Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies) |
3 Months Ended | |
|---|---|---|
Mar. 31, 2018 | ||
| Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract] | ||
| Company Policy [Policy Text Block] |
The Company
We are a pharmaceutical company developing proprietary therapeutics for the treatment of serious medical disorders. Our product development programs utilize our proprietary long-term drug delivery platform, ProNeura™, and focus primarily on innovative treatments for select chronic diseases for which steady state delivery of a drug provides an efficacy and/or safety benefit. We are directly developing our product candidates and also utilize corporate, academic and government partnerships as appropriate. We operate in only one business segment, the development of pharmaceutical products. |
|
| Basis of Accounting, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited condensed financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statement presentation. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three month period ended March 31, 2018 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2018, or any future interim periods. The balance sheet at December 31, 2017 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date, but does not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statements. These unaudited condensed financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Titan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going concern. At March 31, 2018, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $3.5 million, which we believe are sufficient to fund our planned operations into the third quarter of 2018. We will require additional funds to finance our operations, including the advancement of our current ProNeura development programs to later stage clinical studies. While we are currently evaluating the various financing alternatives available to us, our efforts to address our liquidity requirements may not be successful.
|
|
| Going Concern Assessment [Policy Text Block] |
Going concern assessment With the implementation of FASB's standard on going concern, Accounting Standard Update, or ASU No. 2014-15, beginning with the year ended December 31, 2016 and all annual and interim periods thereafter, we will assess going concern uncertainty in our financial statements to determine if we have sufficient cash on hand and working capital, including available borrowings on loans, to operate for a period of at least one year from the date the financial statements are issued or available to be issued, which is referred to as the “look-forward period” as defined by ASU No. 2014-15. As part of this assessment, based on conditions that are known and reasonably knowable to us, we will consider various scenarios, forecasts, projections, estimates and will make certain key assumptions, including the timing and nature of projected cash expenditures or programs, and its ability to delay or curtail expenditures or programs, if necessary, among other factors. Based on this assessment, as necessary or applicable, we make certain assumptions around implementing curtailments or delays in the nature and timing of programs and expenditures to the extent we deem probable those implementations can be achieved and we have the proper authority to execute them within the look-forward period in accordance with ASU No. 2014-15. Based upon the above assessment, we concluded that, at the date the financial statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the months ended March 31, 2018, we did not have sufficient cash to fund our operations for the next 12 months without additional funds and, therefore, there was substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern within 12 months after the date the financial statements were issued.
|
|
| Revenue Recognition, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Revenue Recognition
Beginning January 1, 2018, we have followed the provisions of ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The guidance provides a unified model to determine how revenue is recognized.
We generate revenue principally from collaborative research and development arrangements, technology licenses, and government grants. Consideration received for revenue arrangements with multiple components is allocated among the separate performance obligations based upon their relative estimated standalone selling price.
In determining the appropriate amount of revenue to be recognized as we fulfill our obligations under our agreements, we perform the following steps: (i) identification of the promised goods or services in the contract; (ii) determination of whether the promised goods or services are performance obligations including whether they are distinct in the context of the contract; (iii) measurement of the transaction price, including the constraint on variable consideration; (iv) allocation of the transaction price to the performance obligations based on estimated selling prices; and (v) recognition of revenue when (or as) we satisfy each performance obligation.
Performance Obligations
A performance obligation is a promise in a contract to transfer a distinct good or service to the customer and is the unit of account in ASC Topic 606. Our performance obligations include commercialization license rights, development services and services associated with the regulatory approval process.
We have optional additional items in contracts, which are accounted for as separate contracts when the customer elects such options. Arrangements that include a promise for future commercial product supply and optional research and development services at the customer’s discretion are generally considered as options. We assess if these options provide a material right to the customer and, if so, such material rights are accounted for as separate performance obligations. If we are entitled to additional payments when the customer exercises these options, any additional payments are recorded in revenue when the customer obtains control of the goods or services.
Transaction Price
We have both fixed and variable consideration. Non-refundable upfront payments are considered fixed, while milestone payments are identified as variable consideration when determining the transaction price. Funding of research and development activities is considered variable until such costs are reimbursed at which point they are considered fixed. We allocate the total transaction price to each performance obligation based on the relative estimated standalone selling prices of the promised goods or services for each performance obligation.
At the inception of each arrangement that includes milestone payments, we evaluate whether the milestones are considered probable of being achieved and estimate the amount to be included in the transaction price using the most likely amount method. If it is probable that a significant revenue reversal would not occur, the value of the associated milestone is included in the transaction price. Milestone payments that are not within our control, such as approvals from regulators, are not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received.
For arrangements that include sales-based royalties or earn-out payments, including milestone payments based on the level of sales, and the license or purchase agreement is deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties or earn-out payments relate, we recognizes revenue at the later of (a) when the related sales occur, or (b) when the performance obligation to which some or all of the royalty or earn-out payment has been allocated has been satisfied (or partially satisfied).
Allocation of Consideration
As part of the accounting for these arrangements, we must develop assumptions that require judgment to determine the stand-alone selling price of each performance obligation identified in the contract. Estimated selling prices for license rights are calculated using the residual approach. For all other performance obligations, we use a cost-plus margin approach.
Timing of Recognition
Significant management judgment is required to determine the level of effort required under an arrangement and the period over which we expect to complete our performance obligations under an arrangement. We estimate the performance period or measure of progress at the inception of the arrangement and re-evaluate it each reporting period. This re-evaluation may shorten or lengthen the period over which revenue is recognized. Changes to these estimates are recorded on a cumulative catch up basis. If we cannot reasonably estimate when our performance obligations either are completed or become inconsequential, then revenue recognition is deferred until we can reasonably make such estimates. Revenue is then recognized over the remaining estimated period of performance using the cumulative catch-up method. Revenue is recognized for licenses or sales of functional intellectual property at the point in time the customer can use and benefit from the license. For performance obligations that are services, revenue is recognized over time proportionate to the costs that we have incurred to perform the services using the cost-to-cost input method. |
|
| In Process Research and Development, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Research and Development Costs and Related Accrual Research and development expenses include internal and external costs. Internal costs include salaries and employment related expenses, facility costs, administrative expenses and allocations of corporate costs. External expenses consist of costs associated with outsourced contract research organization, or CRO, activities, sponsored research studies, product registration, patent application and prosecution, and investigator sponsored trials. We also record accruals for estimated ongoing clinical trial costs. Clinical trial costs represent costs incurred by CROs and clinical sites. These costs are recorded as a component of research and development expenses. Under our agreements, progress payments are typically made to investigators, clinical sites and CROs. We analyze the progress of the clinical trials, including levels of patient enrollment, invoices received and contracted costs when evaluating the adequacy of accrued liabilities. Significant judgments and estimates must be made and used in determining the accrued balance in any accounting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates under different assumptions. Revisions are charged to expense in the period in which the facts that give rise to the revision become known. |
|
| New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash. ASU No. 2016-18 is intended to reduce diversity in practice in the classification and presentation of changes in restricted cash on the Condensed Statement of Cash Flows. The ASU requires that the Condensed Statement of Cash Flows explain the change in total cash, cash equivalents and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts. The ASU also requires a reconciliation between the total of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash presented on the Condensed Statement of Cash Flows and the cash and cash equivalents balance presented on the Condensed Balance Sheet. We adopted ASU No. 2016-18, and the guidance has been retrospectively applied to all periods presented. The adoption of the guidance did not have an impact on our Condensed Balance Sheet or Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss.
In July 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued a two-part Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, No. 2017-11, I. Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments With Down Round Features and II. Replacement of the Indefinite Deferral for Mandatorily Redeemable Financial Instruments of Certain Nonpublic Entities and Certain Mandatorily Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests With a Scope Exception amending guidance in FASB ASC 260, Earnings Per Share, FASB ASC 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity, and FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The amendments in Part I of ASU 2017-11 change the classification analysis of certain equity-linked financial instruments (or embedded features) with down round features. The amendments in Part II of ASU 2017-11 re-characterize the indefinite deferral of certain provisions of Topic 480 that now are presented as pending content in the Codification, to a scope exception. Those amendments do not have an accounting effect. ASU 2017-11 is effective for public business entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. We adopted ASU 2017-11 for the year ended December 31, 2017, and retrospectively applied ASU 2017-11 as required. There was no retrospective impact as a result of the adoption of ASU 2017-11 on the financial statements. See Note 10, “Debt Agreements”. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, addressing eight specific cash flow issues in an effort to reduce diversity in practice. The amended guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2017, and for interim periods within those years. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-15 did not have a material impact on our statements of cash flows.
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation: Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU 2016-09”). ASU 2016-09 addresses several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment award transactions, including: (a) income tax consequences; (b) classification of awards as either equity or liabilities; (c) classification on the statement of cash flows; and (d) accounting for forfeitures. We adopted the provisions of ASU 2016-09 in the first quarter of 2017. We have elected to continue to estimate forfeitures based on the estimated number of awards expected to vest. In addition, the adoption of ASU 2016-09 resulted in the recognition of $12.0 million of previously unrecognized excess tax benefits in deferred tax assets, fully offset by a valuation allowance. All tax-related cash flows resulting from stock-based compensation, including the excess tax benefits related to the settlement of stock-based payment awards, are now classified as cash flows from operating activities on our statements of cash flows. The adoption of ASU 2016-09 did not have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). This ASU requires most lessees to recognize right of use assets and lease liabilities, but recognize expenses in a manner similar with current accounting standards. The new standard is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Entities are required to use a modified retrospective approach, with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact of this new standard on the financial statements. In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers and has subsequently issued several supplemental or clarifying ASUs (collectively, “ASC 606”), ASC 606 supersedes nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP. The core principle of ASC 606 is to recognize revenues when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled for those goods or services. ASC 606 defines a five step process to achieve this core principle and, in doing so, more judgment and estimates may be required within the revenue recognition process than are required under existing U.S. GAAP. The standard is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods therein, using either of the following transition methods: (i) a full retrospective approach reflecting the application of the standard in each prior reporting period with the option to elect certain practical expedients, or (ii) a retrospective approach with the cumulative effect of initially adopting ASC 606 recognized at the date of adoption. We adopted the new standard effective January 1, 2018 under the modified retrospective transition method, applying the new guidance to the most current period presented. Upon adoption, there was no change to the units of accounting previously identified under legacy GAAP, which are now considered performance obligations under the new guidance, and there was no change to the revenue recognition pattern for each performance obligation. Therefore, the adoption of the new standard resulted in no cumulative effect to the opening accumulated deficit balance.
We assessed the impact that the adoption of ASC 606 will have on our financial statements by analyzing our current portfolio of customer contracts, including a review of historical accounting policies and practices to identify potential differences in the application of ASC 606. Additionally, we performed a comprehensive review of our current processes and systems to determine and implement changes required to support the adoption of ASC 606 on January 1, 2018. |
|
| Subsequent Events, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Subsequent Events
We have evaluated events that have occurred after March 31, 2018 and through the date that the financial statements are issued. |
|
| Fair Value Measurement, Policy [Policy Text Block] |
Fair Value Measurements
We measure the fair value of financial assets and liabilities based on authoritative guidance which defines fair value, establishes a framework consisting of three levels for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. There are three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value: Level 1 – quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities; Level 2 – quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets or inputs that are observable; Level 3 – inputs that are unobservable (for example cash flow modeling inputs based on assumptions). Financial instruments, including receivables, accounts payable and accrued liabilities are carried at cost, which we believe approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments. Our warrant liabilities are classified within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy because the value is calculated using significant judgment based on our own assumptions in the valuation of these liabilities. We recorded no fair value adjustment of the warrant liabilities for the three month periods ended March 31, 2018. We recorded a non-cash gain on decreases in the fair value of approximately $422,000 for the three month periods ended March 31, 2017 in our Condensed Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss. The underlying warrants expired by their terms on April 18, 2018. See Note 6, “Warrant Liability” for further discussion on the calculation of the fair value of the warrant liability.
|