BioCryst Pharmaceuticals
Annual Report 1997

Plain-text annual report

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K |X| Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 1997 OR | | Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. For the transition period from _________ to ________. Commission File Number 000-23186 BIOCRYST PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) DELAWARE 62-1413174 (State of other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. employer identification no.) incorporation or organization) 2190 Parkway Lake Drive; Birmingham, Alabama 35244 (Address and zip code of principal executive offices) (205) 444-4600 (Registrant's telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered None None Common Stock, $.01 Par Value Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Title of each class Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes |X| No | |. Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K | |. While it is difficult to determine the number of shares owned by non-affiliates, the Registrant estimates that the aggregate market value of the Common Stock on March 22, 1998 (based upon the closing price shown on the Nasdaq National Market on March 20, 1998) held by non-affiliates was approximately $77,526,188. For this computation, the Registrant has excluded the market value of all shares of its Common Stock reported as beneficially owned by officers, directors and certain significant stockholders of the Registrant. Such exclusion shall not be deemed to constitute an admission that any such stockholder is an affiliate of the Registrant. The number of shares of Common Stock, par value $.01, of the Registrant outstanding as of March 22, 1998 was 13,940,210 shares. 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE None. 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 1. BUSINESS General PART I BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("BioCryst" or the "Company") is an emerging pharmaceutical company using structure-based drug design to discover and design novel, small-molecule pharmaceutical products for the treatment of immunological and infectious diseases and disorders. The Company believes that structure-based drug design, by precisely designing compounds to fit the active site of target proteins, offers the potential for developing drugs for many indications that have improved efficacy and fewer side effects than currently marketed drugs for the same indications. The Company is conducting four clinical trials with its lead drug, BCX-34, including a Phase I/II trial with an oral formulation for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma ("CTCL"), a Phase I/II trial with an oral formulation for psoriasis, a Phase I/II trial with an oral formulation for HIV and a Phase I/II trial with an ointment formulation for psoriasis. BioCryst has additional drug discovery projects underway using its structure-based drug design technologies to develop inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase and enzymes and proteins involved in the complement cascade, which is implicated in several major inflammatory conditions. The Company has selected a lead compound, BCX-1470, for its serine protease inhibitor in its complement cascade project and is testing several neuraminidase inhibitors to further assess the compounds' oral activity against influenza A and influenza B. One of the elements of the Company's strategic plan is to leverage its clinical progress by entering into pharmaceutical collaborations with drug companies in major world markets. BioCryst entered into an exclusive license agreement with Torii Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. ("Torii"), a Japanese pharmaceutical company, for the development and commercialization in Japan of BCX-34 and certain other purine nucleoside phosphorylase ("PNP") inhibitor compounds. PNP is an enzyme believed to be involved in T-cell proliferation. BioCryst's lead immunological drug program targets T-cell proliferative disorders, which arise when T-cells, immune system cells that normally fight infection, attack normal body cells or multiply uncontrollably. These disorders are varied and include CTCL (a severe form of cancer), psoriasis, transplant rejection and certain autoimmune diseases. BioCryst has designed and synthesized several chemically distinct classes of compounds which inhibit PNP. The Company has completed seven Phase I clinical trials, four Phase I/II clinical trials, six Phase II clinical trials and two Phase III clinical trials with topical BCX-34 and has completed three Phase I trials with oral and intravenous formulations of the drug and one Phase I/II clinical trial with an oral formulation of the drug and is conducting three Phase I/II clinical trials with an oral formulation of BCX-34. BCX-34 has been tested in over 670 subjects, and no significant drug-related side effects have been observed. While the Phase III clinical trials with topical BCX-34 for the treatment of CTCL and psoriasis did not demonstrate statistical efficacy and resulted in cessation of further development of a topical cream formulation. The Company is continuing its PNP inhibitor program for the oral and ointment formulations of BCX-34. In addition, the Company has initiated preclinical studies using an ophthalmic formulation of BCX-34 for potential use in treating uveitis, Sjogren's syndrome and corneal transplant rejection. BioCryst's scientists include recognized world leaders in the fields of X-ray crystallography and medicinal chemistry, two core disciplines associated with structure-based drug design. The Company has certain collaborative arrangements with The University of Alabama at Birmingham ("UAB"), which has one of the leading X-ray crystallography centers in the world and has been successful in characterizing a significant number of medically relevant protein targets. The Company believes, based upon its scientific staff and management, the number of compounds it has designed and its clinical development program, that it is a leader in the practical application of structure-based drug design. In May 1996, the Company entered into an agreement pursuant to which it granted Torii an exclusive license, with the right to sublicense, to develop, manufacture and commercialize BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds in Japan for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, T-cell cancers (including CTCL) and atopic dermatitis. Upon entering into the agreement, Torii paid the Company $1.5 million in license fees and made a $1.5 million equity investment in the Company, purchasing 76,608 shares of Common Stock at a purchase price of $19.58 per share. A milestone payment of $1 million was paid the Company by Torii in 1997. In order for Torii to maintain its licensing rights, it is obligated to make payments to the Company of up to $18 million upon the achievement of specified development milestones. Torii is responsible for all development, regulatory and commercialization expenses in Japan and is 1 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. obligated to pay royalties to the Company on sales of licensed products in Japan. The agreement will remain in effect, unless earlier terminated, until the last to expire of any patent rights licensed under the agreement, or in the event no patents issue, for twenty years from May 31, 1996. The agreement is subject to termination by Torii at any time and by the Company in certain circumstances, including any material breaches of the agreement by Torii. Pursuant to the agreement, Torii may negotiate a license with the Company to develop BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds for additional indications. Products in Development The following table summarizes BioCryst's development projects as of February 28, 1997: PROGRAM/ INDICATION/ DELIVERY STAGE OF COMPOUND APPLICATION FORM DEVELOPMENT -------- ----------- ---- ----------- PNP Inhibitors (BCX-34) CTCL Oral Phase I/II Psoriasis Oral Phase I/II Ointment Phase I/II HIV Oral Phase I/II Rheumatoid arthritis Oral Preclinical Transplant rejection Oral Preclinical Ophthalmic diseases and disorders Ophthalmic Preclinical Influenza Neuraminidase Inhibitors Influenza Oral Preclinical Complement Inhibitors (BCX-1470) Cardiopulmonary bypass surgery Intravenous/Oral Phase I ---------- See "-Government Regulation" for a description of drug development phases and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Certain Factors That May Affect Future Results, Financial Condition and the Market Price of Securities" for a discussion of certain factors that can adversely affect the Company's drug development programs. PNP Inhibitors (BCX-34) The human immune system employs specialized cells and proteins, including cells known as T-cells and B-cells, to control infection and recognize and attack foreign disease-causing viruses, bacteria and parasites. The immune system can also cause diseases or disorders when it inappropriately identifies the body's own tissue as foreign and, among other things, produces T-cells that attack normal body cells. Such diseases are referred to as autoimmune diseases and include psoriasis, in which the immune system attacks skin tissue, and rheumatoid arthritis, in which the immune system attacks joint tissue. This immune system response also causes transplant rejection in which the T-cells of the immune system attack the transplanted organ or tissue. The immune system may also produce T-cells that multiply uncontrollably. T-cell proliferation in such cases is associated with cancers such as cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Within the past decade, drugs have been developed that treat autoimmune and related diseases by selectively suppressing the immune system. However, most current immunosuppressive drugs have dose-limiting side effects, including severe toxicity. The link between T-cell proliferative disorders and the PNP enzyme was first discovered approximately 20 years ago when a patient, who was genetically deficient in PNP, exhibited limited T-cell activity, but reasonably normal activity of other immune functions. Since then, additional patients with inherited PNP deficiency have been reported. In most patients, the T-cell population was less than 20% of normal levels, often as low as 1-3% of normal levels. However, B-cell function was normal in approximately two-thirds of these patients. These findings suggested that inhibition of PNP might produce selective suppression of T-cell function without significantly impairing B-cell function. BioCryst has designed and synthesized several chemically distinct classes of small molecule compounds (seven of which have been patented in the United States) which inhibit the PNP enzyme. In in vitro preclinical studies, the Company's PNP inhibitor compounds selectively and potently suppressed human T-cells associated with certain T-cell proliferative disorders. One member of a patented class of PNP inhibitor compounds, BCX-34, which was designed and 2 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. developed by BioCryst, to date has undergone clinical trials as a potential treatment for a number of T-cell proliferative diseases and related disorders. The Company is in the clinical stage of development of an oral formulation of BCX-34 and is in the preclinical stage of development of an ophthalmic formulation. Additionally, the Company has an intravenous formulation for future development. An orally deliverable product may allow systemic application of the drug in diseases that either cannot be treated topically or can be treated more successfully with an oral formulation. An ophthalmic formulation in the form of eye droplets may be most suitable for treating certain ophthalmic indications as a result of being able to directly administer the drug to the eye. An intravenous formulation may allow more precise dosage control and direct systemic application into the bloodstream and may permit usage of BCX-34 where other methods of delivery may not be suitable. Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma. CTCL is a severe form of cancer which is characterized by the development of scaly patches on the skin, progressing to ulcers and tumors of the skin, lymph nodes and internal organs. CTCL is a chronic disease involving the proliferation of certain types of T-cells. According to a medical journal, approximately 1,000 new cases of CTCL are diagnosed annually in the United States. There is no known cure and the median survival time is approximately four years after systemic progression of the disease. Existing therapies for CTCL are generally considered inadequate. In October 1993, the Company obtained from the United States Food and Drug Administration (the "FDA") orphan drug designation for BCX-34 to treat CTCL and may qualify for accelerated review as a new drug to treat serious and life-threatening illnesses. The Company completed a Phase I oral and intravenous trial of BCX-34 in May 1995. In this trial, three CTCL patients received a single intravenous dose, followed a week later by a single oral dose, followed three weeks later by five-day consecutive oral dosing. This pharmacology study suggested that BCX-34 is well tolerated systemically and that the drug is highly bioavailable in humans. In late 1995, the Company initiated a Phase I/II dose escalation oral trial in CTCL and other T-cell cancer patients. This is an open label trial designed to provide safety and pharmacokinetic data on BCX-34 as well as provide potential efficacy data. As of December 31, 1997, 30 patients have been enrolled and dosed in this study, and preliminary data indicate biological activity. Psoriasis. Psoriasis is a common chronic and recurrent disease involving T-cells characterized by red, thick scaling of the skin, which can develop at any time in life. According to the National Psoriasis Foundation, it is estimated that approximately five million people suffer from some form of psoriasis in the United States and 150,000 to 260,000 new cases are diagnosed annually. About 10% of these cases are classified as "severe" and are most likely to require physician's care and drug intervention. In some cases, the condition may be accompanied by a form of arthritis which can be debilitating. Current therapies for psoriasis either are of limited benefit or have severe side effects. The Company has initiated Phase I/II clinical trials with an ointment and an oral formulation BCX-34 for the treatment of psoriasis. HIV. Due to the increasing number of HIV-infected people, HIV infection is a major health concern. Despite extensive research and development, the treatment of HIV infection remains unsatisfactory due to the toxicity or limited therapeutic benefit of currently approved therapies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC") estimates that there are approximately one million people in the United States infected with HIV. HIV drug research has focused primarily on developing inhibitors of the enzymes reverse transcriptase ("RT") and HIV protease. Initially, scientists thought blocking the HIV essential RT enzyme would shut down replication of HIV and curb the progression of HIV infection to AIDS. Several RT inhibitors are now approved, but the clinical usefulness of these drugs has been limited by their toxicity and by the ability of HIV to mutate into forms that are resistant to them. A second approach of HIV drug research and treatment has targeted the HIV protease enzyme. HIV protease is an enzyme that performs an essential role in the infectious cycle of HIV. It is believed that blocking HIV protease renders HIV unable to form a new infectious virus. Although numerous companies are developing protease inhibitors, the long-term therapeutic potential of these drugs is uncertain. A new approach to HIV drug research focuses on the T-cell host rather than the virus. It is believed that while resting, nondividing CD4 T-cells can be infected by the virus, the virus does not multiply. Since T-cell activation and growth appear to be essential for virus replication, a treatment which inhibits T-cell growth might decrease the overall viral burden. The Company believes, based in part upon preliminary preclinical in vitro tests, that BCX-34 could potentially be useful in treating HIV-infected patients by reversibly inhibiting the growth of infected T-cells. The Company, in collaboratation with researchers at the UAB Center for AIDS Research on the design, has initiated a Phase I/II clinical 3 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. trial with an oral formulation of BCX-34 for the treatment of HIV. Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease that involves inflammation of the membranes lining joints, causing joint pain, swelling, and deformities. According to a scientific journal, it is estimated that approximately 1% to 2% of the U.S. adult population is afflicted with rheumatoid arthritis. There are many drugs used to treat the disease, but such drug treatments only alleviate the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis. The Company believes T-cell controlling agents, such as PNP inhibitors and specifically an oral formulation of BCX-34, offer promise as a potential drug treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. Among other potential competitors, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, formerly Ciba-Geigy Corporation, ("Novartis") has rights to develop a group of PNP inhibitors, excluding BCX-34, licensed from BioCryst, with potential application in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Transplant Rejection. Risk of rejection is one of the most frequent complications following transplant surgery. Rejection is caused by the body's immune response in which T-cells are generated to attack the transplanted organ or tissue. In general, for organ and bone marrow transplants, rejection is an acute risk during the initial hospital stay for the transplant surgery and thereafter a chronic risk of varying degrees of severity. The Company believes selective suppression of the immune response may reduce the risk of rejection. The immunosuppressant drugs which are currently used to control or prevent rejection often cause significant detrimental side effects. A number of new drugs are in various stages of development by other researchers and companies for the control and prevention of transplant rejection. The Company is at the preclinical stage of development of an oral formulation of BCX-34 for treatment of transplant rejection. Ophthalmic Diseases and Disorders. There are a number of inflammatory diseases of the eye that involve T-cells. A leading ophthalmic inflammatory disease is uveitis, which is characterized by eye swelling, ocular accumulation of fatty deposits and impaired vision. The most severe cases of uveitis, such as Behcet's syndrome and Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada syndrome, may result in blindness. Clinical studies conducted by third parties with currently approved immunosuppressants support the idea that T-cells participate in the pathogenesis of these diseases and that oral and ophthalmic formulations of BCX-34 may potentially be efficacious in treating these diseases. The Company is in the preclinical stage of development of an ophthalmic formulation of BCX-34 for direct delivery of the drug to the eye in treating uveitis, Sjogren's syndrome and corneal transplant rejection. Influenza Neuraminidase Inhibitors Influenza is a viral disease which is particularly dangerous to the very young, the elderly and debilitated patients and those who have suppressed immune systems. The CDC estimates that approximately 10% to 20% of the U.S. population is infected with influenza during most influenza seasons. The current standard for preventing flu is by vaccination, which is of limited benefit as vaccines are designed to resist a specific flu strain. No satisfactory treatment currently exists. Since the early 1980's, UAB scientists have been investigating the active site and function of the enzyme influenza neuraminidase. Influenza neuraminidase is an enzyme on the surface of the influenza virus which is associated with the spread of influenza and is believed to permit the influenza virus to invade human cells. Scientists at UAB and the Company have characterized the molecular structure of influenza neuraminidase and have initiated the design and synthesis of specific inhibitors. Research at UAB and the Company to date indicates that the active site for influenza neuraminidase remains substantially unchanged for the major strains of influenza. The Company believes that a neuraminidase inhibitor may be useful as a treatment for influenza and is in the preclinical stage of development of inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase. Funded in part by a National Institutes of Health ("NIH") Phase I Small Business Innovation Research ("SBIR") grant and a State of Alabama grant, the Company has developed lead compounds which in in vitro studies have indicated inhibition of influenza neuraminidase. The Company is currently assessing several influenza inhibitor compounds for oral activity against influenza A and influenza B. At least two major pharmaceutical companies are engaged in clinical studies of influenza neuraminidase inhibitor compounds intended to treat influenza, and the Company believes that several other pharmaceutical companies are engaged in research to design or discover inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase. Complement Inhibitors The human body is equipped with immunological defense mechanisms to respond aggressively to infection or injury. One of these mechanisms, called complement, is a system of functionally linked proteins that interact with one another in a highly regulated manner. The complement system functions as a "cascade." Once an activator of the system 4 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. converts an inactive enzyme to an active enzyme, the activated enzyme activates more proteins at the next stage, which in turn activates other proteins. This mechanism, if inappropriately activated, can cause acute medical reactions, including inflammatory reactions that accompany hemodialysis, myocardial infarction, bypass surgery and post heart attack reperfusion injury. There are two pathways of complement activation, the classical pathway and the alternative pathway. The classical pathway is usually initiated by antigen-antibody complexes, while the alternative pathway is activated by bacterial, viral and parasite cell surfaces. Due to the biochemical mechanism of the complement cascade, BioCryst believes complement inhibitors may have therapeutic applications in several acute and chronic immunological disorders. BioCryst is focusing its research efforts on designing enzyme inhibitors to limit the rapid and aggressive damage caused by the complement cascade. The Company is initially focusing on designing inhibitors for Factor D and Factor B, enzymes playing a role in the alternative pathway, and the enzyme C1s, which plays a role in the classical pathway. Working with UAB scientists and funded in part by SBIR grants from the NIH, BioCryst has characterized the three-dimensional structure of Factor D and has developed various assay systems for screening complement inhibitors. The Company is performing preclinical studies with certain inhibitors it has designed and synthesized. A serine protease inhibitor, BCX-1470, has been selected by the Company for evaluation in patients receiving heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. Preclinical results have shown that BCX-1470 and related compounds can block key blood enzymes, known as serine proteases, responsible for excessive bleeding and inflammatory damage related to cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. The Company filed an Investigational New Drug ("IND") in January 1998 with respect to the use of an intravenous formulation of BCX-1470 in connection with cardiopulmonary bypass surgery and started a Phase I clinical trial in February 1998. The Company continues to design additional inhibitors. The Company has a collaboration agreement to use combinatorial chemistry to help identify certain inhibitors. See "Research and Development - 3-Dimensional Pharmaceuticals." Drug Discovery Methods Drugs are chemical compounds that interact with target molecules, typically proteins, within the human body to affect a molecule's normal function. Ideally, drugs accomplish their intended therapeutic functions while creating as few side effects as possible. The interaction can be illustrated as follows: the drug molecule inserts itself in the target protein like a key inserted in a lock, and either stimulates, or more commonly suppresses, a protein's normal function. The results vary depending upon the role of the target protein. A drug that is selective or specific, i.e., that binds to or blocks the target protein without affecting other proteins or receptors, is generally more effective, less likely to cause side effects and can be administered in smaller doses. Traditional Drug Discovery Historically, most pharmaceutical companies have relied on costly and time-consuming screening to discover new chemical entities for development. While screening has been the basis for the discovery of virtually all drugs currently in use, the cost has been substantial. On average, it has generally been necessary to assess hundreds or thousands of chemical compounds to find a lead compound which successfully completes the development process. If screening produces a lead compound, it is likely that the compound's mode of action will be unknown and the risk of side effects caused by a lack of target specificity will be high. Newer techniques, such as combinatorial chemistry and high throughput screening, have enhanced the range of compounds that can be examined quickly. However, screening-based research has, to date, failed to yield acceptably safe and effective drugs for many important therapeutic needs. Most pharmaceutical companies presently use some form of pharmacology-based rational drug design which primarily utilizes certain receptors or purified enzyme preparations in assays to identify lead compounds and to design molecules to perform specific therapeutic tasks. Development of lead compounds is conducted by systematic empirical methods and computer modeling. While this approach is more refined than random screening, it is still a costly and time-consuming effort which is limited by the amount and quality of information available about the target protein. Structure-Based Drug Design Structure-based drug design is a drug discovery approach by which synthetic compounds are designed from detailed structural knowledge of the active sites of protein targets associated with particular diseases. The Company's structure-based drug design involves the integrated application of traditional biology and medicinal chemistry along with an 5 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. array of advanced technologies, including X-ray crystallography, combinatorial chemistry, computer modeling of molecular structures and protein biophysical chemistry, to focus on the three-dimensional molecular structure and active site characterization of the proteins that control cellular biology. BioCryst believes that structure-based drug design is an improvement over traditional drug screening techniques. By identifying the target protein in advance and by discovering the chemical and molecular structure of the protein, scientists believe it is possible to design a more optimal drug to interact with the protein. The initial targets for structure-based drug design are selected based on their involvement in the biological pathways integral to the course of a disease. Once a target is selected, its structure is determined by X-ray crystallography, a method used in determining the precise three-dimensional molecular structure of the proteins. This structure is then used as a blueprint for the drug design of a lead compound. The compounds are modeled for their fit in the active site of the target, considering both steric aspects (i.e., geometric shape) and functional group interactions, such as hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interactions. The initial design phase is followed by the synthesis of the lead compound, quantitative measurements of its ability to interact with the target protein, and X-ray crystallographic analysis of the compound-target complex. This analysis reveals important, empirical information on how the compound actually binds to the target and the nature and extent of changes induced in the target by the binding. These data, in turn, suggest ways to refine the lead compound to improve its binding to the target protein. The refined lead compound is then synthesized and complexed with the target, and further refined in a reiterative process. If lead compounds are available from other studies, such as screening of combinatorial libraries, these compounds may serve as starting points for this optimization cycle using structure-based drug design. Once a sufficiently potent compound has been designed and optimized, its activity is evaluated in a biological system to establish the compound's ability to function in a physiological environment. If the compound fails at any stage of the biological evaluation, the design team reviews the structural model and uses crystallography to adjust structural features of the compound to overcome the difficulty. This process continues until a designed compound exhibits the desired properties. The compound is then evaluated in an experimental disease model. If the compound fails, the reasons for failure (e.g., adverse metabolism, plasma binding, distribution, etc.) are determined and, again, new modified compounds are designed to overcome the deficiencies without interfering with their ability to interact with the active site of the target protein. The experimental drug is then ready for conventional drug development (e.g., studies in safety assessment, formulation, clinical trials, etc.). This reiterative analysis and compound modification are possible because of the structural data obtained by X-ray crystallographic analysis at each stage. This capability renders structure-based drug design a powerful tool for rapid and efficient development of drugs that are highly specific for particular protein target sites. Research and Development General BioCryst initiated its research and development program in 1986, with drug synthesis beginning in 1987. The Company has assembled a scientific research staff with expertise in a broad base of advanced research technologies including protein biochemistry, X-ray crystallography, chemistry and pharmacology. Of the Company's 55 employees at March 15, 1998, 41 were employed in its research and development, preclinical studies and clinical trials programs. The Company's staff includes 19 persons with Ph.D. or M.D. degrees. The Company's research facilities include protein biochemistry and organic synthesis laboratories, in vitro and in vivo testing facilities, X-ray crystallography, computer and graphics equipment and formulation facilities. In addition to its research programs pursued in-house, BioCryst collaborates with academic institutions to support research in areas of the Company's product development interests and to conduct its clinical trials. Usually, research assistance provided by outside academic institutions is performed in conjunction with additional in-house research. The faculty member supervising the outside research effort may also participate as a consultant to the Company's in-house 6 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. effort. The Company's primary academic collaboration is with UAB and is described under "Business - Research and Development - UAB Collaborative Arrangements." During the years ended December 31, 1995, 1996 and 1997, the Company spent an aggregate of $25,270,777 on research and development. Of that amount, $7,107,249 was spent in 1995, $7,586,159 was spent in 1996 and $10,577,369 was sent in 1997. Approximately $13,682,948 of that amount was spent on in-house research and development and $11,587,829 was spent on contract research and development. Torii In May 1996, the Company entered into an agreement pursuant to which it granted Torii an exclusive license, with the right to sublicense, to develop, manufacture and commercialize BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds in Japan for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, T-cell cancers (including CTCL) and atopic dermatitis. Upon entering into the agreement, Torii paid the Company $1.5 million in license fees and made a $1.5 million equity investment in the Company, purchasing 76,608 shares of Common Stock at a purchase price of $19.58 per share. A milestone payment of $1 million was made in 1997. In order for Torii to maintain its licensing rights, it is obligated to make payments to the Company of up to $18 million upon the achievement of specified development milestones. Torii is responsible for all development, regulatory and commercialization expenses in Japan and is obligated to pay royalties to the Company on sales of licensed products in Japan. The agreement will remain in effect, unless earlier terminated, until the last to expire of any patent rights licensed under the agreement, or in the event no patents issue, for twenty years from May 31, 1996. The agreement is subject to termination by Torii at any time and by the Company in certain circumstances, including any material breaches of the agreement by Torii. Pursuant to the agreement, Torii may negotiate a license with the Company to develop BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds for additional indications. 3-Dimensional Pharmaceuticals In October 1996, the Company signed an agreement with 3-Dimensional Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("3DP") of Exton, Pennsylvania, under which the companies will share resources and technology to expedite the identification of inhibitors of key serine protease enzymes which represent promising targets for inhibition of complement activation. The agreement combines BioCryst's capabilities in structure-based drug design with the selection power of 3DP's DirectedDiversity(R), a proprietary method of directing combinatorial chemistry and high throughput screening toward specific molecular targets, used to rapidly discover and optimize new drugs. Under the terms of this agreement, the companies will be responsible for their own research costs. If compounds are discovered as a result of the collaboration, the companies will then negotiate clinical development and commercialization rights to those compounds. UAB Collaborative Arrangements UAB has one of the leading X-ray crystallography centers in the world with approximately 140 full-time staff members and approximately $17.7 million in research grants and contract funding in 1997. In 1986, the Company entered into an agreement with UAB which granted the Company exclusive rights to any discoveries resulting from research relating to PNP. Since 1990, the Company has entered into several other research agreements with UAB to perform research for the Company. The agreements provide that UAB perform specific research for the Company in return for research payments and license fees. In November 1994, the Company entered into an agreement with UAB for the joint research and development relating to development of an influenza neuraminidase inhibitor. UAB has granted the Company certain rights to any discoveries in this area resulting from research previously developed by UAB or jointly developed with BioCryst. The Company has agreed to fund certain UAB research laboratories, to expend at least $6 million for the project over a period coinciding with the period the Company funds UAB's research laboratories, to pay certain royalties on sales of any resulting product and to share in future payments received from other third-party collaborators. In July 1995, the Company entered into an agreement with UAB for the joint research and development relating to Factor D inhibitors. UAB has also granted the Company certain rights to any discoveries in this area resulting from research previously developed by UAB or jointly developed with BioCryst. The Company has agreed to fund certain UAB research laboratories, to expend at least $1 million for the project over a three-year period, to pay certain royalties on sales of any resulting product and to share in future payments received from other third-party collaborators. These 7 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. two agreements have initial 25-year terms (automatically renewable for five-year terms throughout the life of the last patent or extension thereof incorporating the license rights) and are terminable by the Company upon three months' notice and by UAB under certain circumstances. BioCryst believes that due to the expertise of the faculty at UAB in the various disciplines employed by BioCryst in its structure-based drug design programs, including X-ray crystallography, and UAB's past performance in identifying and characterizing medically relevant protein targets, BioCryst's relationship with UAB is important to the success of BioCryst. No assurance can be given, however, that UAB's research will be beneficial to BioCryst or that BioCryst will be able to maintain its relationship with UAB. See Note 9 to Notes to Financial Statements. Grants and Technology Agreements In 1987, the Company entered into a research agreement under which BioCryst received approximately $960,000 over four years from Novartis to fund its research of PNP inhibitors and Novartis was granted certain rights to enter into various option and license agreements for PNP inhibitors. In 1990, Novartis exercised its right pursuant to which the Company granted Novartis an exclusive option to enter into a worldwide exclusive license for several of the Company's PNP inhibitor compounds. The license does not include BCX-34. Novartis signed that license agreement and paid the Company a $500,000 fee (up to $300,000 of which is refundable in certain circumstances) following patent issuance in 1993. The terms of the license also call for Novartis to make milestone payments based upon the estimated annual United States sales of the licensed products plus royalties. No assurance can be given that any additional revenues will be realized by the Company pursuant to the license. Novartis' other rights to enter into various option and license agreements for PNP inhibitors have expired. See Note 9 to Notes to Financial Statements. In 1991 and 1992, BioCryst was awarded three $50,000 Phase I SBIR grants by the NIH. They were used to support the design and synthesis of inhibitors to influenza neuraminidase, Factor D and aldose reductase. In 1992, the Company was also awarded $47,500 by the Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs which was used in the design and synthesis of inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase. In February 1994, BioCryst was awarded a two-year $500,000 Phase II SBIR grant by the NIH. The grant was used to support the design of inhibitors of Factor D. There is no assurance that BioCryst will be awarded any future grants. Patents and Proprietary Information The Company owns or has rights to certain proprietary information, issued and allowed patents and patent applications which relate to compounds it is developing. The Company actively seeks, when appropriate, protection for its products and proprietary information by means of United States and foreign patents, trademarks and contractual arrangements. In addition, the Company plans to rely upon trade secrets and contractual arrangements to protect certain of its proprietary information and products. The Company has been issued seven United States patents which expire between 2009 to 2013 and relate to its PNP inhibitor compounds. The Company's current lead compound, BCX-34, is covered by one of the patents. This group also includes BCX-5, which may require a license from Warner-Lambert Company ("Warner-Lambert") to market a product containing this compound. The Company has the right of first refusal to negotiate a license from Warner-Lambert for that compound: however, there can be no assurance that such a license would be available or obtainable on terms acceptable to the Company. The Company has also been issued a patent by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") covering the manufacturing process of its PNP inhibitors which expires in 2015 and an additional patent application has been filed for another new process to prepare BCX-34 and other PNP inhibitors. In addition, one patent has issued by the PTO which expires in 2015 and two patent applications have been filed with the PTO relating to inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase. Also, two provisional United States patent applications have been filed with the PTO on complement inhibitors. There can be no assurance that any patents will provide the Company with sufficient protection against competitive products or otherwise be commercially valuable. The Company's success will depend in part on its ability to obtain and enforce patent protection for products developed by it, preserve its trade secrets, and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of third parties, both in the United States and other countries. In the absence of patent protection, the Company's business may be adversely affected by competitors who develop substantially equivalent technology. Because of the substantial length of time and expense associated with bringing new products through development and regulatory approval to the marketplace, the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries place considerable importance on obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection for new technologies, products and processes. There can be no assurance that patents will be 8 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. issued from such applications, that the Company will develop additional products that are patentable, or that present or future patents will provide sufficient protection to the Company's present or future technologies, products and processes. In addition, there can be no assurance that others will not independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information, design around the Company's patents or obtain access to the Company's know-how, or that others will not successfully challenge the validity of the Company's patents or be issued patents which may prevent the sale of one or more of the Company's product candidates, or require licensing and the payment of significant fees or royalties by the Company to third parties in order to enable the Company to conduct its business. Legal standards relating to the scope of claims and the validity of patents in the fields in which the Company is pursuing research and development are still evolving, are highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual issues. No assurance can be given as to the degree of protection or competitive advantage any patents issued to the Company will afford, the validity of any such patents or the Company's ability to avoid violating or infringing any patents issued to others. Further, there can be no guarantee that any patents issued to or licensed by the Company will not be infringed by the products of others. Litigation and other proceedings involving the defense and prosecution of patent claims can be expensive and time consuming, even in those instances in which the outcome is favorable to the Company, and can result in the diversion of resources from the Company's other activities. An adverse outcome could subject the Company to significant liabilities to third parties, require the Company to obtain licenses from third parties or require the Company to cease any related research and development activities or sales. The Company depends upon the knowledge, experience and skills (which are not patentable) of its key scientific and technical personnel. To protect its rights to its proprietary information, the Company requires all employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators to enter into confidentiality agreements which prohibit the disclosure of confidential information to anyone outside the Company and require disclosure and assignment to the Company of their ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions. There can be no assurance that these agreements will effectively prevent the unauthorized use or disclosure of the Company's confidential information. The Company's research has been funded in part by SBIR or NIH grants. As a result of such funding, the United States Government has certain rights in the inventions developed with the funding. These rights include a non-exclusive, paid-up, worldwide license under such inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the government has the right to require the Company to grant an exclusive license under any of such inventions to a third party if the government determines that (i) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize such inventions, (ii) such action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs or (iii) such action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulation. Federal law requires that any exclusive licensor of an invention that was partially funded by federal grants (which is the case with the subject matter of certain patents issued in the Company's name) agree that it will not grant exclusive rights to use or sell the invention in the United States unless the grantee agrees that any products embodying the invention will be manufactured substantially in the United States, although such requirement is subject to a discretionary waiver by the government. It is not expected that the government will exercise any such rights. Marketing, Distribution and Sales The Company lacks experience in marketing, distributing or selling pharmaceutical products and will have to develop a pharmaceutical sales force and/or rely on collaborators, licensees or on arrangements with others to provide for the marketing, distribution and sales of any products it may develop. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to establish marketing, distribution and sales capabilities or make arrangements with collaborators, licensees or others to perform such activities. Competition The pharmaceutical industry is intensely competitive. Many companies, including biotechnology, chemical and pharmaceutical companies, are actively engaged in activities similar to those of the Company, including research and development of drugs for the treatment of immunological and infectious diseases and disorders. Many of these companies have substantially greater financial and other resources, larger research and development staffs, and more extensive marketing and manufacturing organizations than the Company. In addition, some of them have considerable experience in preclinical testing, clinical trials and other regulatory approval procedures. There are also academic institutions, governmental agencies and other research organizations which are conducting research in areas in which the Company is working; they may also market commercial products, either on their own or through collaborative 9 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. efforts. BioCryst expects to encounter significant competition for any of the pharmaceutical products it plans to develop. Companies that complete clinical trials, obtain required regulatory approvals and commence commercial sales of their products before their competitors may achieve a significant competitive advantage. In addition, certain pharmaceutical and biotechnology firms, including major pharmaceutical companies and specialized structure-based drug design companies have announced efforts in the field of structure-based drug design and in the field of PNP inhibitors, and the Company is aware that other companies or institutions are pursuing development of new drugs and technologies directly targeted at applications for which the Company is developing its drug compounds. The Company expects that the technology for structure-based drug design will attract significant additional competitors over time. In order to compete successfully, the Company's goal is to develop proprietary positions in patented drugs for therapeutic markets which have not been satisfactorily addressed by conventional research strategies and, in the process, extend its expertise in structure-based drug design. Government Regulation BioCryst's research and development activities are, and its future business will be, subject to significant regulation by numerous governmental authorities in the United States, primarily, but not exclusively, by the FDA, and other countries. Pharmaceutical products intended for therapeutic or diagnostic use in humans are governed principally by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and by FDA regulations in the United States and by comparable laws and regulations in foreign countries. The process of completing clinical testing and obtaining FDA approval for a new drug product requires a number of years and the expenditure of substantial resources. Following drug discovery, the steps required before a new pharmaceutical product may be marketed in the United States include (1) preclinical laboratory and animal tests, (2) the submission to the FDA of an application for an IND, (3) clinical and other studies to assess safety and parameters of use, (4) adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the drug, (5) the submission of a New Drug Application ("NDA") to the FDA, and (6) FDA approval of the NDA prior to any commercial sale or shipment of the drug. Typically, preclinical studies are conducted in the laboratory and in animal model systems to gain preliminary information on the drug's pharmacology and toxicology and to identify any potential safety problems that would preclude testing in humans. The results of these studies are submitted to the FDA as part of the IND application. Testing in humans may commence 30 days after submission of the IND to the FDA unless the FDA objects, although companies typically wait for approval from the FDA before commencing clinical trials. A three phase clinical trial program is usually required for FDA approval of a pharmaceutical product. Phase I clinical trials are designed to determine the metabolism and pharmacologic effects of the drug in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, possibly, to obtain early indications of efficacy. These studies generally involve a small number of healthy volunteer subjects, but may be conducted in people with the disease the drug is intended to treat. Phase II studies are conducted in an expanded population to evaluate the effectiveness of the drug for a particular indication and thus involve patients with the disease under study. These studies are also intended to elicit additional safety data on the drug, including evidence of the short-term side effects and other risks associated with the drug. Phase III studies are generally designed to provide the substantial evidence of safety and effectiveness of a drug required to obtain FDA approval. They often involve a substantial number of patients in multiple study centers and may include chronic administration of the drug in order to assess the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug. A clinical trial may combine the elements of more than one phase, and typically two or more Phase III studies are required. Upon completion of clinical testing which demonstrates that the product is safe and effective for a specific indication, an NDA may be submitted to the FDA. This application includes details of the manufacturing and testing processes, preclinical studies and clinical trials. The designation of a clinical trial as being of a particular phase is not necessarily indicative that such a trial will be sufficient to satisfy the requirements of a particular phase. For example, no assurance can be given that a Phase III clinical trial will be sufficient to support an NDA without further clinical trials. The FDA monitors the progress of each of the three phases of clinical testing and may alter, suspend or terminate the trials based on the data that have been accumulated to that point and its assessment of the risk/benefit ratio to the patient. Typical estimates of the total time required for completing such clinical testing vary between four and ten years. FDA approval of the NDA is required before the applicant may market the new product in the United States. The clinical testing and FDA review process for new drugs are likely to require substantial time, effort and expense. There can be no assurance that any approval will be granted to the Company on a timely basis, if at all. The FDA may refuse to approve an NDA if applicable statutory 10 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. and/or regulatory criteria are not satisfied, or may require additional testing or information. There can be no assurance that such additional testing or the provision of such information, if required, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company. The regulatory process can be modified by Congress or the FDA in specific situations. In 1988, the FDA issued regulations intended to expedite the development, evaluation, and marketing of new therapeutic products to treat life-threatening and severely debilitating illnesses for which no satisfactory alternative therapies exist. These regulations provide for early consultation between the sponsor and the FDA in the design of both preclinical studies and clinical trials. Phase I clinical trials may sometimes be carried out in people with the disease that the drug is intended to treat rather than in healthy volunteers, as is customary, followed by studies to establish effectiveness in Phase II. If the results of Phase I and Phase II trials support the safety and effectiveness of the therapeutic agent, and their design and execution are deemed satisfactory upon review by the FDA, marketing approval can be sought at the end of Phase II trials. NDA approval granted under these regulations may be restricted by the FDA as necessary to ensure safe use of the drug. In addition, post-marketing clinical studies may be required. If after approval a post-marketing clinical study establishes that the drug does not perform as expected, or if post-marketing restrictions are not adhered to or are not adequate to ensure safe use of the drug, FDA approval may be withdrawn. The expedited approval may shorten the traditional drug development process by an estimated two to three years. There can be no assurance, however, that any compound the Company may develop will be eligible for evaluation by the FDA under the 1988 regulations or, if eligible, will be approved for marketing at all or, if approved for marketing, will be approved for marketing sooner than would be traditionally expected. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a "rare disease or condition," which generally is a disease or condition that affects populations of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are publicized by the FDA. Under current law, orphan drug designation grants certain U.S. marketing exclusivity to the first company to receive FDA approval to market such designated drug, subject to certain limitations. A product that is considered by the FDA to be different from a particular orphan drug or is approved for different indications is not barred from sale in the United States during the seven year exclusivity period. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory approval process. In October 1993, the Company obtained from the FDA an orphan drug designation for BCX-34 to treat CTCL, and may request orphan drug designation for more of its products and/or additional indications as part of its overall regulatory strategy in the future. There is no assurance, however, that any of its products will receive an orphan drug designation or be the first to be approved by the FDA for the designated indication and, hence, obtain orphan drug marketing exclusivity. Although obtaining FDA approval to market a product with an orphan drug designation can be advantageous, there can be no assurance that the scope of protection or the level of marketing exclusivity that is currently afforded by orphan drug designation and marketing approval will remain in effect in the future. There can be no assurance that the Company will receive FDA approval to market BCX-34 to treat CTCL. In addition, it is possible that other competitors of the Company could obtain orphan drug designation for product candidates that are not the same as BCX-34 though they are intended for use to treat CTCL. Even after initial FDA approval has been obtained, further studies may be required to provide additional data on safety or to gain approval for the use of a product as a treatment in clinical indications other than those for which the product was initially tested. The FDA may also require post-marketing testing and surveillance programs to monitor the drug's effects. Side effects resulting from the use of pharmaceutical products may prevent or limit the further marketing of products. Once the sale of a product is approved, the FDA regulates production, marketing, and other activities under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the FDA's implementing regulations. A post-marketing testing, surveillance and reporting program may be required to continuously monitor the product's usage and effects. Product approvals may be withdrawn, or other actions may be ordered, or sanctions imposed if compliance with regulatory requirements is not maintained. Other countries in which any products developed by the Company or its licensees may be marketed impose a similar regulatory process. In June 1995, the Company notified the FDA that it had submitted incorrect efficacy data to the FDA pertaining to its Phase II dose-ranging studies of BCX-34 for CTCL and psoriasis. Upon learning of the error, the Company initiated internal and external audits and submitted corrected analyses to the FDA. In addition, the Company hired a new Vice President of Clinical Development and outside expert personnel to manage clinical development and monitor studies, 11 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. developed additional standard operating procedures, and contracted with a contract research organization to assist the Company in monitoring its trial for BCX-34 for CTCL. In November 1995, the FDA inspected the Company in relation to a February 1995 48-hour skin stripping study involving application of BCX-34. At the conclusion of the inspection, the FDA issued to the Company a List of Inspectional Observations ("Form FDA 483") including the observation that there was no documentation of any monitoring of the study or of several other studies. The Company responded to this and the other observation in the Form FDA 483. Although the FDA has not raised any additional questions in the matter, the Company does not know whether its responses were satisfactory to the FDA. In June 1996, the FDA inspected the Company and one of its clinical sites in relation to Phase II dose-ranging studies of BCX-34 for CTCL and psoriasis, each of which was concluded in early 1995. At the conclusion of the inspection, the FDA issued to the Company a Form FDA 483 citing deficiencies relating to the monitoring of the studies and the Company's procedures for generating, archiving, and safeguarding the randomization tables used in the studies. The deficient procedures failed to prevent the use of an incorrect randomization table which ultimately resulted in the initial submission to the FDA of data which reported false statistical significance. The FDA issued a Form FDA 483 to the principal investigator at one of the Company's clinical sites, citing numerous significant deficiencies in the conduct of the Phase II dose-ranging study of BCX-34 for CTCL and psoriasis. These deficiencies included improper delegations of authority by the principal investigator, failures to follow the protocols, institutional review board deviations, and discrepancies or deficiencies in documentation and reporting. As a result of the FDA inspections, the Company has been notified that the FDA will not accept data from these studies at that clinical site. As a consequence of the FDA inspections and such resulting Form FDA 483s, the Company's ongoing clinical studies are likely to receive increased scrutiny from the FDA. The Company believes that its procedures and monitoring practices are now in compliance with the FDA's requirements governing Good Clinical Practice ("GCP"). There can be no assurance, however, that the FDA will agree or that, even if it does agree, it will not seek to impose administrative, civil, or other sanctions in connection with the earlier studies and submission. In addition to regulations enforced by the FDA, the Company also is subject to regulation under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Environmental Protection Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and other similar Federal, state and local regulations governing permissible laboratory activities, waste disposal handling of toxic, dangerous or radioactive materials and other matters. The Company believes that it is in compliance with such regulations. For marketing outside the United States, the Company will be subject to foreign regulatory requirements governing human clinical trials and marketing approval for drugs and devices. The requirements relating to the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. Human Resources As of March 15, 1998, the Company had 55 employees, of whom 41 were engaged in research and development and 14 were in general and administrative functions. The Company's scientific staff (19 of whom hold Ph.D. or M.D. degrees) has diversified experience in biochemistry, pharmacology, X-ray crystallography, synthetic organic chemistry, computational chemistry, medicinal chemistry and pharmacology. The Company considers its relations with its employees to be satisfactory. Scientific Advisory Board and Consultants BioCryst has assembled a Scientific Advisory Board comprised of six members (the "Scientific Advisors") who are leaders in certain of the Company's core disciplines or who otherwise have specific expertise in its therapeutic focus areas. The Scientific Advisory Board meets as a group at scheduled meetings and the Scientific Advisors meet more frequently, on an individual basis, with the Company's scientific personnel and management to discuss the Company's ongoing research and drug discovery and development projects. The Company also has consulting agreements with a number of other scientists (the "Consultants") with expertise in the Company's core disciplines or in its therapeutic focus areas who are consulted from time to time by the Company. 12 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. The Scientific Advisors and the Consultants are reimbursed for their expenses and receive nominal cash compensation in connection with their service and have been issued options and/or shares of Common Stock. The Scientific Advisors have been issued a total of 4,975 shares of Common Stock for nominal consideration and granted stock options to purchase a total of 75,000 shares of Common Stock at a weighted average exercise price of $7.37 per share. Consultants have also been granted stock options to purchase a total of 30,000 shares at a weighted average exercise price of $7.52 per share. The Scientific Advisors and the Consultants are all employed by or have consulting agreements with entities other than the Company, some of which may compete with the Company in the future. The Scientific Advisors and the Consultants are expected to devote only a small portion of their time to the business of the Company, although no specific time commitment has been established. They are not expected to participate actively in the Company's affairs or in the development of the Company's technology. Certain of the institutions with which the Scientific Advisors and the Consultants are affiliated may adopt new regulations or policies that limit the ability of the Scientific Advisors and the Consultants to consult with the Company. The loss of the services of certain of the Scientific Advisors and the Consultants could adversely affect the Company to the extent that the Company is pursuing research or development in areas of such Scientific Advisors' and Consultants' expertise. To the extent members of the Company's Scientific Advisory Board or the Consultants have consulting arrangements with or become employed by any competitor of the Company, the Company could be materially adversely affected. One member of the Scientific Advisory Board, Dr. Gordon N. Gill, is a member of the Board of Directors of the Agouron Institute. The Agouron Institute is a shareholder in, and has had contractual relationships with, Agouron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a company utilizing core technology which is similar to the core technology employed by BioCryst. The Scientific Advisory Board consists of the following individuals: Name Position ---- -------- Albert F. LoBuglio, M.D. (Chairman).. Professor of Medicine and the Director of the Comprehensive Cancer Center of UAB Gordon N. Gill, M.D.................. Professor of Medicine and Chair of the Faculty of Basic Biomedical Sciences at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine Robert E. Handschumacher, Ph.D....... Retired Professor and former Chairman of the Department of Pharmacology at Yale University School of Medicine Herbert A. Hauptman, Ph.D............ Research Professor in Biophysical Science at the State University of New York (Buffalo), the President of the Hauptman-Woodward Medical Research Institute, Inc. (formerly the Medical Foundation (Buffalo), Inc.), and Research Professor in Biophysical Sciences at the State University of New York (Buffalo), recipient of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1985) Yuichi Iwaki, M.D., Ph.D............. Professor of Urology and Pathology, University of Southern California School of Medicine Hamilton O. Smith, M.D............... Professor, Molecular Biology and Genetics Department at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, recipient of the Nobel Prize in Medicine (1978) Any inventions or processes independently discovered by the Scientific Advisors or the Consultants may not become the property of the Company and will probably remain the property of such persons or of such persons' employers. In addition, the institutions with which the 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Scientific Advisors and the Consultants are affiliated may make available the research services of their personnel, including the Scientific Advisors and the Consultants, to competitors of the Company pursuant to sponsored research agreements. The Company requires the Scientific Advisors and the Consultants to enter into confidentiality agreements which prohibit the disclosure of confidential information to anyone outside the Company and require disclosure and assignment to the Company of their ideas, developments, discoveries or inventions. However, no assurance can be given that competitors of the Company will not gain access to trade secrets and other proprietary information developed by the Company and disclosed to the Scientific Advisors and the Consultants. 13 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 2. PROPERTIES The Company's administrative offices and principal research facility are located in 28,440 square feet of leased office space in Riverchase Industrial/Research Park in Birmingham, Alabama. The lease runs through July 31, 2000 with an option to lease for an additional three years at current market rates. The Company believes that its facilities are adequate for its current operations. Additional facilities will be necessary to manufacture sufficient quantities under good manufacturing practices to conduct extensive clinical trials or if the Company undertakes commercial manufacturing. See Note 5 to the Financial Statements. ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS None. ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS None. 14 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS PART II The Company's common stock trades on the Nasdaq National Market tier of The Nasdaq Stock MarketSM under the symbol BCRX. Public trading commenced on March 4, 1994. Prior to that date, there was no public market for the Company's stock. The following table sets forth the low and high prices as reported by Nasdaq for each quarter in 1997 and 1996: 1997 1996 ---- ---- Low High Low High ---- ----- ---- ---- First quarter $11.50 $17.00 $ 8.63 $10.25 Second quarter 10.06 14.75 9.13 20.75 Third quarter 4.25 13.75 10.63 17.13 Fourth quarter 6.25 8.38 10.50 17.13 The last sale price of the common stock on February 27, 1998 as reported by Nasdaq was $7.69 per share. As of February 27, 1998, there were approximately 566 holders of record of the common stock. The Company has never paid cash dividends and does not anticipate paying cash dividends. ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA Years Ended December 31, (In thousands, except per share) -------------------------------- Statement of Operations Data: 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- Total revenues $ 2,693 $ 2,652 $ 885 $ 734 $ 363 Research and development expenses $ 10,577 $ 7,586 $ 7,107 $ 5,552 $ 4,196 Net loss $(10,619) $ (7,698) $ (8,576) $ (6,938) $ (5,196) Net loss per share $ (.77) $ (.69) $ (.96) $ (1.02) $ (1.55) Weighted average shares outstanding 13,780 11,171 8,905 6,787 3,352 December 31, (In thousands) -------------- Balance Sheet Data: 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- Cash, cash equivalents and securities $ 24,643 $ 35,785 $ 11,414 $ 10,873 $ 2,873 Total assets 26,485 37,149 13,056 12,803 5,203 Long-term debt and obligations under capital leases, excluding current portion 34 58 300 573 855 Accumulated deficit (48,384) (37,766) (30,067) (21,491) (14,553) Total stockholders' equity 25,285 35,403 11,326 11,176 2,877 15 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS This Annual Report contains certain statements of a forward-looking nature relating to future events or the future financial performance of the Company. Such statements are only predictions and the actual events or results may differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include those discussed below as well as those discussed in other filings made by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Overview Since its inception in 1986, the Company has been engaged in research and development activities (including drug discovery, manufacturing compounds, conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials) and organizational efforts (including recruiting its scientific and management personnel), establishing laboratory facilities, engaging its Scientific Advisory Board and raising capital. The Company has not received any revenue from the sale of pharmaceutical products and does not expect to receive such revenues to a significant extent for at least several years, if at all. The Company has incurred operating losses since its inception. The Company expects to incur significant additional operating losses over the next several years and expects such losses to increase as the Company's research and development and clinical trial efforts expand. Year Ended December 31, 1997 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 1996 Collaborative and other research and development revenue decreased 35.8% to $1,000,000 in 1997 from $1,558,543 in 1996, primarily due to a $1 million milestone payment received from Torii in 1997 compared to the $1.5 million license fee received from Torii and a Factor D grant in 1996. Interest and other income increased 54.8% to $1,692,521 in 1997 from $1,093,617 in 1996, primarily due to interest earned on funds invested from the Company's public offering in September 1996. Research and development expenses increased 39.4% to $10,577,369 in 1997 from $7,586,159 in 1996. The increase was primarily attributable to costs associated with manufacturing compounds, clinical trials and preclinical studies and expenses associated with increased personnel. These costs tend to fluctuate from period to period depending upon the stage of development and the conduct of clinical trials. General and administrative expenses increased .7% to $2,682,137 in 1997 from $2,664,197 in 1996. The increase was in several categories, primarily increased personnel costs and the fact that 1996 expenses were reduced by the reversal of a liability recorded in 1995 for use taxes assessed that the Company successfully contested in 1996, and was partially offset by decreased fees and taxes on the Torii milestone in 1997 versus the fees and taxes on the Torii license in 1996 and decreased legal expenses in 1997. Interest expense decreased 48.1% to $51,880 in 1997 from $100,031 in 1996. The decrease was primarily due to a decline in capitalized lease obligations, along with long-term debt, resulting in lesser interest expense. The Company obtained most of its leases in connection with the move to its current facilities in April 1992. Year Ended December 31, 1996 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 1995 Collaborative and other research and development revenue increased 601.0% to $1,558,543 in 1996 from $222,329 in 1995, primarily due to the $1.5 million license fee received from Torii. This was offset by the decrease in the Factor D grant from 1995 due to its completion in early 1996. Interest and other income increased 65.1% to $1,093,617 in 1996 from $662,259 in 1995, primarily due to interest earned on funds from the Company's public offering in September 1996 and private placements in March 1996 and May 1995. Research and development expenses increased 6.7% to $7,586,159 in 1996 from $7,107,249 in 1995. The increase was primarily attributable to expenses associated with increased personnel. The costs associated with manufacturing compounds, clinical trials and preclinical studies were approximately the same in both 1996 and 1995. These costs tend 16 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. to fluctuate from period to period depending upon the stage of development and the conduct of clinical trials. General and administrative expenses increased 20.6% to $2,664,197 in 1996 from $2,209,488 in 1995. The increase was primarily the result of approximately $574,000 in consulting fees and withholding taxes incurred in connection with the license agreement with Torii which was offset by reversal of a liability recorded in 1995 for use taxes assessed that the Company successfully contested in 1996. Interest expense decreased 30.6% to $100,031 in 1996 from $144,115 in 1995. The decrease was primarily due to a decline in capitalized lease obligations, along with long-term debt, resulting in lesser interest expense. The Company obtained most of its leases in connection with the move to its current facilities in April 1992. Liquidity and Capital Resources Cash expenditures have exceeded revenues since the Company's inception. Operations have principally been funded through public offerings and private placements of equity and debt securities, equipment lease financing, facility leases, collaborative and other research and development agreements (including a license and options for licenses), research grants and interest income. In addition, the Company has attempted to contain costs and reduce cash flow requirements by renting scientific equipment or facilities, contracting with third parties to conduct certain research and development and using consultants. The Company expects to incur additional expenses, resulting in significant losses, as it continues and expands its research and development activities and undertakes additional preclinical studies and clinical trials of compounds which have been or may be discovered. The Company also expects to incur substantial administrative, manufacturing and commercialization expenditures in the future as it seeks FDA approval for its compounds and establishes its manufacturing capability under Good Manufacturing Practices, and substantial expenses related to the filing, prosecution, maintenance, defense and enforcement of patent and other intellectual property claims. At December 31, 1997, the Company's cash, cash equivalents and securities held-to-maturity were $24,643,486, a decrease of $11,141,182 from December 31, 1996 principally due to net cash used in the Company's operating activities ($10.3 million) and purchases of furniture and equipment ($1.1 million), partially offset by a number of other items. The Company has financed its equipment purchases primarily with lease lines of credit. The Company currently has a $500,000 line of credit with its bank to finance capital equipment. In January 1992, the Company entered into an operating lease for its current facilities which, based on an extension signed in March 1997, expires on July 31, 2000, with an option to lease for an additional three years at current market rates. The March 1997 extension also added 5,640 square feet of finished office space. The operating lease requires the Company to pay monthly rent (ranging from $14,562 and escalating annually to a minimum of $15,912 per month in the final year), and a pro rata share of operating expenses and real estate taxes in excess of base year amounts. At December 31, 1997, the Company had long-term capital lease and operating lease obligations which provide for aggregate minimum payments of $251,401 in 1998, $201,653 in 1999 and $127,610 in 2000. The Company is required to expend $6 million over a period coinciding with funding by the Company to UAB on its influenza neuraminidase project of which approximately $5.2 million was expended through December 31, 1997. In 1997, the Company upgraded all its personal computers and established a network using software packages that are generally year 2000 compliant. Consequently, the Company does not anticipate incurring additional significant costs to ensure that its operations will not be adversely impacted by the year 2000 software problem. In addition, the Company has committed to conducting certain clinical trials and animal studies in 1997 for an aggregate amount of approximately $.9 million at December 31, 1997. As described in Note 9, the Company entered into a license agreement with Torii under which Torii paid the Company $1.5 million in license fees and made a $1.5 million equity investment in the Company in 1996 and $1 million in a milestone payment in 1997. While the license agreement provides for additional potential milestone payments of up to $18 million and royalties on future sales of licensed products in Japan, there can be no assurance that Torii will continue to develop the product in Japan or that if it does so that it will result in meeting the milestones or achieving future sales of licensed products in Japan. 17 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. The Company plans to finance its needs principally from its existing capital resources and interest thereon, from payments under collaborative and licensing agreements with corporate partners, through research grants, and to the extent available, through lease or loan financing and future public or private financings. The Company believes that its available funds will be sufficient to fund the Company's operations at least through the end of 1998. However, this is a forward-looking statement, and no assurance can be given that there will be no change that would consume available resources significantly before such time. The Company's long-term capital requirements and the adequacy of its available funds will depend upon many factors, including continued scientific progress in its research, drug discovery and development programs, the magnitude of these programs, progress with preclinical studies and clinical trials, prosecuting and enforcing patent claims, competing technological and market developments, changes in existing collaborative research or development relationships, the ability of the Company to establish additional collaborative relationships, and the cost of manufacturing scale-up and effective marketing activities and arrangements. Additional funding, whether through additional sales of securities or collaborative or other arrangements with corporate partners or from other sources, may not be available when needed or on terms acceptable to the Company. Insufficient funds may require the Company to delay, scale-back or eliminate certain of its research and development programs or to license third parties to commercialize products or technologies that the Company would otherwise undertake itself. Certain Factors That May Affect Future Results, Financial Condition and the Market Price of Securities Early Stage of Development; Uncertainty of Product Development; Technological Uncertainty BioCryst is at an early stage of development. All of the Company's compounds are in research and development, and no revenues have been generated from sales of its compounds. It will be a number of years, if ever, before the Company will recognize significant revenues from product sales or royalties. To date, most of the Company's resources have been dedicated to the research and development of pharmaceutical compounds based upon its PNP program for the treatment of T-cell proliferative diseases and disorders and for the development of inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase and enzymes and proteins involved in the complement cascade. The Company is conducting preclinical and clinical studies with its lead drugs, BCX-34 and BCX-1470, and results from these studies may not support future human clinical testing or further development of the compound. Recently completed Phase III trials with a cream formulation of BCX-34 for treatment of CTCL and psoriasis did not show statistical efficacy. Accordingly, the Company has discontinued further development of the cream formulation of BCX-34, but is continuing its oral trials for BCX-34 and a Phase I trial for a topical ointment treatment for psoriasis. T-cell proliferative diseases, as well as the other disease indications the Company is studying, are highly complex and their causes are not fully known. The Company's compounds under development will require significant additional, time-consuming and costly research and development, preclinical testing and extensive clinical testing prior to submission of any regulatory application for commercial use. Product development of new pharmaceuticals is highly uncertain, and unanticipated developments, clinical or regulatory delays, unexpected adverse side effects or inadequate therapeutic efficacy could slow or prevent product development efforts and have a material adverse effect on the Company. BioCryst's lead drug, BCX-34, reversibly inhibits T-cell activity, an essential component of the human immune system. In addition to any direct toxicities or side effects the drug may cause, BCX-34, while inhibiting T-cells, may compromise the immune system's ability to fight infection. Although the Company will monitor immunosuppression during drug dosing, there can be no assurance that the drug will not cause irreversible immunosuppression. There can be no assurance that the Company's research or product development efforts as to any particular compound will be successfully completed, that the compounds currently under development will be safe or efficacious, that required regulatory approvals can be obtained, that products can be manufactured at acceptable cost and with appropriate quality or that any approved products can be successfully marketed or will be accepted by patients, health care providers and third-party payors. Few drugs discovered by use of structure-based drug design have been successfully developed, approved by the FDA or marketed. Within the pharmaceutical industry, treatment of the disease indications being pursued by the Company, especially T-cell proliferative diseases such as CTCL and psoriasis, have proven difficult. There can be no assurance that drugs resulting from the approach of structure-based drug design employed by the Company will overcome the difficulties of drug discovery and development or result in commercially successful products. Uncertainty Associated with Preclinical and Clinical Testing Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any of its products, BioCryst must undertake 18 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. extensive preclinical and clinical testing to demonstrate their safety and efficacy in humans. The Company has limited experience in conducting clinical trials. To date, the Company has conducted initial preclinical testing of certain of its compounds and is testing oral and topical ointment formulations of BCX-34 in various clinical trials. The results of initial preclinical and clinical testing of compounds under development by the Company are neither necessarily predictive of results that will be obtained from subsequent or more extensive preclinical and clinical testing nor necessarily acceptable to the FDA to support applications for marketing permits. However, the Company recently completed two Phase III trials of a topical cream formulation of BCX-34 which did not show statistical efficacy. Even if the results of subsequent clinical tests are positive, products, if any, resulting from the Company's research and development programs are not likely to be commercially available for several years. Additionally, the Company has made and may in the future make changes to the formulation of its drugs and/or to the processes for manufacturing its drugs. Any such future changes in formulation or manufacturing processes could result in delays in conducting further preclinical and clinical testing, in unexpected adverse events in further preclinical and clinical testing, and/or in additional development expenses. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that clinical studies of products under development will be acceptable to the FDA or demonstrate the safety and efficacy of such products at all or to the extent necessary to obtain regulatory approvals of such products. Companies in the industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after promising results in earlier trials. The failure to comply with data integrity GCP requirements or to adequately demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a therapeutic product under development could delay or prevent regulatory approval of the product, and would have a material adverse effect on the Company. The rate of completion of clinical trials is dependent upon, among other factors, the rate of enrollment of patients. Patient accrual is a function of many factors, including the size of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the study and the existence of competitive clinical trials. Delays in planned patient enrollment in the Company's current trials or future clinical trials may result in increased costs and/or program delays which could have a material adverse effect on the Company. Government Regulation; No Assurance of Product Approval The research, testing, manufacture, labeling, distribution, advertising, marketing and sale of drug products are subject to extensive regulation by governmental authorities in the United States and other countries. Prior to marketing, compounds developed by the Company must undergo an extensive regulatory approval process required by the FDA and by comparable agencies in other countries. This process, which includes preclinical studies and clinical trials of each compound to establish its safety and effectiveness and confirmation by the FDA that good laboratory, clinical and manufacturing practices were maintained during testing and manufacturing, can take many years, requires the expenditure of substantial resources and gives larger companies with greater financial resources a competitive advantage over the Company. To date, no compound or drug candidate being evaluated by the Company has been submitted for approval to the FDA or any other regulatory authority for marketing, and there can be no assurance that any such product or compound will ever be approved for marketing or that the Company will be able to obtain the labeling claims desired for its products or compounds. The Company is and will continue to be dependent upon the laboratories and medical institutions conducting its preclinical studies and clinical trials to maintain both good laboratory and good clinical practices and, except for the formulating and packaging of small quantities of its drug formulations which the Company is currently undertaking, upon the manufacturers of its compounds to maintain compliance with current good manufacturing practices ("GMP") requirements. Data obtained from preclinical studies and clinical trials are subject to varying interpretations which could delay, limit or prevent FDA regulatory approval. Delays or rejections may be encountered based upon changes in FDA policy for drug approval during the period of development and FDA regulatory review. Similar delays also may be encountered in foreign countries. Moreover, even if approval is granted, such approval may entail commercially unacceptable limitations on the labeling claims for which a compound may be marketed. Even if such regulatory approval is obtained, a marketed drug or compound and its manufacturer are subject to continual review and inspection, and later discovery of previously unknown problems with the product or manufacturer may result in restrictions or sanctions on such product or manufacturer, including withdrawal of the product from the market, and other enforcement actions. In June 1995 the Company notified the FDA that it had submitted incorrect efficacy data to the FDA pertaining to its Phase II dose-ranging studies of BCX-34 for CTCL and psoriasis. The FDA inspected the Company in November 1995 19 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. in relation to a study involving the topical application of BCX-34 concluded in early 1995, and in June 1996 the FDA inspected the Company and one of its clinical sites in relation to a Phase II dose-ranging study of BCX-34 for CTCL and a Phase II dose ranging study for psoriasis, both of which were concluded in early 1995. After each inspection, the FDA issued to the Company a Form FDA 483 setting forth certain deficient GCP procedures followed by the Company, some of which resulted in submission to the FDA of efficacy data which reported false statistical significance. The FDA also issued a Form FDA 483 to the principal investigator at one of the Company's clinical sites citing numerous significant deficiencies in the conduct of the Phase II dose-ranging studies of BCX-34 for CTCL and psoriasis. These deficiencies included improper delegations of authority by the principal investigator, failures to follow the protocols, institutional review board deviations, and discrepancies or deficiencies in documentation and reporting. As a consequence of the FDA inspections and such resulting Form FDA 483s, the Company's ongoing clinical studies are likely to receive increased scrutiny since the same clinical site which received the Form FDA 483 is involved in the Company's oral trials; this may delay the regulatory review process or require the Company to increase the number of patients at other sites to obtain approval (which can not be assured on a timely basis or at all). The Company has adjusted certain of its procedures, but there can be no assurance that the FDA will find such adjustments to be in compliance with FDA requirements or that, even if it does find such adjustments to be in compliance, it will not seek to impose administrative, civil or other sanctions in connection with the earlier studies. Administrative sanctions could include refusing to accept earlier studies and requiring the Company to repeat one or more clinical studies, which would be the only studies the FDA would accept for purposes of substantive scientific review of any NDA by the agency. Such sanctions or other government regulation may delay or prevent the marketing of products being developed by the Company, impose costly procedures upon the Company's activities and confer a competitive advantage to larger companies or companies that are more experienced in regulatory affairs and that compete with the Company. There can be no assurance that FDA or other regulatory approval for any products developed by the Company will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. Delay in obtaining or failure to obtain such regulatory approvals will materially adversely affect the marketing of any products which may be developed by the Company, as well as the Company's results of operations. History of Operating Losses; Accumulated Deficit; Uncertainty of Future Profitability BioCryst, to date, has generated no revenue from product sales and has incurred losses since its inception. As of December 31, 1997, the Company's accumulated deficit was approximately $48.4 million. Losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in research activities aimed at discovering, designing and developing the Company's pharmaceutical product candidates and from general and administrative costs. These costs have exceeded the Company's revenues, which to date have been generated primarily from collaborative arrangements, licenses, research grants and from interest income. The Company expects to incur significant additional operating losses over the next several years and expects such losses to increase as the Company's research and development and clinical trial efforts expand. The Company's ability to achieve profitability depends upon its ability to develop drugs and to obtain regulatory approval for its products that may be developed, to enter into agreements for product development, manufacturing and commercialization, and to develop the capacity to manufacture, market and sell its products. There can be no assurance that the Company will ever achieve significant revenues or profitable operations. Additional Financing Requirements; Uncertainty of Additional Funding The Company has incurred negative cash flows from operations in each year since its inception. The Company expects that the funding requirements for its operating activities will increase substantially in the future due to expanded research and development activities (including preclinical studies and clinical trials), the development of manufacturing capabilities and the development of marketing and distribution capabilities. The Company anticipates that its capital resources are adequate to satisfy its capital requirements at least through 1998. However, this is a forward-looking statement, and no assurance can be given that there will be no change that would consume available resources significantly before such time. The Company's future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including continued scientific progress in its research, drug discovery and development programs, the magnitude of these programs, progress with preclinical studies and clinical trials, prosecuting and enforcing patent claims, competing technological and market developments, changes in existing collaborative research or development relationships, the ability of the Company to establish additional collaborative relationships, and the cost of manufacturing scale-up and 20 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. effective marketing activities and arrangements. The Company anticipates, based on its current business plan, that it will be necessary to raise additional funds in 1999 or earlier. Additional funds, if any, may possibly be raised through financing arrangements or collaborative relationships and/or the issuance of preferred or common stock or convertible securities, on terms and prices significantly more favorable than those of the currently outstanding Common Stock, which could have the effect of diluting or adversely affecting the holdings or rights of existing stockholders of the Company. In addition, collaborative arrangements may require the Company to transfer certain material rights to such corporate partners. If adequate funds are not available, the Company will be required to delay, scale back or eliminate one or more of its research, drug discovery or development programs or attempt to obtain funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or others that may require the Company to relinquish some or all of its rights to certain of its intellectual property, product candidates or products. No assurance can be given that additional financing will be available to the Company on acceptable terms, if at all. Competition The Company is engaged in the pharmaceutical industry, which is characterized by extensive research efforts, rapid technological progress and intense competition. There are many public and private companies, including well-known pharmaceutical companies, chemical companies, specialized biotechnology companies and academic institutions, engaged in developing synthetic pharmaceuticals and biotechnological products for human therapeutic applications that represent significant competition to the Company. Existing products and therapies and improvements thereto will compete directly with products the Company is seeking to develop and market, and the Company is aware that other companies or institutions are pursuing development of new drugs and technologies directly targeted at applications for which the Company is developing its drug compounds. Many of the Company's competitors have substantially greater financial and technical resources and production and marketing capabilities and experience than does the Company. The Company has granted Novartis, a worldwide exclusive license to several compounds in the Company's sixth group of PNP inhibitors. Such arrangement with Novartis does not include BCX-34 or most of the Company's other compounds. No assurance can be given that Novartis will or will not develop compounds under such arrangements, will be able to obtain FDA approval for any licensed compounds, that any such licensed compounds if so approved will be able to be commercialized successfully, or that the Company will realize any revenues pursuant to such arrangements. If commercialized, these compounds could compete directly against other compounds, including BCX-34, being developed by the Company. Many of the Company's competitors have significantly greater experience in conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials of new pharmaceutical products and in obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals for health care products. Accordingly, BioCryst's competitors may succeed in obtaining approvals for their products more rapidly than the Company and in developing products that are safer or more effective or less costly than any that may be developed by the Company and may also be more successful than the Company in the production and marketing of such products. Many of the Company's competitors also have current GMP facilities and significantly greater experience in implementing GMP or in obtaining and maintaining the requisite regulatory standards for manufacturing. Moreover, other technologies are, or may in the future become, the basis for competitive products. Competition may increase further as a result of the potential advances from structure-based drug design and greater availability of capital for investment in this field. There can be no assurance that the Company's competitors will not succeed in developing technologies and products that are more effective than any being developed by the Company or that would render the Company's technology and product candidates obsolete or noncompetitive. Dependence on Collaborative Partners; Relationship with The University of Alabama at Birmingham The Company's strategy for research, development and commercialization of certain of its products is to rely in part upon various arrangements with corporate partners, licensees and others. As a result, the Company's products are dependent in large part upon the subsequent success of such third parties in performing preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, manufacturing and marketing. The Company entered into an exclusive license agreement with Torii in May 1996 to develop, manufacture and commercialize in Japan BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds for three indications. The Company has also entered into collaborative arrangements with Novartis and intends to pursue additional collaborations in the future. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to negotiate additional acceptable collaborative arrangements or that such arrangements will be successful. No 21 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. assurance can be given that the Company's collaborative partners will be able to obtain FDA approval for any licensed compounds, that any such licensed compounds, if so approved, will be able to be commercialized successfully, or that the Company will realize any revenues pursuant to such arrangements. Although the Company believes that parties to collaborative arrangements generally have an economic motivation to succeed in performing their contractual responsibilities, the amount and timing of resources which they devote to these activities are not within the control of the Company. There can be no assurance that such parties will perform their obligations as expected or that current or potential collaborators will not pursue treatments for other diseases or seek alternative means of developing treatments for the diseases targeted by collaborative programs with the Company or that any additional revenues will be derived from such arrangements. If any of the Company's collaborators breaches or terminates its agreement with the Company or otherwise fails to conduct its collaborative activities in a timely manner, the development or commercialization of the product candidate or research program under such collaboration agreement may be delayed, the Company may be required to undertake unforeseen additional responsibilities or to devote unforeseen additional resources to such development or commercialization, or such development or commercialization could be terminated. The termination or cancellation of collaborative arrangements could also adversely affect the Company's financial condition, intellectual property position and operations. In addition, disagreements between collaborators and the Company have in the past and could in the future lead to delays in the collaborative research, development or commercialization of certain product candidates, or could require or result in legal process or arbitration for resolution. These consequences could be time-consuming, expensive and could have material adverse effects on the Company. The successful commercialization of the Company's compounds and product candidates is also dependent upon the Company's ability to develop collaborative arrangements with academic institutions and consultants to support research and development efforts and to conduct clinical trials. The Company's primary academic collaboration is with UAB. The Company is highly dependent upon its collaborative arrangements with UAB to support its ongoing research and development programs and the termination or cessation of such relationship could have a material adverse effect upon the Company. There can be no assurance that the Company's current arrangements with UAB will continue or that the Company will be able to develop successful collaborative arrangements with academic institutions and consultants in the future. Uncertainty of Protection of Patents and Proprietary Rights The Company's success will depend in part on its ability to obtain and enforce patent protection for its products, preserve its trade secrets, and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of third parties, both in the United States and in other countries. In the absence of patent protection, the Company's business may be adversely affected by competitors who develop substantially equivalent technology. Because of the substantial length of time and expense associated with bringing new products through development and regulatory approval to the marketplace, the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries place considerable importance on obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection for new technologies, products and processes. To date, the Company has been issued seven United States patents related to its PNP inhibitor compounds. One of these compounds is under a patent issued to Warner-Lambert and the Company may require a license from Warner-Lambert to market a product containing one or both of these compounds. The Company has the right of first refusal to negotiate a license from Warner-Lambert for that compound, however, there can be no assurance that such a license would be available or obtainable on terms acceptable to the Company. A patent has also been issued by the PTO on a new process to prepare BCX-34 and other PNP inhibitors and an additional patent application has been filed for another new process to prepare BCX-34 and other PNP inhibitors. In addition, one patent has been issued by the PTO and two patent applications have been filed with the PTO relating to inhibitors of influenza neuraminidase. Also, two provisional United States patent applications have been filed with the PTO on complement inhibitors. The Company has filed certain corresponding foreign patent applications and intends to file additional foreign patent applications and additional United States patent applications, as appropriate. There can be no assurance that patents will be issued from such applications, that the Company will develop additional products that are patentable or that present or future patents will provide sufficient protection to the Company's present or future technologies, products and processes. In addition, there can be no assurance that others will not independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information, design around the Company's patents or obtain access to the Company's know-how or that others will not successfully challenge the validity of the Company's patents or be issued patents which may prevent the sale of one or more of the Company's product candidates, or require licensing and the payment of significant fees or royalties by the Company to third parties in order 22 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. to enable the Company to conduct its business. Legal standards relating to the scope of claims and the validity of patents in the fields in which the Company is pursuing research and development are still evolving, are highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual issues. No assurance can be given as to the degree of protection or competitive advantage any patents issued to the Company will afford, the validity of any such patents or the Company's ability to avoid infringing any patents issued to others. Further, there can be no guarantee that any patents issued to or licensed by the Company will not be infringed by the products of others. Litigation and other proceedings involving the defense and prosecution of patent claims can be expensive and time consuming, even in those instances in which the outcome is favorable to the Company, and can result in the diversion of resources from the Company's other activities. An adverse outcome could subject the Company to significant liabilities to third parties, require the Company to obtain licenses from third parties or require the Company to cease any related research and development activities or sales. The Company's success is also dependent upon the skills, knowledge and experience (none of which is patentable) of its scientific and technical personnel. To help protect its rights, the Company requires all employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators to enter into confidentiality agreements which prohibit the disclosure of confidential information to anyone outside the Company and requires disclosure and assignment to the Company of their ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions. There can be no assurance, however, that these agreements will provide adequate protection for the Company's trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information in the event of any unauthorized use or disclosure or the lawful development by others of such information. The Company's management and scientific personnel have been recruited primarily from other pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions. In many cases, these individuals are continuing research in the same areas with which they were involved prior to joining BioCryst and may be restricted by agreement from disclosing to the Company trade secrets they learned elsewhere. As a result, the Company could be subject to allegations of violation of such agreements and similar claims and litigation regarding such claims could ensue. Dependence on Key Management and Qualified Personnel The Company is highly dependent upon the efforts of its senior management and scientific team. The loss of the services of one or more members of the senior management and scientific team could significantly impede the achievement of development objectives. Although the Company maintains, and is the beneficiary of, a $2 million key-man insurance policy on the life of Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D., Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer, the Company does not believe the proceeds would be adequate to compensate for his loss. Due to the specialized scientific nature of the Company's business, the Company is also highly dependent upon its ability to attract and retain qualified scientific, technical and key management personnel. There is intense competition for qualified personnel in the areas of the Company's activities, and there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to continue to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of its existing business and its expansion into areas and activities requiring additional expertise, such as production and marketing. The loss of, or failure to recruit, scientific, technical and managerial personnel could have a material adverse effect on the Company. In addition, the Company relies on members of its Scientific Advisory Board and consultants to assist the Company in formulating its research and development strategy. All of the members of the Scientific Advisory Board and all of the Company's consultants are employed by other employers, and each such member or consultant may have commitments to, or consulting or advisory contracts with, other entities that may limit their availability to the Company. Lack of Manufacturing, Marketing or Sales Capability The Company has not yet manufactured or marketed any products and currently does not have the facilities to manufacture its product candidates in commercial quantities under GMP as prescribed and required by the FDA. To be successful, the Company's products must be manufactured in commercial quantities under GMP and at acceptable costs. Although the Company is formulating and packaging under GMP conditions small amounts of certain drug formulations which are the subject of preclinical studies and clinical trials, the current facilities of the Company are not adequate for commercial scale production. Therefore, the Company will need to develop its own GMP manufacturing facility and/or depend on its collaborators, licensees or contract manufacturers for the commercial manufacture of its products. The Company has no experience in such commercial manufacturing and no assurance can be given that the Company will be able to make the transition to commercial production successfully or at an acceptable cost. In 23 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. addition, no assurance can be given that the Company will be able to make arrangements with third parties to manufacture its products on acceptable terms, if at all. The inability of the Company to manufacture or provide for the manufacture of any products it may develop on a cost-effective basis would have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company has no experience in marketing, distributing or selling pharmaceutical products and will have to develop a pharmaceutical sales force and/or rely on its collaborators, licensees or arrangements with others to provide for the marketing, distribution and sales of any products it may develop. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to establish marketing, distribution and sales capabilities or make arrangements with collaborators, licensees or others to perform such activities. Uncertainty of Third-Party Reimbursement and Product Pricing Successful commercialization of any pharmaceutical products the Company may develop will depend in part upon the availability of reimbursement or funding from third-party health care payors such as government and private insurance plans. There can be no assurance that third-party reimbursement or funding will be available for newly approved pharmaceutical products or will permit price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on the Company's investment in its pharmaceutical product development. The U.S. Congress is considering a number of legislative and regulatory reforms that may affect companies engaged in the health care industry in the United States. Although the Company cannot predict whether these proposals will be adopted or the effects such proposals may have on its business, the existence and pendency of such proposals could have a material adverse effect on the Company in general. In addition, the Company's ability to commercialize potential pharmaceutical products may be adversely affected to the extent that such proposals have a material adverse effect on other companies that are prospective collaborators with respect to any of the Company's pharmaceutical product candidates. Third-party payors are continuing their efforts to contain or reduce the cost of health care through various means. For example, third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services. Also, the trend toward managed health care in the United States and the concurrent growth of organizations, such as health maintenance organizations, which can control or significantly influence the purchase of health care services and products, as well as legislative proposals to reform health care or reduce government insurance programs, may result in lower prices for pharmaceutical products. The cost containment measures that health care providers are instituting and the effect of any health care reform could materially adversely affect the Company's ability to sell its products if successfully developed and approved. Risk of Product Liability; Availability of Insurance The Company's business may be affected by potential product liability risks which are inherent in the testing, manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceutical and other products under development by the Company. There can be no assurance that product liability claims will not be asserted against the Company, its collaborators or licensees. The use of products developed by the Company in clinical trials and the subsequent sale of such products is likely to cause BioCryst to bear all or a portion of those risks. The Company does not have product liability insurance but does maintain coverage for clinical trials in the amount of $6 million per occurrence and in the aggregate. No assurance can be given that such insurance will be adequate to cover claims made with respect to the clinical trials. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain or maintain adequate product liability insurance on acceptable terms or that such insurance will provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that any collaborators or licensees of BioCryst will agree to indemnify the Company, be sufficiently insured or have a net worth sufficient to satisfy any such product liability claims. Hazardous Materials; Compliance with Environmental Regulations The Company's research and development involves the controlled use of hazardous materials, chemicals and various radioactive compounds. Although the Company believes that its safety procedures for handling and disposing of such materials comply with the standards prescribed by state and federal regulations, the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be completely eliminated. In the event of such an accident, the Company could be 24 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. held liable for any damages that result and any such liability could exceed the resources of the Company. The Company may incur substantial costs to comply with environmental regulations if the Company develops manufacturing capacity. Control by Existing Management and Stockholders; Effect of Certain Anti-Takeover Considerations The Company's directors, executive officers and certain principal stockholders and their affiliates own beneficially approximately 30.8% of the Common Stock. Accordingly, such holders, if acting together, may have the ability to exert significant influence over the election of the Company's Board of Directors and other matters submitted to the Company's stockholders for approval. The voting power of these holders may discourage or prevent any proposed takeover of the Company unless the terms thereof are approved by such holders. Pursuant to the Company's Composite Certificate of Incorporation (the "Certificate of Incorporation"), shares of Preferred Stock may be issued by the Company in the future without stockholder approval and upon such terms as the Board of Directors may determine. The rights of the holders of Common Stock will be subject to, and may be adversely affected by, the rights of the holders of any Preferred Stock that may be issued in the future. The issuance of Preferred Stock could have the effect of discouraging a third party from acquiring a majority of the outstanding Common Stock of the Company and preventing stockholders from realizing a premium on their shares. The Company's Certificate of Incorporation also provides for staggered terms for the members of the Board of Directors. A staggered Board of Directors and certain provisions of the Company's by-laws and of Delaware law applicable to the Company could delay or make more difficult a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving the Company. Price Volatility The securities markets have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. In addition, the market prices of the common stock of many publicly traded emerging pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies have in the past been, and can in the future be expected to be, especially volatile. Announcements of technological innovations or new products by the Company or its competitors, developments or disputes concerning patents or proprietary rights or collaboration partners, achieving or failing to achieve development milestones, publicity regarding actual or potential medical results relating to products under development by the Company or its competitors, regulatory developments in both U.S. and foreign countries, public concern as to the safety of pharmaceutical products and economic and other external factors, as well as period-to-period fluctuations in the Company's financial results, may have a significant impact on the market price of the Common Stock. 25 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA BALANCE SHEETS December 31, ------------ Assets 1997 1996 ------------ ------------ Cash and cash equivalents (Note 3) $ 3,757,098 $ 3,635,780 Securities held-to-maturity 15,723,631 24,229,033 Prepaid expenses and other current assets 214,777 233,454 ------------ ------------ Total current assets 19,695,506 28,098,267 Securities held-to-maturity 5,162,757 7,919,855 Furniture and equipment, net (Note 2) 1,557,537 1,130,790 Patents 68,928 ------------ ------------ Total assets $ 26,484,728 $ 37,148,912 ============ ============ Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity Accounts payable $ 245,180 $ 615,433 Accrued expenses (Note 4) 306,433 240,878 Accrued taxes, other than income (Note 4) 166,177 209,954 Accrued vacation 89,777 83,277 Current maturities of long-term debt (Note 5) 18,560 Current maturities of capital lease obligations (Note 5) 57,896 219,117 ------------ ------------ Total current liabilities 865,463 1,387,219 ------------ ------------ Capital lease obligations (Note 5) 34,469 58,472 ------------ ------------ Deferred license fee (Note 9) 300,000 300,000 ------------ ------------ Stockholders' equity (Notes 7 and 8): Preferred stock, $.01 par value, shares authorized- 5,000,000; none issued and outstanding Common stock, $.01 par value; shares authorized - 45,000,000; shares issued and outstanding - 13,817,667 - 1997; 13,697,734 - 1996 138,177 136,977 Additional paid-in capital 73,531,104 73,031,864 Accumulated deficit (48,384,485) (37,765,620) ------------ ------------ Total stockholders' equity 25,284,796 35,403,221 ------------ ------------ Commitments and contingency (Notes 5 and 9) Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $ 26,484,728 $ 37,148,912 ============ ============ See accompanying notes to financial statements. 26 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS Years Ended December 31, ------------------------ 1997 1996 1995 ------------ ------------ ------------ Revenues: Collaborative and other research and development (Notes 1 and 9) $ 1,000,000 $ 1,558,543 $ 222,329 Interest and other 1,692,521 1,093,617 662,259 ------------ ------------ ------------ Total revenues 2,692,521 2,652,160 884,588 ------------ ------------ ------------ Expenses: Research and development 10,577,369 7,586,159 7,107,249 General and administrative 2,682,137 2,664,197 2,209,488 Interest 51,880 100,031 144,115 ------------ ------------ ------------ Total expenses 13,311,386 10,350,387 9,460,852 ------------ ------------ ------------ Net loss $(10,618,865) $ (7,698,227) $ (8,576,264) ============ ============ ============ Net loss per share (Note 1) $ (.77) $ (.69) $ (.96) Weighted average shares outstanding (Note 1) 13,779,698 11,171,035 8,905,099 See accompanying notes to financial statements. 27 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY Additional Total Stock- Common Paid-in Accumulated Holders' Stock Capital Deficit Equity -------- ----------- ------------ ------------ Balance at December 31, 1994 $ 79,072 $32,588,017 $(21,491,129) $ 11,175,960 Sale of common stock, 1,570,000 shares 15,700 8,594,550 8,610,250 Exercise of stock options, 13,834 shares 138 50,556 50,694 Employee stock purchase plan sales, 13,331 shares 133 65,725 65,858 Net loss (8,576,264) (8,576,264) -------- ----------- ------------ ------------ Balance at December 31, 1995 95,043 41,298,848 (30,067,393) 11,326,498 Sale of common stock, 3,376,608 shares 33,766 30,495,652 30,529,418 Exercise of stock options, 45,255 shares 453 190,987 191,440 Employee stock purchase plan sales, 18,101 shares 181 147,362 147,543 Exercise of warrants, 753,439 shares 7,534 883,266 890,800 Compensation cost 15,749 15,749 Net loss (7,698,227) (7,698,227) -------- ----------- ------------ ------------ Balance at December 31, 1996 136,977 73,031,864 (37,765,620) 35,403,221 Exercise of stock options, 79,670 shares 797 272,389 273,186 Employee stock purchase plan sales, 15,933 shares 160 163,632 163,792 Exercise of warrants, 24,330 shares 243 (274) (31) Compensation cost 63,493 63,493 Net loss (10,618,865) (10,618,865) -------- ----------- ------------ ------------ Balance at December 31, 1997 $138,177 $73,531,104 $(48,384,485) $ 25,284,796 ======== =========== ============ ============ See accompanying notes to financial statements. 28 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS Years Ended December 31, ------------------------ 1997 1996 1995 ------------ ------------ ------------ Operating activities Net loss $(10,618,865) $ (7,698,227) $ (8,576,264) Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: Depreciation and amortization 648,935 524,367 554,025 Non-monetary compensation cost 63,493 15,749 Changes in operating assets and liabilities: Prepaid expenses and other assets 18,677 45,932 (34,539) Patents (68,928) Accounts payable (370,253) 405,256 62,063 Accrued expenses 65,555 53,205 16,661 Accrued taxes, other than income (43,777) (140,269) 326,497 Accrued vacation 6,500 (27,427) (24,023) ------------ ------------ ------------ Net cash used in operating activities (10,298,663) (6,821,414) (7,675,580) ------------ ------------ ------------ Investing activities Purchases of furniture and equipment (1,075,682) (292,374) (231,685) Purchase of marketable securities (12,200,183) (36,950,717) (11,397,640) Maturities of marketable securities 23,462,683 10,080,905 14,313,366 ------------ ------------ ------------ Net cash provided by/(used in) investing activities 10,186,818 (27,162,186) 2,684,041 ------------ ------------ ------------ Financing activities Principal payments of debt and capital lease obligations (254,547) (274,789) (278,354) Capital leases 50,763 Exercise of stock options 273,186 191,440 50,694 Employee Stock Purchase Plan stock sales 163,792 147,543 65,858 Exercise of warrants (31) 890,800 Sale of common stock, net of issuance costs 30,529,418 8,610,250 ------------ ------------ ------------ Net cash provided by financing activities 233,163 31,484,412 8,448,448 ------------ ------------ ------------ Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 121,318 (2,499,188) 3,456,909 Cash and equivalents at beginning of period 3,635,780 6,134,968 2,678,059 ------------ ------------ ------------ Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 3,757,098 $ 3,635,780 $ 6,134,968 ============ ============ ============ See accompanying notes to financial statements. 29 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 1 - Accounting Policies Basis of Presentation BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company") is a pharmaceutical company using structure-based drug design to discover and design novel, small-molecule pharmaceutical products for the treatment of major immunological and infectious diseases and disorders. The Company has three research projects, of which only one is in clinical trials. While the prospects for a project may increase as the project advances to the next stage of development, a project can be terminated at any stage of development. Until the Company generates revenues from either a research project or an approved product, its ability to continue research projects is dependent upon its ability to raise funds. The Company relies on sole suppliers to manufacture its BCX-34 compound for clinical trials and is evaluating supply sources for commercial production. Net Loss Per Share Net loss per share is computed using the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding. Common equivalent shares from unexercised stock options and warrants are excluded from the computation as their effect is anti-dilutive. Due to this anti-dilutive effect, implementation of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, Earnings per Share, issued February 1997, does not change the calculation of the Company's net loss per share. Securities Held-to-Maturity The Company is required to classify debt and equity securities as held-to-maturity, available-for-sale or trading. The appropriateness of each classification is reassessed at each reporting date. The only dispositions were maturities of securities held-to-maturity. At December 31, 1997, securities held-to-maturity consisted of $20,062,571 of U.S. Treasury and Agency securities and $823,817 of high-grade domestic corporate debt carried at amortized cost. All of the non-current portion of securities held-to-maturity are U.S. Treasury and Agency securities that mature in 1999. The amortized cost of all these securities at December 31, 1997 approximated market value. Furniture and Equipment Furniture and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method with estimated useful lives of five and seven years. Leased laboratory equipment is amortized over the lease life of five years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the remaining lease period. Income Taxes The liability method is used in accounting for income taxes in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109 ("Statement No. 109"). Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Revenue Recognition Research and development revenue on cost-reimbursement agreements is recognized as expenses are incurred, up to contractual limits. Research and development revenues, license fees and option fees are recognized as revenue when irrevocably due. Payments received which are related to future performance are deferred and taken into income as earned over a specified future performance period. Statements of Cash Flows For purposes of the statements of cash flows, the Company considers cash equivalents to be all cash held in money 30 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. market accounts or investments in debt instruments with maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase. Stock-Based Compensation The Company accounts for stock-based compensation under Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB No. 25). Under APB No. 25, the Company's stock option and employee stock purchase plans qualify as noncompensatory plans. Consequently, no compensation expense is recognized. Stock issued to non-employees is compensatory and a compensation expense is recognized under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation ("Statement No. 123"). Use of Estimates Management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Note 2 - Furniture and Equipment Furniture and equipment consisted of the following at December 31: 1997 1996 ---------- ---------- Furniture and fixtures $ 580,077 $ 276,057 Laboratory equipment 1,023,440 692,775 Leased equipment 396,765 1,220,778 Leasehold improvements 1,170,719 816,488 ---------- ---------- 3,171,001 3,006,098 Less accumulated depreciation and amortization 1,613,464 1,875,308 ---------- ---------- Furniture and equipment, net $1,557,537 $1,130,790 ========== ========== The Company does not have any significant impairment losses under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 121, Accounting for the Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and for Long-Lived Assets to be Disposed Of. Note 3 - Concentration of Credit and Market Risk The Company invests its excess cash principally in marketable securities from a diversified portfolio of institutions with strong credit ratings and in U.S. government and agency bills and notes, and by policy, limits the amount of credit exposure at any one institution. These investments are generally not collateralized and primarily mature within one year. The Company has not realized any losses from such investments. At December 31, 1997, approximately $3,780,413 is invested in the Fidelity Institution Cash Portfolio, which invests in treasury notes and repurchase agreements. The Fidelity Institution Cash Portfolio is not insured. Note 4 - Accrued Expenses and Taxes Accrued expenses and taxes were comprised of the following at December 31: 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc.  1997 1996 -------- -------- Accrued clinical trials $159,183 $ 65,725 Accrued bonus 50,000 50,000 Payroll withholdings 48,640 75,915 Accrued other 48,610 49,238 -------- -------- Accrued expenses $306,433 $240,878 ======== ======== Accrued franchise tax $120,000 $150,363 Accrued other 46,177 59,591 -------- -------- Accrued taxes, other than income $166,177 $209,954 ======== ======== 31 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Note 5 - Long-term Debt and Leases Long-term debt consisted of an installment loan paid in May 1997. The Company paid $51,880, $100,031 and $144,115 in interest on debt and lease obligations for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively. The Company had an unused line of credit of $500,000 at December 31, 1997. The Company has the following capital lease obligations and operating leases at December 31, 1997: Capital Operating Leases Leases -------- -------- 1998 $ 72,724 $178,677 1999 17,615 184,038 2000 17,615 109,995 2001 7,191 -------- -------- Total minimum payments 115,145 $472,710 ======== Less interest 22,780 -------- Present value of future minimum payments 92,365 Less current portion 57,896 -------- Non-current portion $ 34,469 ======== Rent expense for operating leases was $186,004, $191,880 and $183,522 in 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively. Note 6 - Income Taxes The Company has not had taxable income since incorporation and, therefore, has not paid any income tax. Deferred tax assets of approximately $20,500,000 and $14,600,000 at December 31, 1997 and 1996, respectively, have been recognized principally for the net operating loss and research and development credit carryforwards and have been reduced by a valuation allowance of $20,500,000 and $14,600,000 at December 31, 1997 and 1996, respectively, which will remain until it is more likely than not that the related tax benefits will be realized. At December 31, 1997, the Company had net operating loss and research and development credit carryforwards ("Carryforward Tax Benefits") of approximately $44,600,000 and $3,400,000, respectively, which will expire in 2005 through 2012. Use of the Carryforward Tax Benefits will be subject to a substantial annual limitation due to the change of ownership provisions of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The annual limitation is expected to result in the expiration of a portion of Carryforward Tax Benefits before utilization, which has been considered by the Company in its computations under Statement No. 109. Additional sales of the Company's equity securities may result in further annual limitations on the use of the Carryforward Tax Benefits against taxable income in future years. Note 7 - Stockholders' Equity The Company was incorporated on November 17, 1989 as a Nevada corporation. On December 29, 1989 it exchanged 384,901 shares of its common stock and 33,350 shares of its 8% Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock, Series 1989 for the predecessor partnership interests of the general partner and limited partners. The partnership was dissolved as of January 15, 1990 and its assets and liabilities were transferred to the Company in an exchange accounted for in a manner similar to a pooling of interests. In 1991, the Company formed a wholly owned subsidiary, BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation; thereafter the Company was merged into BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the surviving corporation. Warrants 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. As part of financing arrangements, the Company has, at certain times, issued warrants to purchase 1,314,341 shares of the Company's common stock at no less than its estimated fair value at the date of grant. In return for their guarantees of a line of credit (now expired), three directors each received warrants (included in the 1,314,341 warrants) to purchase 32 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. 49,400 shares of common stock at $6.00 per share. All warrants are exercisable at various five-year periods through 1998. In lieu of a cash exercise, the warrant holder may elect a net issue exercise. Under a net issue exercise, the shares to be issued are equal to the product of (a) the number of shares of common stock purchasable under the warrant being exercised, and (b) the fair market value of one share of common stock minus the exercise price divided by (c) the fair value of one share of common stock. At December 31, 1997 and 1996, 248,239 shares and 311,841 shares, respectively, of the Company's common stock were reserved for issuance under warrant agreements and the weighted average per share exercise price was $6.48 and $6.68, respectively. During 1997, warrants were exercised to purchase 24,330 shares via net issue exercise by giving up warrants to purchase 25,875 shares. During 1996, warrants were exercised to purchase 201,800 shares with cash and warrants to exercise 551,639 shares were exercised via net issue exercise by giving up warrants to purchase 249,061 shares. Options In November 1991, the Board of Directors adopted the 1991 Stock Option Plan ("Plan") for key employees and consultants of the Company and reserved 500,000 shares of common stock for the Plan. The Plan was approved by the stockholders on December 19, 1991. The term of the Plan is for ten years and includes both incentive stock options and non-statutory options. The option price for the incentive stock options shall not be less than the fair market value of common stock on the grant date. The option price per share for non-statutory stock options may not be less than 85% of the fair market value of common stock on the date of grant. The options generally vest 25% after one year and monthly thereafter on a pro rata basis over the next three years until fully vested after four years. Options are generally granted to all full-time employees. There are an aggregate of 3,146,045 shares reserved for future issuance for the options and warrants discussed above and the Stock Purchase Plan discussed in Note 8. The Company follows APB No. 25 in accounting for its Stock Option and Stock Purchase Plans and accordingly does not recognize a compensation cost. The Company has adopted the disclosure requirement of Statement No. 123 commencing in 1996. Since Statement No. 123 is only applied to options granted after 1994, the pro forma disclosure should not necessarily be considered indicative of future pro forma results when the full four-year vesting (the period in which the compensation cost is recognized) is included in the disclosure in 1999. The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the grant date using the Black-Scholes option-pricing method with the following weighted-average assumptions used for grants in 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively: no dividends, expected volatility of 57.8, 52.3 and 70.2 percent, risk-free interest rate of 6.0, 6.1 and 6.1 percent and expected lives of five years. The weighted-average grant-date fair values of options granted during 1997 under the Stock Option and Employee Stock Purchase Plans were $5.42 and $3.07, respectively. Had the Company adopted Statement No. 123 and determined its compensation cost based on the fair value at the grant dates in 1997, 1996 and 1995, the Company's net loss and net loss per share would have been increased to the pro forma amounts shown below: 1997 1996 1995 ------------- ------------- ------------- Net loss As reported $ (10,618,865) $ (7,698,227) $ (8,576,264) Pro forma (11,657,646) (8,279,551) (8,696,497) Net loss per share As reported (.77) (.69) (.96) Pro forma (.85) (.74) (.98) The stockholders on April 16, 1993 and on March 1, 1994 (approving the Board of Directors' action of December 1993) authorized an amended and restated 1991 Stock Option Plan and approved an additional 1,000,000 shares of common stock for issuance ("Amended Plan"). The Amended Plan includes an increase of common stock reserved for issuance to 1,500,000 shares and establishes an automatic option grant program. The automatic option grant program grants options to new non-employee Board members to purchase 25,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of the fair market value at the grant date for a maximum of ten years and is subject to vesting restrictions and early termination upon the optionee's cessation of Board service. The vesting and exercise provisions of the options issued under the Amended Plan are subject to acceleration, under certain circumstances, upon the occurrence of a hostile 33 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. tender offer for more than 50% of the outstanding stock of the Company or if the Company is acquired. On May 29, 1995, the stockholders approved extending the automatic option grant to cover non-employee Board members not previously eligible for an automatic grant and approved an additional 500,000 shares of common stock for issuance, increasing the common stock reserved for issuance to 2,000,000 shares. On May 14, 1997, the stockholders approved increasing the automatic option grant to 40,000 shares and approved an additional 1,000,000 shares (of which 75,576 were approved by the Board of Directors in 1996) of common stock for issuance, increasing the common stock reserved for issuance to 3,000,000 shares. The following is an analysis of stock options for the three years ending December 31, 1997: Weighted Options Options Average Available Outstanding Exercise Price --------- ----------- -------------- Balance December 31, 1994 87,535 1,304,175 $ 4.53 Option plan amended 500,000 Options granted (384,800) 384,800 8.57 Options exercised (13,834) 3.66 Options canceled 45,079 (45,079) 4.63 ---------- ---------- Balance December 31, 1995 247,814 1,630,062 5.49 Option plan amended 75,576 Options granted (302,540) 302,540 14.68 Options exercised (45,255) 4.23 Options canceled 45,625 (45,625) 4.19 ---------- ---------- Balance December 31, 1996 66,475 1,841,722 7.06 Option plan amended 924,424 Options granted (590,810) 590,810 10.21 Options exercised (87,450) 4.02 Options canceled 139,850 (139,850) 10.33 ---------- ---------- Balance December 31, 1997 539,939 2,205,232 7.82 ========== ========== There were 1,254,263, 1,027,416 and 773,730 options exercisable at December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively. The weighted-average exercise price for options exercisable was $5.84, $4.92 and $4.35 at December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively. The following table summarizes at December 31, 1997, by price range, (1) for options outstanding the number of options outstanding, their weighted-average remaining life and their weighted-average exercise price and (2) for options exercisable the number of options exercisable and their weighted-average exercise price: Outstanding Exercisable ----------- ----------- Range Number Life Price Number Price ----- ------ ---- ----- ------ ----- $ 2 to $ 5 628,664 4.4 $ 3.75 574,629 $ 3.66 5 to 8 775,725 2.4 6.16 448,818 5.95 8 to 12 281,388 2.1 9.07 150,547 9.07 12 to 17 519,455 .8 14.56 80,269 14.85 --------- --------- 2 to 17 2,205,232 2.5 7.82 1,254,263 5.84 ========= ========= 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Note 8 - Employee Benefit Plans On January 1, 1991, the Company adopted an employee retirement plan ("401(k) Plan") under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code covering all employees. Employee contributions may be made to the 401(k) Plan up to limits established by the Internal Revenue Service. Company matching contributions may be made at the discretion of the Board of Directors. The Company made a contribution of $45,603 in 1997 and $30,000 in 1996. The Company did not make a contribution to the 401(k) Plan during the year ended December 31, 1995. On May 29, 1995, the stockholders approved an employee stock purchase plan ("Stock Purchase Plan") effective 34 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. February 1, 1995. The Company has reserved 200,000 shares of common stock under the Stock Purchase Plan. Eligible employees may authorize up to 15% of their salary to purchase common stock at the lower of 85% of the beginning or 85% of the ending price during the six-month purchase intervals. No more than 3,000 shares may be purchased by any one employee at the six-month purchase dates and no employee may purchase stock having a fair market value at the commencement date of $25,000 or more in any one calendar year. There were 15,933 shares, 18,101 shares and 13,331 shares of common stock purchased under the Stock Purchase Plan in 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively, at a weighted average price of $10.28, $8.15 and $4.94, respectively, per share. Note 9 - Collaborative and Other Research and Development Contracts The Company granted Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, formerly Ciba-Geigy Corporation ("Novartis"), an option in 1990 to acquire exclusive licenses to a class of inhibitors arising from research performed by the Company by February 1991. The option was exercised and a $500,000 fee was paid to the Company in 1993. Milestone payments are due upon approval of a new drug application. The Company will also receive a royalty based upon a percentage of sales of any resultant products. Up to $300,000 of the initial fee received is refundable if sales of any resultant products are below specified levels. On November 7, 1991, the Company entered into a joint research and license agreement with The University of Alabama at Birmingham ("UAB"). UAB will perform specific research on Factor D for the Company for a period of approximately three years in return for research and license fees. The agreement was replaced by a new agreement on July 18, 1995 granting the Company a worldwide license in exchange for funding UAB research in the amount of up to $288,000 annually and sharing in any royalties or sublicense fees arising from the joint research. In 1995, the Company expensed $68,638 under the original agreement and expensed $263,000 and $188,000 in 1997 and 1996, respectively, under the new agreement. On November 17, 1994, the Company entered into another agreement for a joint research and license agreement on influenza neuraminidase granting the Company a worldwide license. Under this agreement, the Company funds UAB research in the amount of up to $300,000 annually and UAB shares in any royalties or sublicense fees arising from the joint research. Under the agreement,$175,000, $225,000 and $300,000 were expensed in 1997, 1996 and 1995, respectively. The Company is required to expend $6 million, of which approximately $5.2 million was expended through December 31, 1997, on the project over a period to coincide with funding by the Company to UAB in order to maintain the Company's exclusive worldwide license. In May 1996, the Company entered into an exclusive license agreement with Torii Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. ("Torii") to develop, manufacture and commercialize BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds in Japan for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, T-cell cancers and atopic dermatitis. Upon entering into the agreement, Torii paid the Company $1.5 million in license fees and made a $1.5 million equity investment in the Company, purchasing 76,608 shares of common stock at a purchase price of $19.58 per share. The first milestone payment of $1 million was received in 1997. The agreement further provides for additional potential milestone payments of up to $18 million and royalties on future sales of licensed products in Japan. Torii is responsible for all development, regulatory and commercialization expenses in Japan. The agreement is subject to termination by Torii at any time and by the Company in certain circumstances. Pursuant to the agreement, Torii may negotiate a license with the Company to develop BCX-34 and certain other PNP inhibitor compounds for additional indications. Note 10 - Quarterly Financial Information (Unaudited)(In thousands, except per share) First Second Third Fourth ----- ------ ----- ------ 1997 Quarters Revenues $ 452 $ 1,427 $ 387 $ 427 Net loss (3,149) (2,080) (2,513) (2,877) Net loss per share (.23) (.15) (.18) (.21) 1996 Quarters Revenues $ 168 $ 1,741 $ 252 $ 491 Net loss (1,913) (1,211) (2,512) (2,062) Net loss per share (.20) (.11) (.23) (.15) 35 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS The Board of Directors BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1997. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. at December 31, 1997 and 1996 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1997, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. /s/ Ernst & Young, LLP Birmingham, Alabama January 21, 1998 ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE None. 36 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT The directors and executive officers of the Company are as follows: PART III Name Age Position(s) with the Company ---- --- ---------------------------- Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. 56 Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director J. Claude Bennett, M.D. 64 President, Chief Operating Officer and Director John A. Montgomery, Ph.D. 73 Executive Vice President, Secretary, Chief Scientific Officer and Director Ronald E. Gray 57 Chief Financial Officer, Assistant Secretary and Treasurer William W. Featheringill (2) 55 Director Edwin A. Gee, Ph.D. (1)(2) 78 Director Zola P. Horovitz, Ph.D. 63 Director Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D. (1) 42 Director Joseph H. Sherrill, Jr. 56 Director William M. Spencer, III (2) 77 Director Randolph C. Steer, M.D., Ph.D. 48 Director (1) Member of the Compensation Committee ("Compensation Committee"). (2) Member of the Audit Committee ("Audit Committee"). Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. was named Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and Director in November 1993 and President in January 1995. Dr. Bugg relinquished the position of President in December 1996 when Dr. Bennett joined the Company in that position. Prior to joining the Company, Dr. Bugg had served as the Director of the Center for Macromolecular Crystallography, Associate Director of the Comprehensive Cancer Center and Professor of Biochemistry at UAB since 1975. He was a Founder of BioCryst and served as the Company's first Chief Executive Officer from 1987-1988 while on a sabbatical from UAB. Dr. Bugg also served as Chairman of the Company's Scientific Advisory Board from January 1986 to November 1993. He continues to hold the position of Professor Emeritus in Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics at UAB, a position he has held since January 1994. J. Claude Bennett, M.D. was named President and Chief Operating Officer in December 1996 and elected a Director in January 1997. Prior to joining the Company, Dr. Bennett was President of UAB from October 1993 to December 1996 and Professor and Chairman of the Department of Medicine of UAB from January 1982 to October 1993. Dr. Bennett served on the Company's Scientific Advisory Board from 1989-96. He also serves as a member of the Board of Governors of the Magnuson Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health. He also continues to hold the position of Distinguished University Professor Emeritus at UAB. John A. Montgomery, Ph.D. has been a Director since November 1989 and has been Secretary and Chief Scientific Officer since joining the Company in February 1990. He was Executive Vice President from February 1990 until May 1997, at which time he was named Senior Vice President. Dr. Montgomery was a Founder of BioCryst. Prior to joining the Company, Dr. Montgomery served as Senior Vice President of Southern Research Institute ("SRI") of Birmingham from January 1981 to February 1990. He continues to hold the position of Distinguished Scientist at SRI, a position he has held since February 1990. Ronald E. Gray joined BioCryst in January 1993 as Chief Financial Officer. In 1994, Mr. Gray received the additional title of Treasurer and Assistant Secretary. Prior to joining BioCryst, from June 1992 to September 1992, Mr. Gray was Chief Financial Officer of The ACB Companies, a collection agency. From July 1988 to March 1992, Mr. Gray was Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of Image Data Corporation, a medical imaging company. He was previously Vice President 37 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. of Finance, Secretary and Treasurer of CyCare Sytems, Inc., a health care information processing company. William W. Featheringill was elected a Director in May 1995. Mr. Featheringill is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, since June 1995, of Electronic Healthcare Systems, a software company, and President, Chief Executive Officer and director, since 1973, of Private Capital Corporation, a venture capital management company. Mr. Featheringill was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of MACESS Corporation, which designs and installs paperless data management systems for the managed care industry, from 1988 to November 1995. MACESS Corporation merged with Sungard Data Systems in late 1995. From 1985 to December 1994, Mr. Featheringill was the developer, Chairman and President of Complete Health Services, Inc., a health maintenance organization which grew, under his direction, to become one of the largest HMOs in the southeastern United States. Complete Health Services, Inc. was acquired by United HealthCare Corporation in June 1994. Mr. Featheringill is a director of Citation Corporation. Edwin A. Gee, Ph.D. was elected a Director in August 1993. Dr. Gee, who retired in 1985 as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of International Paper Company, has been active as an executive in biotechnology, pharmaceutical and specialty chemical companies since 1970. He is Chairman Emeritus and a director of Oncogene Science, Inc., one of the leading biotechnology companies for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. Zola P. Horovitz, Ph.D. was elected a Director in August 1994. Dr. Horovitz was Vice President of Business Development and Planning at Bristol-Myers Squibb from 1991 until his retirement in April 1994 and previously was Vice President of Licensing at the same company from 1990 to 1991. Prior to that he spent over 30 years with The Squibb Institute for Medical Research, most recently as Vice President Research, Planning, & Scientific Liaison. He has been an independent consultant in pharmaceutical sciences and business development since his retirement from Bristol-Myers Squibb in April 1994. He serves on the Boards of Directors of Avigen, Inc., Clinicor Inc., Diacrin, Inc., Magainin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Procept Corporation, Roberts Pharmaceutical Corporation and Synaptic Pharmaceutical Corp. Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D. has been a Director of the Company since December 1991. Dr. Rosenwald is President and Chairman of Paramount Capital Investments, LLC, a medical venture capital and merchant banking firm; President and Chairman of Paramount Capital, Inc., an investment banking firm specializing in the health sciences industry; and, since 1994, President of Paramount Capital Asset Management, Inc., a fund manager. From June 1987 to February 1992, he served in various capacities at the investment banking firm of D. H. Blair & Co., where he ultimately became a Managing Director of Corporate Finance and manager of their Health Care Services Group. He is Chairman of the Board of Interneuron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which he co-founded in 1988, and a director of Sparta Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Neose Technologies, Inc., Titan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Avigen, Inc. and VIMrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Joseph H. Sherrill, Jr. was elected a Director in May 1995. Mr. Sherrill served as President of R. J. Reynolds ("RJR") Asia Pacific, based in Hong Kong, where he oversaw RJR operations across Asia, including licensing, joint ventures and a full line of operating companies from August 1989 to his retirement in October 1994. Prior management positions with RJR include Senior Vice President of Marketing for R.J. Reynolds International, President and Chief Executive Officer of R.J. Reynolds Tabacos de Brazil, and President and General Manager of R.J. Reynolds Puerto Rico. Mr. Sherrill also serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Savers Life Insurance Company. William M. Spencer, III has been a Director of the Company since its inception. Mr. Spencer, who is retired, is also a private investor in Birmingham, Alabama. He served as Chairman of the Board of BioCryst from its founding in 1986 until April 1992. He co-founded and operated Motion Industries from 1946 through its merger into Genuine Parts Company in 1976. He has founded several businesses and has served on the Board of Directors of numerous private corporations. Randolph C. Steer, M.D., Ph.D. was elected a Director in February 1993. Dr. Steer has been active as a consultant to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies since 1989. Dr. Steer serves on the Board of Directors of Techne Corporation. 38 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. In accordance with the terms of the Company's Certificate of Incorporation, the Board of Directors has been divided into three classes with members of each class holding office for staggered three-year terms. Dr. Bugg's, Dr. Montgomery's and Dr. Gee's terms expire at the 1998 annual meeting, Mr. Featheringill's, Mr. Sherrill's and Dr. Rosenwald's terms expire at the 1999 annual meeting and Dr. Bennett's, Dr. Horovitz's, Mr. Spencer's and Dr. Steer's terms expire at the 2000 annual meeting (in all cases subject to the election and qualification of their successors or to their earlier death, resignation or removal). At each annual stockholder meeting, the successors to the Directors whose terms expire are elected to serve from the time of their election and qualification until the third annual meeting of stockholders following their election and until a successor has been duly elected and qualified. The provisions of the Company's Certificate of Incorporation governing the staggered Director election procedure can be amended only by a shareholder's vote of at least 75% of the eligible voting securities. There are no family relationships among any of the directors and executive officers of the Company. The Company has an Audit Committee, consisting of Messrs. Featheringill, Gee and Spencer, which is responsible for the review of internal accounting controls, financial reporting and related matters. The Audit Committee also recommends to the Board the independent accountants selected to be the Company's auditors and reviews the audit plan, financial statements and audit results. The Company also has a Compensation Committee consisting of Dr. Gee and Dr. Rosenwald. The Compensation Committee is responsible for the annual review of officer compensation and other incentive programs and is authorized to award options under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan. The Company has a Nominating Committee comprised of all outside directors with terms not expiring in the current year for which the Nominating Committee will be nominating persons for election or re-election as directors. 39 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION The following table sets forth the annual and long-term compensation paid by the Company during the 1997, 1996 and 1995 fiscal years to the Company's Chief Executive Officer and each of the Company's four other most highly compensated executive officers whose annual salary and bonus for the 1997 fiscal year exceeded $100,000 (collectively the "Named Executive Officers"): SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE Long-term Annual Compensation Compensation ------------------- ------------ Other Annual Awards-Securities Name and Principal Position Year Salary Bonus Compensation Underlying Options --------------------------- ---- ------ ----- ------------ ------------------ Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. 1997 $244,992 $50,000 (1) $3,000 (2) 125,000 Chairman and Chief Executive 1996 212,808 50,000 (1) 1,959 (2) 50,000 Officer 1995 207,000 50,000 (1) 0 100,000 J. Claude Bennett, M.D. 1997 220,008 (3) 0 0 35,000 President and Chief Operating 1996 800 0 0 103,000 Officer 1995 0 0 0 0 John A. Montgomery, Ph.D. 1997 150,000 0 0 37,000 Executive Vice President, Secretary 1996 133,656 0 0 12,000 and Chief Scientific Officer 1995 130,008 0 0 11,000 Ronald E. Gray 1997 119,784 0 2,396 (2) 14,400 Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer 1996 109,088 0 1,959 (2) 5,400 and Assistant Secretary 1995 98,520 0 0 11,000 John L. Higgins 1997 118,142 (4) 0 0 8,400 Vice President, Corporate 1996 136,896 0 1,959 (2) 28,400 Development 1995 103,728 0 0 50,000 (1) Paid pursuant to Employment Agreements dated December 17, 1996 and November 19, 1993 between the Company and Dr. Bugg. See "Executive Compensation - Employment Agreements." (2) Represents the Company's contribution to the 401(k) Plan. (3) Paid pursuant to an Employment Agreement dated December 18, 1996 between the Company and Dr. Bennett, under which his annual salary will be $220,000 commencing in 1997. See "Executive Compensation - Employment Agreements." (4) Mr. Higgins left the Company in September 1997. Employment Agreements Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. entered into a new three-year employment agreement with the Company on December 17, 1996 for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999 (the "Bugg Agreement"). Under the terms of the Agreement, Dr. Bugg will serve as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Dr. Bugg will receive annual compensation of $245,000 and a discretionary bonus of $50,000. The Board may, in its discretion, grant other cash or stock bonuses to Dr. Bugg as an award or incentive. Dr. Bugg is also entitled to all employee benefits generally made available to executive officers. Dr. Bugg may, if he desires, also hold positions at UAB, provided that he does not devote more than ten percent of his time to such activities. The term of the Agreement is for three years unless terminated (i) by the Company for cause or (ii) upon the permanent disability of Dr. Bugg. 40 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Dr. Bugg will receive, on the last day of each year during the term of the Agreement, an additional option to purchase a minimum of 25,000 shares of Common Stock of the Company under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan. The exact number of shares will be determined by the plan administrator based on Dr. Bugg's performance and the results of operations of the Company during such year. Under the Bugg Agreement and his previous employment agreement, Dr. Bugg received an option to purchase 75,000 shares of common stock at the end of 1997, 50,000 shares of common stock at the end of 1996, 50,000 shares of common stock related to 1996 performance granted in May 1997 after the 1991 Stock Option Plan was amended, 100,000 shares of common stock at the end of 1995 and 1994 and 200,000 shares of common stock in November 1993. Dr. Bugg will receive an additional stock option to purchase 100,000 shares of Common Stock under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan upon BioCryst's submission to the FDA of any new drug application and another additional stock option to purchase 100,000 shares of Common Stock under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan upon the final approval by the FDA of each such new drug application. The exercise price shall be the fair market value of the Company's Common Stock on the date such additional stock option is granted. These additional stock options will vest 25% one year after the date of issuance and the remaining 75% will vest at the rate of 1/48 per month thereafter. The options may be exercised immediately in the event of a merger or acquisition of the Company. The options may be exercised within 24 months of Dr. Bugg's death or permanent disability. In the event Dr. Bugg's employment is terminated for cause he may exercise the options within three months of the date of such termination to the extent such options were exercisable immediately prior to such termination. In the event Dr. Bugg's employment is terminated for a reason other than cause, death or permanent disability, the options then outstanding shall become immediately exercisable in full. All options granted to Dr. Bugg pursuant to the Agreement are intended to qualify as incentive stock options as defined in Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, except to the extent the portion of such options which become exercisable in any year have an aggregate exercise price in excess of $100,000. All options shall expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. J. Claude Bennett, M.D. entered into an employment agreement with the Company on December 18, 1996 (the "JCB Agreement"). Under the terms of the JCB Agreement, Dr. Bennett will serve as President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company. The Company will also use its best efforts to elect Dr. Bennett as a director of the Company. Dr. Bennett will receive annual compensation of $220,000. Dr. Bennett was also granted an option to purchase 100,000 shares of Common Stock of the Company and the Company will use its best efforts to provide that Dr. Bennett is elected a Director of BioCryst. The Board may, in its discretion, grant other cash or stock bonuses to Dr. Bennett as an award or incentive. An option to purchase 35,000 shares of Common Stock was granted in December 1997. Dr. Bennett is also entitled to all employee benefits generally made available to executive officers. Dr. Bennett may, if he desires, also hold positions at UAB, provided that he does not devote more than ten percent of his time to such activities. The term of the JCB Agreement is for three years unless terminated (i) by the Company for cause or (ii) upon the permanent disability of Dr. Bennett. 41 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Option Grants in 1997 The following table shows, with respect to the Company's Named Executive Officers, certain information with respect to option grants in 1997. All of the grants were made under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan. No stock appreciation rights were granted during such year. Potential Realizable Value at Assumed Annual Rates of Number of Stock Price Securities % of Appreciation for Underlying Total Exercise Option Term(1) Options Options Price Per Expiration ------------- Name Granted Granted Share Date 5% 10% ---- ------- ------- ----- ---- -- --- Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. 50,000 8.5% $14.13 05/13/2007 $444,157 $1,125,581 75,000 12.7% 6.50 12/09/2007 306,586 776,949 J. Claude Bennett, M.D. 35,000 5.9% 6.50 12/09/2007 143,074 362,576 John A. Montgomery, Ph.D. 12,000 2.0% 14.13 05/13/2007 106,598 270,139 25,000 4.2% 6.50 12/09/2007 102,195 258,983 Ronald E. Gray 5,400 .9% 14.13 05/13/2007 47,969 121,563 9,000 1.5% 6.50 12/09/2007 36,790 93,234 John L. Higgins 8,400 1.4% 14.13 05/13/2007 74,618 189,098 (1) Amounts represent hypothetical gains that could be achieved for the respective options at the end of the ten-year option term. The assumed 5% and 10% rates of stock appreciation are mandated by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and do not represent the Company's estimate of the future market price of the Common Stock. Aggregate Option Exercises in 1997 and Year-end Option Values The following table shows, with respect to the Company's Named Executive Officers, the number and value of unexercised options held by the Named Executive Officers as of December 31, 1996. No stock appreciation rights were exercised during the 1996 fiscal year and no such rights were outstanding at the end of that year. Number of Securities Underlying Values of Securities Underlying Shares Unexercised Options Unexercised Options (1) Acquired on Value ------------------- ----------------------- Name Exercise Realized Exercisable Unexercisable Exercisable Unexercisable ---- -------- -------- ----------- ------------- ----------- ------------- Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. 0 0 375,000 237,500 $565,625 $96,875 J. Claude Bennett, M.D. 0 0 33,478 112,522 9,853 18,647 John A. Montgomery, Ph.D. 0 0 94,250 54,250 247,094 19,031 Ronald E. Gray 0 0 60,100 26,700 114,594 11,031 John L. Higgins 17,156 $42,457 0 0 0 0 (1) Amounts reflect the net values of outstanding stock options computed as the difference between $7.00 per share (the fair market value at December 31, 1997) and the exercise price therefor. Director Compensation Directors do not receive a fee for attending Board or committee meetings. Outside directors are reimbursed for expenses incurred in attending Board or committee meetings and while representing the Company in conducting certain business. Individuals who first become non-employee Board members on or after March 3, 1994, at the time of 42 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. commencement of Board service, receive a grant of options to purchase up to 25,000 shares pursuant to the automatic option grant program under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan, and, under the Company's 1991 Stock Option Plan each non-employee director, including those persons presently serving as directors, will receive grants of options to purchase 25,000 additional shares of Common Stock every four years while they continue to serve as directors. All current outside directors of the Company have received options to purchase 25,000 shares of Common Stock. Dr. Horovitz and Dr. Steer also serve as consultants to the Company for a quarterly fee of $4,000 each. Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation The Compensation Committee consists of Dr. Gee and Dr. Rosenwald. There are no Compensation Committee interlocks. 43 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT The following table sets forth information regarding beneficial ownership of the Company's Common Stock as of March 22, 1998 by (i) each director, (ii) each of the Named Executive Officers, (iii) all directors and executive officers of the Company as a group and (iv) each person known to the Company to be the beneficial owner of more than five percent of the Company's Common Stock: Percentage Number of Common of Shares Beneficially Outstanding Name and Address Owned (1) Shares ---------------- --------- ------ William W. Featheringill 2,203,178 (2) 15.8% 100 Brookwood Place, #410 Birmingham, Alabama 35209 Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D. 588,632 (3) 4.2 787 Seventh Avenue, 48th Floor New York, New York 10019 William M. Spencer, III 544,172 (4) 3.9 Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. 479,030 (5) 3.3 Joseph H. Sherrill, Jr. 408,978 (6) 2.9 John A. Montgomery, Ph.D. 143,886 (7) 1.0 Ronald E. Gray 70,300 (8) * Randolph C. Steer, M.D., Ph.D. 60,000 (9) * J. Claude Bennett, M.D. 46,084 (10) * Zola P. Horovitz, Ph.D. 27,187 (9) * Edwin A. Gee, Ph.D. 25,000 (9) * John L. Higgins 8,685 (11) * All executive officers and directors as a group (12 persons) 4,605,132 (12) 30.8 (*) Less than one percent. (1) Gives effect to the shares of Common Stock issuable within 60 days after March 22, 1998 upon the exercise of all options, warrants and other rights beneficially held by the indicated stockholder on that date. (2) Includes 65,000 shares of Common Stock held by his brother of which Mr. Featheringill is a beneficial owner, 299,900 shares of Common Stock held by the Featheringill Family Trust of which he is a beneficial owner and 21,978 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options. (3) Includes 120,239 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of certain common stock warrants, 27,187 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options and 3,125 shares of Common Stock which Dr. Rosenwald holds jointly with his spouse. Also includes 77,539 shares of Common Stock held by Dr. Rosenwald's spouse individually and as custodian for their minor children, as to which Dr. Rosenwald disclaims beneficial ownership. Dr. Rosenwald has granted options to seven individuals to purchase an aggregate of 21,100 shares of Common Stock held by him at purchase prices ranging from $0.60 to $7.20 per share. (4) Includes 49,400 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of certain common stock warrants, 27,187 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options and 10,000 shares of Common Stock held by Mr. Spencer's spouse and 38 shares of Common Stock 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. held by Mega Holdings, Inc. Liquidation Trust which Mr. Spencer is Trustee and a beneficiary. Mr. Spencer disclaims beneficial ownership of the 10,038 shares of Common Stock held by his 44 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. spouse and Mega Holdings, Inc. Liquidation Trust. (5) Includes 413,538 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options. (6) Includes 21,978 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options, 10,000 shares of Common Stock which Mr. Sherrill holds jointly with his spouse and 10,000 shares of Common Stock held by Mr. Sherrill's spouse. Mr. Sherrill disclaims beneficial ownership of the 10,000 shares of Common Stock held by his spouse. (7) Includes 100,792 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options and 19,400 shares of Common Stock held by Dr. Montgomery's spouse. Dr. Montgomery disclaims beneficial ownership of the 19,400 shares of Common Stock held by his spouse. (8) Includes 1,500 shares of Common Stock held by the retirement accounts of Mr. Gray and his spouse and 64,304 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options. (9) Includes shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options. (10) Includes 42,957 shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of stock options. (11) These shares of Common Stock are held jointly with his spouse. (12) See Notes (1) through (11). ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS Dr. Bugg, an executive officer and Director of the Company, is a Professor Emeritus of UAB and is paid an annual stipend of $8,040 by UAB. Dr. Bennett, an executive officer and Director of the Company, is a consultant to and a Distinguished University Professor of UAB and is paid an annual stipend of $12,500 by UAB Education Foundation. The Company paid approximately $791,000 to UAB in 1997 for conducting certain clinical trials, research and data analysis. Dr. Montgomery, an executive officer and Director of the Company, is a former executive officer of SRI. The Company paid approximately $350,000 to SRI in 1997 for certain research, laboratory rental and supplies. Dr. Montgomery is currently a Distinguished Scientist at SRI and was paid approximately $8,248 by SRI in 1997 for various consulting services unrelated to the services performed by SRI for the Company. 45 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ITEM 14. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K (a) Financial Statements PART IV Page in Form 10-K The following financial statements appear in Item 8 of this Form 10-K: Balance Sheets at December 31, 1997 and 1996 26 Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995 27 Statements of Stockholders' Equity for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995 28 Statements of Cash Flows for the three years ended December 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995 29 Notes to Financial Statements 30 to 35 Report of Independent Auditors 36 No financial statement schedules are included because the information is either provided in the financial statements or is not required under the related instructions or is inapplicable and such schedules therefore have been omitted. 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. (b) Reports on Form 8-K None (c) Exhibits Number Description 3.1 Composite Certificate of Incorporation of Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 3.2 Bylaws of Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 4.1 See Exhibits 3.1 and 3.2 for provisions of the Composite Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Registrant defining rights of holders of Common Stock of the Registrant. 10.1 1991 Stock Option Plan, as amended and restated. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the Company's Form S-8 Registration Statement (Registration No. 333-30751). 10.2 Form of Notice of Stock Option Grant and Stock Option Agreement. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 and 99.3 to the Company's Form S-8 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-95062). 10.3 Warehouse Lease dated January 17, 1992 between Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company and the Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.4 Equipment Leases dated February 25, 1993, August 25, 1993, and November 25, 1993 between Ventana Leasing, Inc. and the Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.5 Common Stock Purchase Warrants issued in connection with the issuance of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.6 Fourth Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement among the Registrant and certain securityholders. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.7 Common Stock Purchase Warrants issued in connection with the issuance of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.36 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.8 Common Stock Purchase Warrants dated December 7, 1993 to purchase 49,400 shares of Common Stock issued to each of John Pappajohn, Lindsay A. Rosenwald and William M. Spencer. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.9 Employment Agreement dated December 17, 1996 between the Registrant and Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 dated March 28, 1997. 10.10 Employment Agreement dated December 18, 1996 between the Registrant and J. Claude Bennett. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 dated March 28, 1997. 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. 10.11# License Agreement dated April 15, 1993 between Ciba-Geigy Corporation (now merged into Novartis) and the Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.40 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.12 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.4 to the Company's Form S-8 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-95062). 10.13 First Amendment to Lease Agreement between Registrant and Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company, Inc. for office/warehouse space. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Company's Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 1994 dated March 28, 1995. 10.14 Form of Stock Purchase Agreement dated May 1995 between Registrant and various parties to purchase 1,570,000 shares of common stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 10.15 Form of Registration Rights Agreement dated May 1995 between Registrant and various parties. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the 46 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc.  second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 10.16 Form of Stock Purchase Agreement dated March 22, 1996 among Registrant and certain investors to purchase 1,000,000 shares of common stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K dated March 22, 1996. 10.17 Form of Registration Rights Agreement dated March 22, 1996 among Registrant and certain investors. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company's Form 8-K dated March 22, 1996. 10.18# License Agreement, dated May 31, 1996, between Registrant and Torii Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. ("Torii"). Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K/A dated May 3, 1996 and filed August 2, 1996. 10.19# Stock Purchase Agreement, dated May 31, 1996, between Registrant and Torii. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company's Form 8-K/A dated May 3, 1996 and filed August 2, 1996. 10.20 Second Amendment to Lease Agreement between Registrant and Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company, Inc. for office/warehouse space. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the first quarter ending March 31, 1997 dated May 12, 1997. 23.1 Consent of Independent Auditors. 27.1 Financial Data Schedule. ---------- # Confidential treatment granted. 47 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized in the City of Birmingham, State of Alabama, on this 23rd day of March, 1998. SIGNATURES BIOCRYST PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. By: /s/ Charles E. Bugg -------------------------------- Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 this report has been signed by the following persons in the capacities indicated on March 23rd, 1998: 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc.  Signature Title(s) /s/ Charles E. Bugg Chairman, Chief Executive Officer ------------------------------- and Director (Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D.) /s/ J. Claude Bennett President, Chief Operating Officer and ------------------------------- Director (J. Claude Bennett, M.D.) /s/ John A. Montgomery Executive Vice President, Secretary, Chief ------------------------------- Scientific Officer and Director (John A. Montgomery, Ph.D.) /s/ Ronald E. Gray Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial ------------------------------- and Accounting Officer) (Ronald E. Gray) /s/ William W. Featheringill Director ------------------------------- (William W. Featheringill) /s/ Edwin A. Gee Director ------------------------------- (Edwin A. Gee, Ph.D.) /s/ Zola P. Horovitz Director ------------------------------- (Zola P. Horovitz, Ph.D.) /s/ Lindsay A. Rosenwald Director ------------------------------- (Lindsay A. Rosenwald, M.D.) /s/ William M. Spencer, III Director ------------------------------- (William M. Spencer, III) /s/ Joseph H. Sherrill, Jr. Director ------------------------------- (Joseph H. Sherrill, Jr.) /s/ Randolph C. Steer Director ------------------------------- (Randolph C. Steer, M.D., Ph.D.) 48 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. INDEX TO EXHIBITS 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. Sequentially Numbered Number Description Page 3.1 Composite Certificate of Incorporation of Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 3.2 Bylaws of Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 4.1 See Exhibits 3.1 and 3.2 for provisions of the Composite Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Registrant defining rights of holders of Common Stock of the Registrant. 10.1 1991 Stock Option Plan, as amended and restated. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the Company's Form S-8 Registration Statement (Registration No. 333-30751). 10.2 Form of Notice of Stock Option Grant and Stock Option Agreement. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 and 99.3 to the Company's Form S-8 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-95062). 10.3 Warehouse Lease dated January 17, 1992 between Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company and the Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.4 Equipment Leases dated February 25, 1993, August 25, 1993, and November 25, 1993 between Ventana Leasing, Inc. and the Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.5 Common Stock Purchase Warrants issued in connection with the issuance of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.6 Fourth Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement among the Registrant and certain securityholders. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.7 Common Stock Purchase Warrants issued in connection with the issuance of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.36 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.8 Common Stock Purchase Warrants dated December 7, 1993 to purchase 49,400 shares of Common Stock issued to each of John Pappajohn, Lindsay A. Rosenwald and William M. Spencer. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.9 Employment Agreement dated December 17, 1996 between the Registrant and Charles E. Bugg, Ph.D. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 dated March 28, 1997. 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. 10.10 Employment Agreement dated December 18, 1996 between the Registrant and J. Claude Bennett. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 dated March 28, 1997. 10.11# License Agreement dated April 15, 1993 between Ciba-Geigy Corporation (now merged into Novartis) and the Registrant. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.40 to the Company's Form S-1 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-73868). 10.12 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.4 to the Company's Form S-8 Registration Statement (Registration No. 33-95062). 10.13 First Amendment to Lease Agreement between Registrant and Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company, Inc. for office/warehouse space. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Company's Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 1994 dated March 28, 1995. 49 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. 10.14 Form of Stock Purchase Agreement dated May 1995 between Registrant and various parties to purchase 1,570,000 shares of common stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 10.15 Form of Registration Rights Agreement dated May 1995 between Registrant and various parties. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the second quarter ending June 30, 1995 dated August 11, 1995. 10.16 Form of Stock Purchase Agreement dated March 22, 1996 among Registrant and certain investors to purchase 1,000,000 shares of common stock. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K dated March 22, 1996. 10.17 Form of Registration Rights Agreement dated March 22, 1996 among Registrant and certain investors. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company's Form 8-K dated March 22, 1996. 10.18# License Agreement, dated May 31, 1996, between Registrant and Torii Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. ("Torii"). Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K/A dated May 3, 1996 and filed August 2, 1996. 10.19# Stock Purchase Agreement, dated May 31, 1996, between Registrant and Torii. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company's Form 8-K/A dated May 3, 1996 and filed August 2, 1996. 10.20 Second Amendment to Lease Agreement between Registrant and Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company, Inc. for office/warehouse space. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the Company's Form 10-Q for the first quarter ending March 31, 1997 dated May 12, 1997. 23.1 Consent of Independent Auditors. 51 27.1 Financial Data Schedule. 52 # Confidential treatment granted. 50 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. EXHIBIT 23.1 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 No. 33-81110, 33-95062 and 333-30751) pertaining to the BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 1991 Stock Option Plan of our report dated January 21, 1998, with respect to the financial statements of BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997. /s/ Ernst & Young LLP Birmingham, Alabama March 23, 1998 51 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. ARTICLE 5 This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Financial Statements, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements. PERIOD TYPE FISCAL YEAR END PERIOD END CASH SECURITIES RECEIVABLES ALLOWANCES INVENTORY CURRENT ASSETS PP&E DEPRECIATION TOTAL ASSETS CURRENT LIABILITIES BONDS PREFERRED MANDATORY PREFERRED COMMON OTHER SE TOTAL LIABILITY AND EQUITY SALES TOTAL REVENUES CGS TOTAL COSTS OTHER EXPENSES LOSS PROVISION INTEREST EXPENSE INCOME PRETAX INCOME TAX INCOME CONTINUING DISCONTINUED EXTRAORDINARY CHANGES NET INCOME EPS PRIMARY EPS DILUTED Year Dec 31 1997 Dec 31 1997 3,757,098 20,886,388 0 0 0 19,695,506 3,171,001 1,613,464 26,484,728 865,463 0 0 0 138,177 25,146,619 26,484,728 0 2,692,521 0 0 13,259,506 0 51,880 (10,618,865) 0 0 0 0 0 (10,618,865) (.77) (.77) 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. End of Filing 2002. EDGAR Online, Inc. 

Continue reading text version or see original annual report in PDF format above