| Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies) | 12 Months Ended |
| Dec. 31, 2019 |
| 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 The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The more significant areas requiring the use of management estimates and assumptions include valuation and recognition of revenue. On an ongoing basis, management reviews these estimates and assumptions. Changes in facts and circumstances may alter such estimates and actual results could differ from those 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. Outside of short-term operating needs, the majority of cash on hand is invested in US treasury instruments. 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,
2019
2018
Astellas Pharma Inc. (“Astellas”)—Related party
17
%
74
%
AstraZeneca AB (“AstraZeneca”)
81
%
26
% 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 also include money market accounts and various deposit accounts. 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, 2019 and 2018 totaled $2.1 million and $4.1 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, a total of $11.9 million and $21.9 million, respectively, of the Company’s cash and cash equivalents was held outside of the U.S. in the Company’s foreign subsidiaries to be used primarily for the Company’s China operations. |
| Investments | Investments As of December 31, 2019, the Company’s investments consist of US treasuries, diversified bond funds, 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 (365 days) are considered short-term investments. Those investments with maturities greater than 12 months (365 days) are considered long-term investments. When such investments are held, 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). |
| Inventories | Inventories Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. The cost of inventories is determined using full absorption and standard costing, which approximates cost based on a first-in, first-out method. The Company reviews the standard cost of raw materials, work-in-process and finished goods annually and more often as appropriate to ensure that its inventories approximate current actual cost. The cost of inventories includes direct material cost, direct labor and manufacturing overhead. The Company periodically reviews its inventories to identify obsolete, slow-moving, excess or otherwise unsaleable items. If obsolete, excess or unsaleable items are observed and there are no alternate uses for the inventory, an inventory valuation reserve is recorded through a charge to cost of goods sold on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The establishment of inventory valuation reserves, together with the calculation of the amount of such reserves, requires judgment including consideration of many factors, such as estimates of future product demand and product expiration period, among others. |
| Property and Equipment | Property and Equipment Property and equipment are recorded at cost and depreciated over their estimated useful lives using the straight-line method. Computer equipment, laboratory equipment, machinery 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. |
| Leases | Leases The Company determines if an arrangement is or contains a lease at inception date when it is given control of the underlying assets. The Company elected the practical expedient not to apply the lease recognition and measurement requirements to short-term leases, which is any lease with a term of 12 months or less as of the commencement date that does not include an option to purchase the underlying asset that the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise. The Company’s building leases previously accounted for as build-to-suit arrangements prior to the adoption of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 842 - Leases Lease right-of-use (“ROU”) assets and lease liabilities are recognized based on the present value of the future minimum lease payments over the lease term at commencement date. As its leases do not typically provide an implicit rate, the Company uses its incremental borrowing rate based on the information available at commencement date in determining the present value of future payments. The Company reassesses the incremental borrowing rate periodically for application to any new leases or lease modifications, which approximates the rate at which the Company would borrow, on a secured basis, in the country where the lease was executed. Lease ROU assets include any lease payments made and initial direct costs incurred. The Company has lease agreements with lease and non-lease components. The Company generally accounts for each lease component separately from the non-lease components, and excludes all non-lease components from the calculation of minimum lease payments in measuring the ROU asset and lease liability. The Company’s lease terms may include options to extend or terminate the lease when it is reasonably certain that the Company will exercise that option. Lease expense for minimum lease payments is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease terms. Regarding leases denominated in a foreign currency, the related ROU assets and the corresponding ROU asset amortization costs are remeasured using the exchange rate in effect at the date of initial recognition; the related lease liabilities are remeasured using the exchange rate in effect at the end of the reporting period; the lease costs and interest expenses related to lease liability accretion are remeasured using average exchange rates for the reporting period. Finance leases are included in finance lease ROU assets, finance lease liabilities, current and non-current on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Operating leases are included in other assets, accrued and other current liabilities, and other long-term liabilities on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. |
| 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 Revenues under collaboration agreements 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. 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. API product revenue Product revenue in 2018 consisted 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 was subject to potential future adjustments, which represented a form of variable consideration. The Company evaluated the latest available facts and circumstances in 2018, 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 was necessary. As of December 31, 2018, no new facts or circumstances were available to warrant an adjustment to the estimated transaction price. With respect to these sales in 2018, a change in estimated variable consideration occurred in 2019 at the time the actual listed price for roxadustat was issued by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, which resulted in a total difference of $36.3 million between the estimated and the actual listed price and yield from the manufacture of bulk product tablets. Drug product revenue, net During 2019, the Company started selling roxadustat in China through a number of pharmaceutical distributors located in China. These pharmaceutical distributors are the Company’s customers. Hospitals order roxadustat through a distributor and the Company ships the product directly to the distributors. The delivery of roxadustat to a distributor represents a single performance obligation. Distributors are responsible for delivering product to end users, primarily hospitals. Distributors bear inventory risk once they receive and accept the product. Product revenue is recognized when control of the promised good is transferred to the customer in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the Company expects to be entitled in exchange for the product. The period between the transfer control of promised goods and when the Company receives payment is based on a general 60-day payment term. As such, product revenue is not adjusted for the effects of a significant financing component. The Company established a bad debt allowance based on its judgment to consider factors such as the age of the receivables. Bad debt expense is included in selling, general and administrative expenses on the consolidated statements of operations. There was no bad debt allowance provided as of December 31, 2019. Product drug revenue is recorded at the net sales prices (transaction price) which includes the following estimates of variable consideration:
•
Price adjustment: In December 2019, China’s NHSA released price guidance for roxadustat under NRDL, effective January 1, 2020. Any channel inventories as of January 1, 2020 that had not been sold to hospitals by distributors, or to patients by hospitals, were eligible for a price adjustment under the price protection. The price adjustment is calculated based on estimated channel inventory levels at January 1, 2020. If price guidance changes in the future, the price adjustment will be calculated in the same manner;
•
Contractual sales rebate : The contractual sales rebate is calculated based on the stated percentage of gross sales by each distributor in the distribution agreement entered between FibroGen and each distributor. The contractual sales rebate is accrued at the point of sale to the distributor, and applied to future sales orders made by the distributor under the Company’s discretion;
•
Key account hospital sales rebate : An additional sales rebate is provided to a distributor for product sold to key account hospitals as a percentage of gross sales made by the distributor to eligible hospitals. This additional rebate is accrued at the point of sale to the distributor and applied to future sales orders made by the distributor under the Company’s discretion;
•
Transfer fee discount : The transfer fee discount is offered to a distributor who has its downstream distributors supply to eligible hospitals. This discount is calculated based on a percentage of gross sales made to the downstream distributors, and accrued at the point of sale to the distributor;
•
Sales return : Distributors can request to return product to the Company only due to quality issues and for product within one year of its expiration date. The Company, at its sole discretion, decides whether to accept such return request. The sales return allowance provided as of December 31, 2019 was immaterial; and
•
Non-key account hospital listing award : A one-time fixed-amount award is offered to a distributor who successfully lists the product with an eligible hospital, and meets the sales volume and timing requirements. The non-key account hospital listing award is accrued when the distributor meets eligibility requirements, and applied against future sales orders made by the distributor. The Company considers this particular award to be a material right within the definitions of ASC 606 and therefore have treated it as a separate performance obligation. The above allowances are recorded as reductions of gross accounts receivable from the distributor in the same period that the related revenue is recorded, with the exception of the non-key account hospital listing award, which is accrued when the distributor meets the eligibility requirements. The calculation of such allowances are based on gross sales to the distributor, or estimated utilizing best available information from the distributor, maximum known exposures and other available information including estimated channel inventory levels and estimated sales made by the distributor to hospitals, which involve a substantial degree of judgment. |
| 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. |
| Selling, General and Administrative Expenses | Selling, General and Administrative Expenses Selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses for executive, operational, finance, legal, compliance and human resource functions. SG&A expenses also include facility-related costs, professional fees, accounting and legal services, other outside services including co-promotional expenses, 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-based compensation was estimated using the following assumptions:
•
Expected Term. Expressed as a weighted-average, the expected life of the options is based on the average period the stock options are expected to be outstanding and was based on the Company’s historical information of the option exercise patterns and post-vesting termination behavior as well as contractual terms of the instruments.
•
Expected Volatility. The Company considers its historical volatility data for volatility considerations for its ESPP. The expected volatility for all other stock-based compensation is currently based upon the historical volatility of comparable public entities. In evaluating comparable companies, the Company considered factors such as industry, stage of life cycle, size and duration as a public company.
•
Risk-Free Interest Rate. Expressed as a weighted-average, the risk-free interest rate assumption is based on the U.S. Treasury instruments whose term was consistent with the expected term of the Company’s stock options.
•
Expected Dividend Yield. The Company has never declared or paid any cash dividends and does not plan to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future. |
| 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 ASC 842 In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements The Company adopted the above guidance under ASC 842 as of January 1, 2019, using the modified retrospective transition method, through a cumulative-effect adjustment at the beginning of the first quarter of 2019. The Company elected the optional transition method under the guidance, which allowed it to continue applying previous lease guidance (ASC 840) for the comparative prior year periods presentation in the year of adoption. Accordingly, the Company recognized a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. In addition, the Company elected the package of transitional practical expedients permitted under the transition guidance under ASC 842, which among other things allows the Company to carry forward its historical lease classification, and not to reassess initial direct costs for any existing leases. Meanwhile, the Company did not elect the hindsight practical expedient because it has a limited number of leases, lease terms are straightforward, and most of its lease renewals are undefined until negotiated. In addition, the Company has elected the short-term accounting policy practical expedient and does not apply the balance sheet recognition requirements for short-term leases (excluding expenses relating to leases with a lease term of one month or less), by class of underlying asset to which the right of use relates. The Company has not elected the non-lease components practical expedient, and therefore accounts for each lease component separately from the non-lease components. Upon adoption of ASC 842, the Company classified its existing building leases that were previously accounted for as build-to-suit arrangements as finance leases and applied the transition guidance. Accordingly, the Company derecognized the assets and liabilities previously recognized under ASC 840 build-to-suit guidance. In addition, as a result of applying the transition guidance, the Company also recorded an adjustment to the accumulated depreciation of related leasehold improvements to reflect a change in estimated useful life from the building life to the shorter of the building life and remaining lease term. Differences between the assets and liabilities derecognized were recorded to the opening balance of retained earnings. The impacts to the select line items from the Company’s consolidated balance sheet upon adoption of the ASC 842 guidance are as follows (in thousands):
Balance Sheet Line Item
Nature of Adjustment
New Lease Guidance Adoption Adjustment
Assets
Property and equipment, net
Derecognition - build-to-suit lease assets - building shell, cost
$
(53,880
)
Derecognition - build-to-suit lease assets - building shell, accumulated depreciation
13,476
Change of useful life - leasehold improvements, accumulated depreciation
(38,877
)
Finance lease right-of-use assets
Recognition - finance lease ROU assets
49,597
Other assets
Recognition - operating lease ROU assets
730
Liabilities
Accrued and other current liabilities
Derecognition - deferred rent, current
(619
)
Derecognition - build-to-suit lease liabilities, current
(545
)
Recognition - operating lease liabilities, current
404
Finance lease liabilities, current
Recognition - finance lease liabilities, current
11,499
Long-term portion of lease obligations
Derecognition - build-to-suit lease liabilities, non-current
(95,613
)
Deferred rent
Derecognition - deferred rent, non-current
(3,038
)
Finance lease liabilities, non-current
Recognition - finance lease liabilities, non-current
49,884
Other long-term liabilities
Recognition - operating lease liabilities, non-current
250
Stockholders’ equity
Accumulated deficit
Cumulative decrease to accumulated deficit
$
8,688
The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact to the Company’s consolidated statement of operations or consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019 . ASU 2018-02 In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-02, Income Statement - Reporting Comprehensive Income: Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
Accumulated Deficit
Balance at December 31, 2018
$
(2,281
)
$
(715,827
)
Impact of change in accounting principle upon adoption of ASU 2018-02
611
(611
)
Opening balance as of January 1, 2019
$
(1,670
)
$
(716,438
) The adoption of this guidance had no impact to the Company’s consolidated statement of operations or consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019. ASU 2018-07 In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-07, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. 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
) The adoption of this guidance had no impact to the Company’s consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2018. |
| Recently Issued Accounting Guidance Not Yet Adopted | Recently Issued Accounting Guidance Not Yet Adopted In December 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-15, 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. This guidance requires capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). This guidance should be applied either retrospectively or prospectively, and is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019 including interim periods, with early adoption permitted. The Company will adopt this guidance on January 1, 2020 and does not anticipate a material impact to its consolidated financial statements upon adoption of this guidance. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments U.S. Treasury bills and notes |
| Collaboration Arrangements and Revenues | Astellas Agreements Japan Agreement In June 2005, the Company entered into a collaboration agreement with Astellas Pharma Inc. (“Astellas”) for the development and commercialization (but not manufacture) of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in Japan (“Japan Agreement”). Under this agreement, Astellas paid license fees and other consideration totaling $40.1 million (such amounts were fully received as of February 2009). Under the Japan Agreement, the Company is also eligible to receive from Astellas an aggregate of approximately $132.5 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $22.5 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events (such amounts were fully received as of July 2016), (ii) up to $95.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, and (iii) up to approximately $15.0 million in milestone payments upon the achievement of specified commercial sales milestone. The Japan Agreement also provides for tiered payments based on net sales of product (as defined) in the low 20% range after commercial launch. The aggregate amount of such consideration received through December 31, 2019 totals $90.1 million. In September 2019, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare approved Evrenzo® (generic name: roxadustat; tradename Evrenzo® in Japan) for the treatment of anemia associated with CKD in dialysis patients. This approval triggered a $12.5 million milestone payable to the Company by Astellas under the Japan Agreement. Accordingly, the consideration of $12.5 million associated with this milestone was included in the transaction price and allocated to performance obligations under the Japan Agreement in the third quarter of 2019, substantially all of which was recognized as revenue during the year ended December 31, 2019 from performance obligations satisfied or partially satisfied. During the second quarter of 2018, Astellas reported positive results from the final phase 3 CKD-dialysis trial of roxadustat in Japan, indicating that Astellas was ready to make an NDA submission for the treatment of anemia with roxadustat in CKD-dialysis patients in 2018. The Company evaluated the regulatory milestone payment associated with NDA submission in Japan based on variable consideration requirements under the current revenue standards and concluded that this milestone became probable of being achieved in the second quarter of 2018. Accordingly, the consideration of $15.0 million associated with this milestone was included in the transaction price and allocated to performance obligations under the Japan Agreement in the second quarter of 2018, substantially all of which was recognized as revenue during the year ended December 31, 2018 from performance obligations satisfied or partially satisfied. On November 30, 2018, FibroGen and Astellas entered into an amendment to the Japan Agreement that will allow Astellas to manufacture roxadustat drug product for commercialization in Japan (the “Japan Amendment”). Under this amendment, FibroGen would continue to manufacture and deliver to Astellas roxadustat API. The commercial terms of the Japan Agreement relating to the transfer price for roxadustat for commercial use remain substantially the same, reflecting an adjustment for the manufacture of drug product by Astellas rather than FibroGen. This amendment obligates Astellas to purchase API from the Company, of which $20.9 million was delivered to Astellas in the second quarter of 2018 under a material transfer agreement to conduct commercial scale manufacturing validation for roxadustat drug product in anticipation of commercial launch in Japan. The remaining $43.9 million of API was delivered to Astellas in December 2018. The transaction price of such API product was adjusted in 2019 at the time the listed price for roxadustat was issued by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare to reflect a total difference of $36.3 million between estimated and actual listed price and yield from the manufacture of bulk product tablets. Europe Agreement In April 2006, the Company entered into a separate collaboration agreement with Astellas for the development and commercialization of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in Europe, the Middle East, the Commonwealth of Independent States and South Africa (“Europe Agreement”). Under the terms of the Europe Agreement, Astellas paid license fees and other upfront consideration totaling $320.0 million (such amounts were fully received as of February 2009). The Europe Agreement also provides for additional development and regulatory approval milestone payments up to $425.0 million, comprised of (i) up to $90.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events (such amounts were fully received as of 2012), (ii) up to $335.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events. Under the Europe Agreement, Astellas committed to fund 50% of joint development costs for Europe and North America, and all territory-specific costs. The Europe Agreement also provides for tiered payments based on net sales of product (as defined) in the low 20% range. The aggregate amount of such consideration received through December 31, 2019 totals $410.0 million. During the second quarter of 2019, the Company received positive topline results from analyses of pooled major adverse cardiac event (“MACE”) and MACE+ data from its Phase 3 trials evaluating roxadustat as a treatment for dialysis and non-dialysis CKD patients, enabling Astellas to prepare for an MAA submission to the EMA in the second quarter of 2020, following the Company’s NDA submission to the FDA that was accepted for review in February 2020. The Company evaluated the two regulatory milestone payments associated with the planned MAA submission and concluded that these milestones became probable of being achieved in the second quarter of 2019. Accordingly, the total consideration of $130.0 million associated with these milestones was included in the transaction price and allocated to performance obligations under the Europe Agreement in the second quarter of 2019, of which $128.8 million was recognized as revenue during the year ended December 31, 2019 from performance obligations satisfied or partially satisfied. According to the Europe Agreement, these milestone payments are not billable to Astellas until the submission of an MAA, therefore this $130.0 million remained as an unbilled contract asset as of December 31, 2019. In the fourth quarter of 2018, the Company’s was engaged in the final stages of review with its partners over the proposed development of roxadustat for the treatment of chemotherapy induced anemia (“CIA”). AstraZeneca and Astellas approved the program in December 2018 and January 2019, respectively. Costs associated with the development of this indication are expected to be shared 50-50 between the Company’s two partners. For revenue recognition purposes, the Company concluded that this new indication represents a modification to the Europe agreements and will be accounted for separately, meaning the development costs associated with the new indications are distinct from the original development costs. The development service period for roxadustat for the treatment of CIA under the Europe Agreement is estimated to continue through the end of 2023 to allow for development of this indication. AstraZeneca Agreements U.S./Rest of World (“RoW”) Agreement Effective July 30, 2013, the Company entered into a collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca for the development and commercialization of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in the U.S. and all other countries in the world, other than China, not previously licensed under the Astellas Europe and Astellas Japan Agreements (“U.S./RoW Agreement”). It also excludes China, which is covered by a separate agreement with AstraZeneca described below. Under the terms of the U.S./RoW Agreement, AstraZeneca paid upfront, non-contingent, non-refundable and time-based payments totaling $374.0 million (such amounts were fully received as of June 2016). Under the U.S./RoW Agreement, the Company is also eligible to receive from AstraZeneca an aggregate of approximately $875.0 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $65.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events, $15.0 million of which was received in 2015 as a result of the finalization of its two audited pre-clinical carcinogenicity study reports, (ii) up to $325.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, (iii) up to $160.0 million in milestone payments related to activity by potential competitors and (iv) up to approximately $325.0 million in milestone payments upon the achievement of specified commercial sales events. The aggregate amount of such consideration received through December 31, 2019 totals $389.0 million. Under the U.S./RoW Agreement, the Company and AstraZeneca will share equally in the development costs of roxadustat not already paid for by Astellas, up to a total of $233.0 million (i.e. the Company’s share of development costs is $116.5 million, which was reached in 2015). Development costs incurred by FibroGen during the development period in excess of the $233.0 million (aggregated spend) are fully reimbursed by AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca will pay the Company tiered royalty payments on AstraZeneca’s future net sales (as defined in the agreement) of roxadustat in the low 20% range. In addition, the Company will receive a transfer price for delivery of commercial product based on a percentage of AstraZeneca’s net sales (as defined in the agreement) in the low- to mid-single digit range. As mentioned above, during the second quarter of 2019, the Company received positive topline results from analyses of pooled MACE and MACE+ data from its Phase 3 trials for roxadustat, enabling the Company’s NDA submission to the FDA. The Company evaluated the regulatory milestone payment associated with this planned NDA submission and concluded that this milestone became probable of being achieved in the second quarter of 2019. Accordingly, the consideration of $50.0 million associated with this milestone was included in the transaction price and allocated to performance obligations under the U.S./ RoW Agreement in the second quarter of 2019, of which $42.4 million was recognized as revenue during the year ended December 31, 2019 from performance obligations satisfied or partially satisfied. On December 23, 2019, the Company submitted such NDA, which was accepted by FDA in February 2020. According to the U.S/RoW Agreement, this milestone payment is not billable to AstraZeneca until the NDA is accepted by the FDA, therefore this $50.0 million remained as an unbilled contract asset as of December 31, 2019, and will be billed during the first quarter of 2020. China Agreement Effective July 30, 2013, the Company (through its subsidiaries affiliated with China) entered into a collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca for the development and commercialization (but not manufacture) of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in China (“China Agreement”). Under the terms of the China Agreement, AstraZeneca agreed to pay upfront consideration totaling $28.2 million (such amounts were fully received in 2014). Under the China Agreement, the Company is also eligible to receive from AstraZeneca an aggregate of approximately $348.5 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $15.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events, (ii) up to $146.0 million in milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, and (iii) up to approximately $187.5 million in milestone payments upon the achievement of specified commercial sales and other events. The China Agreement is structured as a 50/50 profit or loss share (as defined) and provides for joint development costs (including capital and equipment costs for construction of the manufacturing plant in China), to be shared equally during the development. The aggregate amount of such consideration received through December 31, 2019 totals $55.2 million. In December 2019, roxadustat has been included on the updated NRDL released by China’s NHSA for the treatment of anemia in CKD, covering patients who are non-dialysis dependent dialysis-dependent As mentioned above, in the fourth quarter of 2018, the Company was engaged in the final stages of review with its partners over the proposed development of roxadustat for the treatment of CIA. AstraZeneca and Astellas approved the program in December 2018 and January 2019, respectively. Costs associated with the development of this indication are expected to be shared 50-50 between the Company’s two partners. In addition to CIA, in December 2018, anemia of chronic inflammation (“ACI”) and multiple myeloma (“MM”) have been approved for development by AstraZeneca and is expected to be fully funded by them. For revenue recognition purposes, the Company concluded that the addition of these new indications represents a modification to the collaboration agreements and will be accounted for separately, meaning the development costs associated with the new indications are distinct from the original development costs. The development service period for roxadustat for the treatment of CIA, ACI and MM under the AstraZeneca agreements is estimated to continue through the end of 2024, to allow for development of these additional indications. On December 17, 2018, FibroGen (China) Medical Technology Development Co., Ltd. (“FibroGen China”), received marketing authorization from the NMPA for roxadustat, a first-in-class hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, for the treatment of anemia caused by CKD in patients on dialysis. This approval triggered a $6.0 million milestone payable to the Company by AstraZeneca . Approximately $9.9 million of the total $12.0 million milestone payables was recognized as revenue during the year ended December 31, 2018 from performance obligations satisfied or partially satisfied. 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, 2019, the transaction price for the Japan Agreement included $40.1 million of non-contingent upfront payments, $50.0 million of variable consideration related to payments for milestones considered probable of being achieved, and $11.4 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, $220.0 million of variable consideration related to payments for milestones considered probable of being achieved, and $229.2 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 was subject to potential future adjustments. This represents a form of variable consideration. The Company evaluated the latest available facts and circumstances in 2018, 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 was necessary. As of December 31, 2018, no new facts or circumstances were available to warrant an adjustment to the transaction price. The transaction price was later adjusted in 2019 at the time the listed price for roxadustat was issued by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare to reflect the difference between estimated and actual listed price and yield from the manufacture of bulk product tablets. 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, 2019, the transaction price for the U.S./RoW Agreement and China Agreement included $402.2 million of non-contingent upfront payments, $114.0 million of variable consideration related to payments for milestones considered probable of being achieved, and $598.8 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 |
| Product Revenue | Product Revenue, Net
Years Ended December 31,
2019
2018
(dollars in thousands)
Product revenue, net:
API product
$
(36,324
)
$
64,776
Drug product
Gross revenue
2,803
—
Price adjustment
(936
)
—
Sales rebates and other discounts
(167
)
—
Drug product revenue, net
1,700
—
Total product revenue, net
$
(34,624
)
$
64,776
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 In addition, the Company started commercial sales of roxadustat drug product in China in the third quarter of 2019. Drug product revenue is recognized in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the Company expects to be entitled in exchange for those products, net of price adjustment, contractual sales rebate and other discounts. For the year ended December 31, 2019, a $0.9 million of price adjustment was recorded based on government-listed price guidance and estimated channel inventory levels. The contractual sales rebate and other discounts were immaterial for the year ended December 31, 2019. |
| 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, 2019. |
| Deferred Revenue | Deferred Revenue Deferred revenue represents amounts billed, or in certain cases, yet to be 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. Deferred revenue 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. As of December 31, 2018, such deferred revenue was included in long-term deferred revenue. As of December 31, 2019, following receipt of the Chinese Good Manufacturing Practices license by FibroGen Beijing in the second quarter of 2019, approximately $0.8 million of the related deferred revenue was included in short-term deferred revenue, which represents the amount of deferred revenue associated with the China unit of accounting that is expected to be recognized within the next 12 months, as a result of the transfer of control of commercial drug product in China. |
| 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. The availability of observable data is monitored to assess classification of financial instruments within the fair value hierarchy. Depending upon the availability of such inputs, specific securities may transfer between levels. In such instances, the transfer is reported at the end of the reporting period. |
