Barrier Therapeutics 10Q 2005 Q2 Quarterly report

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)


þ		QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005


o		TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number 000-50680

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)


Delaware		22-3828030

(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

600 College Road East, Suite 3200, Princeton, NJ		08540

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

(609) 945-1200

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Not Applicable

(Former Name, Former Address and Former Fiscal Year, If Changed Since Last Report)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yesþ Noo

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yeso Noþ

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.


Class		Outstanding as of August 9, 2005

Common Stock, par value $.0001		24,083,248 Shares

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

INDEX


CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS			1

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION			2

ITEM 1. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS			2

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS			2

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS			3

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS			4

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS			5

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS			10

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK			38

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES			38

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION			38

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS			38

ITEM 6. EXHIBITS			39

SIGNATURES			40
Amendment No.2 to the Intellectual Property Transfer and License Agreement
Scientific Advisory Board Consulting Agreement
Certification of principal executive officer
Certification of principal financial officer
Section 1350 Certification of principal executive officer
Section 1350 Certification of principal financial officer

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

In addition to historical facts or statements of current condition, this report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Forward-looking statements contained in this report constitute our expectations or forecasts of future events as of the date this report was filed with the SEC and are not statements of historical fact. You can identify these statements by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. Such statements may include words such as “anticipate,” “will,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “should,” “plan,” “believe,” “hope,” and other words and terms of similar meaning. In particular, these forward-looking statements include, among others, statements about:

	•		the increasing trend of operating losses and the reasons for those losses;

	•		our spending on the clinical development of our later stage and earlier stage product candidates;

	•		our plans regarding the development or regulatory path for any of our product candidates;

	•		the timing of the initiation or completion of any clinical trials;

	•		the timing of filing for regulatory approvals with governmental agencies;

	•		the commercialization of our products;

	•		the timing of the commercial launch of any of our product candidates, if approved;

	•		the commercialization of any of our product candidates, if approved; and

	•		other statements regarding matters that are not historical facts or statements of current condition.

Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this report may turn out to be wrong. We do not intend to update publicly any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Therefore, you should not place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. The factors that could cause actual results to differ from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements include, in addition to those set forth in Part I, Item 2 under the heading “Risk Factors,” our ability to:

	•		obtain substantial additional funds;

	•		obtain and maintain all necessary patents or licenses;

	•		demonstrate the safety and efficacy of product candidates at each stage of development;

	•		meet applicable regulatory standards and file for or receive required regulatory approvals;

	•		meet obligations and required milestones under our license and other agreements;

	•		produce drug candidates in commercial quantities at reasonable costs and compete successfully against other products and companies; and

	•		market our products and product candidates, if approved, and generate revenues.

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS


(Dollars in thousands)	June 30,			December 31,
	2005			2004
	(unaudited)
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	25,216		$	11,908
Marketable securities		74,895			77,173
Interest receivable		1,151			926
Accounts receivable		34			—
Inventory		30			—
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		1,538			1,610

Total current assets		102,864			91,617
Property and equipment, net		972			1,125
Security deposits		42			42
Product rights, net		2,956			—

Total assets	$	106,834		$	92,784

Liabilities and stockholders’ equity
Current liabilities:
Notes payable, current portion	$	273		$	261
Accounts payable		3,907			3,148
Accrued expenses		3,261			4,687
Deferred revenue		768			650
Other current liabilities		14			25

Total current liabilities		8,223			8,771
Notes payable, long-term portion		303			443
Commitments and Contingencies
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock, $.0001 par value; 80,000,000 shares authorized; 24,053,940 issued and outstanding at June 30, 2005; and 21,894,830 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2004		2			2
Additional paid-in capital		228,629			191,568
Accumulated deficit		(129,166	)		(106,200	)
Deferred compensation		(913	)		(1,510	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(244	)		(290	)

Total stockholders’ equity		98,308			83,570

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	106,834		$	92,784

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(unaudited)

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)


	Three months ended June 30,						Six months ended June 30,
	2005			2004			2005			2004
Revenues:
Net product revenue	$	95		$	—		$	305		$	—
Contract revenue		151			—			371			—
Grant revenue		226			179			449			359

Total revenues		472			179			1,125			359

Costs and expenses:
Cost of product revenues		15			—			41			—
Amortization of Product Rights		88			—			144			—
Research and development		7,306			6,564			16,791			12,094
Sales and marketing		2,259			897			4,041			1,641
General and administrative		2,358			1,786			4,411			3,381

Total operating expenses		12,026			9,247			25,428			17,116

Loss from operations		(11,554	)		(9,068	)		(24,303	)		(16,757	)
Interest income		759			319			1,366	��		492
Interest expense		(14	)		(7	)		(29	)		(15	)

Loss before income tax benefit		(10,809	)		(8,756	)		(22,966	)		(16,280	)
Income tax benefit		—			—			—			—
Net loss		(10,809	)		(8,756	)		(22,966	)		(16,280	)
Preferred stock accretion		—			(1,174	)		—			(4,592	)

Net loss attributable to common stockholders	$	(10,809	)	$	(9,930	)	$	(22,966	)	$	(20,872	)

Basic and diluted net loss attributable to common stockholders per share	$	(0.45	)	$	(0.66	)	$	(0.98	)	$	(2.69	)
Weighted-average shares outstanding-basic and diluted		23,839,701			15,043,544			23,323,399			7,763,643

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(unaudited)


	Six months ended June 30,
	2005			2004
Operating activities
Net loss	$	(22,966	)	$	(16,280	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation		206			154
Amortization of deferred compensation		536			1,232
Amortization of product rights		144			—
Non-cash compensation expense related to the issuance of options to non-employees		568			447
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		72			(674	)
Inventory		(30	)		—
Accounts receivable		(34	)		—
Interest receivable		(225	)		(413	)
Deferred financing costs		—			355
Accounts payable and accrued expenses		(667	)		880
Deferred revenue		118			(71	)
Other, net		(3	)		2

Net cash used in operating activities		(22,281	)		(14,368	)
Investing activities
Purchase of fixed assets		(53	)		(313	)
Purchase of product rights		(3,100	)		—
Security deposits		—			(1	)
Purchase of marketable securities		(59,769	)		(65,930	)
Maturities of marketable securities		62,095			16,432

Net cash used in investing activities		(827	)		(49,812	)
Financing activities
Repayment of notes payable		(128	)		(163	)
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock, net		—			(16	)
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net		36,098			67,892
Proceeds from exercise of stock options and other benefit plans		452			27

Net cash provided by financing activities		36,422			67,740
Effect of exchange rate on cash and cash equivalents		(6	)		(17	)

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		13,308			3,543
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period		11,908			11,472

Cash and cash equivalents, end of period		25,216			15,015

Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information
Cash paid during the period for interest	$	29		$	15

Non-cash investing and financing activities
Conversion of redeemable convertible preferred stock to common stock	$	—		$	118,837

Costs in connection with initial public offering of common stock reclassified to additional paid in capital	$	—		$	1,858

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)

June 30, 2005 and 2004

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)

1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Organization, Description of Business

Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. (the “Company”) was incorporated in Delaware on September 17, 2001 and commenced active operations in May 2002. The Company was formed to develop and market products that address medical needs in the treatment of dermatological diseases and disorders initially based on intellectual property in-licensed from Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., each a Johnson & Johnson company. The Company’s activities since inception have consisted principally of licensing products, raising capital, performing research and development, hiring personnel and establishing facilities. With the acquisition of Solagé® in February 2005, the Company has commenced its planned principal operations of selling dermatology products, and therefore is no longer in the development stage. The Company has offices in Princeton, New Jersey, Toronto, Canada, and Geel, Belgium.

Since inception, the Company has relied primarily upon the sale of equity securities to fund operations, most recently through the Company’s initial public offering in April 2004 and follow-on public offering in February 2005. The Company believes that its existing resources should be sufficient to meet its capital and liquidity requirements through the end of 2006. However, the Company’s capital requirements will depend on many factors, including the success of its development and commercialization of the Company’s product candidates. Even if the Company succeeds in developing and commercializing one or more of its product candidates, it may never achieve sufficient sales revenue to achieve or maintain profitability. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting only of adjustments of a normal recurring nature) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and six month period ended June 30, 2005 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2005. The Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2004 has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements as of that date. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in our Form 10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

Consolidation

The financial statements include the accounts of Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Barrier Therapeutics, NV. All significant intercompany transactions and balances are eliminated in consolidation.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, (continued)
(UNAUDITED)

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Reclassifications

Certain amounts from prior periods have been reclassified to conform to the current period’s presentation.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Inventories

Inventory consists primarily of finished goods. Inventory is stated at the lower of cost (determined on a first-in first-out method) or market.

Product Rights

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, “Accounting for Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” or SFAS 144, purchased intangibles and other long-lived assets, other than goodwill, are evaluated for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not be recoverable based on expected undiscounted cash flows attributable to that asset. The amount of any impairment is measured as the difference between the carrying value and the fair value of the impaired asset. No impairment charges for long-lived intangible assets have been recorded for the six months ended June 30, 2005.

Revenue Recognition

Revenues from product sales are recognized net of allowances for product returns, chargebacks, rebates, and other discounts when collectibility is reasonably assured and the amount is fixed and determinable.

Contract revenues include fees and other payments associated with collaborations with third parties and licensing agreements. Revenues from licensing agreements are recognized based on the performance requirements of the agreement. Non-refundable up-front fees, where the Company has an ongoing involvement or performance obligation, are generally recorded as deferred revenue in the balance sheet and amortized into contract revenues in the statement of operations over the terms of the performance obligation. Royalties from licensees are based on third-party sales of licensed products and will be recorded in accordance with contract terms when third-party results are reliably measurable and collectibility is reasonably assured.

Grant revenues are recognized as the Company provides the services stipulated in the underlying grant based on the time and materials incurred. Amounts received in advance of services provided are recorded as deferred revenue and amortized as revenue when the services are provided.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company uses the intrinsic-value method of accounting for stock-based awards granted to employees, as allowed under Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees”, or APB 25, and related interpretations. Accordingly, the Company does not recognize any compensation in the financial statements in connection with stock options granted to employees when those options have exercise prices equal to or greater than fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant. The Company also does not record any compensation expense in connection with the Employee Stock Purchase Plan as long as the purchase price is not less than 85% of the fair market value at the beginning or end of each offering period, whichever is lower.

Although SFAS 123 allows the Company to continue to follow the APB 25 guidelines, pro forma disclosure of net income (loss) and basic and diluted income (loss) per share as if the fair value based method had been applied to all awards is required. Because the estimated value is determined as of the date of grant, the actual value ultimately realized by the employee may be significantly different.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, (continued)
(UNAUDITED)

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Had compensation cost for the Company’s outstanding employee stock options been determined based on the fair value at the grant dates for those options consistent with SFAS 123, the Company’s net loss and basic and diluted net loss per share, would have been changed to the following pro forma amounts:


	Three months ended						Six months ended
	June 30,						June 30,
	2005			2004			2005			2004
Net loss attributable to common stockholders, as reported	$	(10,809	)	$	(9,930	)	$	(22,966	)	$	(20,872	)
Add: Non-cash employee compensation as reported		246			535			536			1,232
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under fair value based method for all awards		(1,439	)		(927	)		(2,274	)		(1,575	)


SFAS 123 pro forma net loss		(12,002	)		(10,322	)		(24,704	)		(21,215	)


Basic and diluted loss attributable per common share	$	(.45	)	$	(.66	)	$	(.98	)	$	(2.69	)

Basic and diluted loss attributable to common stockholders per share, SFAS 123 pro forma	$	(.50	)	$	(.69	)	$	(1.06	)	$	(2.73	)

SFAS 123 pro forma information regarding net loss is required by SFAS 123, and has been determined as if the Company had accounted for its stock-based employee compensation under the fair value method prescribed in SFAS 123. The fair value of the options was estimated using the Black-Scholes pricing model with the following assumptions:


	Three and six months ended June 30,
	2005			2004
Risk-free interest rate		3	%		2.8-3	%
Dividend yield		0	%		0	%
Expected life	8.0 years			9.0 years
Volatility		.80	%		.75	%

The effects of applying SFAS 123 in this pro forma disclosure are not indicative of future amounts. Stock option grants are expensed over their respective vesting periods.

The Company accounts for options issued to nonemployees under SFAS 123 and EITF Issue 96-18,Accounting for Equity Investments that are Issued to Other than Employees for Acquiring or in Conjunction with Selling Goods or Services(“EITF 96-18”). As such, the value of such options is periodically remeasured and income or expense is recognized during their vesting terms.

Deferred Stock Compensation

In connection with the granting of employee stock options and restricted stock awards prior to the Company’s initial public offering, the Company recorded deferred compensation of approximately $3.7 million, representing the difference between the fair value of common stock on the date such options were granted, determined in accordance with GAAP, and the exercise price. These amounts were recorded as a reduction of stockholders’ equity and are being amortized over the vesting period of the individual options, generally four years, using an accelerated vesting method. The accelerated vesting method provides for vesting of portions of the overall award at interim dates and results in higher vesting in earlier years than straight-line vesting. During the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Company recorded amortization of deferred stock compensation of $536.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, (continued)
(UNAUDITED)

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement No. 123 (revised 2004)Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123,Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Statement 123(R) supersedes Accounting Principal Board Opinion (APB) No. 25,Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends FASB No. 95,Statement of Cash Flows. Generally, the approach to accounting in Statement 123(R) is similar to the approach described in Statement 123. However, Statement 123(R)requiresall share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. On April 15, 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a new rule that extended the compliance date to January 1, 2006.

Currently the Company accounts for these payments under the intrinsic value provisions of APB No. 25. Statement 123(R) must be adopted no later than January 1, 2006. The Statement offers several alternatives for implementation. At this time, the Company’s management has not made a decision as to the alternative it may select. The Company is in the process of determining how the new method of valuing stock-based compensation as prescribed by Statement 123(R) will be applied to valuing stock-based awards granted after the effective date and the impact the recognition of additional non-cash compensation expense related to such awards will have on its financial statements.

2. Comprehensive Loss

The components of comprehensive loss are as follows:


	Three months ended June 30,						Six months ended June 30,
	2005			2004			2005			2004
	(unaudited)						(unaudited)
Net (loss) income	$	(10,809	)	$	(8,756	)	$	(22,966	)	$	(16,280	)
Foreign currency translation		(19	)		(28	)		(2	)		(17	)
Change in unrealized net losses on marketable securities		97			(177	)		48			(215	)

Comprehensive loss	$	(10,731	)	$	(8,961	)	$	(22,920	)	$	(16,512	)

Accumulated other comprehensive loss equals the cumulative translation adjustment and unrealized net losses on marketable securities which are the only components of other comprehensive loss included in the Company’s financial statements.

3. Sale of Common Stock

On February 15, 2005, the Company completed a follow-on offering of 2,000,000 shares of common stock at $19.50 per share, which resulted in net proceeds to the Company of $36,098. In connection with the stock sale, the Company paid $2,340 in underwriting discounts and commissions to underwriters.

4. Acquisition of Product Rights

On February 7, 2005, the Company entered into a Product Acquisition Agreement with Moreland Enterprises, Ltd. (“Moreland”). Under the terms of the Product Acquisition Agreement, the Company acquired the United States and Canadian rights to Solagé® (mequinol 2%, tretinoin 0.01%) Topical Solution, and all existing finished goods inventory. The Company was assigned all U.S. and Canadian marketing authorizations, patents, and trademarks for the product. The patent rights include U.S. and Canadian patents covering the pharmaceutical composition of Solagé® and methods of use until at least 2013.

BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, (continued)
(UNAUDITED)

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The Company acquired the intellectual property and finished goods inventory for $3,061 and will make future payments totaling up to an additional $2,000, if certain sales targets are met. The total initial purchase price was allocated $3,000 to product rights and $61 to inventory. During the six month period ended June 30, 2005, the Company recorded a liability and a corresponding increase to the intangible asset product rights of $100 for future amounts payable to Moreland based on product sales during the period. Product rights are being amortized on a straight line basis over the life of the underlying patent, which expires in 2013.

The Company recognized amortization expense of $144 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. Amortization expense for the remainder of 2005 will be $176 and will be $351 for each of the next five years. This amount will increase if additional payments are due to Moreland based on product sales.

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this report. Some of the information contained in this discussion and analysis or set forth elsewhere in this report, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business and related financing, includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. You should review the “Risk Factors” section of this report for a discussion of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results described in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion and analysis.

Overview

We are a pharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of pharmaceutical products in the field of dermatology. Our goal is to develop a portfolio of innovative products that address major medical needs in the treatment of dermatological diseases and disorders. We currently market Solagé® in the U.S. for the treatment of solar lentigines, a common condition also known as age spots or liver spots, and for the broader indication including related hyperpigmented lesions in Canada. We recently obtained the Canadian distribution rights for Vaniqa® (eflornithine hydrochloride) Cream 13.9% for slowing the growth of unwanted facial hair in women. Our product pipeline includes eight product candidates in various stages of clinical development. Our four most advanced product candidates are the following:

	•		Zimycan: an ointment for the treatment of infants with diaper dermatitis complicated by candidiasis, an inflammatory disease characterized by diaper rash complicated with an infection by a yeast calledCandida.

	•		Sebazole: a gel for the treatment of seborrheic dermatitis, a type of eczema characterized by inflammation and scaling of the skin, principally of the scalp, face and chest.

	•		Hyphanox: an oral therapeutic for the treatment of fungal infections, including onychomycosis, commonly known as nail fungus.

	•		Liarozole: an oral therapeutic for the treatment of the group of conditions known as congenital ichthyosis, a rare genetic disease characterized by dryness and scaling of the skin.

We were incorporated in September 2001 and commenced active operations in May 2002. We have generated product revenues from sales of Solagé® since the first quarter of 2005. We have financed our operations and internal growth almost entirely through proceeds from private placements of preferred stock, our initial public offering in the second quarter of 2004 and our follow-on public offering in the first quarter of 2005. Through December 31, 2004, we were a development stage enterprise. We have incurred significant losses since our inception in 2001, as we have devoted substantially all of our efforts to research and development activities, including clinical trials. As of June 30, 2005, we had an accumulated deficit of $129.2 million, which has resulted primarily from our research and development activities, our acquisition of the rights to our product candidates and preferred stock accretion. We expect our operating losses to increase as we do not expect to generate significant revenues in the near future. We expect to continue to increase our research and development costs, our costs of commercial operations are expected to increase, and we will continue to incur the costs of being a public company.

We expect to continue to spend significant amounts, including clinical trial costs, on the development of our product candidates. We plan to seek marketing approvals for our products in various countries throughout the world, particularly in the United States, Canada and Europe. We expect our costs to increase as we continue to develop and ultimately commercialize our product candidates and acquired products, such as Solagé® and Vaniqa ®. While we will be focusing on the clinical development of our later stage product candidates in the near term, we expect to increase our spending on earlier stage clinical candidates as well. We also plan to identify and develop, either internally or through collaborative agreements, additional product candidates that address major needs in dermatology through acquisitions or licenses of marketed dermatological products or rights to potential new products and product candidates that would fit within our growth strategy. Accordingly, we will need to generate significant revenues to achieve, and then maintain, profitability.

The successful development of our product candidates is highly uncertain. We cannot reasonably estimate or know the nature, timing and estimated expenses of the efforts necessary to complete the development of, or the period in which material net cash inflows are expected to commence from, any of our product candidates due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing drugs, including the uncertainty of:

	•		the scope, rate of progress and expense of our clinical trials and other research and development activities;

	•		future clinical trial results;

	•		the expense of clinical trials for additional indications;

	•		the expense and timing of regulatory approvals;

	•		the expense of establishing clinical and commercial supplies of our product candidates and any products that we may develop;

	•		the expense of commercializing our products;

	•		the effect of competing technological and market developments; and

	•		the expense of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing any patent claims and other intellectual property rights.

For instance, since the Phase 3 clinical trial of Hyphanox for vaginal candidiasis failed to meet the primary endpoint, additional clinical expenses would need to be incurred if we decide to conduct another clinical trial for that product in that indication. The failure of this study has caused our timelines for completion of full development and approval by the FDA in this indication for this product to be extended and such approval may never be received. As a result potential revenues from this product in this indication either from our direct sales or through third parties has also been delayed or may never be realized. Also, we may incur additional clinical expenses for Zimycan in order to address the concerns raised by the FDA in the not-approvable letter received by us in May of this year. This action by the FDA has caused the potential approval of Zimycan to be delayed thereby delaying the expected revenues from this product.

Our research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred for the conduct of our clinical trials, manufacturing development costs related to our clinical product candidates, personnel and related costs in support of our research and product development activities and outside professional fees related to product development and regulatory matters.

Sales and marketing costs include the expenses related to the initial sales of Solagé®, and those incurred to prepare for the launch of Zimycan, subject to obtaining requisite marketing approvals in Europe and the United States. In addition, if we were to acquire or in-license other products, we would then incur sales and marketing costs related to such products. These costs could also include expenses related to a sales organization for those regions in which we decide to market our products ourselves and costs for marketing efforts to support third parties with whom we may collaborate in the future in regions where we do not market directly.

Our general and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and related expenses and costs of general corporate activities, including legal and accounting fees, insurance and consulting costs.

We expect to continue to incur net losses over the next several years as we continue our clinical development, continue to expand our selling and marketing operations, apply for regulatory approvals, enter into arrangements with third parties for manufacturing and distribution services and, if approved, market our products. We have a limited history of operations and anticipate that our quarterly results of operations will fluctuate for several reasons, including:

	•		the timing and extent of our research and development efforts;

	•		the timing and extent of our adding new employees and infrastructure;

	•		the timing of any contract, license fee or royalty payments that we may receive or be required to make;

	•		the timing and outcome of our applications for regulatory approvals;

	•		the timing and extent of recognition of product and other revenue; and

	•		the timing and extent of product revenues, offset by marketing and selling expenses.

Recent Developments

On May 24, 2005, the FDA issued a not approvable letter for our NDA for Zimycan for the treatment of diaper dermatitis complicated by candidiasis. The FDA action is based on a single deficiency. The FDA stated that there was insufficient information to characterize the systemic exposure to miconazole in infants. Characterization of systemic exposure to miconazole is a component of the safety evaluation of the product. We are in discussions with the FDA concerning paths for addressing the concern raised in the letter.

In June 2005, we obtained the right to distribute Vaniqa® (eflornithine hydrochloride) Cream, 13.9% in Canada from Shire Pharmaceutical Contracts Limited. Vaniqa® is currently the only prescription product approved by Health Canada for slowing the growth of unwanted facial hair in women. Although approved, this product has never been launched in Canada. Under the terms of our agreement with Shire, we will be the exclusive distributor for Vaniqa® in Canada and will be responsible for all sales, marketing, regulatory and distribution activities. Shire Pharmaceuticals will be responsible for supplying us with finished goods.

On June 29, 2005, we announced that our oral antifungal product candidate, Hyphanox, failed to reach the primary endpoint of therapeutic cure in its Phase 3 non-inferiority trial for the treatment of vaginal candidiasis, commonly known as a vaginal yeast infection. The trial was designed to demonstrate that a single dose of Hyphanox, a novel patented formulation of the antifungal itraconazole, is not inferior to a single dose of fluconazole. The study did reach the secondary endpoint of “clinical efficacy”, and based on this, the Company has triggered the 90 day assessment period for Janssen Pharmaceutica to exercise their pre-negotiated option for this product.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

Our management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our unaudited consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements as well as the reported revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and assumptions. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Revenue Recognition

Contract revenues include fees and other payments associated with collaborations with third parties and licensing agreements. Revenues from licensing agreements are recognized based on the performance requirements of the agreement. Non-refundable up-front fees, where the Company has an ongoing involvement or performance obligation, are generally recorded as deferred revenue in the balance sheet and amortized into contract revenues in the statement of operations over the terms of the performance obligation. We periodically re-evaluate our estimates of the performance period and revise our assumptions as appropriate. These changes in assumptions may affect the amount of revenue recorded in our financial statements in future periods. Royalties from licensees are based on third-party sales of licensed products and will be recorded in accordance with contract terms when third-party results are reliably measurable and collectibility is reasonably assured.

We use revenue recognition criteria in Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, “Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements” and Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue 00-21 “Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables” (“EITF 00-21”). Revenue arrangements that include multiple deliverables, are divided into separate units of accounting if the deliverables meet certain criteria, including whether the fair value of the delivered items can be determined and whether there is evidence of fair value of the undelivered items. In addition, the consideration is allocated among the separate units of accounting based on their fair values, and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are considered separately for each of the separate units of accounting.

Stock-based Compensation

Stock-based compensation charges represent the difference between the exercise price of options granted to employees and the fair value of our common stock on the date of grant for financial statement purposes in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25 and its related interpretations. We recognize this compensation charge over the vesting periods of the shares purchasable upon exercise of options. Should our assumptions of fair value change, the amount recorded as intrinsic value may increase or decrease in the future.

We recorded amortization of deferred stock-based compensation of $536,000 during the six months ended June 30, 2005. Since inception, we have recorded deferred stock-based compensation of $3.7 million and related amortization expense of $2.7 million. We are applying a graded vesting amortization policy for our deferred compensation. This accelerated vesting method provides for vesting of portions of the overall award at interim dates and results in higher compensation expense in earlier years than straight-line amortization. Had we chosen to apply the straight line method of amortization of deferred compensation, our stock compensation charge would have been $73,000 lower for the six months ended June 30, 2005.

Stock-based compensation charges also include the periodic revaluation of stock options that we have granted to non-employees, in accordance with the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 and Emerging Issues Task Force No. 96-18. Pursuant to this accounting literature, equity instruments, such as options, are required to be recorded at the fair value of the consideration received, or the fair value of the equity instrument issued, whichever may be more readily measured. For grants to our non-employees, the fair value of the equity instrument issued is more readily measured and we assign value to the options using a Black-Scholes methodology. As required, we revalue these options over the period when earned in accordance with their respective terms. Should our input assumptions change, for example, fair value of common stock at the measurement date, the fair value of our non-employee consultant compensation will change.

We recorded stock-based compensation expense totaling $568,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005 in connection with the grant of stock options to our non-employees and the accelerated vesting for some options related to employees who are no longer with the Company.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Currently, the Company accounts for these payments under the intrinsic value provisions of APB No. 25.

Statement 123(R) must be adopted no later than January 1, 2006. The Statement offers several alternatives for implementation. At this time, the Company’s management has not made a decision as to the alternative it may select. The Company is in the process of determining how the new method of valuing stock-based compensation as prescribed by Statement 123(R) will be applied to valuing stock-based awards granted after the effective date and the impact the recognition of additional non-cash compensation expense related to such awards will have on its financial statements.

Results of Operations

Revenue.Total revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2004 increased $293,000. We recognized net product revenue of $95,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared with no product revenue in 2004. We recognized contract revenue of $151,000 and grant revenue of $226,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared with no contract revenue and $179,000 in grant revenue for the same period in 2004. The product revenue was for U.S. and Canadian sales of Solagé® which was acquired in February 2005. The contract revenue related to payments made under our marketing and distribution agreements. Grant revenue related to the performance of qualifying work under a Belgian grant.

Total revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004 increased by $766,000. For the six months ended June 30, 2005 we recognized $305,000 in net product revenue compared with no product revenue from the same period in 2004. We recognized contract revenue of $371,000 and grant revenue of $449,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared with no contract revenue and $359,000 in grant revenue for the same period in 2004.

Cost of Product Revenues and Amortization of Product Rights.Our cost of product revenues totaled $15,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005. This amount includes finished product costs and distribution expense related to product sales. Cost of product revenues totaled $41,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. We did not report cost of product revenues during 2004 as we did not have product sales. Amortization expense related to the product rights for the acquisition of Solagé® was $88,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005 and $144,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. Our gross margin on product sales excluding amortization expense for Solagé® for the three months ended June 30, 2005 was 84.2% and for the six months ended June 30, 2005 our gross margin was 86.6%. We expect that our gross margin will fluctuate as we increase our product sales of Solagé® and begin to sell additional products, if and when they are approved.

Research and Development Expenses.Below is a summary of our research and development expenses for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004.


	Three months ended June 30,				Six months ended June 30,
	2005		2004		2005		2004
Sebazole	$	765	$	1,166	$	2,201	$	1,813
Hyphanox		1,459		1,389		4,189		3,054
Zimycan		234		373		483		723
Liarozole		347		150		826		352
Other clinical stage products		1,816		757		3,248		1,358
Research and preclinical stage product costs		245		617		821		898
Internal costs		2,440		2,112		5,023		3,896

Total research and development expenses	$	7,306	$	6,564	$	16,791	$	12,094

In the preceding table, research and development expenses are set forth in the following seven categories:

	•		Sebazole—third-party direct project expenses relating to the development of Sebazole and our former product candidate, Seboride.

	•		Hyphanox—third-party direct project expenses relating to the development of Hyphanox.

	•		Zimycan—third-party direct project expenses relating to the development of Zimycan.

	•		Liarozole—third-party direct project expenses relating to the development of Liarozole.

	•		Other clinical stage products—direct project expenses relating to the development of our other clinical stage product candidates and products in reformulation.

	•		Research and preclinical stage product costs—direct expenses relating to the development of our research and preclinical product candidates and the screening of molecules to identify new product candidates.

	•		Internal costs—costs related primarily to personnel, as well as consulting, overhead and other expenses related to our research and development activities. We do not allocate these costs to specific projects as these costs relate to all research and development activities.

Projects may be reclassified from a prior presentation according to their current stages of development.

Total research and development expenses in the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2004 increased $742,000. Project expenses totaled $4.9 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $414,000 over the corresponding period in 2004. This increase was primarily attributable to higher direct program costs on our earlier clinical stage product candidates, particularly Rambazole and Azoline. This increase was offset by lower project expenses for our late stage product candidates due to decreased costs for Zimycan and Sebazole. Project expenses for Zimycan decreased since a Phase 3 pivotal clinical trial which was ongoing during the first half of 2004, was completed during the third quarter of 2004. Project expenses for Sebazole decreased for the three months ended June 30, 2005 as the costs for the long-term safety study incurred for this period were less than the costs of our Phase 3 pivotal clinical study and manufacturing costs from the same period in 2004. Costs for Liarozole increased due to costs related to the manufacture of clinical supplies. Research and preclinical stage product costs for the three months ended June 30, 2005 decreased $372,000 compared to the corresponding period in 2004 primarily due to the discontinuation of work on Ecalcidene.

Internal costs for the three months ended June 30, 2005 increased $328,000 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2004. Personnel and related costs totaled $1.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $30,000 over the corresponding period in 2004. This increase is primarily attributed to headcount growth, offset by a decrease in amortization of deferred compensation of $103,000, which was $88,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005.

Total research and development expenses were $16.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, a $4.7 million increase compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004. Project expenses totaled $11.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $3.6 million over the corresponding period in 2004. This increase was primarily attributable to higher direct program costs on our earlier clinical stage product candidates, particularly Rambazole and Azoline. Late stage product candidate costs increased for the six months ended June 30, 2005 due primarily to increased spending on Hyphanox and Liarozole compared to the corresponding period in 2004. During the six months ended June 30, 2005, our costs for Hyphanox were related to an ongoing Phase 3 pivotal clinical trial for the treatment of vaginal candidiasis, which commenced in January 2004 and costs related to manufacturing as well as pharmacokinetics studies supporting the treatment of vaginal candidiasis and onychomycosis. Our costs for the six months ended June 30, 2004 for Hyphanox related to the initiation of a Phase 3 pivotal clinical trial for the treatment of vaginal candidiasis. Costs related to other clinical stage products increased due to the cost of ongoing preclinical studies and manufacturing activities primarily for Rambazole and Azoline. Costs for Liarozole increased due to costs related to the manufacture of clinical supplies.

Internal costs for the six months ended June 30, 2005 increased $1.1 million compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004. Personnel and related costs totaled $3.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $485,000 over the corresponding period in 2004 which is primarily attributed to headcount growth. This increase is partially offset by a decrease in amortization of deferred compensation of $264,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the corresponding period of 2004. Other costs, which include consultants, third party services including pharmacovigilance as well as facility expenses, totaled $1.5 million an increase of $644,000 compared to the corresponding period in 2004.

We anticipate that research and development expenses will continue to increase as we further advance our late stage product candidates through clinical development, including the higher cost of Phase 3 clinical trials, and including long-term safety trials. In addition, we will begin to incur additional expenses for our mid-stage pipeline as we move toward larger Phase 2 trials and to devote additional resources to our earlier stage research and preclinical projects. We also expect our personnel and related expenses for research and development to increase.

Sales and Marketing Expenses.Sales and marketing expenses totaled $2.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $1.4 million over the corresponding period in 2004. Personnel and related expenses totaled $868,000 compared to $408,000 for the corresponding period in 2004. Marketing and market research expenses totaled $1.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared to $301,000 for the corresponding period in 2004. Increases in marketing and market research are related to the preparation for the launch of Solagé®, and the potential launch of Zimycan, if, and when, approved by the FDA.

Sales and marketing expenses totaled $4.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $2.4 million over the corresponding period in 2004. These costs include personnel and related expenses of $1.6 million compared to $778,000 for the corresponding period in 2004. This increase is primarily attributed to headcount growth to 24 employees at June 30, 2005 from 10 employees at June 30, 2004. These costs also include amortization of deferred compensation expense of $77,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2005, which was $186,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Marketing and market research expenses were $1.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to $567,000 for the corresponding period in 2004. We expect these costs to increase in the third quarter of 2005 as we continue to hire our own sales force and incur expenses related to the Ventiv contract sales organization. We will also continue to incur marketing costs and other related costs related to the launch of Solagé®. If we were to acquire additional products, in-license products or launch Zimycan, these costs would also increase.

General and Administrative Expenses.General and administrative expenses totaled $2.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $572,000 over the corresponding period in 2004. These costs include personnel and related costs, which totaled $887,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005, a decrease of $53,000 over the corresponding period in 2004. This decrease is due to a decrease in amortization of deferred compensation of $145,000, which was $123,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005, partially offset by an increase in personnel costs related to growth in headcount.

General and administrative expenses totaled $4.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $1.0 million over the corresponding period in 2004. These costs include personnel and related costs, which totaled $1.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $71,000 over the corresponding period in 2004. This increase is comprised of an increase in personnel costs related to growth in headcount partially offset by a decrease in amortization of deferred compensation of $324,000, which was $268,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. Professional fees which include certain costs related to being a public company, totaled $900,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $451,000 compared to the corresponding period in 2004.

We expect general and administrative costs to continue to increase as we add more personnel and expand our infrastructure. The costs associated with being a public company will also increase our general and administrative expenses.

Interest income, net of interest expense.Interest income, net of expense totaled $745,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $433,000 as compared to the corresponding period in 2004. The increase was primarily due to our higher balances of cash and cash equivalents in 2005 compared to 2004, net of cash used in operations, and higher average interest rates.

Interest income, net of expense totaled $1.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, an increase of $860,000 as compared to the corresponding period in 2004. The increase was primarily due to our higher balances of cash and cash equivalents in 2005 compared to 2004, net of cash used in operations, and higher average interest rates.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We have funded our operations principally from issuances of our convertible preferred stock and convertible promissory notes, the proceeds from our initial public offering of common stock and our follow-on public offering of common stock. Since our inception, we raised net proceeds of approximately $36.1 million from our follow-on public offering in February 2005, $67.9 million from our initial public offering in May 2004, and we have issued preferred stock, including notes converted into preferred stock, for aggregate net cash proceeds of approximately $77.3 million. All of the preferred stock that we issued converted to common stock in connection with our initial public offering.

In September 2003, we entered into a $750,000 financing arrangement to fund the purchase of office furniture, computer equipment and software. The original note for $267,000 had an interest rate of 6.4% plus a fluctuating mark-up based on market rates that is set at the time of funding. The fixed portion was reduced to 6.15% in August 2004 in connection with a new note for $407,000. We entered into an additional promissory note in December 2004 to fund $148,000 at 9.37%. We expect to enter into additional promissory notes to fund most of our fixed asset purchases.

At June 30, 2005, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities totaling $100.1 million and working capital of $94.6 million.

We used cash in operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005 of $22.3 million, of which $16.8 million related to research and development spending. Cash used in operations for the six months ended June 30, 2004 was $14.4 million. The increase was attributable to the increased working capital requirements to fund our operations, including our operating losses.

Cash used in investing activities for six months ended June 30, 2005 was $827,000, which included $3.1 million for the acquisition of Solagé® offset net of marketable securities. Cash used in investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2004 was $49.8 million. Our investing activities reflect investments in marketable securities and purchases of fixed assets necessary for operations. We plan to utilize third parties to manufacture our products and to conduct laboratory-based research. Therefore, we do not expect to make significant capital expenditures in 2005.

Net cash provided by financing activities was $36.4 million during six months ended June 30, 2005, which included our follow-on offering net proceeds of $36.1 million. Cash provided by financing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2004 was $67.7 million, which included the net proceeds from our initial public offering of $67.9 million.

We expect that our existing cash at June 30, 2005 will be sufficient to fund our anticipated operating expenses, debt obligations and capital requirements through the end of 2006. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

	•		the success of our development and commercialization of our product candidates;

	•		the scope and results of our clinical trials;

	•		advancement of other product candidates into clinical development;

	•		potential acquisition or in-licensing of other products or technologies;

	•		the timing of, and the costs involved in, obtaining regulatory approvals;

	•		the costs of manufacturing activities;

	•		the costs of commercialization activities, including product marketing, sales and distribution and related working capital needs;

	•		the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims and other

			intellectual property-related costs, including any possible litigation costs; and

	•		our ability to establish and maintain collaborative and other strategic arrangements.

Our capital requirements are likely to increase. As a result, we may require additional funds and may attempt to raise additional funds through public or private equity offerings or debt financings, collaborative agreements with corporate partners or from other sources.

Net Operating Loss Carryforwards

We incurred net operating losses for all the periods since inception and consequently did not pay federal, state or foreign income taxes. As of December 31, 2004, we had federal net operating loss carryforwards of $58.1 million and state net operating loss carryforwards of $50.1 million. Pursuant to Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the annual utilization of a company’s net operating loss carryforwards may be limited if the company experiences a change in ownership of more than 50% within a three-year period. As a result of our equity offerings, we may have experienced such an ownership change. However, we have not performed a detailed analysis of any ownership change. Accordingly, our net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future federal taxable income arising before such ownership changes may be limited. For financial reporting purposes, we have recorded a valuation allowance to fully offset the deferred tax asset related to these carryforwards because realization of the benefit was uncertain.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

Risks Related to Our Financial Results and Need for Additional Financing

We have incurred losses since inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future.

Since our inception in September 2001, we have incurred significant operating losses and, as of June 30, 2005, we had an accumulated deficit of $129.2 million. We currently market Solagé® in the U.S. and Canada. We recently obtained the Canadian distribution rights for Vaniqa®. Our product pipeline includes eight product candidates in various stages of clinical development. We have not yet completed the development of any of our product candidates, and none are ready for commercialization. Prior to our acquisition of Solagé®, we had generated no revenues from the sale of our products. We expect to continue to incur significant operating expenses and anticipate that our expenses may increase substantially in the foreseeable future as we:

	•		conduct clinical trials;

	•		conduct research and development on existing and new product candidates;

	•		seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates;

	•		commercialize our products and product candidates, if approved;

	•		hire additional clinical, scientific, sales and marketing and management personnel;

	•		add operational, financial and management information systems; and

	•		identify and in-license additional compounds or product candidates.

We need to generate significant revenue to achieve profitability. Even if we succeed in developing and commercializing one or more of our product candidates, we may never generate sufficient sales revenue to achieve and then maintain profitability. We expect to incur operating losses for the foreseeable future.

We will need substantial additional funding and may be unable to raise capital when needed, which would force us to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

As of June 30, 2005, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $100.1 million. In February 2005, we raised net proceeds of approximately $36.1 million from the sale of 2 million shares of our common stock, after deducting underwriters’ discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by us. We believe that our existing cash resources and our interest on these funds will be sufficient to meet our projected operating requirements through the end of 2006. We currently have no additional commitments or arrangements for any additional financing to fund the research and development and commercial launch of our product candidates. We will require additional funding in order to continue our research and development programs, including preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, pursue regulatory approvals for our product candidates; pursue the commercial launch of our product candidates and for general corporate purposes. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

	•		the success of our development and commercialization of our product candidates;

	•		the scope and results of our clinical trials;

	•		advancement of other product candidates into clinical development;

	•		potential acquisition or in-licensing of other products or technologies;

	•		the timing of, and the costs involved in, obtaining regulatory approvals;

	•		the costs of manufacturing activities;

	•		the costs of commercialization activities, including product marketing, sales and distribution and related working capital needs;

	•		the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims and other intellectual property-related costs, including any possible litigation costs; and

	•		our ability to establish and maintain collaborative and other strategic arrangements.

Adequate financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all. We may continue to seek additional capital through public or private equity offerings, debt financings or collaborative arrangements and licensing agreements.

If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience dilution. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. Any debt financing that we raise or additional equity we may sell may contain terms that are not favorable to us or our common stockholders. If we raise additional funds through collaboration and licensing arrangements with third parties, it will be necessary to relinquish some rights to our technologies or our product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us.

Lack of funding could adversely affect our ability to pursue our business. For example, if adequate funds are not available, we may be required to curtail significantly or eliminate one or more of our product development programs.

Risks Related to Development of Product Candidates

We will not be able to commercialize our product candidates if our preclinical studies do not produce successful results or if our clinical trials do not demonstrate safety and efficacy in humans.

We intend to market our products in the United States and in various other countries, and as a result, we will need to obtain separate regulatory approvals in most jurisdictions. Before obtaining regulatory approval for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy in humans of our product candidates. Preclinical studies and clinical trials are expensive, can take many years and have uncertain outcomes. In addition, the regulatory approval procedures vary among countries and additional testing may be required in some jurisdictions. Our success will depend on the success of our currently ongoing clinical trials and subsequent clinical trials that have not yet begun. It may take several years to complete the clinical trials of a product, and a failure of one or more of our clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. We believe that the development of each of our product candidates involves significant risks at each stage of testing. If clinical trial difficulties and failures arise, our product candidates may never be approved for sale or become commercially viable. We do not believe that any of our product candidates have alternative uses if our current development activities are unsuccessful.

There are a number of difficulties and risks associated with clinical trials. These difficulties and risks may result in the failure to receive regulatory approval to sell our product candidates or the inability to commercialize any of our product candidates. The possibility exists that:

	•		we may discover that a product candidate does not exhibit the expected therapeutic results in humans, may cause harmful side effects or have other unexpected characteristics that may delay or preclude regulatory approval or limit commercial use if approved;

	•		the results from early clinical trials may not be statistically significant or predictive of results that will be obtained from expanded, advanced clinical trials;

	•		institutional review boards or regulators, including the FDA, may hold, suspend or terminate our clinical research or the clinical trials of our product candidates for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or if, in their opinion, the participating subjects are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

	•		subjects may drop out of our clinical trials;

	•		our preclinical studies or clinical trials may produce negative, inconsistent or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials; and

	•		the cost of our clinical trials may be greater than we currently anticipate.

For example, in June 2005, we announced that our Hyphanox product candidate failed to reach the primary endpoint in its Phase 3, non-inferiority trial for the treatment of vaginal candidiasis. Consequently, the results of trial were not sufficient to support a filing for regulatory approval for Hyphanox in that indication. Similarly, because our preclinical studies of Ecalcidene did not replicate the results of earlier third-party studies, the development of Ecalcidene has been discontinued.

With respect to a number of our product candidates, we expect to rely on the results of clinical trials that were performed by or on behalf of Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P. and its affiliates prior to our acquisition of these product candidates. It is possible that these trial results may not be predictive of the results of the clinical trials that we conduct for our product candidates. In addition, the results of these prior clinical trials may not be acceptable to the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities because the data may be incomplete, outdated or not otherwise acceptable for inclusion in our submissions for regulatory approval. For example, although our product candidates ketanserin and oxatomide are marketed by other companies in some countries outside the United States and Europe, the data used to support the current regulatory approvals for these products do not meet current regulatory guidelines in the United States and Europe. As a result, we must repeat most of the clinical work already completed prior to filing for marketing approval in the United States and Europe for these product candidates.

If we do not receive regulatory approval to sell our product candidates or cannot successfully commercialize our product candidates, we would not be able to generate any initial revenues or grow revenues in future periods, which would result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely impact our stock price.

If our clinical trials for our product candidates are delayed, we would be unable to commercialize our product candidates on a timely basis, which would materially harm our business.

Planned clinical trials may not begin on time or may need to be restructured after they have begun. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays related to:

	•		obtaining an effective investigational new drug application, or IND, or regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial;

	•		negotiating acceptable clinical trial agreement terms with prospective trial sites;

	•		obtaining institutional review board approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective site;

	•		recruiting qualified subjects to participate in clinical trials;

	•		competition in recruiting clinical investigators;

	•		shortage or lack of availability of supplies of drugs for clinical trials;

	•		the need to repeat clinical trials as a result of inconclusive results or poorly executed testing;

	•		the placement of a clinical hold on a study;

	•		the failure of third parties conducting and overseeing the operations of our clinical trials to perform their contractual or regulatory obligations in a timely fashion; and

	•		exposure of clinical trial subjects to unexpected and unacceptable health risks or noncompliance with regulatory requirements, which may result in suspension of the trial.

For example, we completed enrollment of our Phase 3 clinical trial for Zimycan later than expected due to difficulties enrolling infants with proven diaper dermatitis complicated by candidiasis. In addition, in January 2005, the FDA informed us that we should submit the six-month data for a minimum of 300 patients from our ongoing long-term safety study of our Sebazole product candidate at the time of the initial filing of the NDA. This request from the FDA delayed the filing of our Sebazole NDA until the third quarter of 2005 due to the time we expect it will take us to analyze data from the required number of patients. In January 2005, the FDA also asked us to perform a study for Sebazole known as a percutaneous absorption study, which measures the amount of a drug’s absorption, if any, into the bloodstream through the skin. The FDA requested that we submit data from this study at the time of the initial filing of the NDA. In addition, the initiation of our planned Phase 2/3 clinical trial for Liarozole in congenital icthyosis in the United States has been placed on clinical hold due to requests from the FDA for additional information and requirements for the protocol for this study.

We believe that our product candidates have significant milestones to reach, including the successful completion of clinical trials, before commercialization. If we have significant delays in or termination of clinical trials, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates or any other products that we may develop will be adversely impacted. In addition, our product development costs would increase and our ability to generate revenue could be impaired.

If we are wrong in our assessment of the stages of clinical development of our initial product candidates, we may need to perform preclinical studies or clinical trials that we did not anticipate, which would result in additional product development costs for us and delays in filing for regulatory approval for our product candidates.

We acquired the rights to our initial product candidates from Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., each a Johnson & Johnson company. Prior to this acquisition, they had conducted preclinical studies and clinical trials on several of our product candidates. For our product candidates for which we are not currently conducting a clinical trial, we have made an assessment as to whether the next clinical trial that we will perform will be a Phase 1, Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trial based on the results of these preclinical studies and clinical trials. We may be wrong in our assessment of the stages of clinical development of our initial product candidates for several reasons, including that the data we obtained from the previous trials may be outdated or otherwise no longer acceptable for our purposes or to the FDA or similar regulatory authorities in connection with applications that we may file for regulatory approval. If our current assessments prove to be inaccurate, we will likely have to perform additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, which will require us to expend additional resources and may delay filing for regulatory approval for that product.

We may acquire additional products or product candidates in the future and any difficulties from integrating such acquisitions could damage our ability to attain profitability.

We have acquired our entire current product pipeline by licensing intellectual property from third parties, and we may acquire additional products or product candidates that complement or augment our existing product development pipeline. However, because we acquired substantially all of our existing product candidates in the same transaction, we have limited experience integrating products or product candidates into our existing operations. Integrating any newly acquired product or product candidate could be expensive and time-consuming. We may not be able to integrate any acquired product or product candidate successfully. For example, in February 2005 we acquired the United States and Canadian rights to Solagé®. Solagé® is our first marketed product. As a result, we may have difficulty integrating it with our existing product candidates as we expand our resources dedicated to marketing. In addition, we have no experience with a commercial product and cannot assure you that our marketing efforts will be successful. Moreover, we may need to raise additional funds through public or private debt or equity financing to make these acquisitions, which may result in dilution for stockholders and the incurrence of indebtedness.

Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties for Manufacturing, Research and Development and Marketing and Distribution Activities

Because we have no manufacturing capabilities, we will contract with third-party contract manufacturers whose performance may be substandard or not in compliance with regulatory requirements, which could increase the risk that we will not have adequate supplies of our product candidates and harm our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

We do not have any manufacturing experience or facilities. We rely on third-party contract manufacturers to produce the products that we commercialize and use in our clinical trials. If we are unable to retain our current, or engage additional, contract manufacturers, we will not be able to conduct our clinical trials or sell any products for which we receive regulatory approval. The risks associated with our reliance on contract manufacturers include the following:

	•		Contract manufacturers may encounter difficulties in achieving volume production, quality control and quality assurance and also may experience shortages in qualified personnel. As a result, our contract manufacturers might not be able to meet our clinical development schedules or adequately manufacture our products in commercial quantities when required.

	•		Changing manufacturers may be difficult because the number of potential manufacturers for some of our product candidates may be limited and, in one case, there is only a single source of supply. Specifically, the intermediate for our product candidate Hyphanox is manufactured using a process that is proprietary to our contract manufacturer. We do not have a license to the technology used by our contract manufacturer to make the intermediate needed for the Hyphanox tablets. If this manufacturer cannot provide adequate supplies of the intermediate for Hyphanox, we cannot sublicense this technology to a third party to act as our supplier. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for us to find a qualified replacement manufacturer quickly or on terms acceptable to us, the FDA and corresponding foreign regulatory agencies, or at all.

	•		With the exception of Hyphanox, each of our product candidates can be produced by multiple manufacturers. However, if we need to change manufacturers, the FDA and corresponding foreign regulatory agencies must approve these manufacturers in advance. This would involve testing and pre-approval inspections to ensure compliance with FDA and foreign regulations and standards. For instance, for Zimycan, we have used one contract manufacturer in connection with the marketing authorization application that we filed in Europe and we intend to use a separate contract manufacturer for commercial supply of the product in the United States. If we decide to have our United States manufacturer supply us with Zimycan for sale in Europe, it is likely that many of the applicable foreign regulatory agencies will need to approve our United States manufacturer prior to making that transition.

	•		Our contract manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic, unannounced inspection by the FDA and corresponding state and foreign agencies or their designees to ensure strict compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMPs, and other governmental regulations and corresponding foreign standards. Other than through contract, we do not have control over compliance by our contract manufacturers with these regulations and standards. Our present or future contract manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMPs and other FDA requirements or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States. Failure of our contract manufacturers or us to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, failure of regulatory authorities to grant marketing approval of our product candidates, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, seizures or recalls of product candidates, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect our business.

	•		Our contract manufacturers may breach our manufacturing agreements because of factors beyond our control or may terminate or fail to renew a manufacturing agreement based on their own business priorities at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us.

We may compete with other drug developers for access to manufacturing facilities for our current and future product candidates. If we are not able to obtain adequate supplies of our product candidates, it will be more difficult for us to develop our product candidates and compete effectively. Dependence upon third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates may reduce our profit margins, if any, and may limit our ability to develop and deliver products on a timely and competitive basis.

If third parties on whom we rely do not perform as contractually required or expected, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our products and product candidates.

We depend on independent clinical investigators and contract research organizations to conduct our clinical trials. Contract research organizations also assist us in the collection and analysis of trial data. We also depend on third parties to perform services related to our sales force and adverse event reporting requirements. The investigators, contract research organizations, contract sales organization, and other contractors are not our employees, and we cannot control, other than by contract, the amount of resources, including time, that they devote to our product candidates. However, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in

accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial that have been approved by regulatory agencies and for ensuring that we report product-related adverse events in accordance with applicable regulations. Furthermore, the FDA and European regulatory authorities require us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practice, for conducting, recording and reporting clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected.

In connection with our reliance on our independent clinical investigators and contract research organizations, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed, suspended or terminated, including as a result of:

	•		the failure of these investigators and research organizations to comply with good clinical practice or to meet their contractual duties;

	•		the failure of our independent investigators to devote sufficient resources to the development of our product candidates or to perform their responsibilities at a sufficiently high level;

	•		our need to replace these third parties for any reason, including for performance reasons or if these third parties go out of business; or

	•		the existence of problems in the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain due to the failure to adhere to clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons.

Extensions, delays, suspensions or terminations of our clinical trials as a result of the performance of our independent clinical investigators and contract research organizations will delay, and make more costly, regulatory approval for any product candidates that we may develop.

In addition, although we have used a number of contract research organizations to conduct our clinical trials, there are many other qualified contract research organizations available. Any change in a contract research organization during an ongoing clinical trial could seriously delay that trial and potentially compromise the results of the trial.

We are dependent upon distribution arrangements and marketing alliances to commercialize our product candidates outside the United States and Canada. These distribution arrangements and marketing alliances place the marketing and sale of our product candidates in these regions outside our control.

We have entered into distribution arrangements and marketing alliances relating to the commercialization of some of our product candidates. Dependence on these arrangements and alliances subjects us to a number of risks, including:

	•		we may not be able to control the amount and timing of resources that our distributors may devote to the commercialization of our product candidates;

	•		our distributors may experience financial difficulties;

	•		business combinations or significant changes in a distributor’s business strategy may also adversely affect a distributor’s willingness or ability to complete its obligations under any arrangement; and

	•		these arrangements are often terminated or allowed to expire, which could interrupt the marketing and sales of a product and decrease our revenue.

We may not be successful in entering into additional distribution arrangements and marketing alliances with third parties for our earlier stage products. Our failure to enter into these arrangements on favorable terms could delay or impair our ability to commercialize our product candidates outside the United States and Canada and could increase our costs of commercialization. In addition, we may be at a competitive disadvantage in negotiating these agreements with third parties because under our license agreements, Johnson & Johnson, through any of its affiliates, has a right of first negotiation for the commercialization of our product candidates that are based on the licensed intellectual property. Because this first right of negotiation may only be triggered after Phase 2 clinical trials and could extend for up to 180 days, it may hinder our ability to enter into distribution agreements and marketing alliances. It may also delay our receipt of any milestone payments or reimbursement of development costs.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

There are limitations on our patent rights relating to our product candidates that may affect our ability to exclude third parties from competing against us if we receive approval to market these product candidates.

The patent rights that we own or have licensed relating to our product candidates are limited in ways that may affect our ability to exclude third parties from competing against us if we receive regulatory approval to market these product candidates. In particular:

	•		We do not hold composition of matter patents covering the active pharmaceutical ingredients of three of our later stage product candidates. Composition of matter patents on active pharmaceutical ingredients are the strongest form of intellectual property protection for pharmaceutical products as they apply without regard to any method of use or other type of limitation. The active ingredients of most of these product candidates are off patent. As a result, competitors who obtain the requisite regulatory approval can offer products with the same active ingredients as our products so long as the competitors do not infringe any method of use or formulation patents that we may hold. Examples include Solagé®, Zimycan, Sebazole and Hyphanox, for which the active pharmaceutical ingredients, mequinol, trentinoin, miconazole, ketoconazole and itraconazole, are all off patent. The United States patent covering the active ingredient in Liarozole expires in 2006.

	•		We do not hold composition of matter patents covering the formulations of some of our later stage product candidates. Composition of matter patents on formulations can provide protection for pharmaceutical products to the extent that the specifically covered formulations are important. For our product candidates for which we do not hold composition of matter patents covering the formulation, competitors who obtain the requisite regulatory approval can offer products with the same formulations as our products so long as the competitors do not infringe any active pharmaceutical ingredient or method of use patents that we may hold. The United States patent covering the formulation of miconazole and zinc oxide in Zimycan expires in 2007. The United States patent covering the composition of Solagé® expires in 2013.

	•		For some of our product candidates, the principal patent protection that covers, or that we expect will cover, our product candidate is a method of use patent. This type of patent only protects the product when used or sold for the specified method. However, this type of patent does not limit a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside of the patented method. Moreover, physicians may prescribe such a competitive identical product for off-label indications that are covered by the applicable patents. Although such off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method of use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute.

	•		Our patent licenses from Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc. are limited to the field of dermatology. As a result, with some exceptions, Johnson & Johnson, its affiliates or its licensees could manufacture and market products similar to our products outside of this field. This also could result in off-label use of these competitive products for dermatological indications.

These limitations on our patent rights may result in competitors taking product sales away from us, which would reduce our revenues and harm our business.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license development or commercialization rights to products or technology from third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

All of our eight current product candidates in clinical development, are based on intellectual property that we have licensed from Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc. We depend, and will continue to depend, on these license agreements. The terms of these licenses are set out in two license agreements. These license agreements may be terminated on a product-by-product basis, if, by dates specified in the license agreements, we are not conducting active clinical development of the particular product or if we do not obtain regulatory approval for that product. Either of the license agreements may also be terminated if we breach that license agreement and do not cure the breach within 90 days or in the event of our bankruptcy or liquidation.

Disputes may arise with respect to our licensing agreements regarding manufacturing, development and commercialization of any products relating to this intellectual property. These disputes could lead to delays in or termination of the development, manufacture and commercialization of our product candidates or to litigation.

Various aspects of our Johnson & Johnson license agreements may adversely affect our business.

Under our principal license agreements, neither Johnson & Johnson nor any of its affiliates is restricted from developing or acquiring products that may address similar indications as our products or otherwise compete with our products. We have the sole right to commercialize any product candidate based on intellectual property licensed to us under these agreements that we elect to commercialize ourselves or with the assistance of a contract sales organization. In other circumstances, however, Johnson & Johnson and any of its affiliates has a right of first negotiation for the commercialization of our product candidates based on such intellectual property. The rights of first negotiation for the commercialization of our product candidates can be exercised on a territory-by-territory basis. This negotiation may extend for up to 180 days, which may delay our commercialization efforts or hinder our ability to enter into distribution agreements.

Under the license agreements, Janssen has an exclusive option to acquire the right to commercialize Hyphanox on a geographic region-by-region basis. Janssen has 90 days to exercise this option from the date that we provide notice that we are able to manufacture Hyphanox batches that are reproducible and bioequivalent to Janssen’s Sporanox product or a similar itraconazole product previously developed by Janssen. We also must provide this notice if we can demonstrate clinical efficacy in a Phase 3 clinical trial performed by us. In July 2005, we notified Janssen that its right to exercise this option was triggered since the results of our Phase 3 clinical trial of Hyphanox in vaginal candidiasis achieved non-inferiority for the secondary endpoint of clinical cure. Depending on whether or not Janssen exercises its option and the regions for which it chooses to exercise its option, our business may be either favorably or adversely affected.

The license agreements also permit each of Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc., to abandon its maintenance of any patents or the prosecution of any patent applications included in the licensed intellectual property for any reason. If any of these companies abandon these activities, we have the option to undertake their maintenance and prosecution if we decide to prevent their abandonment. To date, we have assumed the maintenance and prosecution for all of the patents and patent applications relating to our Sebazole and Zimycan product candidates. If we are required to undertake these activities for any additional product candidates, our operating costs will increase.

In addition, our license agreements limit our use of our product candidates to the specific field of dermatology as defined in the license agreements. As so defined, dermatology consists of applications for the treatment or prevention of diseases of human skin, hair, nails and oral and genital mucosa, but excludes treatments for skin cancer. We have not been granted the right to sell oxatomide in Japan, Italy, Mexico and much of Central America or to sell ketanserin in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. Our right to sell the following products in the

following countries is semi-exclusive with the Johnson & Johnson companies:

	•		Zimycan in Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Indonesia, Luxembourg, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru and Venezuela; and

	•		Ketanserin in South America.

This field of use and geographic restrictions limit our ability to market our products worldwide and, therefore, limit the potential market size for our products.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our intellectual property, our competitors could develop and market products similar or identical to ours, which may reduce demand for our product candidates.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our proprietary technologies and product candidates and our ability to prevent third parties from infringing our proprietary rights. The patent situation in the field of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals generally is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and scientific questions. We may not be able to obtain additional issued patents relating to our technology or products. Even if issued, patents may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated, or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing similar products or limit the length of term of patent protection we may have for our products. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

Because of the substantial length of time and expense associated with bringing new products through the development and regulatory approval processes in order to reach the marketplace, the pharmaceutical industry places considerable importance on patent protection for new technologies, products and processes. Accordingly, we expect to seek patent protection for our new proprietary technologies and some of our product candidates. The risk exists, however, that new patents may be unobtainable and that the breadth of the claims in a patent, if obtained, may not provide adequate protection for our proprietary technologies or product candidates.

Although we own or otherwise have rights to a number of patents, these patents may not effectively exclude competitors, the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its validity or enforceability and third parties may challenge the validity or enforceability of our patents. Because patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all, and because publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our issued United States patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for protection of the inventions set forth in the foreign patents or patent applications. It is possible that a competitor may successfully challenge our patents or that challenges will result in the elimination or narrowing of patent claims and, therefore, reduce our patent protection.

Moreover, competitors may infringe our patents or successfully avoid them through design innovation. To prevent infringement or unauthorized use, we may need to file infringement lawsuits, which are expensive and time-consuming. In addition, because of the size of our patent portfolio, we may not be able to prevent infringement or unauthorized use of all of our patents due to the associated expense and time commitment of monitoring these activities. If there is an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, may narrow our patent claims or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the ground that our patents do not cover its technology. Interference proceedings brought in the United States Patent and Trademark Office may be necessary to determine whether our patent applications or those of our collaborators are entitled to priority of invention relative to third parties. Litigation, interference or opposition proceedings may result in adverse rulings and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management. We may not be able to prevent misappropriation of our respective proprietary rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect our rights as fully as in the United States.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information and know-how, the value of our technology may be adversely affected.

In addition to patent protection, we rely upon trade secrets relating to unpatented know-how and technological innovations to develop and maintain our competitive position, which we seek to protect, in part, by confidentiality agreements with our employees and consultants. We also have confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and our consultants. If our employees or consultants breach these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any of these breaches. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known to or be independently developed by our competitors.

If the development of our product candidates infringes the intellectual property of our competitors or other third parties, we may be required to pay license fees or cease our development activities and pay damages, which could significantly harm our business.

Even if we have our own patents which protect our products, our product candidates may nonetheless infringe the patents or violate the proprietary rights of third parties. In these cases, we may be required to obtain licenses to patents or proprietary rights of others in order to continue to develop and commercialize our product candidates. We may not, however, be able to obtain any licenses required under any patents or proprietary rights of third parties on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we were able to obtain rights to a third party’s intellectual property, these rights may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors potential access to the same intellectual property.

Third parties may assert patent or other intellectual property infringement claims against us, or our collaborators, with respect to technologies used in potential product candidates. Any claims that might be brought against us relating to infringement of patents may cause us to incur significant expenses and, if successfully asserted against us, may cause us to pay substantial damages. Even if we were to prevail, any litigation could be costly and time-consuming and could divert the attention of our management and key personnel from our business operations. In addition, any patent claims brought against our collaborators could affect their ability to carry out their obligations to us.

Furthermore, as a result of a patent infringement suit brought against us, or our collaborators, the development, manufacture or potential sale of product candidates claimed to infringe a third party’s intellectual property may have to stop or be delayed. Ultimately, we may be unable to commercialize some of our product candidates or may have to cease some of our business operations as a result of patent infringement claims, which could severely harm our business.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

We may not receive regulatory approvals for our product candidates or approvals may be delayed, either of which could materially harm our business.

Government authorities in the United States and foreign countries extensively regulate the development, testing, manufacture, distribution, marketing and sale of our product candidates and our ongoing research and development activities. All of our product candidates are in various stages of development, and we are currently not authorized to market any of our product candidates. We believe that our product candidates have significant milestones to reach, including the receipt of regulatory approvals, before commercialization.

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals is expensive, often takes many years, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. According to the FDA, a Phase 1 clinical trial typically takes several months to complete, a Phase 2 clinical trial typically takes several months to two years to complete and a Phase 3 clinical trial typically takes one to four years to complete. Industry sources report that the preparation and submission of new drug applications, or NDAs, which are required for regulatory approval, generally take six months to one year to complete after completion of a pivotal clinical trial. Industry sources also report that approximately 10 to 15% of all NDAs accepted for filing by the FDA are rejected and that FDA approval, if granted, usually takes approximately one year after submission, although it may take longer if additional information is required by the FDA. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that the FDA will approve any NDA that we may file. In addition, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America reports that only one out of five product candidates that enter clinical trials will ultimately be approved by the FDA for commercial sale.

In particular, human therapeutic products are subject to rigorous preclinical studies, clinical trials and other approval procedures of the FDA and similar regulatory authorities in foreign countries. The FDA regulates, among other things, the development, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, record keeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale and distribution of pharmaceutical products. Securing FDA approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data, information about product manufacturing processes and inspection of facilities and supporting information to the FDA for each therapeutic indication to establish the product candidate’s safety and efficacy. Varying interpretations of the data obtained from preclinical and clinical testing could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval of a product candidate. For example in May 2005, the FDA issued a not approvable letter for Zimycan stating that there was insufficient information regarding the systemic exposure to miconazole in infants. We are currently working with the FDA to provide them with additional data that will address their concerns.

Changes in the FDA approval process during the development period or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application may also cause delays in the approval or result in rejection of an application. In addition, recent withdrawals of approved products by major pharmaceutical companies may result in a renewed focus on safety at the FDA which may result in delays in the approval process. The FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process and may reject our data or disagree with our interpretations of our clinical trial data, which also could cause delays of an approval or the rejection of an application. The FDA may also determine that there is no substantial benefit over the products currently marketed to justify approval. The approval process may take many years to complete and may involve ongoing requirements for post-marketing studies. For example, in January 2005, the FDA informed us that we should submit the six-month data for a minimum of 300 patients from our ongoing long-term safety study of our Sebazole product candidate at the time of the initial filing of the NDA. The FDA’s request to include this data has delayed the filing of our Sebazole NDA until the third quarter of 2005.

Any FDA or other regulatory approval of our product candidates, once obtained, may be withdrawn, including for failure to comply with regulatory requirements or if clinical or manufacturing problems follow initial marketing. If our product candidates are marketed abroad, they will also be subject to extensive regulation by foreign governments.

In addition, any proposed brand name that we intend to use for our product candidates will require approval from the FDA. The FDA typically conducts a rigorous review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. The FDA may also object to a product name if it believes the name inappropriately implies medical claims.

Any failure to receive the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize our product candidates would severely harm our business. The process of obtaining these approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate domestic and foreign statutes and regulations require spending substantial time and financial resources. If we fail to obtain or maintain, or encounter delays in obtaining or maintaining, regulatory approvals, it could adversely affect the marketing of any product candidate we develop our ability to receive product or royalty revenues and our liquidity and capital resources.

We may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for our product candidates for the treatment of rare dermatological diseases, and our competitors may obtain orphan drug exclusivity prior to us, which could significantly harm our business.

Some jurisdictions, including Europe and the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. The Commission for the European Community and the FDA have granted Liarozole orphan drug status for its use in the treatment of congenital ichthyosis. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an application for marketing authorization. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process, but does make the product eligible for orphan drug exclusivity and specific tax credits in the United States. Generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity means that another application to market the same drug for the same indication may not be approved, except in limited circumstances, for a period of up to ten years in Europe and for a period of seven years in the United States. Obtaining orphan drug designations and orphan drug exclusivity for our product candidates for the treatment of rare dermatological diseases

may be critical to the success of these product candidates. Our competitors may obtain orphan drug exclusivity for products competitive with our product candidates before we do, in which case we would be excluded from that market. Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for any of our product candidates, we may not be able to maintain it. For example, if a competitive product is shown to be clinically superior to our product, any orphan drug exclusivity we have obtained will not block the approval of such competitive product.

If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements, regulatory agencies may take action against us, which could significantly harm our business.

Any products for which we obtain marketing approval including our marketed product Solagé®, along with the manufacturing processes, post-approval clinical data, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for these products, will be subject to continual requirements and review by the FDA and other regulatory bodies. Even if regulatory approval of a product is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval or contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product.

In addition, regulatory authorities subject a marketed product, its manufacturer and the manufacturing facilities to continual review and periodic inspections. We will be subject to ongoing FDA requirements, including required submissions of safety and other post-market information and reports, registration requirements, cGMP regulations, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping requirements. The cGMP regulations include requirements relating to quality control and quality assurance, as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation. If we engage contract manufacturers, we will rely on their compliance with cGMP regulations and other regulatory requirements relating to the manufacture of products, if any. We also will be subject to state laws and registration requirements covering the distribution of our products. Regulatory agencies may change existing requirements or adopt new requirements or policies. We may be slow to adapt or may not be able to adapt to these changes or new requirements. Because many of our products contain ingredients that also are marketed in over-the-counter drug products, there is a risk that the FDA or an outside third party at some point would propose that our products be distributed over-the-counter rather than by prescription potentially affecting third-party and government reimbursement for our products.

Later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products, manufacturing processes or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in any of the following:

	•		restrictions on our products or manufacturing processes;

	•		warning letters;

	•		withdrawal of the products from the market;

	•		voluntary or mandatory recall;

	•		fines;

	•		suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals;

	•		suspension or termination of any of our ongoing clinical trials;

	•		refusal to permit the import or export of our products;

	•		refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications that we submit;

	•		product seizure; and

	•		injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

We have only limited experience in regulatory affairs, which may affect our ability or the time we require to obtain necessary regulatory approvals.

We have only limited experience in filing the applications necessary to gain regulatory approvals. Moreover, some of the products that are likely to result from our product development, licensing and acquisition programs may be based on new technologies that have not been extensively tested in humans. The regulatory requirements governing these types of products may be less well defined or more rigorous than for conventional products. As a result, we may experience a longer regulatory process in connection with obtaining regulatory approvals of any products that we develop, license or acquire.

If we fail to obtain regulatory approval in foreign jurisdictions, we would not be able to market our products abroad, and the growth of our revenues, if any, would be limited.

We intend to have our products marketed outside the United States. 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. The approval procedure varies among countries and jurisdictions and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. We may not 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 or jurisdictions, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or jurisdictions or by the FDA. We may not be able to file for regulatory approvals and may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize our products in any market. The failure to obtain these approvals could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

For example, our Zimycan product candidate has received marketing approval from the Belgian Health Authorities and has been the subject of a mutual recognition procedure for approval in 14 other countries in Europe. Although, the product has received marketing approval from 8 of those countries, we still must obtain pricing approval prior to launching in those countries. In addition, we are considering amendments to those regulatory filings which, if required, may delay launch in those counties. In the remaining 6 countries, which consist of the larger market countries such as the United Kingdom and Spain, we must re-file our applications for approval in order to satisfy the requirements of those countries for additional clinical data. Although we believe we have the additional data, this request and the need to re-file, has delayed the launch of Zimycan in these 6 countries.

Risks Related to Commercialization

If our products and product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval do not achieve broad market acceptance, the revenues that we generate from their sales will be limited.

The commercial success of our products and our product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities will depend upon the acceptance of these products by physicians, patients and healthcare payors. Safety, efficacy, convenience and cost-effectiveness, particularly as compared to competitive products, are the primary factors that affect market acceptance. Even if a product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile in clinical trials, market acceptance of the product will not be known until after it is launched. We only recently began actively marketing Solagé® in July 2005. Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party healthcare payors on the benefits of Solagé ® or any of our future products may require significant resources and may never be successful.

If our products fail to achieve and maintain market acceptance or if new products or technologies are introduced by others that are more favorably received than our products, or if we are otherwise unable to market and sell our products successfully, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth will suffer.

If we are unable to expand our domestic sales and marketing infrastructure or enter into agreements with third parties to perform these functions in territories outside the United States and Canada, we will not be able to commercialize our product candidates.

We currently have only limited internal sales, distribution and marketing capabilities. In order to commercialize our products and product candidates, we must continue to develop and expand our sales, marketing and distribution

capabilities, or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services for us.

In the United States and Canada, we are building our own sales force to market our products directly to dermatologists and other target physicians. In addition to hiring our own sales representatives and regional managers, we have entered into an agreement with a contract sales organization to provide us with additional sales representatives and a number of complementary services including sales information systems, fleet management, training and logistics and recruiting support. We may encounter difficulties hiring a sales force in a timely manner or one that is sufficient in size or adequate in expertise. We cannot control, other than by contract, the performance of our contract sales organization. The development and expansion of this sales force and establishing a distribution infrastructure for our domestic operations will require substantial resources.

We intend to rely on third parties to perform many necessary commercial services for our products, including services related to the distribution, storage, and transportation of our products.

We intend to rely on the Specialty Pharmaceutical Services unit of Cardinal Health PTS, LLC, to perform a variety of functions related to the sale and distribution of Solagé® and any subsequently approved products in the United States. These services include distribution, logistics management, inventory storage and transportation, invoicing and collections. We intend to rely on McKesson Logistics Solutions for similar functions related to the import, quality testing, sale and distribution of Solagé®, Vaniqa® and any subsequently approved products in Canada. If these third party service providers fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, fail to meet expected deadlines or otherwise do not carry out their contractual duties, our ability to deliver products to meet commercial demand would be significantly impaired.

We expect to depend on three wholesalers for the vast majority of our product revenues in the United States, and the loss of any of these wholesalers would decrease our revenues.

The prescription drug wholesaling industry in the United States is highly concentrated, with a vast majority of all sales made by three major full-line companies. Those companies are Cardinal Health, McKesson Corporation and AmerisourceBergen. We expect that a vast majority of our product revenues will be from these three companies. Although we have entered into agreements with each of these companies concerning the terms of their purchase of products from us, none of them is under an obligation to continue to purchase our products. The loss of any of these wholesalers, a material reduction in their purchases or the cancellation of product orders or unexpected returns of unsold products from any one of these wholesalers could decrease our revenues and impede our future growth prospects.

Risks Related to Employees and Growth

If we are not able to retain our current senior management team or attract and retain qualified scientific, technical and business personnel, our business will suffer.

We are dependent on the members of our senior management team, in particular, our Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Geert Cauwenbergh, our Chief Operating Officer, Charles Nomides and our Chief Commercial Officer, Alfred Altomari, for our business success. Dr. Cauwenbergh and Mr. Nomides have a long history and association with our current product candidates and intellectual property. Our employment agreements with these and our other executive officers are terminable on short notice or no notice. The loss of any one of these individuals would result in a significant loss in the knowledge and experience that we, as an organization, possess and could cause significant delays, or outright failure, in the development and approval of our product candidates. We do not carry key man life insurance on the lives of any of our personnel.

In addition, competition for qualified scientific, technical, and business personnel is intense in the pharmaceutical industry. If we are unable to hire and retain qualified personnel, our business will suffer.

We will need to hire additional employees as we grow. Any inability to manage future growth could harm our ability to commercialize our product candidates, increase our costs and adversely impact our ability to compete effectively.

Our growth will require us to hire a significant number of qualified scientific, commercial and administrative personnel. There is intense competition for human resources, including management in the technical fields in which we operate, and we may not be able to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates. The inability to attract new employees when needed and retain existing employees as we grow could severely harm our business.

Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of our management, including the need to identify, recruit, retain and integrate additional employees. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively.

Changes in the expensing of stock options could result in unfavorable accounting charges or require us to change our compensation practices.

We rely heavily on stock options to compensate existing employees and attract new employees. We currently are not required to record stock-based compensation charges if the employee’s stock option exercise price equals or exceeds the fair value of our common stock at the date of grant. On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement No. 123 (revised 2004)Share-Based Payment, which requires all share-based payments to employees to be recognized in the statement of operations based on their fair values. On April 15, 2005 the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a new rule that extended the compliance date for periods ending after January 1, 2006. Therefore, during 2006 we will change our accounting policy to record expense for the fair value of the stock options granted. As a result, our operating expenses will increase. We will continue to include stock options in our compensation arrangements.

Risk Related to Our Industry

If third-party payors do not reimburse customers for any of our product candidates that are approved for marketing, they might not be used or purchased, and our revenues and profits will not develop or grow.

Our revenues and profits depend heavily upon the availability of reimbursement for the use of our product candidates that are approved for marketing from third-party health care and government payors, both in the United States and in foreign markets. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

	•		safe, effective and medically necessary;

	•		appropriate for the specific patient;

	•		cost-effective; and

	•		neither experimental nor investigational.

Since reimbursement approval for a product is required from each third-party and government payor individually, seeking this approval is a time-consuming and costly process. Third-party payors may require cost-benefit analysis data from us in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of any product we might bring to market. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to reimbursement. There also exists substantial uncertainty concerning third-party reimbursement for the use of any drug product incorporating new technology. In addition, as a result of actions by these third-party payors, the health care industry is experiencing a trend toward containing or reducing costs through various means, including lowering reimbursement rates, limiting therapeutic class coverage and negotiating reduced payment schedules with service providers for drug products.

New federal legislation will increase the pressure to reduce the price of pharmaceutical products paid for by Medicare, which will adversely affect our revenues, if any.

The Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 reforms the way Medicare will

cover and reimburse for pharmaceutical products. The legislation expands Medicare coverage for drug purchases by the elderly and eventually will introduce a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for drugs. In addition, the new legislation provides authority for limiting the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class. As a result of the new legislation and the expansion of federal coverage of drug products, we expect that there will be additional pressure to contain and reduce costs. These costs initiatives and other provisions of this legislation could decrease the coverage and price that we receive for our products and could seriously harm our business.

Foreign governments tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenues, if any.

In some foreign countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take six to twelve months or longer after the receipt of regulatory marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be materially harmed.

We face potential product liability exposure, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability for a product and may have to limit its commercialization.

The use of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of products that expose us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against these claims, we may incur substantial losses or expenses, be required to limit the commercialization of our product candidates and face adverse publicity. We have obtained limited product liability insurance coverage for our clinical trials with a $10 million annual aggregate coverage limit, and our insurance coverage may not reimburse us or may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. We intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for our product candidates in development, but we may be unable to obtain commercially reasonable product liability insurance for any products approved for marketing. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to fall and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash.

If our competitors develop and market products faster than we do or if the products of our competitors are considered more desirable than ours, revenues for any of our product candidates that are approved for marketing will not develop or grow.

The pharmaceutical industry, and the dermatology segment in particular, is highly competitive and includes a number of established, large and mid-sized pharmaceutical companies, as well as smaller emerging companies, whose activities are directly focused on our target markets and areas of expertise. We face and will continue to face competition in the discovery, in-licensing, development and commercialization of our product candidates, which could severely impact our ability to generate revenue or achieve significant market acceptance of our product candidates. Furthermore, new developments, including the development of other drug technologies and methods of preventing the incidence of disease, occur in the pharmaceutical industry at a rapid pace. These developments may render our product candidates or technologies obsolete or noncompetitive.

Compared to us, many of our competitors and potential competitors have substantially greater:

	•		capital resources;

	•		research and development resources, including personnel and technology;

	•		regulatory experience;

	•		preclinical study and clinical trial experience; and

•

manufacturing, distribution and sales and marketing experience.

As a result of these factors, our competitors may obtain regulatory approval of their products more rapidly than us. Our competitors may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit our ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates or technologies. Our competitors may also develop drugs that are more effective, useful and less costly than ours and may also be more successful than us in manufacturing and marketing their products.

Our recently acquired Solagé® product faces competition in the treatment of solar lentigeness from Triluma from Galderma S.A., Avage from Allergan, Inc., EpiQuin Micro from SkinMedica, Inc. and other prescription 4% hydroquinone formulations as well as over-the-counter 2% hydroquinone products, Retin-A from Ortho-Neutrogena and other tretinoin containing topical formulations. If approved, each of our product candidates will compete for a share of the existing market with numerous products that have become standard treatments recommended or prescribed by physicians. For example, we believe the primary competition for our product candidates are:

	•		For Zimycan, in the treatment of diaper dermatitis complicated by candidiasis, ointments and creams containing nystatin, Mycolog II from Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, clotrimazole containing creams from Bayer AG and from generic manufacturers and topical miconazole creams.

	•		For Sebazole, in the treatment of seborrheic dermatitis, Nizoral from Janssen, ketoconazole creams from generic manufacturers, Desowen from Galderma S.A. and Loprox from Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation.

	•		For Hyphanox, in the treatment of onychomycosis, Sporanox from Janssen, Lamisil from Novartis AG and Penlac from Dermik Laboratories.

	•		For Liarozole, in the treatment of congenital ichthyosis, Soriatane from Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. and Connetics and over-the-counter topical moisturizers and emollients.

	•		For oral Rambazole, in the treatment of acne, Accutane from Hoffman-La Roche and generic manufacturers. For oral Rambazole, in the treatment of psoriasis, Soriatane from Hoffman-La Roche and Connetics, biologic agents such as Amevive from Biogen Idec Inc. and Raptiva from Genentech, Inc. and methotrexate from generic manufacturers.

We also believe that many of the competitive products for our later stage product candidates and Rambazole will similarly compete with our earlier stage product candidates because of the indications for which we are developing these product candidates.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Our stock price is volatile, and the market price of our common stock may drop below the price you pay.

Market prices for securities of biopharmaceutical and specialty pharmaceutical companies have been particularly volatile. Some of the factors that may cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate include:

	•		results of our clinical trials or those of our competitors;

	•		the regulatory status of our product candidates;

	•		whether or not Janssen exercises its option to commercialize Hyphanox;

	•		failure of any of our product candidates, if approved, to achieve commercial success;

	•		developments concerning our competitors and their products;

	•		success of competitive products and technologies;

	•		regulatory developments in the United States and foreign countries;

	•		developments or disputes concerning our patents or other proprietary rights;

	•		our ability to manufacture any products to commercial standards;

	•		public concern over our drugs;

	•		litigation involving our company or our general industry or both;

	•		future sales of our common stock;

	•		changes in the structure of health care payment systems, including developments in price control legislation;

	•		departure of key personnel;

	•		period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us;

	•		changes in estimates of our financial results or recommendations by securities analysts;

	•		investors’ general perception of us; and

	•		general economic, industry and market conditions.

If any of these risks occurs, it could cause our stock price to fall and may expose us to class action lawsuits that, even if unsuccessful, could be costly to defend and a distraction to management.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and under Delaware law may prevent or frustrate a change in control or a change in management that stockholders believe is desirable.

Provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. These provisions may also prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our management. These provisions include:

	•		a classified board of directors;

	•		limitations on the removal of directors;

	•		advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations;

	•		the inability of stockholders to act by written consent or to call special meetings; and

	•		the ability of our board of directors to designate the terms of and issue new series of preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be used to institute a rights plan, or a poison pill, that would work to dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by our board of directors.

The affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of our shares of capital stock entitled to vote is necessary to amend or repeal the above provisions of our certificate of incorporation. In addition, absent approval of our board of directors, our bylaws may only be amended or repealed by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of our shares of capital stock entitled to vote.

In addition, Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder, generally a person which together with its affiliates owns or within the last three years has owned 15% of our voting stock, for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person became an interested stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a prescribed manner. Accordingly, Section 203 may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company.

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK

Our exposure to market risk is limited to our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. We invest in high-quality financial instruments, primarily money market funds, federal agency notes, corporate debt securities and United States treasury notes, with the effective duration of the portfolio less than one year, which we believe are subject to limited credit risk. We currently do not hedge our interest rate exposure. Due to the short-term nature of our investments, we do not believe that we have any material exposure to interest rate risk arising from our investments.

Most of our transactions are conducted in United States dollars, although we do have some agreements with vendors located outside the United States. Transactions under some of these agreements are conducted in United States dollars, subject to adjustment based on significant fluctuations in currency exchange rates. Transactions under other of these agreements are conducted in the local foreign currency. We have a wholly-owned subsidiary, Barrier Therapeutics, N.V., which is located in Geel, Belgium and a wholly owned subsidiary, Barrier Therapeutics Canada Inc., which is located in Toronto, Canada. Except for funding being received under our grant from a Belgian governmental agency, which is denominated in Euros and locally earned interest income, all research costs incurred by Barrier Therapeutics, N.V. are funded under a service agreement with Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. from investments denominated in dollars. Our Canadian subsidiary, Barrier Therapeutics Canada, Inc. will become operational in the third quarter of 2005. While we expect that there will be some income from sales of products during the next year which will be denominated in Canadian dollars, most of the funding for these operations will also come from investments denominated in dollars. Therefore, we are subject to currency fluctuations and exchange rate gains and losses on these transactions. If the exchange rate undergoes a change of 10%, we do not believe that it would have a material impact on our results of operations or cash flows.

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report are functioning effectively to provide reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. A controls system, no matter how well designed and operated, cannot provide absolute assurance that the objectives of the controls system are met, and no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within a company have been detected.

Change in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

No change in our internal control over financial reporting occurred during our most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

	(a)		The Company held its annual stockholders meeting on June 16, 2005.

	(b)		The following directors were elected as Class I directors: Charles F. Jacey, Jr. and Nicholas J. Simon III. The term of the following directors continued after the meeting: Geert Cauwenbergh, Ph.D., Srini Akkaraju, M.D., Ph.D., Robert Campbell, Carl W. Ehmann, M.D., Peter Ernster, and Andrew N. Schiff, M.D.

	(c)		The stockholders voted for each of the proposals as follows:


Proposal	Shares Voted For		Shares Voted Against		Abstained
Election of Charles F. Jacey, Jr.		18,768,889		-0-		5,257
Election of Nicholas J. Simon III		17,317,913		-0-		1,456,233
Appointment of Ernst & Young as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005		18,770,685		2,536		925

(d)

The Company’s definitive proxy materials were filed with the SEC on April 26, 2005 and the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K was filed with the SEC on March 25, 2005.

ITEM 6. EXHIBITS


Exhibit
No.		Description

10.1		Amendment No. 2 to the Intellectual Property Transfer and License Agreement, dated as of May 12, 2005, by and between Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. and Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P.

10.2		Scientific Advisory Board Consulting Agreement dated as of August 1, 2005 by and between Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. and Carl W. Ehmann, M.D.

31.1		Certification of principal executive officer required by Rule 13a-14(a).

31.2		Certification of principal financial officer required by Rule 13a-14(a).

32.1		Section 1350 Certification of principal executive officer.

32.2		Section 1350 Certification of principal financial officer.

SIGNATURES

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


	BARRIER THERAPEUTICS, INC.
	(Registrant)

August 11, 2005	By	GEERT CAUWENBERGH

		Geert Cauwenbergh, Ph.D.
		Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
		(Principal executive officer)

	By	ANNE M. VANLENT

		Anne M. VanLent
		Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer
		(Principal financial and accounting officer)

Positive
Negative
Uncertain
Constraining
Legalese
Litigious
Readability	H.S. freshman Good

Barrier Therapeutics Inactive 10-Q2005 Q2 Quarterly report

Content analysis