Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|12 Months Ended|
Dec. 31, 2014
|Accounting Policies [Abstract]|
|Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies||
Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Navidea’s Manocept platform is predicated on the ability of the chemical backbone of the tilmanocept molecule to specifically target the CD206 mannose receptor expressed on macrophages. The Manocept platform serves as the molecular backbone of Lymphoseek® (technetium Tc 99m tilmanocept) injection, the first product developed by Navidea based on the platform. Lymphoseek is a novel, receptor-targeted, small-molecule radiopharmaceutical used in the evaluation of lymphatic basins that may have cancer involvement in patients. Lymphoseek is designed for the precise identification of lymph nodes that drain from a primary tumor, which have the highest probability of harboring cancer. Lymphoseek is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in solid tumor cancers where lymphatic mapping is a component of surgical management and for guiding sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with clinically node negative breast cancer, melanoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity. Lymphoseek has also received European approval in imaging and intraoperative detection of sentinel lymph nodes in patients with melanoma, breast cancer or localized squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity.
Building on the success of Lymphoseek, the flexible and versatile Manocept platform acts as an engine for the design of purpose-built molecules offering the potential to be utilized across a range of diagnostic modalities, including single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), intra-operative and/or optical-fluorescence detection in a variety of disease states.
Recent preclinical data being developed by the Company using tilmanocept linked to various therapeutic agents also suggest that tilmanocept’s binding affinity to CD206 receptors demonstrates the potential for this technology to be useful in treating diseases linked to the over-activation of macrophages. This includes various cancers as well as autoimmune, infectious, cardiovascular, and central nervous system diseases. Thus, in January 2015, the Company formed a new subsidiary, Macrophage Therapeutics, Inc., to further explore therapeutic applications for the Manocept platform.
In addition, over the last year, the company’s Board of Directors made the decision to reduce our support while seeking to partner or out-license two of our development programs:
The company is in discussions with potential parties interested in sublicensing and/or assuming financial responsibility for the ongoing development of these two neuro tracer compounds and is currently evaluating term sheets.
Other than Lymphoseek, none of the Company’s drug product candidates have been approved for sale in any market.
In December 2001, we acquired Cardiosonix Ltd. (Cardiosonix), an Israeli company with a blood flow measurement device product line in the early stages of commercialization. In August 2009, the Company’s Board of Directors decided to discontinue the operations and attempt to sell Cardiosonix. However, we were obligated to continue to service and support the Cardiosonix devices through 2013. The Company has not received significant expressions of interest in the Cardiosonix business and as such, we continue to wind down our activities in this area until a final shutdown of operations or a sale of the business unit is completed.
In 2005 we formed a new corporation, Cira Biosciences, Inc. (Cira Bio), to explore the development of patient-specific cellular therapies that have shown positive patient responses in a variety of clinical settings. Navidea owned 90% of the outstanding shares of Cira Bio with the remaining shares being held by the principals of Cira LLC. In October 2013, Cira Bio was dissolved in its entirety after several years of inactivity.
In July 2011, we established a European business unit, Navidea Biopharmaceuticals Limited, to address international development and commercialization needs for our technologies, including Lymphoseek. Navidea owns 100% of the outstanding shares of Navidea Biopharmaceuticals Limited.
Level 1 – Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;
Level 2 – Quoted prices in markets that are not active or financial instruments for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly; and
Level 3 – Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.
A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. In determining the appropriate levels, we perform a detailed analysis of the assets and liabilities whose fair value is measured on a recurring basis. At each reporting period, all assets and liabilities for which the fair value measurement is based on significant unobservable inputs or instruments which trade infrequently and therefore have little or no price transparency are classified as Level 3. See Note 2.
The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instruments:
Stock options granted under the 2002 Plan and the 2014 Plan generally vest on an annual basis over one to four years. The stock options that were awarded as an employment inducement in connection with the appointment of our new CEO will vest in three tranches based on certain service and market conditions as defined in the agreement. Outstanding stock options under the plans, if not exercised, generally expire ten years from their date of grant or up to 90 days following the date of an optionee’s separation from employment with the Company. We issue new shares of our common stock upon exercise of stock options.
Stock-based payments to employees and directors, including grants of stock options, are recognized in the consolidated statement of operations based on their estimated fair values on the date of grant. The fair value of each stock option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Expected volatilities are based on the Company’s historical volatility, which management believes represents the most accurate basis for estimating expected future volatility under the current circumstances. Navidea uses historical data to estimate forfeiture rates. The expected term of stock options granted is based on the vesting period and the contractual life of the options. The risk-free rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield in effect at the time of the grant. The assumptions used to calculate the fair value of stock option awards granted during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 are noted in the following table:
The portion of the fair value of stock-based awards that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as compensation expense over either (1) the requisite service period or (2) the estimated performance period. Restricted stock awards are valued based on the closing stock price on the date of grant and amortized ratably over the estimated life of the award. Restricted stock may vest based on the passage of time, or upon occurrence of a specific event or achievement of goals as defined in the grant agreements. In such cases, we record compensation expense related to grants of restricted stock based on management’s estimates of the probable dates of the vesting events. Stock-based awards that do not vest because the requisite service period is not met prior to termination result in reversal of previously recognized compensation costs. See Note 3.
We earn additional revenues based on a percentage of the actual net revenues achieved by Cardinal Health on sales to end customers made during each fiscal year. The amount we charge Cardinal Health related to end customer sales of Lymphoseek is subject to a retroactive annual adjustment. To the extent that we can reasonably estimate the end-customer prices received by Cardinal Health, we record sales based upon these estimates at the time of sale. If we are unable to reasonably estimate end customer sales prices related to products sold, we record revenue related to these product sales at the minimum (i.e., floor) price provided for under our distribution agreement with Cardinal Health.
We also earn revenue related to milestones as defined in our distribution agreements. Such revenue is recognized when the milestones are achieved with no future obligations and payments under the agreements have become contractually due. We generate additional revenue from grants to support various product development initiatives. We generally recognize grant revenue when expenses reimbursable under the grants have been incurred and payments under the grants become contractually due. Lastly, we recognize revenue from the provision of services to R-NAV, LLC and its subsidiaries. See Note 7.
Current accounting standards include guidance on the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in the financial statements. Such standards also prescribe a recognition threshold and measurement model for the financial statement recognition of a tax position taken, or expected to be taken, and provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. The Company believes that the ultimate deductibility of all tax positions is highly certain, although there is uncertainty about the timing of such deductibility. As a result, no liability for uncertain tax positions was recorded as of December 31, 2014 or 2013 and we do not expect any significant changes in the next twelve months. Should we need to accrue interest or penalties on uncertain tax positions, we would recognize the interest as interest expense and the penalties as a selling, general and administrative expense. As of December 31, 2014, tax years 2011-2014 remained subject to examination by federal and state tax authorities. See Note 14.
In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-12, Compensation-Stock Compensation. ASU 2014-12 requires that a performance target included in a share-based payment award that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. Therefore, under the existing stock compensation guidance in Topic 718, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. If the performance target becomes probable of being achieved before the end of the requisite service period, the remaining unrecognized compensation cost should be recognized prospectively over the remaining requisite service period. The total amount of compensation cost recognized during and after the requisite service period should reflect the number of awards that are expected to vest and should be adjusted to reflect those awards that ultimately vest. The requisite service period ends when the employee can cease rendering service and still be eligible to vest in the award if the performance target is achieved. ASU 2014-12 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, including interim periods therein. Earlier adoption is permitted. Entities may apply the amendments in ASU 2014-12 either (a) prospectively to all awards granted or modified after the effective date or (b) retrospectively to all awards with performance targets that are outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. If retrospective transition is adopted, the cumulative effect of applying ASU 2014-12 as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements should be recognized as an adjustment to the opening retained earnings balance at that date. Additionally, if retrospective transition is adopted, an entity may use hindsight in measuring and recognizing the compensation cost. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-12 to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements-Going Concern. ASU 2014-15 defines when and how companies are required to disclose going concern uncertainties, which must be evaluated each interim and annual period. ASU 2014-15 requires management to determine whether substantial doubt exists regarding the entity's going concern presumption. Substantial doubt about an entity's ability to continue as a going concern exists when relevant conditions and events, considered in the aggregate, indicate that it is probable that the entity will be unable to meet its obligations as they become due within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). If substantial doubt exists, certain disclosures are required; the extent of those disclosures depends on an evaluation of management's plans (if any) to mitigate the going concern uncertainty. ASU 2014-15 is effective prospectively for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016, and to annual and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-15 to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements; however, it may affect our disclosures.
In November 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-16, Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to Debt or to Equity. ASU 2014-16 does not change the current criteria in GAAP for determining when separation of certain embedded derivative features in a hybrid financial instrument is required. Rather, ASU 2014-16 clarifies how current GAAP should be interpreted in evaluating the economic characteristics and risks of a host contract in a hybrid financial instrument that is issued in the form of a share. Specifically, ASU 2014-16 clarifies that an entity should consider all relevant terms and features - including the embedded derivative feature being evaluated for bifurcation - in evaluating the nature of the host contract. Further, ASU 2014-16 clarifies that no single term or feature would necessarily determine the host economic characteristics and risks of the host contract. Rather, the nature of the host contract depends upon the economic characteristics and risks of the entire hybrid financial instrument. In addition, ASU 2014-16 clarifies that, in evaluating the nature of a host contract, an entity should assess the substance of the relevant terms and features (that is, the relative strength of the debt-like or equity-like terms and features given the facts and circumstances) when considering how to weight those terms and features. Specifically, the assessment of the substance of the relevant terms and features should incorporate a consideration of (1) the characteristics of the terms and features themselves, (2) the circumstances under which the hybrid financial instrument was issued or acquired, and (3) the potential outcomes of the hybrid financial instrument, as well as the likelihood of those potential outcomes. ASU 2014-16 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. Initial adoption should be applied on a modified retrospective bases to existing hybrid financial instruments issued in the form of a share as of the beginning of the fiscal year for which the amendments are effective. We are evaluating the potential impact of ASU 2014-16, however we do not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-16 to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
The entire disclosure for all significant accounting policies of the reporting entity.
Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef