Significant Accounting Policies | (3) Significant Accounting Policies Revenue Recognition The Company’s revenues are generated primarily through collaborative research, development and commercialization agreements. The terms of these agreements generally contain multiple elements, or deliverables, which may include (i) licenses, or options to obtain licenses, to the Company’s technology, (ii) research and development activities to be performed on behalf of the collaborative partner, and (iii) in certain cases, services in connection with the manufacturing of pre-clinical and clinical material. Payments to the Company under these arrangements typically include one or more of the following: non-refundable, upfront license fees; option exercise fees; funding of research and/or development efforts; milestone payments; and royalties on future product sales. The Company analyzes its collaboration arrangements to assess whether they are within the scope of ASC 808 to determine whether such arrangements involve joint operating activities performed by parties that are both active participants in the activities and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of such activities. This assessment is performed throughout the life of the arrangement based on changes in the responsibilities of all parties in the arrangement. For collaboration arrangements that are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808, the Company first determines which elements of the collaboration are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 and those that are more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the scope of ASC 605. The Company’s policy is to recognized amounts received from collaborators in connection with joint operating activities that are within the scope of ASC 808 as a reduction to research and development expense. When evaluating multiple element arrangements under ASC 605, the Company considers whether the deliverables under the arrangement represent separate units of accounting. This evaluation requires subjective determinations and requires management to make judgments about the individual deliverables and whether such deliverables are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship. In determining the units of accounting, management evaluates certain criteria, including whether the deliverables have standalone value, based on the relevant facts and circumstances for each arrangement. The consideration received is allocated among the separate units of accounting using the relative selling price method, and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are applied to each of the separate units. The Company determines the estimated selling price for deliverables within each agreement using vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) of selling price, if available, third-party evidence (“TPE”) of selling price if VSOE is not available, or best estimate of selling price if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. Determining the best estimate of selling price for a deliverable requires significant judgment. The Company typically uses best estimate of selling price to estimate the selling price for licenses to the Company’s proprietary technology, since the Company often does not have VSOE or TPE of selling price for these deliverables. In those circumstances where the Company utilizes best estimate of selling price to determine the estimated selling price of a license to the Company’s proprietary technology, the Company considers market conditions as well as entity-specific factors, including those factors contemplated in negotiating the agreements and internally developed models that include assumptions related to the market opportunity, estimated development costs, probability of success and the time needed to commercialize a product candidate pursuant to the license. In validating the Company’s best estimate of selling price, the Company evaluates whether changes in the key assumptions used to determine the best estimate of selling price will have a significant effect on the allocation of arrangement consideration among multiple deliverables. The Company typically receives non-refundable, upfront payments when licensing its intellectual property in conjunction with a research and development agreement. When management believes the license to its intellectual property does not have stand-alone value from the other deliverables to be provided in the arrangement, the Company generally recognizes revenue attributed to the license on a straight-line basis over the Company’s contractual or estimated performance period, which is typically the term of the Company’s research and development obligations. If management cannot reasonably estimate when the Company’s performance obligation ends, then revenue is deferred until management can reasonably estimate when the performance obligation ends. When management believes the license to its intellectual property has stand-alone value, the Company generally recognizes revenue attributed to the license upon delivery. The periods over which revenue should be recognized are subject to estimates by management and may change over the course of the research and development agreement. Such a change could have a material impact on the amount of revenue the Company records in future periods. Payments or reimbursements resulting from the Company’s research and development efforts for those arrangements where such efforts are considered as deliverables are recognized as the services are performed and are presented on a gross basis so long as there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collection of the related receivable is reasonably assured. Amounts received prior to satisfying the above revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue in the accompanying balance sheets. At the inception of each agreement that includes milestone payments, the Company evaluates whether each milestone is substantive and at risk to both parties on the basis of the contingent nature of the milestone. This evaluation includes an assessment of whether (a) the consideration is commensurate with either (1) the entity’s performance to achieve the milestone, or (2) the enhancement of the value of the delivered item(s) as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the entity’s performance to achieve the milestone, (b) the consideration relates solely to past performance, and (c) the consideration is reasonable relative to all of the deliverables and payment terms within the arrangement. The Company evaluates factors such as the scientific, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the respective milestone, the level of effort and investment required to achieve the respective milestone and whether the milestone consideration is reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement in making this assessment. The Company aggregates its milestones into four categories: (i) clinical and development milestones, (ii) regulatory milestones, (iii) commercial milestones, and (iv) patent-related milestones. Clinical and development milestones are typically achieved when a product candidate advances into a defined phase of clinical research or completes such phase. For example, a milestone payment may be due to the Company upon the initiation of a phase 3 clinical trial for a new indication, which is the last phase of clinical development and could eventually contribute to marketing approval by the FDA or other global regulatory authorities. Regulatory milestones are typically achieved upon acceptance of the submission for marketing approval of a product candidate or upon approval to market the product candidate by the FDA or other global regulatory authorities. For example, a milestone payment may be due to the Company upon the FDA’s acceptance of a New Drug Application (“NDA”). Commercial milestones are typically achieved when an approved pharmaceutical product reaches certain defined levels of net sales by the licensee, such as when a product first achieves global sales or annual sales of a specified amount. Patent-related milestones are typically achieved when a patent application is filed or a patent is issued with respect to certain intellectual property related to the applicable collaboration. Revenues from clinical and development, regulatory, and patent-related milestone payments, if the milestones are deemed substantive and the milestone payments are nonrefundable, are recognized upon successful accomplishment of the milestones. The Company has concluded that the clinical and development, regulatory and patent-related milestones pursuant to its current research and development arrangements are substantive. Milestones that are not considered substantive are accounted for as license payments and recognized on a straight-line basis over the remaining period of performance. Revenues from commercial milestone payments are accounted for as royalties and are recorded as revenue upon achievement of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. Research and Development Expenses Research and development expenses are charged to expense as incurred. Research and development expenses consist of costs incurred in performing research and development activities, including internal costs for salaries, bonuses, benefits, stock-based compensation, facilities, and research-related overhead, and external costs for clinical trials, drug manufacturing and distribution, license fees, consultants and other contracted services. Warrants Issued in Connection with Private Placement In May 2016, the Company issued PIPE warrants to purchase an aggregate of 17,642,482 shares of common stock in connection with a private placement financing and recorded the warrants as a liability (the “PIPE Warrants”). The Company accounts for warrant instruments that either conditionally or unconditionally obligate the issuer to transfer assets as liabilities regardless of the timing of the redemption feature or price, even though the underlying shares may be classified as permanent or temporary equity. As of December 31, 2017, PIPE Warrants exercisable for 259,067 shares of common stock had been exercised and PIPE Warrants exercisable for 17,383,415 shares of common stock were outstanding. In January 2018, PIPE Warrants with respect to 518,134 shares of common stock underlying such PIPE Warrants were exercised, and the Company issued 518,134 shares of its common stock and received approximately $0.5 million in cash proceeds. Refer to Note 7, “Common Stock—Private Placement / PIPE Warrants” for further discussion of the private placement financing. The PIPE Warrants contain a provision giving the warrant holder the option to receive cash, equal to the fair value of the remaining unexercised portion of the warrant, as cash settlement in the event that there is a fundamental transaction (contractually defined to include various merger, acquisition or stock transfer activities). Due to this provision, ASC 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity The following table rolls forward the fair value of the Company’s PIPE warrant liability, the fair value of which is determined by Level 3 inputs for the year ended December 31, 2017 (in thousands): Issuance of warrants on May 13, 2016 $ 9,344 Decrease in fair value (4,751 ) Fair value at December 31, 2016 $ 4,593 Increase in fair value 33,740 Reduction in warrant liability for PIPE Warrant exercises (587 ) Fair value at December 31, 2017 $ 37,746 The key assumptions used to value the PIPE Warrants were as follows: Original Issuance December 31, 2016 December 31, 2017 Expected price volatility 76.25% 78.18% 84.86% Expected term (in years) 5.00 4.50 3.50 Risk-free interest rates 1.22% 1.93% 2.09% Stock price $ 0.89 $ 0.54 $ 2.79 Dividend yield — — — Potential Class Action Settlement In December 2017, the Company entered into a binding memorandum of understanding (the “MOU”) with class representatives Bob Levine and William Windham (the “Plaintiffs”), regarding the settlement of a securities class action lawsuit (the “Class Action”) filed in 2013 and pending in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (the “District Court”) against us and certain of our former officers (Tuan Ha-Ngoc, David Johnston, and William Slichenmyer, together, the “Individual Defendants”), In re AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Securities Litigation et al. , No. 1:13-cv-11157-DJC. As previously disclosed, the Class Action was purportedly brought on behalf of stockholders who purchased our common stock between May 16, 2012 and May 1, 2013 (the “Class”). In December 2017, upon entering into the MOU, this settlement became estimable and probable. Accordingly, the Company recorded an estimated $17.1 million contingent liability, including $15.0 million for the cash portion of the settlement with a corresponding insurance recovery for the 100% portion to be paid directly by certain of the Company’s insurance carriers, and an approximate $2.1 million estimate for the fair value on December 31, 2017 of 2.0 million warrants to purchase shares of its common stock exercisable from the date of issue until the expiration of a one-year period after the date of issue at an exercise price equal to the closing price on December 22, 2017, the trading day prior to the execution of the MOU, which was $3.00 per share (“the Settlement Warrants”) The settlement is subject to the execution of a definitive settlement agreement, notice to the Class, and final approval of the District Court and shall be effective on the date (the “Effective Date”) on which all of the following circumstances have occurred: (a) a final judgment containing the requisite release of claims has been entered by the District Court (“Final Judgment”); (b) no appeal is pending with respect to the Final Judgment; (c) the Final Judgment has not been reversed, modified, vacated or amended; (d) the time to file any appeal from the Final Judgment has expired without the filing of an appeal or an order dismissing the appeal or affirming the Final Judgment has been entered, and any time to file a further appeal (including a writ of certiorari or for reconsideration of the appeal) has expired; and (e) the MOU and any settlement agreement with respect to the claims released in the Final Judgment have not expired or been terminated. The Company as agreed to use its best efforts to issue and deliver the Settlement Warrants within ten business days following the Effective Date. In January 2018, the Company entered into a stipulation of settlement agreement (the “Stipulation”) that was preliminarily approved by the District Court in February 2018. A hearing by the District Court for final approval of the Stipulation has been scheduled for May 30, 2018. Refer to Note 15, “Legal Proceedings” for further discussion of this class action settlement. The estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants to be issued on the Effective Date has been determined using the Black-Scholes pricing model. The estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants to be issued on the Effective Date are subject to revaluation at each balance sheet date and any changes in fair value are recorded as a non-cash gain or (loss) in the Statement of Operations as a component of operating expenses until the Settlement Warrants are issued, at which point they will be recorded as equity or as a liability based upon the issuance terms The key assumptions used to estimate the fair value the Settlement Warrants were as follows: December 31, 2017 Expected price volatility 101.52% Expected term (in years) 1.00 Risk-free interest rates 1.76% Stock price $ 2.79 Dividend yield — Cash and Cash Equivalents The Company considers all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less at the date of purchase and an investment in a U.S. government money market fund to be cash equivalents. Changes in the balance of cash and cash equivalents may be affected by changes in investment portfolio maturities, as well as actual cash disbursements to fund operations. The Company’s cash is deposited in highly-rated financial institutions in the United States. The Company invests in U.S. government money market funds, high-grade, short-term commercial paper, corporate bonds and other U.S. government agency securities, which management believes are subject to minimal credit and market risk. The carrying values of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents approximate fair value due to their short-term maturities. Marketable Securities Marketable securities consist primarily of investments which have expected average maturity dates in excess of three months, but not longer than 24 months. The Company invests in high-grade corporate obligations, including commercial paper, and U. S. government and government agency obligations that are classified as available-for-sale. Since these securities are available to fund current operations they are classified as current assets on the consolidated balance sheets. Marketable securities are stated at fair value, including accrued interest, with their unrealized gains and losses included as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income or loss, which is a separate component of stockholders’ equity. The fair value of these securities is based on quoted prices and observable inputs on a recurring basis. The cost of marketable securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity, with such amortization and accretion recorded as a component of interest expense, net. Realized gains and losses are determined on the specific identification method. Unrealized gains and losses are included in other comprehensive loss until realized, at which point they would be recorded as a component of interest expense, net. Below is a summary of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016: Amortized Cost Unrealized Gains Unrealized Losses Fair Value December 31, 2017 Cash and cash equivalents: Cash and money market funds $ 14,949 $ — $ — $ 14,949 Corporate debt securities — — — — Total cash and cash equivalents 14,949 — — 14,949 Marketable securities: Corporate debt securities due within 1 year $ 17,074 $ 1 $ (5 ) $ 17,070 US government agency securities due within 1 year 1,506 — — 1,506 Total marketable securities 18,580 1 (5 ) 18,576 Total cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities $ 33,529 $ 1 $ (5 ) $ 33,525 December 31, 2016 Cash and cash equivalents: Cash and money market funds $ 14,091 $ — $ — $ 14,091 Corporate debt securities 1,005 — — 1,005 Total cash and cash equivalents 15,096 — — 15,096 Marketable securities: Corporate debt securities due within 1 year 8,246 6 — 8,252 Total marketable securities 8,246 6 — 8,252 Total cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities $ 23,342 $ 6 $ — $ 23,348 Concentrations of Credit Risk Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to credit risk primarily consist of cash and cash equivalents, marketable securities and accounts receivable. The Company maintains deposits in highly-rated, federally-insured financial institutions in excess of federally insured limits. The Company’s investment strategy is focused on capital preservation. The Company invests in instruments that meet the high credit quality standards outlined in the Company’s investment policy. This policy also limits the amount of credit exposure to any one issue or type of instrument. The Company’s accounts receivable primarily consists of amounts due to the Company from licensees and collaborators. The Company has not experienced any material losses related to accounts receivable from individual licensees or collaborators. Fair Value Measurements The fair value of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities reflects the Company’s estimate of amounts that it would have received in connection with the sale of the assets or paid in connection with the transfer of the liabilities in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In connection with measuring the fair value of its assets and liabilities, the Company seeks to maximize the use of observable inputs (market data obtained from sources independent from the Company) and to minimize the use of unobservable inputs (the Company’s assumptions about how market participants would price assets and liabilities). The following fair value hierarchy is used to classify assets and liabilities based on the observable inputs and unobservable inputs used in order to value the assets and liabilities: Level 1: Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. An active market for an asset or liability is a market in which transactions for the asset or liability occur with sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. Level 2: Observable inputs other than Level 1 inputs. Examples of Level 2 inputs include quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities and quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in markets that are not active. Level 3: Unobservable inputs based on the Company’s assessment of the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company measures the fair value of its marketable securities by taking into consideration valuations obtained from third-party pricing sources. The pricing services utilize industry standard valuation models, including both income and market based approaches, for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly, to estimate fair value. These inputs include reported trades of and broker-dealer quotes on the same or similar securities, issuer credit spreads, benchmark securities and other observable inputs. As of December 31, 2017, the Company’s financial assets valued based on Level 1 inputs consisted of cash and cash equivalents in a U.S. government money market fund and in addition, for 2016, high-grade corporate debt securities, including commercial paper, and its financial assets valued based on Level 2 inputs consisted of high-grade corporate debt securities, including commercial paper, and in addition, for 2017, U.S. government agency securities. During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company did not have any transfers of financial assets between Levels 1 and 2. As of December 31, 2017, the Company’s financial liabilities that were recorded at fair value consisted of warrant liabilities, including the PIPE warrant liability and the estimated fair value of the Settlement Warrants. The fair value of the Company’s loans payable at December 31, 2017 approximates its carrying value, computed pursuant to a discounted cash flow technique using a market interest rate and is considered a Level 3 fair value measurement. The effective interest rate, which reflects the current market rate, considers the fair value of the warrants issued in connection with the loan, loan issuance costs and the deferred financing charge. The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016: Fair Value Measurements as of December 31, 2017 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total (in thousands) Financial assets carried at fair value: Cash and money market funds $ 14,949 $ — $ — $ 14,949 Corporate debt securities — — — — Total cash and cash equivalents $ 14,949 $ — $ — $ 14,949 Marketable securities: Corporate debt securities due within 1 year $ — $ 17,070 $ — $ 17,070 US government agency securities due within 1 year — 1,506 — 1,506 Total marketable securities $ — $ 18,576 $ — $ 18,576 Total cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities $ 14,949 $ 18,576 $ — $ 33,525 Financial liabilities carried at fair value: PIPE warrant liability $ — $ — $ 37,746 $ 37,746 Settlement warrant liability — — 2,073 2,073 Total warrant liabilities $ — $ — $ 39,819 $ 39,819 Fair Value Measurements as of December 31, 2016 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total (in thousands) Financial assets carried at fair value: Cash and money market funds $ 14,091 $ — $ — $ 14,091 Corporate debt securities — 1,005 — 1,005 Total cash and cash equivalents $ 14,091 $ 1,005 $ — $ 15,096 Marketable securities: Corporate debt securities due within 1 year — $ 8,252 — $ 8,252 Total marketable securities $ — $ 8,252 $ — $ 8,252 Total cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities $ 14,091 $ 9,257 $ — $ 23,348 Financial liabilities carried at fair value: PIPE warrant liability $ — $ — $ 4,593 $ 4,593 Total warrant liability $ — $ — $ 4,593 $ 4,593 Property and Equipment Property and equipment are stated at cost and are depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets. Maintenance and repair costs are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $0, $30 thousand and $9.6 million, respectively. In September 2014, the Company entered into a Lease Termination Agreement (refer to Note 12). As a result, the Company revised the estimated useful life of its leasehold improvements related to this space. In February 2015, the Company provided notice that it would surrender the remaining space on May 29, 2015. Accordingly, the Company again revised the estimated useful life of its leasehold improvements related to this office space and amortized such assets through May 2015, resulting in an additional $2.9 million of depreciation expense during the year ended December 31, 2015. Long-lived Assets The Company reviews long-lived assets, including property and equipment, for impairment whenever changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the asset may not be fully recoverable. The Company recognized $0, $0 and $0.2 million of impairment losses during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, primarily related to leasehold improvements. Basic and Diluted Loss per Common Share Basic net loss per share is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period, excluding restricted stock that has been issued but is not yet vested. Diluted net loss per common share is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and the weighted average dilutive potential common shares outstanding using the treasury stock method. However, for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net loss per share as the inclusion of weighted average shares of unvested restricted common stock and common stock issuable upon the exercise of stock options and warrants would be anti-dilutive. The following table summarizes outstanding securities not included in the computation of diluted net loss per common share as their inclusion would be anti-dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively: Years Ended December 31, 2017 2016 2015 Outstanding stock options 7,537,958 4,858,678 4,796,005 Outstanding warrants 17,383,415 19,453,295 608,696 Unvested restricted stock — — 42,750 Total 24,921,373 24,311,973 5,447,451 Stock-Based Compensation Under the Company’s stock-based compensation programs, the Company periodically grants stock options and restricted stock to employees, directors and nonemployee consultants. The Company also issues shares under an employee stock purchase plan. The fair value of all awards is recognized in the Company’s statements of operations over the requisite service period for each award. Awards that vest as the recipient provides service are expensed on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period. Other awards, such as performance-based awards that vest upon the achievement of specified goals, are expensed using the accelerated attribution method if achievement of the specified goals is considered probable. The Company has also granted awards that vest upon the achievement of market conditions. Per Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 718 Share-Based Payments, The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value its stock option awards without market conditions, which require the Company to make certain assumptions regarding the expected volatility its common stock price, the expected term of the option grants, the risk-free interest rate and the dividend yield with respect to its common stock. In 2016, the Company began calculating volatility using its historical data. Previously, the Company did not have sufficient history to support a calculation of volatility using only its historical data. As such, prior to 2016, the Company used a weighted-average volatility considering the Company’s own volatility since March 2010 and the volatilities of several peer companies. For purposes of identifying similar entities, the Company considered characteristics such as industry, length of trading history, similar vesting terms and in-the-money option status. Due to the lack of the Company’s own historical data, the Company elected to use the “simplified” method for “plain vanilla” options to estimate the expected term of the Company’s stock option grants. Under this approach, the weighted-average expected life is presumed to be the average of the vesting term and the contractual term of the option. The risk-free interest rate used for each grant is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant for instruments with a similar expected life. The Company utilizes a dividend yield of zero based on the fact that the Company has never paid cash dividends and has no present intention to pay cash dividends. The fair value of equity-classified awards to employees and directors are measured at fair value on the date the awards are granted. Awards to nonemployee consultants are recorded at their fair values and are re-measured as of each balance sheet date until the recipient’s services are complete. During the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company recorded the following stock-based compensation expense: Years Ended December 31, 2017 2016 2015 (in thousands) Research and development $ 290 $ 293 $ 298 General and administrative 799 706 765 Restructuring — — 69 Total stock-based compensation expense $ 1,089 $ 999 $ 1,132 Stock-based compensation expense is allocated to research and development and general and administrative expense based upon the department of the employee to whom each award was granted. Expenses recognized in connection with the modification of awards in connection with the Company’s strategic restructurings are allocated to restructuring expense. No related tax benefits of the stock-based compensation expense have been recognized. Income Taxes The Company provides for income taxes using the asset-liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on differences between financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. The Company calculates its provision for income taxes on ordinary income based on its projected annual tax rate for the year. Uncertain tax positions are recognized if the position is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon examination by a tax authority. Unrecognized tax benefits represent tax positions for which reserves have been established. Segment and Geographic Information Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise engaging in business activities for which discrete financial information is available and regularly reviewed by the chief operating decision maker in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. The Company views its operations and manages its business in one operating segment principally in the United States. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company has $0 and $0.8 million, respectively, of net assets located in the United Kingdom. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the , and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Significant items subject to such estimates and assumptions in |