheath and stimulate them in a number of ways, leading to increased remyelination activity. First identified in mice, similar antibodies were subsequently identified in human blood samples by the Mayo team and we have been able to produce a recombinant human antibody that may be suitable for clinical development.

        We have also supported preclinical studies at Mayo Clinic to learn more about the ways the antibodies act to stimulate the myelin sheath-forming cells. In 2004, Mayo Clinic received a $2 million grant to develop and manufacture clinical-grade material and progress the program towards clinical development.

Sales and Marketing

        We have established three sales channels for marketing Zanaflex Capsules: an internal specialty sales force, a contract sales force and a telemarketing group.

        We focus our sales and marketing efforts on physicians and other prescribers who treat spasticity in the United States. Approximately 9,200 physicians generated roughly 78% of the prescriptions for Zanaflex and generic tizanidine tablets in the United States in 2004. Most of these physicians are located at major medical centers. We have existing relationships with the majority of these centers through our Fampridine-SR clinical trial process.

        We believe that, in general, people with MS and SCI are knowledgeable about their conditions, actively seek new treatments, and directly influence their prescriber's evaluation of treatment options. We have existing relationships with the major advocacy groups that focus on MS and SCI. We provide regular updates regarding our development programs and we sponsor or support several educational initiatives. We have implemented a comprehensive series of educational and promotional programs to support Zanaflex Capsules. These include educational materials, a peer-to-peer speakers' program, samples, medical information and drug safety monitoring services, as well as a patient assistance program. At the request of the FDA, we have also implemented an educational program to inform



pharmacists, prescribers and patients that Zanaflex tablets or generic tizanidine tablets are not therapeutically equivalent to Zanaflex Capsules and that, as a result, a prescription for Zanaflex Capsules should not be substituted with any tablet formulations at the pharmacy.

        We believe that the expertise we are developing through commercializing Zanaflex Capsules will provide a strong foundation for our marketing of Fampridine-SR, if approved, as well as for additional potential treatments in CNS conditions. As a result, we plan to market Fampridine-SR ourselves in the United States and possibly in Canada, if it is approved in both countries. We expect that the sales force for Zanaflex Capsules would also promote Fampridine-SR in the United States since both products would have many of the same prescribers. We do not currently intend to build commercial capabilities outside North America but intend to secure those capabilities through one or more partners.

        Similar to other phamaceutical companies, our principal customers are wholesale pharmaceutical distributors. We currently depend on three key customers. For the nine months ended September 30, 2005, Cardinal Health, McKesson Corporation and AmerisourceBergen Corporation accounted for approximately 51.4%, 27.3% and 13.2% of our shipments, respectively.

Scientific and Medical Network

        We have an established advisory team and network of well-recognized scientists, clinicians and opinion leaders in the fields of MS and SCI. Depending on their expertise, these advisors provide assistance in trial design, conduct clinical trials, keep us apprised of the latest scientific advances and help us identify and evaluate business development opportunities. A number of the members of this network form our Scientific Advisory Board. The members of our Scientific Advisory Board are highlighted below:

Name

 Affilation

Michael S. Beattie, Ph.D. Brumbaugh Professor and Chair of the Department of Neuroscience, Ohio State University.

Jacqueline C. Breshnahan, Ph.D.

 

Professor of Neuroscience, Ohio State University.

Mary B. Bunge, Ph.D.

 

Professer of Cell Biology and Anatomy, Neurological Surgery and Neurology, University of Miami School of Medicine.

Carl W. Cotman, Ph.D.

 

Professor of Psychobiology and Neurology, University of California, Irvine.

James W. Fawcett, Ph.D.

 

Merck Company Professor of Experimental Neurology, Cambridge University, and Chairman of the MRC Cambridge Centre for Brain Repair.

Martin Grumet, Ph.D.

 

Professor of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Rutgers University Director, W. M. Keck Center for Collaborative Neuroscience.

Eugene Johnson, Jr., Ph.D.

 

Norman J. Stupp Professor of Neurology, and Professor of Molecular Biology and Pharmacology at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis.

Mark D. Noble, Ph.D.

 

Professor of Genetics at the Center for Cancer Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center.

Melitta Schachner, Ph.D.

 

Professor and Director of the Institute for Synthesis of Neural Structures, University of Hamburg, Germany.
   



Jerry Silver, Ph.D.

 

Professor of Neurosciences, Case Western Reserve University.

Patrick A. Tresco, Ph.D.

 

Professor of Bioengineering, Director Keck Center for Bioengineering, University of Utah.

Mark H. Tuszynski, M.D., Ph.D.

 

Professor of Neurosciences, Director of the Center for Neural Repair, and Attending Neurologist at the University of California, San Diego.

Stephen G. Waxman, M.D., Ph.D.

 

Chairman of the Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine.

Wise Young, Ph.D., M.D.

 

Professor II and Founding Director of the W. M. Keck Center for Collaborative Neuroscience, Rutgers University.

        In addition, we have recruited over 35 MS centers and 80 SCI rehabilitation centers in the United States and Canada to conduct our clinical trials. Our clinical management team has extensive experience in the areas of MS and SCI and works closely with this network.

Collaborations, Alliances and License Agreements

Elan Corporation plc

        In July 2004, we entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement with Elan pursuant to which we acquired all of Elan's research, development, distribution, sales and marketing rights to Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets in the United States. The assets acquired include the products' FDA registrations and FDA dossiers, proprietary product know-how, a patent and two related patent applications, certain inventory of Zanaflex tablets and certain product books and records. Elan has granted us a license that allows us to use the Zanaflex trademarks in the United States and has given us the right to buy the Zanaflex trademark for a nominal sum once specified milestone and royalty payments have been made. Elan also granted us an exclusive, perpetual and royalty-free license to certain intellectual property relating to technology contained in Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets or used in the manufacture of Zanaflex Capsules, for use in connection with the sale and marketing of Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets in the United States. We also acquired the right to develop new indications, formulations, dosage forms, delivery systems and process improvements of Zanaflex. Under the agreement, Elan agreed not to directly or indirectly market, distribute or sell any products containing tizanidine as an active pharmaceutical ingredient in the United States until the later of the end of our obligation to pay royalties to Elan or valid termination of our supply agreement with Elan. In addition, we agreed not to directly or indirectly market, distribute or sell any products containing tizanidine as its active pharmaceutical ingredient in the United Kingdom or Ireland until July 2007.

        Our agreement with Elan obligates us to pay a combination of sales-based milestone payments of up to $19.5 million and royalties on future sales of Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets. We have made or accrued an aggregate of $3.5 million in payments under this agreement through September 30, 2005. Our obligation to pay royalties to Elan for Zanaflex tablets and Zanaflex Capsules ends on the later of July 2014 or when the last patent included in the acquisition expires. We also agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to commercialize Zanaflex Capsules.

        As part of the acquisition, we assumed certain of Elan's rights and obligations relating to Zanaflex under a license agreement with Novartis, to the extent that these rights and obligations arise subsequent to our acquisition of Zanaflex. Under this agreement we obtained certain rights to market and sell tizanidine products and rights to product improvements developed by Novartis. We are obligated to pay Novartis royalties based on net sales of Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets until



the agreement expires in February 2007, after which time we will have a fully paid-up license from Novartis to these rights.

        Elan and Novartis manufacture Zanaflex Capsules and tablets for us, respectively. See "—Manufacturing." In December 2005, we entered into a financing arrangement with PRF pursuant to which we assigned PRF the right to receive a portion of our net revenues from Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and any future Zanaflex products. The arrangement covers all Zanaflex net revenues generated from October 1, 2005 through and including December 31, 2015, unless the arrangement is terminated earlier. See "Business—"Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Financing Activities."

        In January 1997, we licensed from Elan exclusive worldwide rights to Elan's sustained release formulation of fampridine, Fampridine-SR, for the treatment of SCI. In April 1998, we formed MS Research & Development Corporation, or MSRD, with Elan's subsidiary, Elan International Services, Ltd., or EIS, to develop Fampridine-SR for treatment of MS. At that time, MSRD licensed from Elan exclusive worldwide rights to Fampridine-SR for the treatment of MS.

        In September 2003, we entered into a termination and assignment agreement with Elan, EIS and MSRD pursuant to which MSRD assigned to us its assets, including the license from Elan for Fampridine-SR for MS. We paid MSRD approximately $11.5 million for all the assets and assumed liabilities of MSRD. MSRD distributed the purchase price to its shareholders according to their equity ownership interest. We received a distribution of approximately $9.5 million as a result of this distribution. We also purchased EIS's shares at par value, and own approximately 88% of MSRD, which now has no assets or liabilities and is inactive.

        In September 2003, we entered into an amended and restated license with Elan, which replaced the two prior licenses for Fampridine-SR in oral sustained release dosage form. Under this agreement, Elan granted us exclusive worldwide rights to Fampridine-SR for all indications, including SCI, MS and all other indications. We agreed to pay Elan milestone payments of up to $15.0 million and royalties based on net sales of the product, if approved. We have not made any payments under this agreement through September 30, 2005.

        Elan is responsible for completing the chemistry, manufacturing and controls section of our NDA for Fampridine-SR and equivalent regulatory applications outside the United States. Elan is also supplying us with product for our clinical trials under this agreement.

        Elan may terminate our license in countries in which we have a license, including the United States, if we fail to file regulatory approvals within a commercially reasonable time after completion and receipt of positive data from all preclinical and clinical studies required for the related NDA or any NDA equivalent. We could also lose our rights under the license agreement if we fail to launch a product in such countries within 180 days of NDA or equivalent approval or if we fail to fulfill our payment obligations under the license agreement. If Elan terminates our license in any applicable country, Elan is entitled to license from us our patent rights and know-how relating to the product and to market the product in the applicable country, subject to royalty payments to us.

        We have the right to terminate the Elan license at any time by written notice. In addition, the Elan license may be immediately terminated by either party following an incurable breach of any term or provision by the other party. The Elan license may also be terminated by either party following notice and a cure period with respect to an uncured breach by either party.

        Subject to the early termination provisions, the Elan license terminates on a country by country basis on the last to occur of fifteen years from the date of the agreement, the expiration of the last to expire Elan patent or the existence of competition in that country.



Cardinal Health PTS, LLC

        In August 2005, we entered into a sales force agreement with Cardinal Health. Under this agreement, approximately 160 of Cardinal Health's sales representatives market Zanaflex Capsules to approximately 4,000 high prescribing primary care physicians identified by us throughout the United States. Although these sales representatives do not exclusively represent Acorda, our agreement with Cardinal Health provides that they will not market any other products during their sales calls related to Zanaflex Capsules. We are responsible for providing training to the Cardinal Health sales representatives regarding the medical and technical aspects of Zanaflex Capsules and on our specific sales strategies and policies. We also provide all samples and promotional materials for use by these sales representatives. Cardinal Health is responsible for general supervision and management of the sales force, including ensuring legal and regulatory compliance, including maintaining procedures relating to the handling of drugs by their sales representatives in compliance with applicable laws and prudent management practices.

        We have agreed to pay Cardinal Health service fees based on the achievement of targeted sales levels and to reimburse Cardinal Health for certain costs. The agreement has a term of two years and cannotcan be terminated without cause prior to December 31, 2005.cause.

Rush-Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center

        In 1990, Elan licensed from Rush-Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center, or Rush, know-how relating to fampridine for the treatment of MS. We subsequently licensed this know-how from Elan. In September 2003, we entered into an agreement with Rush and Elan terminating the Rush license to Elan and providing for mutual releases. We also entered into a license agreement with Rush in which Rush granted us an exclusive worldwide license to its know-how relating to fampridine for the treatment of MS. Rush has also assigned to us its Orphan Drug Designation for fampridine for the relief of symptoms of MS.

        We agreed to pay Rush a license fee, milestone payments of up to $1.15 million and royalties based on net sales of the product for neurological indications. We have made an aggregate of $200,000 in payments under this agreement through September 30, 2005.

        The Rush license may be terminated by either party following an uncured material breach by the other party and notice. The Rush license may also be terminated upon the filing or institution of bankruptcy, reorganization, liquidation or receivership proceedings, or upon an assignment of a substantial portion of the assets for the benefit of creditors by the other party. We also entered into an agreement with Elan relating to the allocation of payments between us and Elan of certain payments to Rush under the Rush license. Subject to the early termination provisions, the Rush license terminates upon expiration of the royalty obligations, which expire fifteen years from the date of the agreement.

Canadian Spinal Research Organization

        In August 2003, we entered into an Amended and Restated License Agreement with the Canadian Spinal Research Organization, CSRO. Under this agreement we were granted an exclusive and worldwide license under certain patent assets and know-how of CSRO relating to the use of fampridine in the reduction of chronic pain and spasticity in a spinal cord injured subject.

        We are required to pay to CSRO royalties based on a percentage of net sales of any product incorporating the licensed rights, including royalties on the sale of Fampridine-SR for any indication.

        We have the right to terminate the CSRO agreement at any time by written notice. In addition, the CSRO agreement may be terminated by either party following an uncured material breach by the other party. The CSRO agreement may also be terminated by either party upon the filing or institution of bankruptcy, reorganization, liquidation or receivership proceedings, or upon an assignment of assets, by the other party. Subject to the early termination provisions, the CSRO agreement will expire upon the termination of all royalty or other payment obligations on a country-by-country basis, which will be



no longer than the earlier of the expiration of the last to expire licensed patent in such country or ten years from the date of the first commercial sale of the product in such country.

Cornell Research Foundation, Inc.

        In February 2003, we entered into a license agreement with Cornell Research Foundation, Inc., pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive license under a patent for the use of fampridine in the treatment of anterior horn cell diseases. In consideration for the license, we paid Cornell an upfront license fee and are required to make payments of up to $150,000 to Cornell upon the achievement of certain milestones relating to the successful reissuance or reexamination of the patents licensed to us and, the completion of a clinical trial testing the use of Fampridine-SR in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. We have made an aggregate of $50,000 in payments under this agreement through September 30, 2005. We are also obligated to pay Cornell an annual royalty on net sales of Fampridine-SR in any and all indications, subject to a minimum annual royalty requirement of $25,000.

        Under the Cornell agreement, Cornell is responsible for all patent prosecution and maintenance activities relating to the licensed patent, and we are responsible for paying all fees incurred by Cornell in connection therewith. We have the right under this agreement to enforce any patent rights within the licensed patents against infringement by third parties at our own expense.

        We have the right to terminate the Cornell Agreement at any time by written notice. In addition, the Cornell agreement may be terminated by either party following an uncured material breach by the other party. Subject to the early termination provisions, the term of the Cornell agreement will continue until the expiration of the last to expire valid claim under the licensed patent.

Cambridge University Technical Services Limited and King's College London

        In December 2003, we entered into a license agreement with Cambridge University Technical Services Limited and King's College London, pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive worldwide license, including the right to sublicense, under a U.S. patent application and its foreign counterpart to develop and commercialize products related to enzymatic methods, including chondroitinase, of treating CNS disorders. We were also granted a non-exclusive worldwide license, including the right to sublicense, under the same U.S. and foreign patent applications to develop and commercialize products related to small molecule inhibitors for use in treating CNS disorders.

        In consideration for these licenses, we paid an upfront license fee and are required to make payments of up to $2.15 million upon the achievement of certain milestones. We have made an aggregate of $45,000 in payments under this agreement through September 30, 2005. We are also obligated to pay royalties on net sales and on any sublicense royalties that we receive.

        The King's College license may be terminated by any party following an uncured material breach by any other party. The King's College license may also be terminated by any party if any other party ceases to carry on business, is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be bankrupt or upon the appointment of a liquidator of that party. Subject to the early termination provisions, the King's College license agreement will continue until the expiration of the last to expire valid claim under the licensed patent applications, at which time the licenses granted under the license agreement will automatically become non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up and irrevocable.

Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

        In September 2000, we entered into a license agreement with Mayo Foundation for Education and Research, or Mayo Clinic, pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive worldwide license to its patents and other intellectual property on remyelinating antibodies. Under this agreement, we have the right to develop, make, use and sell the remyelinating antibody products for the prevention, mitigation and treatment of CNS disorders. We have worked closely with one of Mayo Clinic's research groups on developing and patenting this emerging technology in connection with the therapeutic use of these



antibodies, specifically myelination and remyelination in MS and SCI. Mayo Clinic has the right to continue researching the antibodies and, in the event it develops other applications related to the licensed patent, which are outside of the scope of our current license, but are for the treatment of CNS disorders. Mayo Clinic is required to offer rights in these new applications to us before it offers such rights to a third party.

        Under the Mayo Clinic agreement, we are obligated to make milestone payments of up to $1.875 million. We also pay royalties based on net sales. We have not made any milestone or royalty payments under this agreement through September 30,December 31, 2005. The Mayo Clinic agreement may be terminated by either party following an uncured material breach by the other party. We may terminate the Mayo Clinic agreement at will upon prior written notice to Mayo. In addition, either party also has the right to terminate upon the insolvency of the other party, the filing of bankruptcy by or against the other party, or the assignment of assets to the benefit of creditors by the other party. Unless otherwise terminated, this license agreement will terminate upon the expiration of the last licensed patent in any such licensed product.

        We have also supported preclinical studies at Mayo Clinic to learn more about the ways the antibodies act to stimulate the myelin sheath-forming cells. In 2004, Mayo Clinic received a $2 million grant to develop and manufacture clinical-grade material and progress the program towards clinical development. A subsequent letter agreement between Mayo Clinic and us acknowledges that the work under this grant is being performed subject to and pursuant to the Mayo Clinic agreement.

CeNeS Pharmaceuticals plc

        In November 2002, we entered into two license agreements with CeNeS Pharmaceuticals plc. The first agreement relates to an exclusive worldwide sublicense under certain patents, patent applications and know-how to make, have made, use, import, offer for sale and sell protein products composed of GGF-2 and non-protein products developed through the use of material covered by a valid claim in the patents. The license to these patents and the right to sub-license these patents were granted to CeNeS by the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research.

        Our payment obligations to CeNeS include payment of an upfront license fee, royalties based on annual net sales of the product, if any, as well as payments of up to $8.5 million upon achieving certain milestones in connection with the development, testing and regulatory approval of any protein products. We have not made any payments under this agreement through September 30,December 31, 2005. We are obligated to make minimum royalty payments commencing on the third calendar year following the first commercial sale of any licensed product. If we fail to pay any minimum royalty, CeNeS will have the option to convert our license or any sublicense to a non-exclusive license. This agreement with CeNeS is effective until the later of November 12, 2017 or the expiration of the last-to-expire valid claim in the licensed patents. We may terminate this agreement at will upon prior written notice to CeNeS. In addition, this first agreement may be terminated by either party following an uncured material breach by the other party and if this agreement is terminated under that provision, we may retain the exclusive worldwide sublicense granted to us under this agreement, provided that we continue to pay royalties.

        The second agreement relates to an exclusive worldwide sublicense to us under certain patents, patent applications and know-how to make and have made, use and have used, sell, offer for sale, have sold and import protein products composed of one or more proteins encoded by the growth factor gene nrg-2 and non-protein products developed through the use of material covered by a valid claim of the patents. The license to this patent and the right to sub-license this patent was granted to CeNeS by the President and Fellows of Harvard College ("Harvard").College.

        We have agreed to a timeline to achieve certain milestones relating to the research and development and the clinical testing and filing of regulatory approvals for the products. We are also required to make milestone payments of up to $5.93 million. If we are unable to meet a milestone, CeNeS has agreed to negotiate in good faith with us to agree for a reasonable extension of the time to



achieve the milestone up to one year. We are obligated to pay CeNeS a license fee and royalties based on a percentage of net sales of protein products and non-protein products covered under the agreement. We have not made any payments under this agreement through September 30,December 31, 2005.

        This second agreement may be terminated by either party following an unremedied default of a material obligation by the other party. CeNeS may terminate this agreement upon our failure to cure a default in our obligations relating to maintenance of insurance liability or our failure meet certain milestones. Harvard may terminate the underlying Harvard license if CeNeS becomes insolvent, makes an assignment of assets for the benefit of creditors, or has a petition bankruptcy filed for or against it. In that case, Harvard is required, upon our written request, to enter into a direct license with us under the same terms as those set forth in the agreement. We have the right to terminate this agreement upon written notice to CeNeS. The license granted to us pursuant to this agreement continues after the expiration of this agreement and may continue after the termination of this agreement, depending upon the circumstances under which this agreement is terminated.

        Subject to early termination provisions, this agreement remains effective until the last patent, patent application or claim included in the licensed patents has expired, been abandoned or been held finally rejected or invalid.

Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.

        In September 2003, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. ("Teva"), or Teva, under which we were granted a co-exclusive license with Teva to jointly develop and promote in the United States products containing valrocemide.

        We made an initial payment to Teva of $2 million that was charged as research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2003, upon execution of the collaboration agreement, and were obligated to make payments to Teva relating to the development of valrocemide.

        We and Teva amicably terminated the collaboration agreement as of June 27, 2005 and in connection with the termination we paid Teva approximately $3.1 million. We and Teva have no further obligations to each other under the collaboration agreement.

Manufacturing

Zanaflex

        We currently rely on Elan, Novartis and other third parties to supply us with Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets. Zanaflex Capsules are manufactured using Elan's proprietary SODAS (spheroidal oral drug absorption system) multiparticulate drug delivery technology. We agreed to provide Elan with monthly written 18-month forecasts, and with annual written two-year forecasts, of our supply requirements for Zanaflex Capsules. In each of the five months following the submission of our 18-month forecast we are obligated to purchase the quantity specified in the forecast, even if our actual requirements are greater or less. Elan is not obligated to supply products in excess of our forecast requirements, but will use commercially reasonable efforts to fulfill any such orders. The initial term of the agreement expires in 2009, with two automatic two-year renewal terms. Either party may terminate the agreement by notifying the other party at least 12 months prior to the expiration of the initial term or any renewal term. In addition, either party may terminate the agreement if the other party commits a material breach that remains uncured. If a failure to supply occurs under the agreement, other than a force majeure event, or if we terminate the supply agreement for cause, Elan must use commercially reasonable efforts to assist us in transferring production of Zanaflex Capsules to us or a third-party manufacturer, provided that such third party is not a technological competitor of Elan. If we need to transfer production, Elan has agreed to grant us a royalty-free, fully paid-up license of its manufacturing know-how and other information and rights related to the production of Zanaflex Capsules, including a license to use its SODAS technology for specified purposes. We have the right to sublicense this know-how to a third party manufacturer, provided that this third party is not a



technological competitor of Elan. In the event of termination of the supply agreement due to a force majeure event that continues for more than three months, Elan has agreed to enter into negotiations with us to preserve the continuity of supply of products, including the possibility of transferring manufacturing of Zanaflex Capsules to us or a third party manufacturer. Elan obtains tizanidine, the active ingredient in Zanaflex Capsules, from Novartis.

        We currently rely on Novartis for our supply of Zanaflex tablets. Novartis currently produces tizanidine, but has arranged with another party to formulate tablets. We have arranged with another company, Sharp, to bottle and package Zanaflex tablets. Under a supply agreement we assumed from Elan, Novartis is responsible for manufacturing Zanaflex tablets and tizanidine, the API in both Zanaflex Capsules and Zanaflex tablets, for us through February 2007.

Although Novartis currently produces tizanidine, it has informed us that it intends to discontinue tizanidine production by the end of 2005.the first quarter of 2006. It is our understanding that Novartis is currently in the process of qualifying an alternative tizanidine manufacturer. We have established relationships with the companies that currently formulate, bottle and package the tablets, however, we do not have an agreement with an alternative tizanidine manufacturer. It is the responsibility of each of Novartis and Elan to procure the API required to meet its contractual obligations to supply us with product. We do not anticipate an interruption in API supply. Novartis is currently transferring the methods of manufacturing tizanidine to Rohner, an API manufacturer in Pratteln, Switzerland. We have verified this transfer and plan to audit Rohner's manufacturing site towardstoward the end of the first quarter of 2006, following the commencement of Rohner's manufacture of tizanidine. We have also identified an alternate source for tizanidine in collaboration with Elan. WeHowever, we do not have an agreement with an alternative tizanidine manufacturer, and we do not anticipate entering into a supply agreement for API with either party. AnyElan or Rohner. It is the responsibility of each of Novartis and Elan to procure the API required to meet their contractual obligations under their respective supply agreements with us. We do not anticipate an interruption in API supply, and any cost associated with validating API suppliers would be incurred by Novartis or Elan. The costs of our audit of Rohner or any other supplier are not material and are considered part of our normal course of business. We have arranged with another company, Sharp Corporation, to bottle and package Zanaflex tablets.

Fampridine-SR

        In September 2003, we entered into an agreement with Elan for the supply of Fampridine-SR. Under that agreement, we are required to purchase at least 75% of our annual requirements of Fampridine-SR from Elan unless Elan is unable or unwilling to meet our requirements. In addition, the agreement also obligates us to make compensatory payments if we do not purchase 100% of our requirements from Elan.

        As permitted by our agreement with Elan, we have designated Patheon, Inc. as a qualified second manufacturing source of Fampridine-SR. In connection with that designation, Elan assisted us in transferring manufacturing technology to Patheon. We and Elan have agreed that we may purchase up to 25% of our annual requirements from Patheon without making compensatory payments to Elan. In addition, Patheon may supply us with Fampridine-SR if Elan is unable or unwilling to meet our requirements.

Preclinical Products

        We have established the internal capability to manufacture research quantities of antibody and protein product candidates and have contracted for testing and manufacturing development activities for GGF-2 to be performed by an outside contractor.

Intellectual Property

        We have in-licensed, or are the assignee of, over 25 U.S. patents, over 60 foreign patents and over 65 patent applications pending in the United States or abroad. There are five major families of patents in our portfolio.



Zanaflex

        As part of our purchase from Elan of the Zanaflex assets, we acquired one issued U.S. patent and two pending U.S. patent applications. Our issued patent is generally directed to certain methods of reducing somnolence and reducing peak plasma concentrations in patients receiving tizanidine therapy. This issued patent expires in 2021. Our two pending U.S. patent applications are directed to



multiparticulate formulations of tizanidine and certain other methods of using tizanidine. The process of seeking patent protection can be time consuming and we cannot assure you that patents will be issued from these pending applications or that, if patents are issued, they will be of sufficient scope to provide meaningful protection of our products.

        In addition, we entered into a Supply Agreement with Elan as part of the acquisition, whereby Zanaflex Capsules are manufactured for us by Elan using Elan's proprietary SODAS technology and proprietary information. This proprietary technology is owned by Elan and, in the event Elan ceases to manufacture Zanaflex Capsules, Elan has agreed to grant us a royalty-free, fully paid-up license of its manufacturing know-how and other information and rights related to the production of Zanaflex Capsules, including a license to use its SODAS technology for specified purposes. We have the right to sublicense this know-how to a third party manufacturer, so long as this third party is not a technological competitor of Elan.

        Elan has granted us a license that allows us to use the Zanaflex trademark in the United States and gave us the right to buy the Zanaflex trademark for a nominal sum once specified milestone and royalty payments have been made.

Fampridine-SR

        We hold an exclusive, worldwide license from CSRO for a U.S. patent and its foreign counterparts for the use of fampridine in the treatment of spasticity and neuropathic pain in chronic SCI. The U.S. patent expires in 2013.

        We hold an exclusive, worldwide license from Elan to three U.S. patents, with corresponding issued patents and pending applications in a number of foreign countries, relating to timed delivery formulations of a family of aminopyridine compounds, including fampridine, which also claim methods of administration and treatment for relevant neurological conditions. One of the three U.S. patents expires in 2011 and the other two U.S. patents expire in 2013.

        We hold an exclusive license from Cornell University for an issued patent that relates to the use of aminopyridine compositions, including fampridine, for the treatment of diseases of anterior horn cells, including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, which is also known as Lou Gehrig's disease. This patent expires in 2016.

        We also have a pending U.S. patent application and its foreign equivalent directed to methods of using aminopyridines and a pending U.S. patent directed to aminopyridine formulations.

Chondroitinase

        We have a license to a U.S. application and its foreign counterpart from King's College, University of Cambridge directed to treatment of CNS damage. We have recently filed a number of U.S. patent applications and their foreign counterparts directed to chondroitinase enzymes and methods of use and preparation. In particular, we have filed seven U.S. applications, with foreign equivalents to four of them, directed to fusion proteins of chondroitinase, chimeric proteins including chondroitinase, deletion mutants, and certain methods relating to chondroitinase.

Neuregulins

        We are the exclusive licensee under a license agreement with CeNeS Pharmaceuticals, plc, of a worldwide portfolio of patents and patent applications related to products of neuregulin genes,



including GGF-2. These patents claim the use of particular neuregulins to treat various pathophysiological conditions, particularly stimulating myelinating cells in order to treat demyelinating conditions of the central and peripheral nervous system. These patents also claim a number of additional potential applications of neuregulins, including stimulation of growth in mammalian muscle cells and treating cardiac failure, peripheral neuropathy and nerve injury.



Remyelinating Antibodies

        We are the exclusive licensee of a portfolio of patents and patent applications related to a series of remyelinating antibodies discovered in the laboratory of Dr. Moses Rodriguez at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota for the treatment of CNS disorders. One U.S. patent has been issued and foreign counterparts of this patent have also issued in Australia, Mexico, New Zealand and South Korea, as well as in Europe, where patents have been validated in Germany, Spain, France, Great Britain and Italy. Applications are pending elsewhere, including Canada and Japan.

Competition

        The market for developing and marketing pharmaceutical products is highly competitive. We are aware of many biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies that are engaged in development and/or marketing of therapeutics for a broad range of CNS conditions. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, research and development, human and other resources than we do. Furthermore, many of these companies have significantly more experience than we do in preclinical testing, human clinical trials, regulatory approval procedures and sales and marketing.

Spasticity

        Tizanidine, the active pharmaceutical ingredient in Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets, is one of the two leading FDA-approved treatments for spasticity, a symptom suffered by both MS and SCI patients. Zanaflex tablets were approved by the FDA in 1996 and lost compound patent protection in 2002. Eleven generic manufacturers of tizanidine are distributing their own tablet formulations. Baclofen, which is also available generically, is the other leading drug for the treatment of spasticity. The mechanism of action and associated effects of baclofen are different from those of tizanidine. Due to the different pharmacokinetic profile of Zanaflex Capsules, Zanaflex tablets and generic tizanidine tablets are not AB-rated with Zanaflex Capsules. To our knowledge there are currently no other treatments for spasticity in clinical development.

MS and SCI

        Current disease management approaches to MS are classified either as relapse management or disease course management approaches. For relapse management, the majority of neurologists treat sudden and severe relapses with a four-day course of intravenous high-dose corticosteroids. Many of these corticosteroids are available generically. For disease course management, there are a number of FDA-approved MS therapies that seek to modify the immune system. These treatments attempt to reduce the frequency and severity of exacerbations or slow the accumulation of physical disability for people with certain types of MS, though their precise mechanisms of action are not known. These products include Avonex from Biogen-IDEC, Betaseron from Schering AG, Copaxone from Teva and Rebif from Serono.

        Several biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, as well as academic laboratories, are involved in research and/or product development for various neurological diseases, including MS and SCI. We are aware that Aventis is developing a sodium/potassium channel blocker, HP 184, with a potential indication in SCI, MS and other conditions. We believe that HP 184 is in clinical trials for SCI and any resulting product could compete with Fampridine-SR. Neurorecovery Inc. has publicly disclosed that it has an immediate release form of fampridine for peripheral nervous system conditions in Phase 2 trials and any resulting product might compete with Fampridine-SR. In certain



circumstances, pharmacists are not prohibited from formulating certain drug compounds to fill prescriptions on an individual patient basis. We are aware that at present compounded fampridine is used by some people with MS or SCI. Although we expect this use to decrease substantially if Fampridine-SR is approved, it is possible that some people will continue to use this formulation of fampridine. Several companies are engaged in developing products that include novel immune system approaches and cell transplant approaches to remyelination for the treatment of people with MS. These



programs are in early stages of development and may compete with Fampridine-SR or our preclinical candidates in the future.

        Our lead product candidate, Fampridine-SR, is the first product to our knowledge that acts to improve neurological function in subjects with MS. We are not aware of other companies in clinical development with products that specifically address walking ability in subjects with MS. As a result of its focus on improving function, we believe that Fampridine-SR may be complementary to both the relapse management and disease course management therapies that are commercially available. Nonetheless, Fampridine-SR will compete for market acceptance with these current treatments because they have been accepted and regularly prescribed to people with MS by physicians.

Government Regulation

FDA Regulation and Product Approval

        The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in state and local jurisdictions and in foreign countries impose substantial requirements upon the preclinical testing, clinical development, manufacture, distribution and marketing of pharmaceutical products. These agencies and other federal, state and local entities regulate research and development activities and the testing, manufacture, quality control, safety, effectiveness, labeling, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, sale, promotion, import and export of our products and product candidates.

        In the United States, Zanaflex tablets, Zanaflex Capsules, and some of our product candidates are regulated by the FDA as drugs. Other of our product candidates are potentially regulated both as drugs and as biological products. Drugs are subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended, and the regulations of the FDA, as well as to other federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. Biologics are also regulated under the Public Health Service Act, as amended. Violations of regulatory requirements at any stage may result in various adverse consequences, including FDA's and other health authorities' delay in approving or refusal to approve a product. Violations of regulatory requirements also may result in enforcement actions, including withdrawal of approval, labeling restrictions, seizure of products, fines, injunctions and/or civil or criminal penalties.

        The process required by the FDA under these laws before our product candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:


        The research, development and approval process requires substantial time, effort, and financial resources and we cannot be certain that any approval will be granted on a timely or commercially viable basis, if at all.

        Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of the product candidate, its chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as animal studies to assess its potential safety and efficacy. We then submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data and any available clinical data or literature to the FDA as part of an IND application, which must



become effective before we may begin human clinical trials. The IND becomes effective 30 days after the FDA acknowledges that the filing is complete, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the preclinical trials or the design of the proposed clinical trials as outlined in the IND. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before clinical trials can begin. Further, an independent Institutional Review Board charged with protecting the welfare of human subjects involved in research at each medical center proposing to conduct the clinical trials must review and approve any clinical trial and study subjects must provide informed consent for their participation in the research.

        Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases which may overlap:

        In the case of product candidates for severe or life-threatening diseases such as MS, the initial human testing is often conducted in affected subjects rather than in healthy volunteers. Since these subjects already have the target condition, these clinical trials may provide initial evidence of efficacy traditionally obtained in Phase 2 clinical trials and thus these clinical trials are frequently referred to as Phase 1b clinical trials.

        Before proceeding with a study, sponsors may seek a written agreement from the FDA regarding the design, size, and conduct of a clinical trial. This is known as an SPA. Three types of studies are eligible for SPAs: (1) animal carcinogenicity studies, (2) final product stability studies, and (3) clinical studies for pivotal trials whose data will form the primary basis to establish a product's efficacy. Where the FDA agrees to an SPA, the agreement may not be changed by either the sponsor or the FDA except if the sponsor and the FDA agree to a change, or an appropriately senior FDA official determines that a substantial scientific issue essential to determining the safety or effectiveness of the product was identified after the testing began. SPAs thus help establish up front agreement with the FDA about the adequacy of the design of a clinical trial to support a regulatory approval, but the agreement is not binding if new circumstances arise. In addition, even if an SPA remains in place and the trial meets its endpoints with statistical significance, the FDA could determine that the overall balance of risks and benefits for the product candidate is not adequate to support approval, or only justifies approval for a narrow set of uses or approval with restricted distribution or other burdensome post-approval requirements or limitations. There is thus no guarantee that a study will ultimately be adequate to support an approval even if the study is subject to an SPA.

        U.S. law requires that studies conducted to support approval for product marketing be "adequate and well controlled." In general, this means that either a placebo or a product already approved for the



treatment of the disease or condition under study must be used as a reference control. Studies must also be conducted in compliance with good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements.

        We cannot be certain that we will successfully complete Phase 1, Phase 2 or Phase 3 testing of our product candidates within any specific time period, if at all. Furthermore, the FDA or the Institutional Review Boards or the sponsor may prevent clinical trials from beginning or may place clinical trials on hold or terminate them at any point in this process if, among other reasons, they conclude that study subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk.



        In the U.S., the results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA for review and approval prior to marketing and commercial shipment of the product candidate. If the product is regulated as a drug, a New Drug Application, or NDA, must be submitted and approved before commercial marketing may begin. If the product, such as an antibody, is regulated as a biologic, a Biologic License Application, or BLA, must be submitted and approved before commercial marketing may begin. The NDA or BLA must include a substantial amount of data and other information concerning the safety and effectiveness (and, in the case of a biologic, purity and potency) of the compound from laboratory, animal and clinical testing, as well as data and information on manufacturing, product stability, and proposed product labeling.

        Each domestic and foreign manufacturing establishment, including any contract manufacturers we may decide to use, must be listed in the NDA or BLA and must be registered with the FDA. The application will generally not be approved until the FDA conducts a manufacturing inspection, approves the applicable manufacturing process for the drug or biological product, and determines that the facility is in compliance with current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, requirements. If the manufacturing facilities and processes fail to pass the FDA inspection, we will not receive approval to market these products.

        Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, as amended, the FDA receives fees for reviewing a BLA or NDA and supplements thereto, as well as annual fees for commercial manufacturing establishments and for approved products. These fees can be significant. The NDA or BLA review fee alone can exceed $700,000, although certain limited deferrals, waivers and reductions may be available.

        Under applicable laws and FDA regulations, each NDA or BLA submitted for FDA approval is usually reviewed for administrative completeness and reviewability within 45 to 60 days following submission of the application. If deemed complete, the FDA will "file" the NDA or BLA, thereby triggering substantive review of the application. The FDA can refuse to file any NDA or BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable. If the FDA refuses to file an application, the FDA will retain 25% of the user fee as a penalty. The FDA has established performance goals for the review of NDAs and BLAs—six months for priority applications and 10 months for regular applications. However, the FDA is not legally required to complete its review within these periods and these performance goals may change over time. Moreover, the outcome of the review, even if generally favorable, typically is not an actual approval but an "action letter" that describes additional work that must be done before the application can be approved. The FDA's review of an application may involve review and recommendations by an independent FDA advisory committee.

        The FDA may deny an NDA or BLA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical data. Even if such data is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA or BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. If the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved therapeutic uses for the product as described in the product labeling, require that contraindications, warning statements or precautions be included in the product labeling, require that additional studies be conducted following approval as a condition of the approval, impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing or dispensing in the form of a risk management plan, or otherwise limit the scope of any approval or post-approval, or limit labeling. Once issued, the FDA may withdraw product approval if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. In addition, the FDA may require testing and



surveillance programs to monitor the effect of approved products which have been commercialized, and the agency has the power to prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of these post-marketing programs.

        Satisfaction of the above FDA requirements or similar requirements of state, local and foreign regulatory agencies typically takes several years or more and the actual time required may vary substantially, based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the pharmaceutical product candidate. Government regulation may delay or prevent marketing of potential products for a considerable period



of time or permanently and impose costly procedures upon our activities. We cannot be certain that the FDA or any other regulatory agency will grant approval for any of our product candidates on a timely basis, or on a commercially viable basis, if at all. Success in preclinical or early stage clinical trials does not assure success in later stage clinical trials. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities is not always conclusive and may be susceptible to varying interpretations which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Even if a product candidate receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific indications. Further, even after regulatory approval is obtained, later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market. Delays in obtaining, or failures to obtain regulatory approvals would have a material adverse effect on our business. Marketing our product candidates abroad will require similar regulatory approvals and is subject to similar risks. In addition, we cannot predict what adverse governmental regulations may arise from future U.S. or foreign governmental action.

        Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA clearances or approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the drug, other reporting, advertising and promotion restrictions. The FDA's rules for advertising and promotion require in particular that we not promote our products for unapproved uses, and that our promotion be fairly balanced and adequately substantiated. We must also submit appropriate new and supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. We cannot be certain that we or our present or future suppliers will be able to comply with the current Good Manufacturing Practices and other FDA regulatory requirements. The FDA also enforces the requirements of the Prescription Drug Marketing Act, or PDMA, which, among other things, imposes various requirements in connection with the distribution of product samples to physicians.

        In addition to inspections related to manufacturing, we are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory bodies related to the other regulatory requirements that apply to drugs manufactured or distributed by us. For example, the FDA may conduct periodic inspections regarding our reporting of adverse events, and the FDA has indicated to the industry that it may be conducting increased inspections related to compliance with the requirements of the PDMA concerning the handling of drug samples. When the FDA conducts an inspection, it will identify any deficiencies it believes exist in the form of a notice of inspectional observations, or Form FDA 483. The observations may be more or less significant. If we receive a notice of inspectional observations, we likely will be required to respond in writing, and may be required to undertake corrective and preventive actions in order to address the FDA's concerns.

We and our product candidates are also subject to a variety of state laws and regulations in those states or localities where they are or will be marketed. Any applicable state or local regulations may hinder our ability to market our product candidates in those states or localities.

        The FDA's policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted which could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our potential products. Moreover, increased attention to the containment of health care costs in the United States and in foreign markets could result in new government regulations which could have a material adverse effect on our business. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse governmental regulation which might arise from future legislative or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad.



Orphan Drugs

        Under the Orphan Drug Act, special incentives exist for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases or conditions, which are defined to include those diseases or conditions that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S. Sponsors may request that FDA grant a drug orphan designation prior to



approval. We have received Orphan Drug designation for Fampridine-SR for the treatment of both MS and incomplete SCI.

        Products designated as orphan drugs are eligible for special grant funding for research and development, FDA assistance with the review of clinical trial protocols, potential tax credits for research, reduced filing fees for marketing applications, and a special seven-year period of market exclusivity after marketing approval. Orphan drug exclusivity prevents FDA approval of applications by others for the same drug and the designated orphan disease or condition. FDA may approve a subsequent application from another person if FDA determines that the application is for a different drug or different use, or if FDA determines that the subsequent product is clinically superior, or that the holder of the initial orphan drug approval cannot assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the drug to meet the public's need. In addition, even when a drug has orphan exclusivity, the FDA may approve a competing drug for the same orphan use. The FDA may also approve someone else's application for the same drug that has orphan exclusivity, but for a different use, in which case the competing drug could be prescribed by physicians outside its FDA approval for the orphan use, notwithstanding the existence of orphan exclusivity. A grant of an orphan designation is not a guarantee that a product will be approved. If a sponsor receives orphan drug exclusivity upon approval, there can be no assurance that the exclusivity will prevent another person from receiving approval for the same or a similar drug for the same or other uses.

Generic Drugs, AB Ratings and Pharmacy Substitution

        Generic drugs are approved through an abbreviated process, which differs in important ways from the process followed for innovative products. Generally an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, is filed with the FDA. The ANDA must seek approval of a drug product that has the same active ingredient(s), dosage form, strength, route of administration, and conditions of use (labeling) as a so-called "reference listed drug" approved under an NDA with full supporting data to establish safety and effectiveness. Only limited exceptions exist to this ANDA sameness requirement, including certain limited variations approved by the FDA through a special suitability petition process. The ANDA also generally contains clinical data to demonstrate that the product covered by the ANDA is absorbed in the body at the same rate and to the same extent as the reference listed drug. This is known as bioequivalence. In addition, the ANDA must contain information regarding the manufacturing processes and facilities that will be used to ensure product quality, and must contain certifications to patents listed with the FDA for the reference listed drug.

        Every state has a law permitting or requiring pharmacists to substitute generic equivalents for brand-name prescriptions unless the physician has prohibited substitution. Managed care organizations often urge physicians to prescribe drugs with generic equivalents, and to authorize substitution, as a means of controlling costs. They also may require lower copayments as an incentive to patients to ask for and accept generics.

        While the question of substitutability is one of state law, most states look to the FDA to determine whether a generic is substitutable. FDA lists therapeutic equivalence ratings in a publication often referred to as the Orange Book. In general, a generic drug that is listed in the Orange Book as therapeutically equivalent to the branded product will be substitutable under state law and, conversely, a generic drug that is not so listed will not be substitutable. To be considered therapeutically equivalent, a generic drug must first be a pharmaceutical equivalent of the branded drug. This means that the generic has the same active ingredient, dosage form, strength or concentration and route of



administration as the brand-name drug. Tablets and capsules are presently considered different dosage forms that are pharmaceutical alternatives and not substitutable pharmaceutical equivalents.

        In addition to being pharmaceutical equivalents, therapeutic equivalents must be bioequivalent to their branded counterparts. Bioequivalence for this purpose is defined in the same manner as for



ANDA approvals, and usually requires a showing of comparable rate and extent of absorption in a small human study.

        Solid oral dosage form drug products generally are rated AB in the Orange Book if they are considered therapeutic equivalents. If bioequivalence has been adequately demonstrated, the products will be rated "AB."

Foreign Regulation and Product Approval

        Outside the United States, our ability to market a product candidate 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 Community, or EC, registration procedures are available to companies wishing to market a product in more than one EC member state. If the regulatory authority is satisfied that adequate evidence of safety, quality and efficacy has been presented, a marketing authorization will be granted. This foreign regulatory approval process involves all of the risks associated with FDA clearance discussed above.

Other Regulations

        In the U.S., the research, manufacturing, distribution, sale, and promotion of drug and biological products are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (formerly the Health Care Financing Administration), other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the U.S. Department of Justice and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments. For example, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs must comply with the anti-kickback and fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, as amended, the False Claims Act, also as amended, the privacy provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, and similar state laws. Pricing and rebate programs must comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended, and the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, as amended. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. All of these activities are also potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

        We are also subject to numerous federal, state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, environmental protection, fire hazard control, and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances. We may incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations now or in the future.

Reimbursement and Pricing Controls

        In many of the markets where we or our collaborative partners would commercialize a product following regulatory approval, the prices of pharmaceutical products are subject to direct price controls (by law) and to drug reimbursement programs with varying price control mechanisms.

        In the United States, there has been an increased focus on drug pricing in recent years. Although there are currently no direct government price controls over private sector purchases in the United States, federal legislation requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay prescribed rebates on certain drugs to enable them to be eligible for reimbursement under certain public health care programs such



as Medicaid. Various states have adopted further mechanisms under Medicaid and otherwise that seek to control drug prices, including by disfavoring certain higher priced drugs and by seeking supplemental rebates from manufacturers. Managed care has also become a potent force in the market place that increases downward pressure on the prices of pharmaceutical products. Federal legislation, enacted in



December 2003, has altered the way in which physician-administered drugs covered by Medicare are reimbursed. Under the new reimbursement methodology, physicians are reimbursed based on a product's "average sales price," or ASP. This new reimbursement methodology has generally led to lower reimbursement levels. The new federal legislation also has added an outpatient prescription drug benefit to Medicare, effective January 2006. In the interim, Congress has established a discount drug card program for Medicare beneficiaries. Both benefits will be provided primarily through private entities, which will attempt to negotiate price concessions from pharmaceutical manufacturers.

        Public and private health care payors 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. Payors also set other criteria to govern the uses of a drug that will be deemed medically appropriate and therefore reimbursed or otherwise covered. In particular, many public and private health care payors limit reimbursement and coverage to the uses of a drug that are either approved by the FDA or that are supported by other appropriate evidence (for example, published medical literature) and 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 coverage for physician-administered oncology drugs, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, or OBRA '93, with certain exceptions, prohibits Medicare carriers from refusing to cover unapproved uses of an FDA-approved drug if the unapproved use is supported by one or more citations in the American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information, the American Medical Association Drug Evaluations, or the U.S. Pharmacopoeia Drug Information. Another commonly cited compendium, for example under Medicaid, is the DRUGDEX Information System.

        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 and/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. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products, as exemplified by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in the UK 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.

Employees

        As of January 3, 2006, we had 67 employees. Of the 67 employees, 24 perform research and development activities, including both preclinical programs and clinical trials, 29 work in sales, marketing, business development and communications and 14 perform general and administrative tasks.

Facilities

        Our principal executive offices are located in an approximately 30,000 square foot facility in Hawthorne, NY, which houses offices and laboratory space. The current annual rent for this facility is $642,000. We believe that our facility is currently adequate for our purposes and that it will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. The lease for this facility expires in January 2008.

Legal Proceedings

        We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings.



MANAGEMENT

Executive Officers and Directors

        The following table sets forth, as of December 31, 2005,January 11, 2006, information about our executive officers and directors.

Name

 Age
 Position(s)
Ron Cohen, M.D. 49 President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Andrew R. Blight, Ph.D. 55 Chief Scientific Officer
Mary Fisher 44 Chief Operating Officer
David Lawrence, M.B.A. 48 Chief Financial Officer
Jane Wasman 49 Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
Standish M. Fleming(2) 58 Director
John Friedman 52 Director
Sandra Panem, Ph.D.(1) 59 Director
Barclay A. Phillips(2) 43 Director
Mark R.E. Pinney, M.B.A., C.F.A., M.S. 51 Director
Lorin J. Randall(2)62Director
Steven M. Rauscher(1) 52 Director
Michael Steinmetz, Ph.D.(2) 58 Director
Wise Young, Ph.D., M.D.(1) 5556 Director

(1)
Member of the executive compensation committee

(2)
Member of the audit committee

        Ron Cohen, M.D.,has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since he founded Acorda in 1995. Dr. Cohen previously was a principal in the startup of Advanced Tissue Sciences, Inc., a biotechnology company engaged in the growth of human organ tissues for transplantation uses. Dr. Cohen received his B.A. degree with honors in Psychology from Princeton University, and his M.D. from the Columbia College of Physicians & Surgeons. He completed a residency in Internal Medicine at the University of Virginia Medical Center, and is Board Certified in Internal Medicine. Dr. Cohen serves on the Board of Directors of Zymenex A/S, a Danish pharmaceutical company, and on the Emerging Company Section of the Board of the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO). He is Chairman Emeritus and a Director of the Board of the New York Biotechnology Association and also serves as on the Scientific Advisory Board of the Daniel Heumann Fund and as a member of the Columbia-Presbyterian Health Sciences Advisory Council.

        Andrew R. Blight, Ph.D., has been our Chief Scientific Officer since January 2004 and previously served as our Executive Vice President, Research and Development from 2000 to 2004, and Vice President, Research and Development, from 1998 to 2000. Prior to joining Acorda, Dr. Blight spent approximately six years as Professor and Director of the Neurosurgery Research Laboratory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Blight held prior academic positions at Purdue University and New York University. Dr. Blight is a leader in SCI pathophysiology research and has made several important contributions to the field, particularly on the role of demyelination in SCI. He also pioneered the therapeutic application of 4-AP in SCI animal models and in human clinical trials. Dr. Blight is a member of the editorial board of the Journal of Neurotrauma and has served as a member of the NIH NSDA review committee. He was previously Secretary, Treasurer and Vice President of the National Neurotrauma Society. Dr. Blight received his B.S. in Zoology and his Ph.D. in Zoology/Neurobiology from the University of Bristol, U.K.



        Mary Fisher has been our Chief Operating Officer since January 2005 and previously served as our Vice President, Commercial Operations from 2003 through 2004 and Vice President, Marketing



and Strategic Planning from 2000 to 2003. From 1999 to 2000, Ms. Fisher was an independent consultant to various pharmaceutical companies. From 1994 to 1999, Ms. Fisher was Vice President, Strategic Healthcare and Commercial Operations for Cephalon, Inc. In that capacity she was responsible for the company's corporate sales, managed care marketing, pricing, reimbursement, health economics, patient support programs, product planning, commercial manufacturing, distribution and customer service. From 1990 until joining Cephalon, Ms. Fisher was Corporate Communications Manager for Immunex Corporation.

        David Lawrence, M.B.A., has been our Chief Financial Officer since January 2005. He previously served as our Vice President, Finance from January 2001 through 2004, and Director, Finance from 1999 to 2001. From 1991 to 1999, Mr. Lawrence held several positions for Tel-Air Communications, Inc. including Vice President and Controller. Prior to Tel-Air, he held financial management positions of Controller and Finance Manager for Southwestern Bell and Metromedia Telecommunications respectively. Mr. Lawrence received his undergraduate degree in Accounting from Roger Williams College, and an M.B.A in Finance from Iona College. Mr. Lawrence is a founding member and currently serves on the Board of Directors as Treasurer of The Brian Ahearn Children's Fund.

        Jane Wasman, J.D., has been our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary since May 2004. From 1995 to 2004, Ms. Wasman held various leadership positions at Schering-Plough Corporation, including Staff Vice President and Associate General Counsel responsible for legal support for U.S. Pharmaceuticals operations, including sales, marketing and compliance; FDA regulatory matters; global research and development; and, corporate licensing and business development. She served as Staff Vice President, International in 2001 and as Staff Vice President, European Operations—Legal from 1998 to 2000. Previously, Ms. Wasman specialized in litigation at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson. She also served as Associate General Counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Veteran's Affairs. Ms. Wasman graduated Magna Cum Laude from Princeton University and earned her J.D. from Harvard Law School.

        Standish M. Fleming has been a member of our Board of Directors since 2004. He is a 19-year veteran of life sciences venture capital investing. Mr. Fleming co-founded Forward Ventures in 1993. Before establishing Forward Ventures II in 1993, Mr. Fleming served as start-up chairman, president and CEO of GeneSys Therapeutics (now part of Cell Genesys). He has served as founding director and acting president of Triangle Pharmaceuticals (now part of Gilead Sciences, Inc.), CombiChem (now part of Bristol-Myers Squibb) and Corixa and GenQuest (now both part of GlaxoSmithKline). Mr. Fleming was a founding board member of Ciphergen Biosystems and Gryphon Sciences. He is a former president of the Biotechnology Venture Investors Group. Mr. Fleming began his venture career with Ventana Growth Funds in San Diego in 1986. Mr. Fleming earned his B.A. from Amherst College and his M.B.A. from the UCLA Graduate School of Management. Mr. Fleming has served on the boards of 19 venture-backed companies and is also currently a director of Ambit and Sanarus Medical, and a founding director of Arizeke Pharmaceuticals and Nereus Pharmaceuticals.

        John Friedman has been a member of our Board of Directors since 2003. Mr. Friedman is the Managing Partner of Easton Hunt Capital Partners, L.P., a private investment firm that he founded in 1999. Since 1991, Mr. Friedman has also been the President of Easton Capital Corp., a private investment firm. He also helped manage Atrium Capital Corporation, an investment firm, from 1991 to 1993. From 1989 to 1991, Mr. Friedman was the founder and Managing General Partner of Security Pacific Capital Investors, a private investment firm. Prior to joining Security Pacific, Mr. Friedman was a Managing Director and Partner at E.M. Warburg, Pincus & Co., Inc., where he was employed from 1981 to 1989. From 1978 to 1980, Mr. Friedman was an attorney with Sullivan & Cromwell LLP and during 1980 he was employed at Shearson Loeb Rhoades. Mr. Friedman received a B.A. in History from Yale



College and a J.D. degree from Yale Law School. Mr. Friedman is a member of the board of directors of Comverse Technology, Inc., a telecommunications equipment company, YM BioSciences, Inc., a



biotechnology company, Renovis, a biotechnology company, Conor Medsystems, Inc., a drug delivery technology company, as well as several private companies. Mr. Friedman is also co-chairman of the President's Council of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.

        Sandra Panem, Ph.D., has been a member of our Board of Directors since 1998. She is currently a partner at Cross Atlantic Partners, which she joined in 2000. From 1994 to 1999, Dr. Panem was President of Vector Fund Management, the then asset management affiliate of Vector Securities International. Prior thereto, Dr. Panem served as Vice President and Portfolio Manager for the Oppenheimer Global BioTech Fund, a mutual fund that invested in public and private biotechnology companies. Previously, she was Vice President at Salomon Brothers Venture Capital, a fund focused on early and later-stage life sciences and technology investments. Dr. Panem was also a Science and Public Policy Fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, and an Assistant Professor of Pathology at the University of Chicago. She received a B.S. in biochemistry and Ph.D. in microbiology from the University of Chicago. Dr. Panem currently serves on the boards of directors of Martek Biosciences Corp., Bioject Medical Technologies, Inc., Labcyte, Inc. and Confluent Surgical, Inc.

        Barclay A. Phillips has been a member of our Board of Directors since September 2004. Mr. Phillips has been a Managing Director of Vector Fund Management, a venture capital firm focused on investments in the life sciences and healthcare industry, since 1999. From 1991 to 1999, Mr. Phillips served in various roles including Director of Private Placements and Biotechnology Analyst for INVESCO Funds Group, Inc. From 1985 to 1990, Mr. Phillips held positions in sales and trading with Paine Webber, Inc. and Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. Over the last twelve years, Mr. Phillips has served on the boards of a number of private companies and currently serves as a Director of CancerVax Corp. Mr. Phillips received a B.A. in economics from the University of Colorado.

        Mark R. E. Pinney, M.B.A., C.F.A., M.S., joined our Board of Directors at our founding. He was also our Chief Financial Officer from 2001 to 2004. Since 2004, he has served as Chief Financial Officer and Chief Privacy Officer of Tacoda Systems, Inc. From 2000 to 2001, Mr. Pinney was Chairman of CanDo, Inc., an Internet company that offered product and service solutions to people with disabilities. In 1998, he co-founded and was Chief Executive Officer of LifeWire, Inc., a company developing community-based destination web sites for the disability population. LifeWire merged with CanDo in 2000. Mr. Pinney also co-founded Real Media, Inc., an Internet advertising software and services firm, in 1996. From 1984 to 1988, he was Vice President, Corporate Finance for Merrill Lynch Capital Markets and from 1988 to 1992, he was Vice President, Private Transactions at Dillon Read & Co., Inc. Mr. Pinney also serves on the Advisory Board of United Spinal Association. He received an undergraduate degree in engineering at the University of Exeter, England, an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business and a masters degree in engineering from Columbia University. He is a Chartered Financial Analyst.

        Lorin J. Randallhas been a member of our Board of Directors since January 2006. Mr. Randall has been Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Eximias Pharmaceutical Corporation, a development-stage drug development company since 2004. From 2002 to 2004, Mr. Randall served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of i-STAT Corporation, a publicly-traded manufacturer of medical diagnostic devices which was acquired by Abbott Laboratories in 2004. From 1995 to 2001, Mr. Randall was Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of CFM Technologies, Inc. a publicly-traded manufacturer of semiconductor manufacturing equipment. Mr. Randall previously served on the board of Quad Systems Corporation, a publicly-traded manufacturer of electronics manufacturing equipment where he served as Chairman of the Audit Committee. Mr. Randall received a B.S. in accounting from The Pennsylvania State University and an M.B.A. from Northeastern University.



Steven M. Rauscher has served on our Board of Directors since 2005. He is President and CEO of Oscient Pharmaceuticals Corporation, a commercial stage biopharmaceutical company. He joined Oscient in 2000 having served as a member of the Board of Directors since 1993. Previously, Mr. Rauscher was CEO of AmericasDoctor, a company providing clinical research services to the pharmaceutical industry. Prior to AmericasDoctor, he held a number of leadership positions at Abbott Laboratories, including Vice President of Corporate Licensing, Vice President of Business Development, International Division and Vice President of Sales, U.S. Pharmaceuticals. Mr. Rauscher received a B.S. from Indiana University and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago.

        Michael Steinmetz, Ph.D., has been a member of our Board of Directors since 1999. Dr. Steinmetz is a Managing Director at Clarus Ventures LLC, a company he co-founded in 2005. From 1999 to June 2005, he was a General Partner of MPM's BioVentures' Funds. Prior to MPM, he held positions at various academic institutions, including the California Institute of Technology and the Basel Institute for Immunology where he was a permanent member. In 1986, he joined Hoffmann-La Roche and held



various leadership positions in R&D, initially in Switzerland and subsequently in the United States where, as Vice President of Preclinical Research and Development, he was responsible for Roche's drug discovery activities in the United States and Roche's global biotechnology efforts. Dr. Steinmetz received a degree in chemistry from the University of Hamburg, Germany and holds a Ph.D. from the University of Munich, Germany. He has done academic research in the areas of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Immunology and has published over 130 manuscripts in leading scientific journals.

        Wise Young, Ph.D., M.D., has been a member of the board of directors and of our scientific advisory board since the founding of the company in 1995. Dr. Young has been at Rutgers University since 1997, where he serves as Professor and Chair of the Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Professor II and Director of the Neuroscience Center and founderFounding Director of the W.M. Keck Center for Neuroscience. Dr. Young is one of the preeminent scientists in the fields of spinal cord injury and neurotrauma, SCI animal models, and the pharmacological therapy of SCI. He was the Principal Investigator for the Multicenter Animal Spinal Cord Injury Study, funded by the National Institutes of Health; is editor-in-chief ofCurrent Concepts in Critical Care and Trauma; and serves on numerous editorial boards, including those ofExperimental Neurology, Journal of Neurotrauma, Brain Research andStroke. Dr. Young has received the Wakeman Award for Research in Neurosciences, and a Jacob Javits Neuroscience Award from the National Institute of Neurological Disorder and Stroke. He is also a member of the Scientific Advisory Council of the American Paralysis Association and of the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study executive committee. Dr. Young received a B.A. in biology and chemistry from Reed College, a Ph.D. in physiology and biophysics from the University of Iowa and an M.D. from Stanford University.

Board Composition

        Our board of directors currently has nine members. Upon completion of this offering, our board of directors will consist of nine directors divided into three classes, with each class serving for a term of three years:


        At each annual meeting of stockholders, the successors to directors whose terms will then expire will be elected for three-year terms. This classification of the board of directors may have the effect of delaying or preventing changes in control or management. See "Risk Factors—Certain provisions of Delaware law, our certificate of incorporation and our by-laws may delay or prevent an acquisition of us that stockholders may consider favorable or may prevent efforts by our stockholders to change our directors or our management, which could decrease the value of your shares."

        We believe that a majority of the members of our Board of Directors will be independent under the current independence requirements of the Nasdaq National Market and the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. The authorized number of directors may be changed by resolution adopted by a majority of the board of directors.

Board Observation Rights

        In connection with our Revenue Interests Assignment Agreementrevenue interests assignment agreement with PRF, we granted PRF the right to appoint a representative to receive all notices and materials provided to our board of directors



and to attend as an observer all meetings of our board of directors, subject to certain exceptions. Mr. Gregory B. Brown, M.D. is the initial representative designated by PRF for such purpose. This right will terminate on the earlier to occur of the fourth anniversary of the completion of an initial public offering of shares of our common stock or termination of our agreement with PRF.

Director Compensation

        Our outside directors compensation policy provides that new outside directors on our board receive an initial grant of stock options in the amount of 0.2% of the fully diluted shares of our common stock, or a comparable adjusted number of stock appreciation rights or shares of restricted stock, with a fair market value exercise price and a three-year quarterly vesting schedule commencing on the date of the award, unless they hold at least an equivalent amount of common stock through prior ownership. On an annual basis, at the discretion of the board of directors upon the recommendation of the compensation committee, outside directors can receive stock options in the amount of up to 0.02% of the fully diluted shares of our common stock, or a comparable adjusted number of stock appreciation rights or shares of restricted stock, with a fair market value exercise price and a one-year quarterly vesting schedule. Upon consummation of this offering, this compensation policy will be extended to all of the outside directors on our board of directors. Directors are also reimbursed for reasonable expenses related to their service on our board of directors.

Board Committees

        Our board of directors has an audit committee, a compensation committee and a nominations committee.

Audit Committee

        Our audit committee consists of Mr. Phillips, Mr. Fleming, Mr. Randall and Dr. Steinmetz. Mr. Phillips serves as chair of our audit committee. Our board of directors has determined that Mr. Fleming qualifiesand Mr. Randall each qualify as an "audit committee financial expert" as that term is defined in Item 401(h) of Regulation S-K of the Securities Act. We believe that the composition of our audit committee meets, and the functioning of our audit committee will comply with, the applicable requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Nasdaq National Market and SEC rules and regulations.

        Our audit committee is responsible for:




        We have adopted a written audit committee charter that we will make available on our website.


Compensation Committee

        Our compensation committee consists of Dr. Panem, Mr. Rauscher and Dr. Young. Dr. Panem serves as chair of our compensation committee. We believe that the composition of our compensation committee meets, and the functioning of our compensation committee will comply with, the applicable requirements of the Nasdaq National Market and SEC rules and regulations. Our compensation committee is responsible for:

        We have adopted a written compensation committee charter that we will make available on our website.

Nominations Committee

        Effective upon the closing of this offering, our nominations committee will consist of Mr. Friedman, Dr. Panem and Dr. Steinmetz. Mr. Friedman will serve as chair of the committee. The nominations committee will be responsible for identifying potential candidates to serve on our board. We have approved a written nominations committee charter that also will be effective upon the closing of this offering and that sets forth procedures for the consideration of director nominees and other related matters.

Code of Ethics

        Our board of directors has adopted a code of ethics for all directors, officers and employees. We will make this code available on our website upon completion of this offering.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

        The compensation of our executive officers is currently determined by our compensation committee, as described above. None of our executive officers has served as a member of the board of directors or compensation committee of any entity that has one or more executive officers serving as a member of our board of directors or compensation committee.



        Dr. Panem is affiliated with Cross Atlantic Partners, which participated in the sale of our Series J preferred stock in a private placement consummated in May 2003. Pursuant to an amended and restated registration rights agreement among us and certain of our stockholders, including entities affiliated with Dr. Panem, the parties to the registration rights agreement have demand and piggy-back registration rights. See "Certain Relationships and Related Transactions."

Executive Compensation

        The following summary compensation table sets forth the aggregate compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to the following individuals during the fiscal yearyears ended December 31, 2005:2005 and 2004:

        We refer to these individuals as our "named executive officers."



SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

 
  
  
  
 Long-Term
Compensation

 
 Annual Compensation
 Securities Underlying
Name and Principal Position

 Year
 Salary
 Bonus(2)
 Restricted
Stock Award(3)

 Options(4)
Ron Cohen, M.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
 2005 $305,000 $0 260,385 51,265
Andrew R. Blight, Ph.D.
Chief Scientific Officer
 2005 $215,000 $0 97,385 52,338
Mary Fisher
Chief Operating Officer
 2005 $225,000 $0 157,231 132,323
Jane Wasman
Executive VP & General Counsel
 2005 $225,000 $ 77,615 44,769
David Lawrence M.B.A.
Chief Financial Officer
 2005 $180,000 $0 64,231 70,109
          
 
          835,847(1)350,804




Long-Term
Compensation



Annual Compensation
Securities Underlying

Name and Principal Position

Year
Salary
Bonus(1)
Restricted
Stock Award(2)

Options(3)
All Other
Compensation

Ron Cohen, M.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
2005
2004
$
305,000
305,000
$

120,000

260,385
51,265


Andrew R. Blight, Ph.D.
Chief Scientific Officer


2005
2004



215,000
210,000




65,450



97,385


52,338





Mary Fisher
Chief Operating Officer(4)


2005
2004



225,000
210,000




74,000



157,231


132,323



$


109,087

Jane Wasman
Executive VP & General Counsel(5)


2005
2004



225,000
225,000







77,615


44,769



$


25,000

David Lawrence M.B.A.
Chief Financial Officer(6)


2005
2004



180,000
164,800




64,000



64,231


70,109





(1)
The total aggregate restricted stock holdings as of December 31, 2005.

(2)
Bonuses were earned in 2005 and will be paid in 2006. The amounts have not yet been determined.

(3)(2)
These restricted stock awards are subject to vesting over a four-year period as follows: the first installment will vest on the last to occur of (a) the expiration of the lock-up period following our initial public offering, and (b) the third day after public announcement of data regarding either the primary outcome measure of our Fampridine-SR Phase 3 trial in MS or suspension or termination of the trial, whichever comes first, and (c) in the case of Ron Cohen, June 30, 2007; except that if the vesting date under (a) or (b) or (c) would occur during a "blackout" period under our insider trading policy, the vesting date will be the first day following termination of the blackout period. The first vested installment under each restricted stock award will be calculated as the total number of shares covered by the award multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of months from the vesting commencement date to the date on which the first installment of restricted shares vest, or the "initial vesting date," and the denominator is 48. All remaining restricted shares will vest in equal quarterly installments, measured from the vesting commencement date, except that for any partial quarter in which the initial vesting date occurs, the unvested portion of shares remaining for that quarter will vest at the end of such quarter. The vesting commencement date for each of these individuals was March 9, 2004, with the exception of Ms. Wasman, whose vesting commencement date was May 10, 2004.

(4)(3)
Stock options were granted in 2005 with a four-year vesting schedule vesting in equal quarterly installments.

(4)
Ms. Fisher was Executive Vice President, Operations in 2004 and was promoted to Chief Operating Officer on January 1, 2005. Other Compensation expense represents relocation costs.

(5)
Ms. Wasman began employment in May 2004.

(6)
Mr. Lawrence was Vice President, Finance in 2004 and was promoted to Chief Financial Officer on January 1, 2005.

Stock Options

Aggregate Exercise of Stock Options and Year-end Option Values

        The following table contains information regarding the number of shares of common stock subject to both exercisable and unexercisable stock options, as well as the value of unexercisable in-the-money options as of December 31, 2005 for the named executive officers. There was no public market for our common stock as of December 31, 2005. Accordingly, the value of unexercised in-the-money options as of such date has been calculated by determining the difference between the exercise price per share



and an assumed offering price of $          per share, which is the midpoint of the estimated price range shown on the cover of this prospectus.

 
  
  
 Number of Securities
Underlying Unexercised
Options at
December 31, 2005

 Value of Unexercised
In-the-Money
Options at
December 31, 2005

 
 Shares
Acquired
on
Exercise

  
Name

 Value
Realized
($)

 Exercisable
 Unexercisable
 Exercisable
 Unexercisable
Ron Cohen 0 0 665,721 38,452 $  $ 
Andrew Blight 0 0 108,205 39,255      
Mary Fisher 0 0 69,965 99,245      
Jane Wasman 0 0 11,193 33,576      
David Lawrence 0 0 46,415 52,584      

        The following table sets forth the number of shares underlying options that have been issued to each of the named executive officers in calendar year 2005. No stock appreciation rights have been granted to these individuals. The potential realizable value set forth in the last column of the table is calculated based on the term of the option at the time of grant, which is ten years. This value is based on assumed rates of stock price appreciation of 0%, 5% and 10% compounded annually from the date of grant until their expiration date, assuming a fair market value equal to the mid-point of the estimated price range of an offering, minus the applicable exercise price. These numbers are calculated based on the requirements of the SEC and do not reflect our estimate of future stock price growth. Actual gains, if any, on stock option exercises will depend on future performance of the common stock on the date on which the options are exercised.


  
  
  
  
  
 Potential Realizable
Value at Assumed
Annual Rates of Stock
Price Appreciation
for Option Term(2)

  
  
  
  
  
 Potential Realizable
Value at Assumed
Annual Rates of Stock
Price Appreciation
for Option Term(2)


 Number of Shares Underlying Stock Options Granted in Calendar Year 2005(1)
  
  
  
  
 Number of Shares Underlying Stock Options Granted in Calendar Year 2005(1)
  
  
  
  

 Percent of Total Options Granted to Employees in Fiscal Year
  
 Market Price on Date of Grant ($/share)
  
 Percent of Total Options Granted to Employees in Fiscal Year
  
 Market Price on Date of Grant ($/share)
  
Name

 Exercise
Price
($/share)

 Expiration Date
 Exercise
Price
($/share)

 Expiration Date
 10%
 Market Price on Date of Grant ($/share)
  Market Price on Date of Grant ($/share)
10%
Ron Cohen 51,265 8.8% $8.14   1/1/2015   51,265 8.8% $8.14 $  1/1/2015 $ 
Andrew Blight 52,338 9.0% $8.14   1/1/2015   52,338 9.0% $8.14 $  1/1/2015   
Mary Fisher 132,323 22.7% $8.14   1/1/2015     132,323 22.7% $8.14 $  1/1/2015      
Jane Wasman 44,769 7.7% $8.14   1/1/2015     44,769 7.7% $8.14 $  1/1/2015      
David Lawrence 70,109 12.0% $8.14   1/1/2015     70,109 12.0% $8.14 $  1/1/2015      

(1)
The stock options are granted with a four-year vesting schedule, vesting in equal quarterly installments.

(2)
Amounts represent hypothetical gains that could be achieved for stock options if exercised at the end of the option term. The potential realizable values at 5% and 10% appreciation are calculated by (i) multiplying the number of common shares of common stock subject to a given stock option by a fair market value of $          price per share; (ii) assuming that the aggregate stock value derived from that calculation compounds at the annual rate of 5% or 10% shown in the table from September 30, 2005 until the expiration of the option; (iii) subtracting from that result the aggregate option exercise price.

Stock Incentive Plans

        Our board of directors has adopted two equity incentive plans: our 2006 StockEmployee Incentive Plan (the 2006 Plan) and our 1999 Employee Stock Option Plan (the 1999 Plan and, together with the 2006 Plan, the Plans). AAs of January 15, 2006, a total of 3,723,7365,481,334 shares of our common stock will be availablehad been reserved for issuance under the Plans, including 700,5223,000,000 shares remaining eligiblereserved for the grant of awards. Following the effective date ofawards under the 2006 Plan, noPlan. No additional awards will be made under the 1999 Plan.

        The 2006 Plan was adopted on January 3, 2006 will becomeand became effective, on the date as of which it is approvedfollowing approval by our stockholders.stockholders, on January 11, 2006. The 1999 Plan was adopted by our board of directors in June 1999. The Plans allow us to issue incentive and nonstatutory stock options, restricted stock awards and stock



appreciation rights for shares of our common stock. The 2006 Plan will terminate ten years after the effective date of the plan.

        There are a total of 3,723,736The 3,000,000 shares of common stock that will be availablereserved for issuance under the 2006 Plan (including an amount towill be added under the "evergreen" provision described below on the day the plan is approvedincreased by the shareholders), which includes thenumber of shares issuable upon the exercise of our common stock, if any, that are subject to outstanding awards under the 1999 Plan and a number of shares equalat January 11, 2006, to the remainingextent that such shares reserved for awards under the 1999 Plan.are surrendered before exercise, lapse, are terminated without being exercised or are forfeited after such date.

        In addition, the 2006 Plan contains an "evergreen" provision which provides for automatic annual increases to the share reserve under the 2006 Plan on the first day of each fiscal year by a number of shares equal to the lesser of:

        Although a similar evergreen provision is contained in our 1999 Plan, this provision has been amended, effective upon the adoption of the 2006 Plan by our board of directors, so as not to increase the reserved shares under the 1999 Plan.

        Our compensation committee administers the Plans, selects those persons who are to be granted awards under the 2006 Plan and determines the terms and conditions of those awards. Our directors, key employees, independent contractors, agents and consultants are eligible to receive awards under our Plans, but only employees and officers may receive incentive stock options.

        The exercise price per share of the incentive stock options awarded under the Plans must be at least equal to the fair market value of a share of our common stock on the date of grant. The exercise price per share of nonstatutory stock options awarded under the Plans must be equal to the fair market value of a share of our common stock on the date of grant, or such other price that the compensation committee may determine is appropriate. The compensation committee determines the exercise period of the stock options, but in no event will the stock options expire later than ten years from the date of grant. Except as the compensation committee may otherwise determine, upon the voluntary termination or involuntary termination without cause of the option holder, the stock options may be exercised for a period of three months after such termination. In the case of termination of the option holder by reason of retirement or due to disability, the stock options may be exercised at any time to the extent that such stock option was vested, but only within one year of termination in the case of incentive stock options. In the case of termination by death, the option holder's estate, or any person who acquires the stock option by reason of the option holder's death, may exercise the stock option within a period of three years after the option holder's death.

        An award under our Plans will become vested only if the vesting conditions set forth in the award agreement, as determined by the compensation committee, are satisfied. The vesting conditions may include performance of services for a specified period, achievement of performance objectives or a combination of the two types of criteria. Performance objectives may be based on financial or operating measures. In granting performance-based awards under the 2006 Plan, which are regulated by Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, the compensation committee is bound to follow the criteria established under the 2006 Plan.

        Under the 2006 Plan, upon a reorganization event, as defined, each outstanding award under the 2006 Plan, with certain exceptions, must either be assumed or an equivalent exercisable or unrestricted award substituted by the successor entity in the reorganization. If an award is assumed and, within 18 months after the reorganization event the recipient's employment is terminated without cause or he or she terminates employment for good reason, the award will become exercisable in full. If the successor entity does not assume outstanding awards at the time of a reorganization event, the compensation committee must provide that either (i) all or some portion of outstanding awards will be accelerated immediately prior to the reorganization event, or (ii) all outstanding awards will terminate upon consummation of the reorganization event and each recipient of an award will receive, in



exchange for the award, a cash



payment equal to the value of the award, or (iii) if our common stock remains publicly traded, the awards will remain in place unchanged.

        Under the 1999 Plan, in the event of a tender offer by a person or persons other than us, for all or any part of the outstanding stock which, following consummation of the tender offer would result in the offeror's or offerors' owning, beneficially or of record, an aggregate of more than 25% of our outstanding common stock, or in the event of a change of control as defined, stock options under the 1999 Plan will become immediately exercisable to the extent of the total number of shares subject to the stock options. The compensation committee may authorize payment of cash upon exercise of a stock appreciation right in the event of a tender offer as described above, or a change of control.

        In September 2003, we repriced 115,578 stock options issued to employees, which had an exercise price per option of more than $7.64, with a new exercise price of $7.64. In March 2004, we repriced 1,227,648 stock options issued to employees, which had an exercise price per option of more than $2.60, with a new exercise price per option of $2.60. We recognized additional compensation charges for these repricings (see Note 9 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus).

401(k) Plan

        Effective September 1, 1999, we adopted a defined contribution 401(k) savings plan covering all of our employees. Participants may elect to defer a percentage of their annual pre-tax compensation to the 401(k) plan, subject to defined limitations. Our board of directors has discretion to match contributions made by our employees. We did not make any matching contributions to the plan in fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002 or in calendar years 2003 and 2004.

Employment Contracts, Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control Arrangements

        We are a party to an employment agreement with Dr. Cohen that governs the terms and conditions of his employment as our President and Chief Executive Officer. The employment agreement provides for a base annual salary of $280,000, subject to annual increases and bonuses at the discretion of the board of directors. His current salary is $305,000. Dr. Cohen is eligible to receive annual performance-based stock options to purchase common stock in an amount determined by the board of directors based on Dr. Cohen's individual performance and the achievement of our goals and objectives. Dr. Cohen's employment agreement would have expired in January 2004, but is subject to automatic successive one-year renewal periods unless either Dr. Cohen or we give the other written notice at least 60 days prior to the expiration date that Dr. Cohen or we do not intend to renew the contract. Dr. Cohen's employment agreement has been renewed effective January 20052006 for a one-year period. In the event we terminate the agreement with Dr. Cohen without cause, or if Dr. Cohen voluntarily terminates the agreement with good reason, we are obligated to make severance payments equal to one year's base annual salary and COBRA premium payments for the severance period plus a bonus equal to his prior year's bonus pro rated for the number of days worked prior to termination. In such event, all of Dr. Cohen's options will become immediately exercisable and will remain exercisable for 48 months following termination. If Dr. Cohen's employment terminates for death or disability, we are obligated to pay his base salary for three months and COBRA premiums for the COBRA coverage period and 65% of his outstanding options will become immediately vested and remain exercisable for 48 months following such termination. In the event of a change in control, the vesting of Dr. Cohen's options will be governed by the terms of our stock option plan and his stock option agreement, but in no event will less than 65% of Dr. Cohen's then unvested stock options become immediately vested and exercisable. If Dr. Cohen voluntarily terminates his employment without good reason following a change in control, he is entitled to receive the same severance and bonus package described above, however, only 65% of his outstanding options will become immediately vested and remain exercisable for 48 months following termination. Following his termination of employment, Dr. Cohen will remain subject to confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation covenants for one year in the case of non-competition and non-solicitation and five years in the case of confidentiality.



        On September 26, 2004, we entered into an amendment to Dr. Cohen's employment agreement to increase the amount of severance to which he would be entitled in the event of a termination of his employment by us without cause or by Dr. Cohen with good reason from one year to 15 months and to make such severance, together with his prorated bonus, payable in one lump sum within 30 days after such termination.

        We are party to an employment agreement with Dr. Blight that governs the terms and conditions of his employment as our Chief Scientific Officer. The employment agreement provides for a base annual salary of $215,000, subject to annual review by Dr. Cohen and by the compensation committee of the Board of Directors. His current salary is $215,000.

        We are party to an employment agreement with Ms. Fisher that governs the terms and conditions of her employment as our Chief Operating Officer. The employment agreement provides for a base annual salary of $225,000, subject to annual review by Dr. Cohen and by the compensation committee of the Board of Directors. Her current salary is $225,000.

        We are party to an employment agreement with Mr. Lawrence that governs the terms and conditions of his employment as our Chief Financial Officer. The employment agreement provides for a base annual salary of $180,000, subject to annual review by Dr. Cohen and by the compensation committee of the Board of Directors. His current salary is $180,000.

        We are party to an employment agreement with Ms. Wasman that governs the terms and conditions of her employment as our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary. The employment agreement provides for a base annual salary of $225,000, subject to annual review by Dr. Cohen and by the compensation committee of the Board of Directors. Her current salary is $225,000.

        Pursuant to their employment agreements, Dr. Blight, Ms. Fisher, Mr. Lawrence and Ms. Wasman are eligible to receive an annual bonus and to receive annual performance-based stock options to purchase common stock, stock appreciation rights awards and/or restricted stock awards of common stock in an amount to be recommended by the compensation committee and approved by the board of directors based on their respective performances and upon the achievement of our goals and objectives. Each of their employment agreements expires on December 19, 2006 but is subject to extension by the mutual agreement of both parties.

        In the event we terminate our employment agreement with Dr. Blight, Ms. Fisher, Mr. Lawrence or Ms. Wasman without cause, or if one of them voluntarily terminates his or her agreements with good reason, we are obligated to make severance payments equal to nine months base annual salary, in the case of Dr. Blight and Ms. Fisher, and seven months base annual salary, in the case of Mr. Lawrence and Ms. Wasman, as well as COBRA premium payments for the severance period. In such event, all options, stock appreciation rights awards and restricted stock awards that have vested as of the termination date shall remain exercisable for 90 days following such date. All unvested options, stock appreciation rights awards and stock awards will be cancelled on the date of termination. If Dr. Blight, Ms. Fisher, Mr. Lawrence or Ms. Wasman voluntarily terminates his or her employment without good reason or if we terminate his or her employment without cause within 18 months after a change in control, we are obligated to make severance payments equal to one year's base annual salary, in the case of Dr. Blight and Ms. Fisher, and nine months base annual salary, in the case of Mr. Lawrence and Ms. Wasman, in each case paid in a lump sum within 30 days after termination, as well as COBRA premium payments for the severance period plus a bonus equal to a prior year's bonus pro rated for the number of days worked prior to termination. We are also obligated to pay salary earned but not paid, vacation and sick leave days that have accrued, and reimbursable business expenses incurred through the date of termination. In such event, not less than 50% of the unvested options, stock appreciation rights and restricted or other stock awards shall become immediately and full vested and shall remain exercisable for 18 months following such date. All options that have vested



as of the termination date shall remain exercisable for 90 days following such date. All unvested options, stock appreciation rights awards and stock awards will be cancelled on the date of termination.

Indemnification of Directors and Executive Officers and Limitation on Liability

        Our certificate of incorporation currently provides and, upon the closing of this offering, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will provide, that we shall indemnify our directors and officers to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. Upon the closing of this offering, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will also provide that, with respect to proceedings initiated by our officers and directors, we are only required to indemnify these persons if the proceeding was authorized by our board of directors. Our amended bylaws permit us, by action of our board of directors, to indemnify our other employees and agents to the same extent as we are required to indemnify our officers and directors.

        In addition, our certificate of incorporation provides, and upon the closing of this offering our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will provide, that our directors will not be personally liable to us or our stockholders for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duty as a director, except for liability:

        There is no pending litigation or proceeding involving any of our directors or officers for which indemnification is being sought, nor are we aware of any pending or threatened litigation that may result in claims for indemnification by any director or officer.



CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

Sale of Securities

        In March 2001, we consummated a private placement of 10,204,047 shares of Series I preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $39,694,000. Except for Michael Steinmetz, Standish Fleming and Barclay Phillips, who are affiliated with MPM/BB Bioventure, Forward Ventures and Vector Fund Management, respectively, none of our executive officers or directors purchased any shares of the Series I preferred stock.

        The following table sets forth, with respect to the Series I preferred stock transaction, the purchase price per share, the aggregate shares purchased and the total investment for MPM/BB Bioventure Group, Forward Ventures and Vector Fund Management:

Investor

 Purchase Price
per Share of
Series I Preferred

 Aggregate Shares of
Series I Preferred
Purchased

 Total Investment in
Series I Preferred

MPM/BB Bioventure Group $3.89 639,359 $2,487,107
Forward Ventures $3.89 1,542,417 $6,000,002
Vector Fund Management $3.89 398,547 $1,550,348

        In May 2003, we consummated a private placement of 112,790,233 shares of Series J preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $55,267,000. Except for Michael Steinmetz, John Friedman, Sandra Panem, Standish Fleming and Barclay Phillips, who are affiliated with MPM/BB Bioventure Group, Easton Hunt Capital Partners, Cross Atlantic Partners, Forward Ventures and Vector Fund Management, respectively, none of our executive officers or directors purchased any shares of the Series J preferred stock.

        The following table sets forth, with respect to the Series J preferred stock transaction, the purchase price per share, the aggregate shares purchased and the total investment for each of MPM/BB Bioventure Group, Easton Hunt Capital Partners, Cross Atlantic Partners, Forward Ventures and Vector Fund Management:

Investor

 Purchase Price
per Share of
Series J Preferred

 Aggregate Shares of
Series J Preferred
Purchased

 Total Investment in
Series J Preferred

MPM/BB Bioventure group $0.49 15,306,121 $7,500,000
Easton Hunt Capital Partners $0.49 11,224,490 $5,500,000
Cross Atlantic Partners $0.49 8,506,256 $4,168,065
Forward Ventures $0.49 8,163,264 $4,000,000
Vector Fund Management $0.49 2,040,816 $1,000,000

        In March 2004, we consummated a private placement of 1,533,330 shares of Series K preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $11,499,958. Except for John Friedman and Sandra Panem, who are affiliated with Easton Hunt Capital Partners and Cross Atlantic Partners, respectively, none of our executive officers or directors purchased any shares of the Series K preferred stock.



        The following table sets forth, with respect to the Series K preferred stock transaction, the purchase price per share, the aggregate shares purchased and the total investment for each of Easton Hunt Capital Partners, Easton Hunt New York and Cross Atlantic Partners:

Investor

 Purchase Price
per Share of
Series K Preferred

 Aggregate Shares of
Series K Preferred
Purchased

 Total Investment in
Series K Preferred

Easton Hunt Capital Partners $7.50 100,000 $750,000
Easton Hunt New York $7.50 100,000 $750,000
Cross Atlantic Partners $7.50 55,574 $416,805

Board Representation and Registration Rights

        Pursuant to an amended and restated registration rights agreement dated as of March 3, 2004, the holders of our Series I Preferred, Series J Preferred and Series K preferred stock have demand and piggy-back registration rights. Pursuant to the terms of this agreement, holders of at least 30% of outstanding "registrable securities" have the right to initiate a demand registration, subject to our ability to delay registration under certain circumstances.

        In addition, if we propose to register any of our securities under the Securities Act, including in this offering, certain of our other stockholders are entitled to notice of the registration and to include their registrable shares in the offering. If the managing underwriter determines that marketing factors require a limitation on the number of shares to be underwritten, the managing underwriters may limit or exclude from such underwriting the registrable securities and other securities of these stockholders. If we are so advised by the managing underwriter, then all securities other than registrable securities shall first be excluded from the registration. In no event, however, will the amount of stockholders' securities to be included in the offering be reduced below 30% of the total securities in the offering. We are required to bear substantially all costs incurred in these registrations, other than underwriting discounts and commissions.

        Pursuant to the lock-up agreements with the underwriters, holders of greater than 70% of the "registrable securities" under our registration rights agreement have waived their rights to demand registration and participation in this offering under the registration rights agreement until the later of October 30, 2006 or expiration of the lock-up agreements.

AgreementsAgreement with Former Director

        In November, 2004, we entered into an agreement with Mark Pinney, under which we agreed to extend the last date by which Mr. Pinney is entitled to exercise vested stock options previously granted to him to 90 days after he is no longer a director or consultant to us. In addition, he will be entitled to retain certain shares of restricted stock if the vesting requirements for these shares are met within the extended time period. On September 26, 2005, Mr. Pinney was issued 5,000 shares of restricted stock for services rendered as a member of our board of directors from November 1, 2004 through December 31, 2005. Mr. Pinney's shares of restricted stock are otherwise subject to the vesting in the manner described in footnote 3 to the Summary Compensation Table found on page 92.

Agreements with Elan

        In September 2003, we entered into the following agreements with Elan, which holds more than 5% of our outstanding common stock:Elan: