| Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies) | 12 Months Ended |
| Dec. 31, 2018 |
| Accounting Policies [Abstract] | |
| Basis of Presentation | Basis of Presentation The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”). The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its wholly owned subsidiaries and its majority-owned subsidiaries, FibroGen Europe and FibroGen China Anemia Holdings, Ltd. (“FibroGen China”). All inter-company transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company operates in one segment — the discovery, development and commercialization of novel therapeutics to treat serious unmet medical needs. |
| Foreign Currency Translation | Foreign Currency Translation The reporting currency of the Company and its subsidiaries is the United States (“U.S.”) dollar. The functional currency of FibroGen Europe is the Euro. The assets and liabilities of FibroGen Europe are translated to U.S. dollars at exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet date. All income statement accounts are translated at monthly average exchange rates. Resulting foreign currency translation adjustments are recorded directly in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. The functional currency of FibroGen, Inc. and all other subsidiaries is the U.S. dollar. Accordingly, monetary assets and liabilities in the non-functional currency of these subsidiaries are remeasured using exchange rates in effect at the end of the period. Revenues and costs in local currency are remeasured using average exchange rates for the period, except for costs related to those balance sheet items that are remeasured using historical exchange rates. The resulting remeasurement gains and losses are included within interest income and other, net in the consolidated statements of operations as incurred and have not been material for all periods presented. |
| Use of Estimates | Use of Estimates |
| Concentration of Credit Risk and Other Risks and Uncertainties | Concentration of Credit Risk and Other Risks and Uncertainties The Company is subject to risks associated with concentration of credit for cash and cash equivalents. A portion of cash on hand is invested in a diversified portfolio of investment grade corporate bonds issued by U.S. corporations as rated investment grade corporate bonds. Any remaining cash is deposited with major financial institutions in the U.S., Finland, China and the Cayman Islands. At times, such deposits may be in excess of insured limits. The Company has not experienced any loss on its deposits of cash and cash equivalents. Included in current assets are significant balances of accounts receivable as follows:
December 31,
2018
2017
Astellas Pharma Inc. (“Astellas”)—Related party
74
%
47
%
AstraZeneca AB (“AstraZeneca”)
26
%
53
% The Company’s future results of operations involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Factors that could affect the Company’s future operating results and cause actual results to vary materially from expectations include, but are not limited to, rapid technological change, the results of clinical trials and the achievement of milestones, market acceptance of the Company’s product candidates, competition from other products and larger companies, protection of proprietary technology, strategic relationships and dependence on key individuals. |
| Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Time Deposits | Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Time Deposits The Company considers all highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less and that are used in the Company’s cash management activities at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents include money market accounts, various deposit accounts, and money market funds. Restricted time deposits include an irrevocable standby letter of credit as security deposit for a long-term property lease with the Company’s landlord. Restricted time deposits as of December 31, 2018 and 2017 totaled $4.1 million and $5.2 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2018, a total of $21.9 million of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents is held outside of the U.S. in the Company’s foreign subsidiaries to be used primarily for the Company’s China operations. |
| Investments | Investments The Company’s investments consist of available-for-sale debt investments, marketable equity investments, a term deposit and a certificate of deposit. Those investments with original maturities of greater than three months and remaining maturities of less than 12 months are considered short-term investments. Those investments with maturities greater than 12 months are considered long-term investments. The Company’s investments classified as available-for-sale are recorded at fair value based upon quoted market prices at period end. Unrealized gains and losses for available-for-sale debt investments that are deemed temporary in nature are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as a separate component of stockholder’ equity. Marketable equity securities are equity securities with readily determinable fair value, and are measured and recorded at fair value. Realized and unrealized gains or losses resulting from changes in value and sale of the Company’s marketable equity investments are recorded in other income (expenses) in the consolidated statement of operations. A decline in the fair value of any security below cost that is deemed other than temporary results in a charge to earnings and the corresponding establishment of a new cost basis for the security. Premiums and discounts are amortized (accreted) over the life of the related security as an adjustment to its yield. Dividend and interest income are recognized when earned. Realized gains and losses are included in earnings and are derived using the specific identification method for determining the cost of investments sold. |
| Fair Value of Financial Instruments | Fair Value of Financial Instruments Carrying amounts of certain of the Company’s financial instruments including cash equivalents, investments, receivables, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate fair value (refer to Note 4). |
| Property and Equipment | Property and Equipment Property and equipment (except for costs of construction of certain long-lived assets — refer to Note 8) are recorded at cost and depreciated over their estimated useful lives using the straight-line method. Computer equipment, laboratory equipment, and furniture and fixtures are depreciated over three to five years. Leasehold improvements are recorded at cost and amortized over the term of the lease or their useful life, whichever is shorter. |
| Impairment of Long-Lived Assets | Impairment of Long-Lived Assets The Company continually evaluates whether events or circumstances have occurred that indicate that the estimated remaining useful life of its long-lived assets may warrant revision or that the carrying value of these assets may be impaired. If the Company determines that an impairment trigger has been met, the Company evaluates the realizability of its long-lived assets based on a comparison of projected undiscounted cash flows from use and eventual disposition with the carrying value of the related asset. Any write-downs (which are measured based on the difference between the fair value and the carrying value of the asset) are treated as permanent reductions in the carrying amount of the assets (asset group). Based on this evaluation, the Company believes that, as of each of the balance sheet dates presented, none of the Company’s long-lived assets were impaired. |
| Revenue Recognition | Revenue Recognition Substantially all of the Company’s revenues to date have been generated from its collaboration agreements. The Company’s collaboration agreements include multiple performance obligations comprised of promised services, or bundles of services, that are distinct. Services that are not distinct are combined with other services in the agreement until they form a distinct bundle of services. The Company’s process for identifying performance obligations and an enumeration of each obligation for each agreement is outlined in Note 3 “Collaboration Agreements.” Determining the performance obligations within a collaboration agreement often involves significant judgment and is specific to the facts and circumstances contained in each agreement. The Company has identified the following material promises under its collaboration agreements: (1) license of FibroGen technology, (2) the performance of co-development services, including manufacturing of clinical supplies and other services during the development period, and (3) manufacture of commercial supply. The evaluation as to whether these promises are distinct, and therefore represent separate performance obligations, is described in more details in Note 3 “Collaboration Agreements.” For revenue recognition purposes, the Company determines that the term of its collaboration agreements begin on the effective date and ends upon the completion of all performance obligations contained in the agreements. In each agreement, the contract term is defined as the period in which parties to the contract have present and enforceable rights and obligations. The Company believes that the existence of what it considers to be substantive termination penalties on the part of the counterparty create sufficient incentive for the counterparty to avoid exercising its right to terminate the agreement unless in exceptionally rare situations. The transaction price for each collaboration agreement is determined based on the amount of consideration the Company expects to be entitled for satisfying all performance obligations within the agreement. The Company’s collaboration agreements include payments to the Company of one or more of the following: non-refundable upfront license fees; co-development billings; development, regulatory, and commercial milestone payments; payments from sales of active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”); and royalties on net sales of licensed products. Upfront license fees are non-contingent and non-refundable in nature and are included in the transaction price at the point when the license fees become due to the Company. The Company does not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component if the expectation at contract inception is such that the period between payment by the customer and the transfer of the promised goods or services to the customer will be one year or less. Co-development billings resulting from the Company’s research and development efforts, which are reimbursable under its collaboration agreements, are considered variable consideration. Determining the reimbursable amount of research and development efforts requires detailed analysis of the terms of the collaboration agreements and the nature of the research and development efforts incurred. Determining the amount of variable consideration from co-development billings requires the Company to make estimates of future research and development efforts, which involves significant judgment. Co-development billings are allocated entirely to the co-development services performance obligation when amounts are related specifically to research and development efforts necessary to satisfy the performance obligation, and such an allocation is consistent with the allocation objective. Milestone payments are also considered variable consideration, which requires the Company to make estimates of when achievement of a particular milestone becomes probable. Similar to other forms of variable consideration, milestone payments are included in the transaction price when it becomes probable that such inclusion would not result in a significant revenue reversal. Milestone payments are therefore included in the transaction price when achievement of the milestone becomes probable. Product revenue consists of sales of commercial-grade API used in support of pre-commercial validation work. In 2018, the Company recorded revenue from commercial-grade API sales to Astellas based on a transaction price that is subject to potential future adjustments. This represents a form of variable consideration. With respect to these sales in 2018, the transaction price will be adjusted at the time the roxadustat listed price is issued by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare to reflect differences between estimated and actual listed price, yield from the manufacture of bulk product tablets, and bulk product manufacturing costs. The Company evaluates the latest available facts and circumstances, including listed prices of comparable drug products in Japan and historical bulk drug product manufacturing yields and costs, to determine whether any adjustments to the estimated transaction price is necessary. As of December 31, 2018, no new facts or circumstances were available to warrant an adjustment to the transaction price. For arrangements that include sales-based royalties and for which the license is deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate, the Company recognizes revenue at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which some or all of the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied (or partially satisfied). To date, the Company has not recognized any royalty revenue resulting from its collaboration arrangements. The transaction price is allocated to performance obligations based on their relative standalone selling price (“SSP”), with the exception of co-development billings allocated entirely to co-development services performance obligations. The SSP is determined based on observable prices at which the Company separately sells the products and services. If an SSP is not directly observable, then the Company will estimate the SSP considering marketing conditions, entity-specific factors, and information about the customer or class of customer that is reasonably available. The process for determining SSP involves significant judgment and includes consideration of multiple factors, including assumptions related to the market opportunity and the time needed to commercialize a product candidate pursuant to the relevant license, estimated direct expenses and other costs, which include the rates normally charged by contract research and contract manufacturing organizations for development and manufacturing obligations, and rates that would be charged by qualified outsiders for committee services. Significant judgment may be required in determining whether a performance obligation is distinct, determining the amount of variable consideration to be included in the transaction price, and estimating the SSP of each performance obligation. An enumeration of the Company’s significant judgments is outlined in Note 3 “Collaboration Agreements.” For each performance obligation identified within an arrangement, the Company determines the period over which the promised services are transferred and the performance obligation is satisfied. Service revenue is recognized over time based on progress toward complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. The Company uses an input method to measure progress toward the satisfaction of co-development services and certain other related performance obligations, which is based on costs of labor hours or full time equivalents and out-of-pocket expenses incurred relative to total expected costs to be incurred. The Company believes this measure of progress provides a faithful depiction of the transfer of services because other measures do not measure as accurately how the Company transfers its performance obligations to its collaboration partners. |
| Research and Development Expenses | Research and Development Expenses Research and development expenses consist of independent research and development costs and the gross amount of costs associated with work performed under collaboration agreements. Research and development costs include employee-related expenses, expenses incurred under agreements with clinical research organizations (“CROs”), other clinical and preclinical costs and allocated direct and indirect overhead costs, such as facilities costs, information technology costs and other overhead. All research and development costs are expensed as incurred. |
| Clinical Trial Accruals | Clinical Trial Accruals Clinical trial costs are a component of research and development expenses. The Company accrues and expenses clinical trial activities performed by third parties based upon actual work completed in accordance with agreements established with clinical research organizations and clinical sites. The Company determines the costs to be recorded based upon validation with the external service providers as to the progress or stage of completion of trials or services and the agreed-upon fee to be paid for such services. |
| General and Administrative Expenses | General and Administrative Expenses General and administrative expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses for executive, operational, finance, legal, compliance and human resource functions. Other general and administrative expenses include facility-related costs and professional fees, accounting and legal services, other outside services, recruiting fees and expenses associated with obtaining and maintaining patents. |
| Income Taxes | Income Taxes The Company utilizes the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for expected future consequences of temporary differences between the financial reporting and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates. Management makes estimates, assumptions and judgments to determine the Company’s provision for income taxes and also for deferred tax assets and liabilities, and any valuation allowances recorded against the Company’s deferred tax assets. The Company assesses the likelihood that its deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income and, to the extent the Company believes that recovery is not likely, the Company must establish a valuation allowance. The calculation of the Company’s current provision for income taxes involves the use of estimates, assumptions and judgments while taking into account current tax laws, interpretation of current tax laws and possible outcomes of future tax audits. The Company has established reserves to address potential exposures related to tax positions that could be challenged by tax authorities. Although the Company believes its estimates, assumptions and judgments to be reasonable, any changes in tax law or its interpretation of tax laws and the resolutions of potential tax audits could significantly impact the amounts provided for income taxes in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The calculation of the Company’s deferred tax asset balance involves the use of estimates, assumptions and judgments while taking into account estimates of the amounts and type of future taxable income. Actual future operating results and the underlying amount and type of income could differ materially from the Company’s estimates, assumptions and judgments thereby impacting the Company’s financial position and results of operations. The Company has adopted ASC 740-10, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes The Company includes interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits within income tax expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. |
| Stock-Based Compensation | Stock-Based Compensation The Company maintains equity incentive plans under which incentive and nonqualified stock options are granted to employees and non-employee consultants. Compensation expense relating to non-employee stock options has not been material for all the periods presented. The Company measures and recognizes compensation expense for all stock options and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) granted to its employees and directors based on the estimated fair value of the award on the grant date. The Company uses the Black-Scholes valuation model to estimate the fair value of stock option awards. The fair value is recognized as expense, net of estimated forfeitures, over the requisite service period, which is generally the vesting period of the respective award, on a straight-line basis. The Company believes that the fair value of stock options granted to non-employees is more reliably measured than the fair value of the services received. As such, the fair value of the unvested portion of the options granted to non-employees is re-measured each period. The resulting increase in value, if any, is recognized as expense during the period the related services are rendered on a straight-line basis. The determination of the grant date fair value of options using an option pricing model is affected by the Company’s estimated Common Stock fair value and requires management to make a number of assumptions including the expected life of the option, the volatility of the underlying stock, the risk-free interest rate and expected dividends. The Company estimates the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. The fair value of employee stock options is being amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the awards. Prior to the Company’s initial public offering, the Company, in making its determinations of the fair value of its Common Stock, considered a variety of quantitative and qualitative factors, including (i) net present value of the Company’s projected earnings, (ii) fair market value of the stock of comparable publicly-traded companies, (iii) any third party transactions involving the Company’s convertible preferred stock, (iv) liquidation preferences of the Company’s preferred stock and the likelihood of conversion of the preferred stock, (v) changes in the Company’s business operations, financial condition and results of operations over time, including cash balances and burn-rate, (vi) the status of new product development, and (vii) general financial market conditions. Subsequent to the IPO, the fair market value of common stock is based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market on the date of the grant. The fair value of employee stock options was estimated using the following assumptions: Expected Term. Expected Volatility. Risk-Free Interest Rate. Expected Dividend Yield. |
| Comprehensive Income (Loss) | Comprehensive Income (Loss) The Company is required to report all components of comprehensive income (loss), including net loss, in the consolidated financial statements in the period in which they are recognized. Comprehensive income (loss) is defined as the change in equity during a period from transactions and other events and circumstances from non-owner sources, including unrealized gains and losses on investments and foreign currency translation adjustments. Comprehensive gains (losses) have been reflected in the consolidated statements of comprehensive income (loss) for all periods presented. |
| Recently Issued and Adopted Accounting Guidance | Recently Issued and Adopted Accounting Guidance New Revenue Standards In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) Revenue Recognition Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers Under ASC 606, the Company recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration which the Company expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that the Company determines are within the scope of ASC 606, the Company performs the following five steps: (i) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (iii) determine the transaction price; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the Company satisfies a performance obligation. The Company only applies the five-step model to contracts when it is probable that the Company will collect the consideration it is entitled to in exchange for the goods or services it transfers to the customer. At contract inception, once the contract is determined to be within the scope of ASC 606, the Company assesses the goods or services promised within each contract and determines those that are performance obligations and assesses whether each promised good or service is distinct. The Company then recognizes as revenue the amount of the transaction price that is allocated to the respective performance obligation when (or as) the performance obligation is satisfied. The Company adopted the new revenue standards as of January 1, 2018 using the full retrospective method, which required the Company to recast the prior reporting periods presented in the consolidated financial statements. The primary impact upon adoption of the new revenue standards relates to the manner in which revenue is recognized for co-development billings and milestone payments under the Company’s collaboration arrangements. Under the new revenue standards, both of these elements of consideration are considered variable consideration which requires the Company to make estimates of when co-development billings become due or when achievement of a particular milestone becomes probable. Payments are included in the transaction price when it becomes probable that inclusion would not lead to a significant revenue reversal. The Company has recast its consolidated statement of operations and balance sheet from amounts previously reported due to the adoption of the new revenue standards. The adoption of the new revenue standards had no impact to the Company’s previously reported consolidated statement of cash flows. Select line items from the Company’s consolidated statement of operations and balance sheet, which reflect the adoption of the new revenue standards are as follows (in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, 2017
Year Ended December 31, 2016
As Previously Reported
New Revenue Standards Adjustment
As Recast
As Previously Reported
New Revenue Standards Adjustment
As Recast
Statement of Operations
License revenue
$
96,056
$
(86,123
)
$
9,933
$
137,352
$
(86,745
)
$
50,607
Development and other revenue
29,612
91,451
121,063
42,225
90,357
132,582
Total revenue
125,668
5,328
130,996
179,577
3,612
183,189
Net loss
(126,203
)
5,328
(120,875
)
(61,680
)
3,612
(58,068
)
Net loss per share - basic and diluted
$
(1.73
)
$
0.07
$
(1.66
)
$
(0.98
)
$
0.05
$
(0.93
)
December 31, 2017
As Previously Reported
New Revenue Standards Adjustment
As Recast
Balance Sheet
Deferred revenue, current
$
7,968
$
8,702
$
16,670
Deferred revenue, net of current
112,231
26,010
138,241
Accumulated deficit
(595,945
)
(34,712
)
(630,657
) The adoption of the new revenue standards also resulted in the following changes in the accumulated deficit as of December 31, 2016 and 2015:
As Previously Reported
New Revenue Standards Adjustment
As Recast
Accumulated Deficit
As of December 31, 2016
$
(469,742
)
$
(40,040
)
$
(509,782
)
As of December 31, 2015
$
(408,062
)
$
(43,652
)
$
(451,714
) ASU 2016-01 In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10)
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
Accumulated Deficit
Balance at December 31, 2017
$
(1,795
)
$
(630,657
)
*
Impact of change in accounting principle upon adoption of ASU 2016-01
(1,250
)
1,250
Opening balance as of January 1, 2018
$
(3,045
)
$
(629,407
)
*
Recast to reflect the adoption of the new revenue standards. See above. The adoption of this guidance had no impact to the Company’s consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2018. ASU 2017-09 In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting ASU 2016-16 In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory |
| Recently Issued Accounting Guidance Not Yet Adopted | Recently Issued Accounting Guidance Not Yet Adopted Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract. In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-02, Income Statement - Reporting Comprehensive Income: Reclassification of Certain Tax effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments In November 2018, the FASB issued 2018-19, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses ”), which clarifies certain topics included within ASU 2016-13. ASU 2016-13 and ASU 2018-19 are effective for the Leases (Topic 842) Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements (“ ”) , utilize the modified retrospective transition method through a cumulative-effect adjustment at the beginning of the first quarter of 2019. a recognition of approximately $47 million to $62 million in right-of-use assets and approximately $57 million to $67 million in lease liabilities, respectively, upon adoption of this guidance, for its operating leases and facility leases disclosed in Note 8 to its consolidated balance sheets. Accordingly, balances as of December 31, 2018 in property and equipment, net, and long-term portion of lease financing obligations would be removed. The Company |
| Collaboration Arrangements | Accounting for the Astellas Agreements For each of the Astellas agreements, the Company has evaluated the promised services within the respective arrangements and has identified performance obligations representing those services and bundles of services that are distinct. Promised services that were not distinct have been combined with other promised services to form a distinct bundle of promised services, with revenue being recognized on the bundle of services rather than the individual services. There are no right-of-return provisions for the delivered items in the Astellas agreements. As of December 31, 2018, the transaction price for the Japan Agreement included $40.1 million of non-contingent upfront payments, $37.5 million of variable consideration related to payments for milestones considered probable of being achieved, and $12.1 million of variable consideration related to co-development billings. The transaction price for the Europe Agreement included $320.0 million of non-contingent upfront payments, $90.0 million of variable consideration related to payments for milestones considered probable of being achieved, and $180.9 million of variable consideration related to co-development billings. For revenue recognition purposes, the Company determined that the term of each collaboration agreement with Astellas begins on the effective date and ends upon the completion of all performance obligations contained in the agreement. The contract term is defined as the period in which parties to the contract have present and enforceable rights and obligations. The Company believes that the requirement to continue funding development for a substantive period of time and loss of product rights, along with non-refundable upfront payments already remitted by Astellas, create significant disincentive for Astellas to exercise its right to terminate the agreements. For the Astellas agreements, the Company allocated the transaction price to the various performance obligations based on the relative SSP of each performance obligation, with the exception of co-development billings allocated entirely to co-development services performance obligations. For the technology license under the Japan Agreement and Europe Agreement, SSP was determined primarily by using the discounted cash flow (“DCF”) method, which aggregates the present value of future cash flows to determine the valuation as of the effective date of each of the agreements. The DCF method involves the following key steps: 1) the determination of cash flow forecasts and 2) the selection of a range of comparative risk-adjusted discount rates to apply against the cash flow forecasts. The discount rates selected were based on expectations of the total rate of return, the rate at which capital would be attracted to the Company and the level of risk inherent within the Company. The discounts applied in the DCF analysis ranged from 17.5% to 20.0%. The Company’s cash flow forecasts were derived from probability-adjusted revenue and expense projections by territory. Such projections included consideration of taxes and cash flow adjustments. The probability adjustments were made after considering the likelihood of technical success at various stages of clinical trials and regulatory approval phases. SSP also considered certain future royalty payments associated with commercial performance of the Company’s compounds, transfer prices and expected gross margins. The promised services that were analyzed, along with their general timing of satisfaction and recognition as revenue, are as follows:
(1)
License to the Company’s technology existing at the effective date of the agreements. For both of the Astellas agreements, the license was delivered at the beginning of the agreement term. In both cases, the Company concluded at the time of the agreement that its collaboration partner, Astellas, would have the knowledge and capabilities to fully exploit the licenses without the Company’s further involvement. However, the Japan Agreement has contractual limitations that might affect Astellas’ ability to fully exploit the license and therefore, potentially, the conclusion as to whether the license is capable of being distinct. In the Japan Agreement, Astellas does not have the right to manufacture commercial supplies of the drug. In order to determine whether this characteristic of the agreement should lead to a conclusion that the license was not distinct in the context of the agreement, the Company considered the ability of Astellas to benefit from the license together with other resources readily available to Astellas. Finally, the Company considered the fact that at the time of delivery of the license, the development services were beyond the preclinical development phase and any remaining development work in either agreement would not be expected to result in any significant modification or customization to the licensed technology. As such, the development services are separately identifiable from the licensed technology, indicating that the license is a distinct performance obligation. Manufacturing rights. In the case of the Japan Agreement, the Company retained manufacturing rights largely because of the way the parties chose for FibroGen to be compensated under the agreement. At the time the agreement was signed, the Company believed that it was more advantageous upon commercialization to have a transfer price revenue model in place as opposed to a traditional sales-based model. The manufacturing process does not require specialized knowledge or expertise uniquely held by FibroGen, and notwithstanding contractual restrictions, Astellas could employ manufacturing services from readily available third parties in order to benefit from the license. Therefore, along with the foregoing paragraph, the Company determined that the license in Japan is a distinct performance obligation despite the retention of manufacturing rights by the Company. In summary, the Company concludes that item (1) represents a performance obligation. The portion of the transaction price allocated to this performance obligation based on a relative SSP basis is recognized as revenue in its entirety at the point in time the license transfers to Astellas.
(2)
Co-development services (Europe Agreement). This promise relates to co-development services that were reasonably expected to be performed by the Company at the time the collaboration agreement was signed and is considered distinct. Co-development billings are allocated entirely to the co-development services performance obligation as amounts are related specifically to research and development efforts necessary to satisfy the performance obligation, and such an allocation is consistent with the allocation objective. Revenue is recognized over time based on progress toward complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. The Company uses an input method to measure progress toward the satisfaction of the performance obligation, which is based on costs of labor hours and out-of-pocket expenses incurred relative to total expected costs to be incurred. The measure of progress is updated each reporting period. Co-development services are expected to continue over the development period that is currently estimated to continue through the end of 2019. In addition, the Company concluded that the new indication related to CIA approved in January 2019 represents a modification to the Europe agreements at that time and will be accounted for separately, for which the development service period is estimated to continue through the end of 2023. There was no provision for co-development services in the Japan Agreement.
(3)
License to the Company’s technology developed during the term of the agreement and development (referred to as “when and if available”) and information sharing services. These promises are generally satisfied throughout the term of the agreements.
(4)
Manufacturing of clinical supplies of products. This promise is satisfied as supplies for clinical product are delivered for use in the Company’s clinical trial programs during the development period, or pre-commercialization period.
(5)
Committee service . This promise is satisfied throughout the course of the agreements as meetings are attended. Items (3)-(5) are bundled into a single performance obligation which is distinct given the fact that all are highly interrelated during the development period (pre-commercial phase of development) such that satisfying them independently is not practicable. Revenue is recognized over time based on progress toward complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. The Company uses an input method to measure progress toward the satisfaction of the performance obligation, which is based on costs of labor hours or full time equivalents and out-of-pocket expenses incurred relative to total expected costs to be incurred. The measure of progress is updated each reporting period.
(6)
Manufacturing commercial supplies of products. This promised service is distinct as services are not interrelated with any of the other performance obligations. Payments received for commercial supplies of products represent sales-based payments related predominately to the license of intellectual property under both Astellas agreements. Revenue is recognized as supplies are shipped for commercial use during the commercialization period. To date, no such revenue has been recognized. In 2018, the Company recorded revenue from commercial-grade API sales to Astellas to conduct commercial scale manufacturing validation based on a transaction price that is subject to potential future adjustments. This represents a form of variable consideration. The Company evaluates the latest available facts and circumstances to determine whether any adjustments to the estimated transaction price is necessary. As of December 31, 2018, no new facts or circumstances were available to warrant an adjustment to the transaction price. Accounting for the AstraZeneca Agreements The Company evaluated whether the U.S./RoW Agreement and China Agreement should be accounted for as a single or separate arrangements and concluded that the agreements should be accounted for as a single arrangement with the presumption that two or more agreements executed with a single customer at or around the same time should be presumed to be a single arrangement. The key points the Company considered in reaching this conclusion are as follows:
1.
While the two agreements were largely negotiated separately, those negotiations proceeded concurrently, and were intended to be completed contemporaneously, presuming AstraZeneca
2.
Throughout negotiations for both agreements, the Company and the counterparties understood and considered the possibility that one arrangement may be executed without the execution of the other arrangement. However, the preference for the Company and the counterparties during the negotiations was to execute both arrangements concurrently.
3.
The two agreements were executed as separate agreements because different development, regulatory and commercial approaches required certain terms of the agreements to be structured differently, rather than because the Company or the counterparties considered the agreements to be fundamentally separate negotiations. Accordingly, as the agreements are being accounted for as a single arrangement, upfront and other non-contingent consideration received and to be received has been and will be pooled together and allocated to each of the performance obligations in both the U.S./RoW Agreement and China Agreement based on their relative SSPs. For each of the AstraZeneca agreements, the Company has evaluated the promised services within the respective arrangements and has identified performance obligations representing those services and bundled services that are distinct. Promised services that were not distinct have been combined with other promised services to form a distinct bundle of promised services, with revenue being recognized on the bundle of services rather than the individual promised services. There are no right-of-return provisions for the delivered items in the AstraZeneca agreements. As of December 31, 2018, the transaction price for the U.S./RoW Agreement and China Agreement included $402.2 million of non-contingent upfront payments, $42.0 million of variable consideration related to payments for milestones considered probable of being achieved, and $621.6 million of variable consideration related to co-development billings. For the AstraZeneca agreements, the Company allocated the transaction price to the various performance obligations based on the relative SSP of each performance obligation, with the exception of co-development billings. Co-development billings under the U.S./RoW Agreement were allocated entirely to the U.S./RoW co-development services performance obligation, and co-development billings under the China Agreement were allocated entirely to the combined performance obligation under the China Agreement. For revenue recognition purposes, the Company determined that the term of its collaboration agreements with AstraZeneca begin on the effective date and ends upon the completion of all performance obligations contained in the agreements. The contract term is defined as the period in which parties to the contract have present and enforceable rights and obligations. The Company believes that the requirement to continue funding development for a substantive period of time and the loss of product rights, along with non-refundable upfront payments already remitted by AstraZeneca, represent substantive termination penalties that create significant disincentive for AstraZeneca to exercise its right to terminate the agreement. For the technology license under the AstraZeneca U.S./RoW Agreement, SSP was determined based on a two-step process. The first step involved determining an implied royalty rate that would result in the net present value of future cash flows to equal to zero (i.e. where the implied royalty rate on the transaction would equal the target return for the investment). This results in an upper bound estimation of the magnitude of royalties that a hypothetical acquirer would reasonably pay for the forecasted cash flow stream. The Company’s cash flow forecasts were derived from probability-adjusted revenue and expense projections. Such projections included consideration of taxes and cash flow adjustments. The probability adjustments were made after considering the likelihood of technical success at various stages of clinical trials and regulatory approval phases. The second step involved applying the implied royalty rate, which was determined to be 40%, against the probability-adjusted projected net revenues by territory and determining the value of the license as the net present value of future cash flows after adjusting for taxes. The discount rate utilized was 17.5%. U.S./RoW Agreement: The promised services that were analyzed, along with their general timing of satisfaction and recognition as revenue, are as follows:
(1)
License to the Company’s technology existing at the effective date of the agreements. For the U.S./RoW Agreement, the license was delivered at the beginning of the agreement term. The Company concluded that AstraZeneca has the knowledge and capabilities to fully exploit the license under the U.S./RoW Agreement without the Company’s further involvement. Finally, the Company considered the fact that at the time of delivery of the license, the development services were beyond the preclinical development phase and any remaining development work would not be expected to result in any significant modification or customization to the licensed technology. As such, the development services are separately identifiable from the licensed technology, indicating that the license is a distinct performance obligation. Therefore, the Company has concluded that the license is distinct and represents a performance obligation. The portion of the transaction price allocated to this performance obligation based on a relative SSP basis is recognized as revenue in its entirety at the point in time the license transfers to AstraZeneca.
(2)
Co-development services. This promise relates to co-development services that were reasonably expected to be performed by the Company at the time the collaboration agreement was signed and is distinct. Co-development billings are allocated entirely to the co-development services performance obligation as amounts are related specifically to research and development efforts necessary to satisfy the performance obligation, and such an allocation is consistent with the allocation objective. Revenue is recognized over time based on progress toward complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. The Company uses an input method to measure progress toward the satisfaction of the performance obligation, which is based on costs of labor hours or full time equivalents and out-of-pocket expenses incurred relative to total expected costs to be incurred. Co-development services are expected to continue over the development period that is currently estimated to continue through the end of 2020. In addition, the Company concluded that the addition of the new indications related to CIA, ACI and MM approved during the fourth quarter of 2018 represents a modification to the collaboration agreements and will be accounted for separately, for which the joint development service period is estimated to continue through the end of 2024.
(3)
Manufacturing of clinical supplies of products. This promise is satisfied as supplies for clinical product are delivered for use in the Company’s clinical trial programs during the development period, or pre-commercialization period.
(4)
Information sharing and committee service. These promises are satisfied throughout the course of the agreement as services are provided. Items (3)-(4) are bundled into a single performance obligation which is distinct given the fact that all are highly interrelated during the development period (pre-commercial phase of development) such that delivering them independently is not practicable. Revenue is recognized over time based on progress toward complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. The Company uses an input method to measure progress toward the satisfaction of the performance obligation, which is based on costs of labor hours or full time equivalents and out-of-pocket expenses incurred relative to total expected costs to be incurred. The measure of progress is updated each reporting period.
(5)
Manufacturing commercial supplies of products. This promise is distinct as services are not interrelated with any of the other performance obligations. Payments received for commercial supplies of products represent sales-based royalties related predominately to the license of intellectual property under the agreement. Revenue is recognized as supplies are shipped for commercial use during the commercialization period. To date, no such revenue has been recognized. China Agreement: The performance obligation that were analyzed, along with their general timing of satisfaction and recognition as revenue, are as follows:
•
License to the Company’s technology existing at the effective date of the agreement. The license was delivered at the beginning of the agreement term. However, the China Agreement with AstraZeneca has contractual limitations that might affect AstraZeneca’s ability to fully exploit the license and therefore, potentially, the conclusion as to whether the license is distinct in the context of the agreement. In the China Agreement, AstraZeneca does not have the right to manufacture commercial supplies of the drug. In order to determine whether this characteristic of the arrangement should lead to a conclusion that the license was not distinct in the context of the agreement, the Company considered the ability of AstraZeneca to benefit from the license on its own or together with other resources readily available to AstraZeneca. For the China Agreement, the Company retained manufacturing rights as an essential part of a strategy to pursue domestic regulatory pathway for product approval which requires the regulatory licensure of the manufacturing facility in order to commence commercial shipment. The prospects for the collaboration as a whole would have been substantially different had manufacturing rights been provided to AstraZeneca. Due to certain regulatory restrictions in China, manufacturing services of commercial drug product in China are not readily available to AstraZeneca or any other parties. Therefore, AstraZeneca cannot benefit from the license on its own or together with other readily available resources. Accordingly, all the promises identified, including co-development services, under the China Agreement have been bundled into a single performance obligation and amounts of the transaction price allocable to this performance obligation are deferred until control of the manufactured commercial drug product has begun to transfer to AstraZeneca. Upon commencement of the transfer of control to commercial drug product, revenue would be recognized in a pattern consistent with estimated deliveries of the commercial drug product. |
| Product Revenue | Product Revenue As described above, the Japan Amendment obligates Astellas to purchase API from the Company to conduct commercial scale manufacturing validation for roxadustat drug product in anticipation of commercial launch in Japan. The Company fulfilled all the delivery obligations under the term of the Japan Amendment during the year ended December 31, 2018, and recognized the related product revenue of $64.8 million in the same period. |
| Other Revenues | Other Revenues Other revenues consist primarily of collagen material sold for research purposes. Other revenues were immaterial for each of the three years ended December 31, 2018. |
| Deferred Revenue | Deferred Revenue Deferred revenue represents amounts billed to the Company’s collaboration partners for which the related revenues have not been recognized because one or more of the revenue recognition criteria have not been met. The current portion of deferred revenue represents the amount to be recognized within one year from the balance sheet date based on the estimated performance period of the underlying performance obligations. The long term portion of deferred revenue represents amounts to be recognized after one year through the end of the non-contingent performance period of the underlying performance obligations. The long term portion of deferred revenue also includes amounts allocated to the China unit of accounting under the AstraZeneca arrangement as revenue recognition associated with this unit of accounting is tied to the commercial launch of the products within China, which is not expected to occur within the next year. |
| Fair Value Measurements | Fair Value Measurements In accordance with the authoritative guidance on fair value measurements and disclosures under U.S. GAAP, the Company presents all financial assets and liabilities and any other assets and liabilities that are recognized or disclosed at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. The guidance defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about fair-value measurements. The guidance also requires fair value measurements be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories: Level 1 : Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 : Observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 3 : Unobservable inputs. The Company values certain assets and liabilities, focusing on the inputs used to measure fair value, particularly in instances where the measurement uses significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs. The Company’s financial instruments are valued using quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) or based upon other observable inputs (Level 2). The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires management to make judgments and considers factors specific to the asset or liability. In addition, the categories presented do not suggest how prices may be affected by the size of the purchases or sales, particularly with the largest highly liquid financial issuers who are in markets continuously with non-equity instruments, or how any such financial assets may be impacted by other factors such as U.S. government guarantees. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. |
