Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3)​

 Registration No. 333-229465​

PROSPECTUS

10,000,000 Common Shares

Auris Medical Holding AG
Common Shares

This prospectus relates to the resale, from time to time, of up to 10,000,000 common shares of Auris Medical Holding AG, a stock corporation organized under the laws of Switzerland, by the selling shareholder, LPC Capital Fund, LLC, or “LPC.” The common shares to which this prospectus relates may be issued to LPC pursuant to a purchase agreement, dated as of May 2, 2018, between us and LPC, which we refer to as the “Purchase Agreement”.

We are not selling any securities under this prospectus and will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of common shares by the selling shareholder. However, we may receive proceeds of up to $8,989,225 from the issuance of our common shares to LPC under the Purchase Agreement, from time to time in our discretion after the date the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part is declared effective and the other conditions in the Purchase Agreement have been satisfied.

LPC is an “underwriter” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(11) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the “Securities Act”. LPC may sell the common shares described in this prospectus in a number of different ways and at varying prices. See “Plan of Distribution” for more information about how LPC may sell the common shares being registered pursuant to this prospectus.

We will pay the expenses incurred in registering the common shares to which this prospectus relates, including legal and accounting fees. See “Plan of Distribution.”

Currently, our common shares are traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “EARS”. The closing price of our common shares on Nasdaq on February 12, 2019 was $0.36 per common share.

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined under the federal securities laws and, as such, are subject to reduced public company reporting requirements. See “Prospectus Summary — Implications of Being an “Emerging Growth Company and a Foreign Private Issuer.”

Investing in our common shares involves a high degree of risk. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page9.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The date of this prospectus is February 15, 2019.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this prospectus to “Auris Medical Holding AG” or “Auris,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” “ours,” “us” or similar terms refer to Auris Medical Holding AG (formerly Auris Medical AG), together with its subsidiaries, prior to our corporate reorganization by way of the Merger (as defined below) on March 13, 2018 (i.e. to the transferring entity), and to Auris Medical Holding AG (formerly Auris Medical NewCo Holding AG), together with its subsidiaries after the Merger (i.e. to the surviving entity) and prior to the Redomestication (as defined below). The trademarks, trade names and service marks appearing in this prospectus are property of their respective owners. The term “Auris Medical (Bermuda)” refers to Auris Medical Holding Ltd., a Bermuda corporation whose shares our shareholders are expected to own after we change the corporate jurisdiction of the Company from Switzerland to Bermuda pursuant to the Redomestication.

On March 13, 2018, Auris NewCo Holding AG merged (the “Merger”) with Auris Medical Holding AG (“Auris OldCo”), a corporation (Aktiengesellschaft) organized in accordance with Swiss law and domiciled in Switzerland. The Merger took place following Auris OldCo shareholder approval at an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders held on March 12, 2018. Auris NewCo Holding AG changed its name to Auris Medical Holding AG following consummation of the Merger.

Unless indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this prospectus to our common shares as of any date prior to March 13, 2018 refer to our common shares (having a nominal value of CHF 0.40 each) prior to the 10:1 “reverse share split” effected through the Merger and all references to our common shares as of, and after, March 13, 2018 refer to our common shares (having a nominal value of CHF 0.02 each) after the 10:1 “reverse share split” effected through the Merger.

The terms “dollar,” “USD” or “$” refer to U.S. dollars and the term “Swiss Franc” and “CHF” refer to the legal currency of Switzerland.

i

We have not authorized anyone to provide any information other than that contained in this prospectus or in any free writing prospectus prepared by or on behalf of us or to which we may have referred you. We take no responsibility for, and can provide no assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may give you. We have not authorized any other person to provide you with different or additional information. We are not making an offer to sell the common shares in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. This offering is being made in the United States and elsewhere solely on the basis of the information contained in this prospectus. You should assume that the information appearing in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date on the front cover of this prospectus, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or any sale of the common shares. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed since the date on the front cover of this prospectus.

ii

1

2

3

4

5

6

​

7

​

8

RISK FACTORS

Any investment in our common shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below and all of the information included in this prospectus before deciding whether to purchase our common shares. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only risks and uncertainties we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations. If any of the events or circumstances described in the following risk factors actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations would suffer. In that event, the price of our common shares could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. The risks discussed below also include forward-looking statements and our actual results may differ substantially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. See “Forward-Looking Statements.”

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We are in the process of evaluating potential next steps in the development of our lead product candidate, Keyzilen® following the failure of the Phase 3 trial. In addition, we have initiated a strategic partnering process for our second lead product candidate Sonsuvi®. We cannot give any assurance that these candidates will continue to be developed, receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized or partnered.

We do not have any products that have gained regulatory approval. We have two lead clinical-stage product candidates, (i) Keyzilen® (AM-101), which is being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear tinnitus and (ii) Sonsuvi® (AM-111), which is being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear hearing loss. On March 13, 2018, we announced that preliminary top-line data from the TACTT3 Phase 3 clinical trial with Keyzilen® indicated that the study did not meet its primary efficacy endpoint of a statistically significant improvement in the Tinnitus Functional Index, or TFI, score from baseline to Day 84 in the active treated group compared to placebo either in the overall population or in the otitis media subpopulation. This followed our announcement in August 2016 that, TACTT2, the previously conducted Phase 3 sister trial with Keyzilen®, did not meet its two co-primary efficacy endpoints of statistically significant changes in tinnitus loudness and tinnitus burden compared to placebo. We are in the process of evaluating our options for the Keyzilen® development program, including whether we will continue to seek the development, regulatory approval and commercialization of either Keyzilen® in the future, or pursue an alternative course of action. If we continue development of Keyzilen®, we would need to conduct additional studies and trials in the future, in order to pursue regulatory approval and would need to raise additional capital to fund any such additional study, and we may be unable to secure such capital. If we are not able to raise additional capital, we may not be able to complete the development, testing and commercialization of Keyzilen®.

On November 28, 2017, we announced that the HEALOS Phase 3 clinical trial that investigated our other lead product candidate, Sonsuvi®, in the treatment of acute inner ear hearing loss did not meet the primary efficacy endpoint of a statistically significant improvement in hearing from baseline to Day 28 compared to placebo for either active treatment groups in the overall study population. However, in post-hoc analyses a clinically meaningful and nominally significant improvement in hearing was observed in the subpopulation of patients with acute profound hearing loss at baseline. Based on these results, we submitted the design of a new pivotal trial with AM-111 0.4 mg/mL in patients suffering from acute profound hearing loss to the EMA and subsequently also to the FDA for review. Through a Protocol Assistance procedure the EMA endorsed the proposed trial design, choice of efficacy and safety endpoints, as well as the statistical methodology. In a Type C meeting with written responses, the proposed choice of primary and secondary efficacy endpoints, the safety endpoints, as well as the planned sample size and statistical methodology were also endorsed by the FDA. Following this feedback, we have mandated a transaction advisory firm to identify potential partners for the Sonsuvi® development program and provide support for partnering discussions and negotiations. If successful, this may result in one or several sale, out-licensing or co-development transaction(s) on a global or regional scale. However, there is no guarantee that we will be successful in any pursuit of such strategic options or if we do continue our efforts to develop and commercialize Sonsuvi® in the future, or that any alternative course of action will lead to the success of the program.

9

We are a development-stage company and have a limited operating history and a history of operating losses. We anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future.

We are a development-stage biopharmaceutical company with limited operating history. Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. We incurred net losses (defined as net loss attributable to owners of the Company) of CHF 7.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018, and CHF 24.4 million, CHF 30.7 million and CHF 29.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. As of September 30, 2018, we had an accumulated deficit of CHF 142.5 million.

Our losses have resulted principally from expenses incurred in research and development of our product candidates, pre-clinical research and general and administrative expenses that we have incurred while building our business infrastructure. We expect to continue to incur significant operating losses in the future as we continue our research and development efforts for our product candidates in clinical development. In our financial year ended December 31, 2017, we incurred CHF 19.2 million in research and development costs, and we expect that our total operating expense in 2018 will be in the range of CHF 10.0 to 13.0 million.

To date, we have financed our operations through the initial public offering and a follow-on offering of our common shares, private placements of equity securities and short- and long-term loans. On July 19, 2016, we entered into a Loan and Security Agreement with Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., or Hercules. The agreement provides us with a senior secured term loan facility for up to $20 million. As of September 30, 2018, the amount outstanding under the Loan and Security Agreement was CHF 2.1 million. On January 31, 2019, we made the final payment to Hercules under the facility, comprising the last amortization rate as well as an end of term charge. With the final payment, all covenants and collaterals in favor of Hercules have been lifted.

We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenues from product sales. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. It may be several years, if ever, before we have a product candidate approved for commercialization and begin to generate revenues from product sales.

We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the marketing approvals necessary to commercialize, one or more of our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales unless and until we obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize, Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or AM-201. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales depends heavily on our success in many areas, including but not limited to:

•

completing research and clinical development of our product candidates;

​

•

obtaining marketing approvals for our product candidates, including Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or AM-201, for which we will have to complete clinical trials;

​

•

developing a sustainable and scalable manufacturing process for any approved product candidates and maintaining supply and manufacturing relationships with third parties that can conduct the process and provide adequate (in amount and quality) products to support clinical development and the market demand for our product candidates, if approved;

​

•

launching and commercializing product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval, either directly or with a collaborator or distributor;

​

•

obtaining market acceptance of our product candidates as viable treatment options;

​

•

addressing any competing technological and market developments;

​

•

identifying, assessing, acquiring and/or developing new product candidates;

​

10

•

negotiating favorable terms in any collaboration, licensing, or other arrangements into which we may enter;

​

•

maintaining, protecting, and expanding our portfolio of intellectual property rights, including patents, trade secrets, and know-how; and

​

•

attracting, hiring, and retaining qualified personnel.

​

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties with pharmaceutical product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, the EMA, or other regulatory agencies, domestic or foreign, to change our manufacturing processes, or to perform clinical, nonclinical, or other types of trials in addition to those that we currently anticipate. In cases where we are successful in obtaining regulatory approvals to market one or more of our product candidates, our revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval, the accepted price for the product, the ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement at any price, and whether we own the commercial rights for that territory. If the number of our addressable patients is not as significant as we estimate, the indication approved by regulatory authorities is narrower than we expect, or the treatment population is narrowed by competition, physician choice or treatment guidelines, we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, even if approved. Additionally, if we are not able to generate sufficient revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may never become profitable.

We may be unable to develop and commercialize Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or AM-201 or any other product candidate and, even if we do, may never achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of the Company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business or continue our operations.

We expect that we will need substantial additional funding before we can expect to become profitable from sales of our products. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

We expect our research and development expenses to remain significant in connection with our ongoing clinical development activities, particularly as we continue our ongoing trials of AM-125, may initiate new trials of Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® and initiate pre-clinical and clinical development of other product candidates. We expect that our total operating expense in 2019 will be in the range of CHF 10.0 to 13.0 million. As of September 30, 2018, our cash and cash equivalents were CHF 5.3 million. We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements at least until the second quarter of 2019. Our assumptions may prove to be wrong, and we may have to use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, suspend, reduce or terminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts. Also, should we fail to raise sufficient funds to cover our operating expenditures for at least a 12 month period, we may no longer be considered a “going concern.” The lack of a going concern assessment may negatively affect the valuation of the Company’s investments in its subsidiaries and result in a revaluation of these holdings. Under Swiss law, should the Company’s assets fall short of its liabilities as evidenced by the Company’s standalone Swiss GAAP accounts, the board of directors will have to immediately take steps to restructure the business or if it fails to do, file for bankruptcy. If the board of directors fails to take appropriate action, under Swiss law, in case of such over-indebtedness, the auditors may, according to Swiss law, file for bankruptcy on the Company’s behalf. Following the Redomestication, similar standards will apply under Bermuda law, and the board of directors will need to consider the interests of our creditors and take appropriate action to restructure the business if it appears that we are insolvent or likely to become insolvent. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

•

the scope, rate of progress, results and cost of our clinical trials, nonclinical testing, and other related activities;

​

11

•

the cost of manufacturing clinical supplies, and establishing commercial supplies, of our product candidates and any products that we may develop;

​

•

the number and characteristics of product candidates that we pursue;

​

•

the cost, timing, and outcomes of regulatory approvals;

​

•

the cost and timing of establishing sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities; and

​

•

the terms and timing of any collaborative, licensing, and other arrangements that we may establish, including any required milestone and royalty payments thereunder.

​

We expect that we will require additional funding to continue our ongoing clinical development activities and seek to obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates. If we receive regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, and if we choose to not grant any licenses to partners, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, sales, marketing and distribution, depending on where we choose to commercialize. We also expect to continue to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Additional funds may not be available on a timely basis, on favorable terms, or at all, and such funds, if raised, may not be sufficient to enable us to continue to implement our long-term business strategy. If we are not able to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our shareholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our intellectual property or future revenue streams.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, grants, and license and development agreements in connection with any collaborations. We do not have any committed external source of funds. In the event we need to seek additional funds, we may raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities. In such an event, our shareholders’ ownership interests will be diluted, and the terms of these new securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect our shareholders’ rights as holders of our common shares. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements, such as our term loan agreement with Hercules, that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our intellectual property or future revenue streams. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

We do not have a history of commercializing pharmaceutical products, which may make it difficult to evaluate the prospects for our future viability.

Our operations to date have been limited to financing and staffing the Company, developing our technology and developing our product candidates. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully complete large-scale, pivotal clinical trials, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products.

Risks Related to the Development and Clinical Testing of Our Product Candidates

We depend entirely on the success of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, and AM-125 and AM-201, which are still in clinical development. If our clinical trials are unsuccessful, we do not obtain regulatory approval or we are unable to commercialize Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201, or we experience significant delays in doing so, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

We currently have no products approved for sale and have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the development of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201, which are still in

12

clinical development. Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for at least the next few years, if ever, will depend heavily on successful clinical development, obtaining regulatory approval and eventual commercialization of these product candidates. We currently generate no revenues from sales of any drugs, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable drug. The success of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 and our other product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:

•

completing clinical trials that demonstrate the efficacy and safety of our product candidates;

​

•

receiving marketing approvals from competent regulatory authorities;

​

•

establishing commercial manufacturing capabilities;

​

•

launching commercial sales, marketing and distribution operations;

​

•

acceptance of our product candidates by patients, the medical community and third-party payors;

​

•

a continued acceptable safety profile following approval;

​

•

competing effectively with other therapies; and

​

•

qualifying for, maintaining, enforcing and defending our intellectual property rights and claims.

​

If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain timelines and uncertain outcomes, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. If clinical trials of our product candidates are prolonged or delayed, we may be unable to obtain required regulatory approvals, and therefore be unable to commercialize our product candidates on a timely basis or at all.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive pre-clinical studies and clinical trials that our products are safe and effective in humans. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. For example, positive results generated to date in clinical trials for our product candidates do not ensure that later clinical trials will demonstrate similar results. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through pre-clinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Our future clinical trial results may not be successful.

Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with FDA, EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ legal requirements, regulations or guidelines, and are subject to oversight by these governmental agencies and Institutional Review Boards, or IRBs, at the medical institutions where the clinical trials are conducted. In addition, clinical trials must be conducted with supplies of our product candidates produced under current good manufacturing practices, or cGMP, and other requirements. We depend on medical institutions and clinical research organizations, or CROs, to conduct our clinical trials in compliance with current good clinical practice, or cGCP, standards. To the extent the CROs fail to enroll participants for our clinical trials, fail to conduct the trials to cGCP standards or are delayed for a significant time in the execution of trials, including achieving full enrollment, we may be affected by increased costs, program delays or both, which may harm our business.

To date, we have not completed all clinical trials required for the approval of any of our product candidates. Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® are in Phase 3 clinical development and AM-125 is in Phase 2 and AM-201 is in Phase 1 clinical development.

13

The completion of clinical trials for our clinical product candidates may be delayed, suspended or terminated as a result of many factors, including but not limited to:

•

the delay or refusal of regulators or IRBs to authorize us to commence a clinical trial at a prospective trial site and changes in regulatory requirements, policies and guidelines;

​

•

delays or failure to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;

​

•

delays in patient enrollment and variability in the number and types of patients available for clinical trials;

​

•

the inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients in trials to ensure adequate statistical power to detect statistically significant treatment effects;

​

•

negative or inconclusive results, which may require us to conduct additional pre-clinical or clinical trials or to abandon projects that we expect to be promising;

​

•

safety or tolerability concerns could cause us to suspend or terminate a trial if we find that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

​

•

regulators or IRBs requiring that we or our investigators suspend or terminate clinical research for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or safety concerns, among others;

​

•

lower than anticipated retention rates of patients and volunteers in clinical trials;

​

•

our CROs or clinical trial sites failing to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, deviating from the protocol or dropping out of a trial;

​

•

delays relating to adding new clinical trial sites;

​

•

difficulty in maintaining contact with patients after treatment, resulting in incomplete data;

​

•

errors in survey design, data collection and translation;

​

•

delays in establishing the appropriate dosage levels;

​

•

the quality or stability of the product candidate falling below acceptable standards;

​

•

the inability to produce or obtain sufficient quantities of the product candidate to complete clinical trials; and

​

•

exceeding budgeted costs due to difficulty in accurately predicting costs associated with clinical trials.

​

Any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Positive or timely results from pre-clinical or early-stage trials do not ensure positive or timely results in late-stage clinical trials or product approval by the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Product candidates that show positive pre-clinical or early clinical results may not show sufficient safety or efficacy in later stage clinical trials and therefore may fail to obtain regulatory approvals. For example, although Keyzilen® achieved favorable results in our Phase 2 efficacy trial, in August 2016, we announced that the Phase 3 TACTT2 clinical trial of Keyzilen® did not meet its two co-primary efficacy endpoints of statistically significant changes in tinnitus loudness and tinnitus burden compared to placebo. On March 13, 2018, we announced preliminary top-line data from the TACTT3 trial which indicated that the study had not met its primary efficacy endpoint of a statistically significant improvement in the

14

Tinnitus Functional Score from baseline to Day 84 in the active treated group compared to placebo either in the overall population or in the otitis media subpopulation. On May 15, 2018, we announced that further investigation of the trial’s outcomes confirmed these preliminary results.

Also, pre-clinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. Many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in pre-clinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval for the product candidates. The FDA, the EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and in determining when or whether regulatory approval will be obtained for any of our product candidates. Even if we believe the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, the EMA or any other regulatory authority.

In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety and/or efficacy results between different trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, adherence to the dosing regimen and other trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. In the case of our late-stage clinical product candidates, results may differ in general on the basis of the larger number of clinical trial sites and additional countries and languages involved in Phase 3 clinical trials.

In the case of Keyzilen®, our endpoints in Phase 3 clinical trials are based on patient reported outcomes, or PROs, some of which were captured daily from trial participants with electronic diaries. Based on insights from our analysis of the TACTT2 and TACTT3 trials, we believe the high frequency of tinnitus loudness ratings over an extended period of time may have caused a number of patients to excessively focus on their tinnitus symptoms, thereby influencing the measured outcome. In addition, the daily reporting requirements may have led to rating fatigue and a loss of accuracy and reliability of the data that were entered. In the previous clinical trials with Keyzilen® we had collected these PROs only during study visits, i.e. much less frequently. Under the SPA with the FDA we agreed to increase the rating frequency.

In the case of Sonsuvi®, we are evaluating the safety and efficacy in an idiopathic condition which implies a considerable heterogeneity in the etiology and natural history of the condition. In addition, we are dealing with a limited availability of detailed and reliable data relating to the natural history of acute hearing loss, which implies substantial uncertainty with regards to the design of clinical trials, e.g. for determining the number of patients required for statistical testing or the size of the expected treatment effect. For example, a Phase 2 clinical trial with Sonsuvi® showed a strong relationship between the level or severity of initial hearing loss and the size of the treatment effect for active-treated patients compared to placebo-treated patients. Whereas a high spontaneous recovery rate and no treatment effects were observed in patients with mild to moderate hearing loss at baseline, lower spontaneous recovery and meaningful treatment effects were observed in patients with severe to profound hearing loss. Accordingly, enrollment into the Phase 3 trials HEALOS and ASSENT was restricted to patients with severe-profound hearing loss at baseline. On November 28, 2017, we announced that the HEALOS Phase 3 clinical trial that investigated Sonsuvi® in the treatment of acute inner ear hearing loss did not meet the primary efficacy endpoint of a statistically significant improvement in hearing from baseline to Day 28 compared to placebo for either active treatment groups in the overall study population. However, a post-hoc analysis of the subpopulation with profound acute hearing loss (PTA ≥ 90 dB at baseline in accordance with a commonly used classification of hearing loss severity) revealed a clinically meaningful and nominally significant improvement in the Sonsuvi® 0.4 mg/mL treatment group. Accordingly, in HEALOS we found confirmation about the relationship between severity of hearing loss and the size of therapeutic effects; however, such therapeutic effects were not observed in the subgroup of patients with severe initial hearing loss but rather, unlike in the Phase 2 trial, only in the subgroup with profound initial hearing loss. We understand from animal studies that the pharmacological target for Sonsuvi® is only activated in case of severe acute cochlear injury; however, activation of this target cannot be determined in humans, and we have to rely on the measurement of hearing loss for assessing the severity of injury.

Based on the results from the HEALOS clinical trial, we submitted the design of a new pivotal trial with AM-111 0.4 mg/mL in patients suffering from acute profound hearing loss to the EMA and subsequently also to the FDA for review. Through a Protocol Assistance procedure the EMA endorsed the proposed trial design, choice of efficacy and safety endpoints, as well as the statistical methodology. In a

15

Type C meeting with written responses, the proposed choice of primary and secondary efficacy endpoints, the safety endpoints, as well as the planned sample size and statistical methodology were also endorsed by the FDA. Orphan drug designation for AM-111 was granted by the FDA and EMA for the treatment of acute sensorineural hearing loss, or ASNHL, an umbrella term that comprises hearing loss from acute acoustic trauma, or AAT, surgery-induced trauma, or ISSNHL. We estimate ISSNHL to be the largest of the three subgroups. The broader, more general designation of ASNHL is based on the common pathophysiologic pathway shared by the three subgroups. Although we expect to obtain regulatory approval for the entire indication of ASNHL based on confirmatory efficacy and safety data that covers only one or two rather than all three of the subgroups, there can be no assurance that regulatory agencies will concur with this assumption at the time of the marketing approval procedure. In that case, it may not be sufficient to conduct trials in the subgroup of ISSNHL, as is currently planned to gain the indication for ASNHL.

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125, AM-201 or any other product candidate that we develop beyond the trials and testing that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are unfavorable or are only modestly favorable or if there are safety concerns associated with Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi® or our other product candidates, we may:

•

be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates;

​

•

not obtain marketing approval at all;

​

•

obtain approval for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired;

​

•

obtain approval with labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or significant safety warnings, including boxed warnings;

​

•

be subject to additional post-marketing testing or other requirements; or

​

•

remove the product from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

​

Our product development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals or if we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or AM-201 beyond the trials and testing that we currently contemplate and we may be required to obtain additional funds to complete such additional clinical trials. We cannot assure you that our clinical trials will begin as planned or be completed on schedule, if at all, or that we will not need to restructure our trials after they have begun. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do or shorten any periods during which we have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates, which may harm our business and results of operations. In addition, some of the factors that cause, or lead to, clinical trial delays may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125, AM-201 or any other product candidate.

If serious adverse, undesirable or unacceptable side effects are identified during the development of our product candidates or following approval, if any, we may need to abandon our development of such product candidates, the commercial profile of any approved label may be limited, or we may be subject to other significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

If our product candidates are associated with serious adverse, undesirable or unacceptable side effects, we may need to abandon their development or limit development to certain uses or sub-populations in which such side effects are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Many compounds that initially showed promise in pre-clinical or early-stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that restricted their use and prevented further development of the compound for larger indications.

In our clinical trials of Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® to date, adverse events have included procedure-related transient changes in tinnitus loudness, muffled hearing, ear discomfort or pain, incision site complications and middle ear infections. A limited number of serious adverse events were observed (in 1.2 to 2.5% of patients enrolled in the Keyzilen® trials and in 2.7 to 4.5% of patients in the Sonsuvi® trials); all (Keyzilen®) or most (Sonsuvi®) were considered unrelated or unlikely related to the treatment. In the two Phase 1 trials

16

with intranasal betahistine, adverse events included transient and dose-dependent nasal congestion or discomfort. Occurrence of serious procedure- or treatment-related side effects could impede clinical trial enrollment and receipt of marketing approval from the FDA, the EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. They could also adversely affect physician or patient acceptance of our product candidates.

Additionally, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

•

regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product;

​

•

regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label;

​

•

we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients;

​

•

we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients; and

​

•

our reputation and physician or patient acceptance of our products may suffer.

​

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

We depend on enrollment of patients in our clinical trials for our product candidates. If we are unable to enroll patients in our clinical trials, our research and development efforts could be materially adversely affected.

Successful and timely completion of clinical trials will require that we enroll a sufficient number of patient candidates. Trials may be subject to delays as a result of patient enrollment taking longer than anticipated or patient withdrawal. Patient enrollment depends on many factors, including the size and nature of the patient population, eligibility criteria for the trial, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the design of the clinical protocol, the availability of competing clinical trials, the availability of new drugs approved for the indication the clinical trial is investigating, and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies.

The specific target population of patients and therapeutic time windows may make it difficult for us to enroll enough patients to complete our clinical trials in a timely and cost-effective manner. Delays in the completion of any clinical trial of our product candidates will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and delay or potentially jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, either when testing our product candidates in the clinic or at the commercial stage; and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of pharmaceutical products. Currently, we have no products that have been approved for commercial sale; however, the current and future use of product candidates by us in clinical trials, and the sale of any approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. These claims might be made by patients that use the product, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling such products. Any claims against us, regardless of their merit, could be difficult and costly to defend and could materially adversely affect the market for our product candidates or any prospects for commercialization of our product candidates.

Although the clinical trial process is designed to identify and assess potential side effects, it is always possible that a drug, even after regulatory approval, may exhibit unforeseen side effects. If any of our product candidates were to cause adverse side effects during clinical trials or after approval of the product candidate, we may be exposed to substantial liabilities. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our product candidates.

17

We purchase liability insurance in connection with each of our clinical trials. It is possible that our liabilities could exceed our insurance coverage. We intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates. However, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. If a successful product liability claim or series of claims is brought against us for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, our assets may not be sufficient to cover such claims and our business operations could be impaired.

Should any of the events described above occur, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We have obtained orphan drug designation for Sonsuvi® for the treatment of ASNHL from the FDA and the EMA, and we may rely on obtaining and maintaining orphan drug exclusivity for Sonsuvi®, if approved. Orphan drug designation may not ensure that we will enjoy market exclusivity in a particular market, and if we fail to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for Sonsuvi®, we may be subject to earlier competition and our potential revenue will be reduced.

Sonsuvi® has been granted orphan drug designation for the treatment of ASNHL by the FDA and EMA. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the European Union, the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, or COMP, grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biological product or where there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment, or, if such a method exists, the medicine must be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.

In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity. In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug or biological product approval. This period may be reduced to six years if the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity.

Even though we have obtained orphan drug designation for Sonsuvi® for the treatment of ASNHL in the United States and Europe, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug designation for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

The orphan drug designation for Sonsuvi® relates to ASNHL, an umbrella term comprising AAT, ISSNHL and surgery-induced trauma based on a common pathophysiologic pathway. Our Phase 3 late-stage program enrolled patients suffering from ISSNHL, which represent the largest of the three ASNHL subgroups.

18

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must and have in the past decided to prioritize development of certain product candidates; these decisions may prove to have been wrong and may adversely affect our revenues.

Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, we must decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each. As such, we have been primarily focused on the development of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 for the treatment of acute inner ear tinnitus, acute inner ear hearing loss, vertigo and antipsychotic-induced weight gain, respectively. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular compounds, product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, our potential decisions to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain product development programs may also prove not to be optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the market potential of our product candidates or misread trends in the biopharmaceutical industry, in particular for inner ear disorders, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Our research and development activities could be affected or delayed as a result of possible restrictions on animal testing.

Certain laws and regulations require us to test our product candidates on animals before initiating clinical trials involving humans. Animal testing activities have been the subject of controversy and adverse publicity. Animal rights groups and other organizations and individuals have attempted to stop animal testing activities by pressing for legislation and regulation in these areas and by disrupting these activities through protests and other means. To the extent the activities of these groups are successful, our research and development activities may be interrupted, delayed or become more expensive.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

We cannot give any assurance that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.

Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize one or more product candidates. We currently have two lead clinical-stage product candidates, (i) Keyzilen® (AM-101), which is being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear tinnitus and (ii) Sonsuvi® (AM-111), being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear hearing loss. Additionally, we have one product candidate, AM-125, in Phase II clinical development, and another, AM-201, in Phase I clinical development. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates.

Although certain of our employees have prior experience with submitting marketing applications to the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we as a company have not submitted such applications for our product candidates. We cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Applications for our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;

​

•

the population studied in the clinical program may not be sufficiently broad or representative to assure safety in the full population for which we seek approval;

​

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from nonclinical trials or clinical trials;

​

•

the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to support the submission of a new drug application, or NDA, or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere;

​

19

•

we may be unable to demonstrate to the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate’s risk-benefit ratio for its proposed indication is acceptable;

​

•

the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities may fail to approve the manufacturing processes, test procedures and specifications, or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and

​

•

the approval policies or regulations of the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

​

In addition, no product for the treatment of acute inner ear tinnitus, acute inner ear hearing loss or antipsychotic-induced weight gain has been approved by the FDA or the EMA. Accordingly, our current product candidates or any of our other future product candidates could take a significantly longer time to gain regulatory approval than expected or may never gain regulatory approval. This could delay or eliminate any potential product revenue by delaying or terminating the potential commercialization of our product candidates.

We generally plan to seek regulatory approval to commercialize our product candidates in the United States, the European Union and in additional foreign countries where we have commercial rights. To obtain regulatory approval in other countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such other countries regarding safety, efficacy, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical trials, commercial sales, pricing, and distribution of our product candidates. Even if we are successful in obtaining approval in one jurisdiction, we cannot ensure that we will obtain approval in any other jurisdictions. Failure to obtain marketing authorization for our product candidates will result in our being unable to market and sell such products, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial conditional and results of operations. If we fail to obtain approval in any jurisdiction, the geographic market for our product candidates could be limited. Similarly, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates.

Because we are developing therapies for which there is little clinical experience and, in some cases, using new endpoints, there is more risk that the outcome of our clinical trials will not be favorable. Even if the results of our trials are favorable, there is risk that they will not be acceptable to regulators or physicians.

There are currently no drugs with proven efficacy for acute inner ear tinnitus or acute inner ear hearing loss. In addition, there has been limited historical clinical trial experience generally for the development of drugs to treat these conditions. Regulatory authorities in the United States and European Union have not issued definitive guidance as to how to measure the efficacy of treatments for acute inner ear tinnitus or acute inner ear hearing loss, and regulators have not yet established what is required to be demonstrated in a clinical trial in order to signify a clinically meaningful result and/or obtain marketing approval. We designed our Phase 3 trials for Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® to include endpoints that we believe are clinically justified and meaningful. Specifically, with regard to Keyzilen®, the EMA indicated that a statistically significant improvement in tinnitus loudness that is supported by several secondary variables would demonstrate a clinically meaningful result. The FDA indicated that an improvement in tinnitus loudness supported by a co-primary efficacy point, such as the TFI questionnaire, would be clinically meaningful.

With regard to Sonsuvi®, the FDA and EMA have indicated that a 10 dB improvement in hearing thresholds is clinically significant, in line with clinical practice. However, no product has been approved for marketing based upon such guidance and we cannot be certain that Sonsuvi® will be approved even if it were to demonstrate such result in further Phase 3 trials.

Whereas various balance tests such as the tandem Romberg or standing on foam tests or other objective measures such as nystagmography or head impulse tests are widely used in the diagnosis and management of vertigo, there is no universally recognized definition of the clinical meaningfulness of outcomes, and regulatory authorities have not issued guidelines for demonstrating efficacy for drug-based treatments such as AM-125. Therefore we cannot be certain that AM-125 will be approved even if it were to show statistically significant improvements in these tests.

20

Some of our conclusions regarding the potential efficacy of Sonsuvi® in our completed HEALOS clinical trial for the treatment of ASNHL in the subgroup of patients with profound acute hearing loss is based on retrospective analyses of the results, which are generally considered less reliable indicators of efficacy than pre-specified analyses.

After determining that we did not achieve the primary efficacy endpoint in our completed HEALOS clinical trial of Sonsuvi® for the treatment of ASNHL, we performed retrospective analyses that we believe show treatment effects on the magnitude of hearing recovery in favor of Sonsuvi® in case of profound hearing loss at baseline. Although we believe that these additional analyses were warranted, a retrospective analysis performed after unblinding trial results can result in the introduction of bias if the analysis is inappropriately tailored or influenced by knowledge of the data and actual results. In particular, the analysis that resulted in a clinically meaningful effect being observed in active-treated patients who suffered from profound acute hearing loss poses greater risk of bias as such subgroup was not pre-specified in the trial design, notwithstanding that we applied a commonly used definition of profound hearing loss.

Because of these limitations, regulatory authorities typically give greatest weight to results from pre-specified analyses and less weight to results from post-hoc, retrospective analyses. According to discussions with the EMA and FDA, the therapeutic benefits that were observed in the HEALOS subgroup of profound acute hearing loss will need to be confirmed prospectively in one or more additional Phase 3 trials in order to gain regulatory market approval. However, there is no guarantee that we will ever receive such regulatory approval.

Safety issues with isomers of our product candidates or with approved products of third parties that are similar to our product candidates, could delay or prevent the regulatory approval process or result in restrictions on labeling.

Discovery of previously unknown problems, or increased focus on a known problem, with an approved product may result in restrictions on its permissible uses, including withdrawal of the medicine from the market. Esketamine and betahistine, the active pharmaceutical ingredients, or APIs, of Keyzilen® and AM-125, may be affected by the safety of the drugs related to them. Although both APIs have been used successfully in patients for many years, newly observed toxicities or worsening of known toxicities, in pre-clinical studies of, or in patients receiving, Esketamine, the racemate Ketamine or betahistine, or reconsideration of known toxicities of these APIs in the setting of new indications, could result in increased regulatory scrutiny of Keyzilen® or AM-125. For example, Ketamine is regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, under the Controlled Substances Act, or CSA, as a Schedule III drug. DEA scheduling is a separate process that can delay when a drug may become available to patients beyond a NDA approval date, and the timing and outcome of such DEA process is uncertain. Although we have observed no abuse liability associated with Keyzilen® to date, if Keyzilen® were to be scheduled under the CSA, such scheduling could negatively impact the ability or willingness of physicians to prescribe Keyzilen® and our ability to commercialize it.

Substantial additional data may need to be generated in order to obtain marketing approval for AM-125.

Oral betahistine has been in clinical use for several decades and is reported to be currently marketed in 115 countries world-wide. However, in the United States oral betahistine is not approved since the FDA revoked the drug product’s marketing authorization in the early 1970s over issues with unsubstantiated information about some patients in the efficacy studies upon which approval had been based. Given the absence of an approved betahistine drug product in the United States and to the extent that existing data may not be deemed sufficient, the FDA may require a full development package for AM-125.

Furthermore, additional data will be required for the specific formulation of AM-125 and the intranasal administration route. Since intranasal delivery of betahistine has the potential to result in substantially higher systemic exposures as measured by concentrations in blood plasma compared to oral delivery, existing safety assessments conducted with or for the approved drug product may not be sufficient. In addition, some of these assessments were performed a long time ago and may not be in line with current regulations and guidelines. Therefore the scope of our development program for AM-125 may ultimately not be much smaller than one for new chemical entities.

21

Even if our product candidates obtain regulatory approval, we will be subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.

If marketing authorization is obtained for any of our product candidates, the product will remain subject to continual regulatory review and therefore authorization could be subsequently withdrawn or restricted. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves any of our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and oversight by regulatory authorities, including with respect to the manufacturing processes, labeling, packing, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising and marketing restrictions, and recordkeeping and, potentially, other post-marketing obligations, all of which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize such products. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMPs, cGDPs and cGCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In the European Union, the marketing authorization holder has to operate a pharmacovigilance system which conforms with and is equivalent to the respective Member State’s pharmacovigilance system, requiring him to evaluate all information scientifically, to consider options for risk minimization and prevention and to take appropriate measures as necessary. As part of this system, we will have to, inter alia, have a qualified person responsible for pharmacovigilance, maintain a pharmacovigilance system master file, operate a risk management system for each medicinal product, monitor the outcome of risk minimization measures, and update continuously all pharmacovigilance data to update the risk assessment.

Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

•

restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market, or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;

​

•

fines, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;

​

•

refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;

​

•

product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and

​

•

injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

​

If any of these events occurs, our ability to sell such product may be impaired, and we may incur substantial additional expense to comply with regulatory requirements, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The FDA’s or any other regulatory authority’s policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

Enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and may affect the prices we may set.

In the United States and the European Union, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system. These changes could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

22

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Health Care Reform Law was enacted, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for health care and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. The Health Care Reform Law, among other things, increased rebates a manufacturer must pay to the Medicaid program, addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, established a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must provide 50% point-of-sale discounts on products covered under Part D and implemented payment system reforms including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models. Further, the law imposed a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import branded prescription drug products, expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs, and created a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research. Substantial provisions affecting compliance were enacted, which may affect our business practices with health care practitioners. Continued pressure on pharmaceutical pricing is expected and may also increase our regulatory burdens and operating costs.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Health Care Reform Law was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2025 unless additional Congressional action is taken. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other health care funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers and accordingly, our financial operations. Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing by requiring drug companies to notify insurers and government regulators of price increases and provide an explanation of the reasons for the increase, reduce the out-of-pocket cost of prescription drug, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. Moreover, U.S. President Donald Trump has discussed the need for federal legislation, regulation or Executive Order to regulate the prices of medicines.

Because of the continued uncertainty about the implementation of the Health Care Reform Law, including the potential for further legal challenges or repeal of that legislation, we cannot quantify or predict with any certainty the likely impact of the Health Care Reform Law or its repeal on our business model, prospects, financial condition or results of operations, in particular on the pricing, coverage or reimbursement of any of our product candidates that may receive marketing approval. We also anticipate that Congress, state legislatures, and third-party payors may continue to review and assess alternative healthcare delivery and payment systems and may in the future propose and adopt legislation or policy changes or implementations effecting additional fundamental changes in the healthcare delivery system. We cannot assure you as to the ultimate content, timing, or effect of changes, nor is it possible at this time to estimate the impact of any such potential legislation.

In the European Union, a new clinical trial regulation centralizes clinical trial approval, which eliminates redundancy, but in some cases this may extend timelines for clinical trial approvals due to potentially longer wait times. The regulation requires specific consents for use of data in research which, among other measures, may increase the costs and timelines for our product development efforts. The

23

regulation also provides an obligation for clinical trial sponsors to make summaries of all trial results, accompanied by a summary understandable to laypersons, as well as the clinical trial report publicly available in a new database. Beyond this obligation, the EMA adopted a new “Agency policy on publication of clinical data” (in force since January 1, 2015) based on which the EMA makes available to the public all clinical trials submitted with the EMA as well as raw data results (“individual patient data”). These publication requirements can conflict with legitimate secrecy interests of the sponsors and may lead to valuable clinical trial data falling into the public domain.

On June 23, 2016, the UK public voted in a referendum to leave the European Union. The UK government subsequently announced its intention to serve notice of withdrawal from the European Union no later than March 2017. As a consequence of such withdrawal notice, EU law will cease to apply to the UK from the date of entry into force of a withdrawal agreement, or two years after UK’s submission of the withdrawal notification. As a result, the UK is likely to remain within the European Union for at least the next two years, and, therefore there will likely be no major legal implications for the life sciences sector in the short term. In the long term, however, the effects may be more severe, in particular if the UK cannot agree the terms of a continued close association with the European Union and/or chooses not to incorporate existing EU rules into national law and/or to no longer align themselves with European law. The administrative burden for pharmaceutical companies could increase significantly because regulatory requirements, for example clinical trial authorizations and marketing authorization applications, may need to be fulfilled under a new and different legal framework for the UK. Existing marketing authorizations granted in the European Union under the centralized procedure prior to the exit may potentially not be recognized anymore by the UK.

Austerity measures in certain European nations may also affect the prices we are able to seek if our products are approved, as discussed below.

Both in the United States and in the European Union, legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We do not know whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be.

Our relationships with customers and payors may be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which, if violated, could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, exclusion from government healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings, among other penalties.

Healthcare providers, payors and others play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, primarily in the United States, that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable U.S. healthcare laws and regulations, include the following:

•

the U.S. healthcare anti-kickback statute prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made under U.S. government healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid;

​

•

the U.S. False Claims Act imposes criminal and civil penalties, including civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, against individuals or entities for knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the U.S. government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government;

​

•

the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, imposes criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters;

​

24

•

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, imposes obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;

​

•

the transparency requirements under the Health Care Reform Law require manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies to report to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services information related to payments and other transfers of value made by such manufacturers to physicians and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians or their immediate family members; and

​

•

analogous laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers, and some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other health care providers or marketing expenditures.

​

Similar laws exist in other jurisdictions.

In the European Union, there is currently no central European anti-bribery or similar legislation. However, more and more EU member states as well as life sciences industry associations are enacting increasingly specific anti-bribery rules for the healthcare sector which are as severe and sometimes even more severe than in the United States. Germany, for example, has recently adopted new criminal provisions dealing with granting benefits to healthcare professionals. This new law has increased the legal restrictions as well as the legal scrutiny for the collaboration and contractual relationships between the pharmaceutical industry and its customers.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available under the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, it is possible that some of our future business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent health care reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, the Health Care Reform Law, among other things, amends the intent requirement of the federal anti-kickback and criminal healthcare fraud statutes. A person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it. Moreover, the Health Care Reform Law provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal anti-kickback statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from U.S. government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business with are found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

We operate in highly competitive and rapidly changing industries, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing competing products before or more successfully than we do.

The biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries are highly competitive and subject to significant and rapid technological change. Our success is highly dependent on our ability to discover, develop and obtain marketing approval for new and innovative products on a cost-effective basis and to market them successfully. In doing so, we face and will continue to face intense competition from a variety of businesses, including large, fully integrated pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and

25

biopharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other private and public research institutions in Europe, the United States and other jurisdictions. These organizations may have significantly greater resources than we do and conduct similar research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and marketing of products that compete with our product candidates.

We believe that our key competitors are Otonomy, Inc., or Otonomy, Sound Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Sound Pharma, and Sensorion SA, or Sensorion. In October 2013, Otonomy announced the launch of a development program for the treatment of tinnitus, OTO-311, which is based on the NMDA receptor antagonist gacyclidine and may directly compete with our Keyzilen® product candidate. According to a recent public filing, Otonomy intends to develop a polymer-based formulation of gacyclidine that will provide a full course of treatment from a single intratympanic injection. Following a Phase 1 trial, Otonomy made adjustments to the formulation, resulting in product candidate OTO-313, which the company plans to evaluate in a Phase 1/2 trial starting in 2019. OTO-313’s competitive strength will ultimately depend on the demonstration of clinical efficacy and safety and its comparison with Keyzilen®. Otonomy is also developing OTO-104, which is a polymer-based formulation of dexamethasone for intratympanic treatment of vertigo in Ménière’s disease. In Phase 3 of clinical development, OTO-104 showed no treatment effects in a North American study, but showed treatment effects in a European study, which had been terminated early. In March 2018 the company announced its intention to conduct another Phase 3 study with OTO-104. If Otonomy’s drug product is approved prior to AM-125, we will have to compete against it in the treatment of vertigo in Ménière’s disease. In addition, OTO-104 is being evaluated by Otonomy for the treatment of certain types of hearing loss and may compete against Sonsuvi®.

In June 2006, Sound Pharma began clinical testing of an oral treatment for hearing loss (SPI-1005, ebselen). Its active substance mimics and prompts production of the glutathione peroxidase enzyme. In February 2014, Sound Pharma announced positive outcomes from a placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial with SPI-1005 in the prevention of temporary inner ear hearing loss from listening to loud music with a mobile digital media player. Although Sonsuvi® targets permanent rather than transient hearing loss, SPI-1005 may become competing products if Sound Pharma seeks and manages to demonstrate clinical efficacy also in the prevention and treatment of permanent inner ear hearing loss.

Sensorion is developing SENS-401, a 5-HT3 antagonist with anti-inflammatory properties, for the oral treatment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The company is initiating a Phase 2 clinical trial with SENS-401 in the treatment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Sensorion is also developing SENS-111, a histamine H4 receptor antagonist, for the oral treatment of acute vertigo crises and in 2017 initiated a Phase 2 trial to enroll patients with acute unilateral vestibulopathy. According to Sensorion, this trial will conclude in the second half of 2019. If successful, SENS-401 may compete against Sonsuvi®, and SENS-111 may compete against AM-125.

There are several companies developing treatments for hearing loss. Strekin AG, a privately held Swiss company, announced in April 2016 that it plans to develop STR001, an agonist of the peroxisome proliferator, for surgery induced hearing loss and that it commenced a Phase 2 program in Germany and France. Nordmark, a German company, is developing Ancrod, the biologically active substance from the venom of the Malayan Pit Viper (Calloselasma rhodostoma), for the treatment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss and has initiated Phase 2 program. Both, STR001 and Ancrod have the potential to compete with Sonsuvi®.

There exist a variety of drug products that are licensed or used off-label for the treatment of vestibular disorders and Ménière’s disease, including steroids, diuretics, anti-emetics or anti-nausea medications. In many countries outside the United States, oral betahistine is the standard of care and licensed for the treatment of Ménière’s disease and vestibular vertigo. Although, we expect that AM-125 will offer benefits over oral betahistine due to the ability to bypass the strong first-pass metabolism associated with oral intake and provide for a higher bioavailability and avoid gastric side effects, it may take time to change prescribing and usage patterns in favor of the newer product.

26

The highly competitive nature of and rapid technological changes in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries could render our product candidates or our technology obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors may, among other things:

•

develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, less expensive, or more convenient or easier to administer;

​

•

obtain quicker regulatory approval;

​

•

establish superior proprietary positions;

​

•

have access to more manufacturing capacity;

​

•

implement more effective approaches to sales and marketing; or

​

•

form more advantageous strategic alliances.

​

Should any of these occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

The successful commercialization of our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish adequate coverage and reimbursement levels and pricing policies.

The successful commercialization of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125, AM-201 or our other product candidates will depend, in part, on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for our products or procedures using our products will be available from government and health administration authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payors. To manage healthcare costs, many governments and third-party payors increasingly scrutinize the pricing of new technologies and require greater levels of evidence of favorable clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness before extending coverage. In light of such challenges to prices and increasing levels of evidence of the benefits and clinical outcomes of new technologies, we cannot be sure that coverage will be available for Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or any other product candidate that we commercialize and, if available, that the reimbursement rates will be adequate.

Our customers, including hospitals, physicians and other healthcare providers that purchase certain injectable drugs administered during a procedure, such as our product candidates, generally rely on third-party payors to pay for all or part of the costs and fees associated with the drug and the procedures administering the drug. These third-party payors may pay separately for the drug or may bundle or otherwise include the costs of the drug in the payment for the procedure. We are unable to predict at this time whether our product candidates, if approved, will be eligible for such separate payments. Nor can we predict at this time the adequacy of payments, whether made separately for the drug and procedure or with a bundled or otherwise aggregate payment amount for the drug and procedure. In addition, obtaining and maintaining adequate coverage and reimbursement status is time-consuming and costly.

Third-party payors may deny coverage and reimbursement status altogether of a given drug product, or cover the product but may also establish prices at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. Because the rules and regulations regarding coverage and reimbursement change frequently, in some cases at short notice, even when there is favorable coverage and reimbursement, future changes may occur that adversely impact the favorable status. Further, the net reimbursement for drug products may be subject to additional reductions if there are changes to laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States.

The unavailability or inadequacy of third-party coverage and reimbursement could have a material adverse effect on the market acceptance of our product candidates and the future revenues we may expect to receive from those products. In addition, we are unable to predict what additional legislation or regulation relating to the healthcare industry or third-party coverage and reimbursement may be enacted in the future, or what effect such legislation or regulation would have on our business.

27

Our products may not gain market acceptance, in which case we may not be able to generate product revenues, which will materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Even if the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authority approves the marketing of any product candidates that we develop, physicians, healthcare providers, patients or the medical community may not accept or use them. Efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may not be successful. If Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or any other product candidate that we develop does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenues or any profits from operations. The degree of market acceptance of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 or any of our product candidates that is approved for commercial sale will depend on a variety of factors, including:

•

how clinicians and potential patients perceive our novel products;

​

•

the timing of market introduction;

​

•

the number and clinical profile of competing products;

​

•

our ability to provide acceptable evidence of safety and efficacy;

​

•

the prevalence and severity of any side effects;

​

•

relative convenience and ease of administration, particularly as Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® have to be administered by an ear, nose, throat physician, and in case of Keyzilen® the procedure has to be repeated for a total of three times;

​

•

cost-effectiveness;

​

•

patient diagnostics and screening infrastructure in each market, particularly as Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi® and AM-125, are being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear disorders and are thus dependent on a relatively rapid diagnosis and dosing process;

​

•

marketing and distribution support;

​

•

availability of coverage, reimbursement and adequate payment from health maintenance organizations and other third-party payors, both public and private; and

​

•

other potential advantages over alternative treatment methods.

​

If our product candidates fail to gain market acceptance, this will have a material adverse impact on our ability to generate revenues to provide a satisfactory, or any, return on our investments. Even if some products achieve market acceptance, the market may prove not to be large enough to allow us to generate significant revenues.

In addition, the potential market opportunity of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 are difficult to precisely estimate. Our estimates of the potential market opportunity are predicated on several key assumptions such as industry knowledge and publications, third-party research reports and other surveys. While we believe that our internal assumptions are reasonable, these assumptions involve the exercise of significant judgment on the part of our management, are inherently uncertain and the reasonableness of these assumptions could not have been assessed by an independent source in every detail. If any of the assumptions proves to be inaccurate, then the actual market for Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 could be smaller than our estimates of the potential market opportunity. If the actual market for Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 is smaller than we expect, or if the products fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, health care payors and patients, our product revenue may be limited and it may be more difficult for us to achieve or maintain profitability.

We have never commercialized a product candidate before and may lack the necessary expertise, personnel and resources to successfully commercialize our products on our own or together with suitable partners.

We have never commercialized a product candidate, and we currently have no sales force, marketing or distribution capabilities. To achieve commercial success for Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and our other product candidates, we will have to develop our own sales, marketing and supply organization or outsource these activities to a third party.

28

Factors that may affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates on our own include recruiting and retaining adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel, obtaining access to or persuading adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe our drug candidates and other unforeseen costs associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization. Developing a sales and marketing organization requires significant investment, is time-consuming and could delay the launch of our product candidates. We may not be able to build an effective sales and marketing organization. If we are unable to build our own distribution and marketing capabilities or to find suitable partners for the commercialization of our product candidates, we may not generate revenues from them or be able to reach or sustain profitability.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We have several areas of disagreement with Xigen, and consequently our relationship with Xigen may be adversely affected, we could potentially lose our right to commercialize Sonsuvi® and our business, commercialization prospects and financial condition may be adversely affected.

We have several areas of disagreement with Xigen S.A., or Xigen, with whom we have an agreement pursuant to which Xigen granted us an exclusive worldwide license to use specified compounds to develop, manufacture and commercialize “pharmaceutical products as well as drug delivery devices and formulations for local administration of therapeutic substances to the inner ear for the treatment of ear disorders” (the Area). We differ from Xigen in our interpretation of the definition of the Area. We interpret “Area,” as it pertains to pharmaceutical products, as not limited to local administration to the inner ear, but inclusive of the use of pharmaceutical products generally for the treatment of ear disorders (and that the limitation of “local administration to the inner ear” applies only to “drug delivery devices and formulations”). Xigen has adopted the interpretation that the license is limited to local administration for both pharmaceutical products and drug delivery and formulations. This difference in interpretation has no impact on our current or planned use of Sonsuvi® delivered locally via intratympanic treatment.

In addition, in October 2013, Xigen assigned certain of the patents relevant to the agreement to Xigen Inflammation Ltd., an unaffiliated entity organized in Cyprus. We consider this transfer to be in breach of the agreement since our prior written approval was not sought, although Xigen Inflammation Ltd. has confirmed to us that the assignment of patents is without prejudice to our license for local administration. In the past, Xigen has also requested from us quantities of Sonsuvi® for certain analyses, although we believe the quantities requested exceed what laboratories would generally require for such tests.

The agreement contains a confidentiality provision restricting the disclosure of the terms of the agreement. We believe that Xigen may have waived the confidentiality provision of the agreement by disclosing the terms of the agreement to Xigen Inflammation Ltd., although Xigen has denied that any disclosure of the agreement has been made to the assignee despite the assignee’s assurance that the assignment was without prejudice to our license for local administration. Despite this, in connection with our initial public offering, we sought Xigen’s consent to disclose certain provisions of the agreement and file a redacted version of the agreement with the SEC. Xigen, however, was only willing to provide its consent if we agreed to limit the scope of the definition of  “Area,” desist from claims that the transfer of patents to Xigen Inflammation Ltd. was in breach of the agreement and provide Xigen with certain quantities of the active substance of Sonsuvi® for analysis.

We believe Xigen’s demands were unreasonable and unwarranted, and therefore we were not able to come to an agreement with Xigen prior to disclosing certain provisions of the agreement in the prospectus relating to our initial public offering and filing a redacted version of the agreement. Xigen may consider such disclosure to be a breach of the confidentiality provision of the agreement. The agreement is governed by Swiss law, and the venue is Solothurn, Switzerland. In the opinion of our Swiss counsel, while there can be no assurances, this disclosure by us does not rise to the level of material breach that would allow Xigen to repudiate the agreement.

We cannot predict the result of these disagreements with Xigen and any litigation that may result. While Xigen has taken no action as of the date of this Annual Report, Xigen may attempt to repudiate the contract and initiate a claim for damages against us. According to our Swiss counsel, Xigen would have to

29

show that it had suffered a loss due to the disclosure of the redacted agreement and certain provisions of the agreement in the prospectus associated with our initial public offering, and the damages could be equal to the amount of the effective direct damage that Xigen proves it has suffered.

These disagreements, and in particular any resulting litigation, could result in substantial legal expenses, distraction to our management and employees and potentially the loss of our right to commercialize Sonsuvi®. No assurance can be given that these disagreements and any resulting litigation will not have a material adverse effect on our business, commercialization prospects for Sonsuvi® and our other product candidates and our financial condition. For a description of our agreement with Xigen. See “Business — Business overview — Collaboration and License Agreements — Xigen.”

If we fail to maintain our current strategic relationships with INSERM and Xigen, our business, commercialization prospects and financial condition may be materially adversely affected.

We have a co-ownership/exploitation agreement with the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, or INSERM, governing the exploitation of any products derived from patents that resulted from our joint research program with INSERM that was conducted in 2003 to 2005. Under this agreement with INSERM, we are given the exclusive right to exploit the patents issuing from the filed patent applications for all claimed applications, including the treatment of tinnitus, in order to develop, promote, manufacture, cause to be manufactured, use, sell and distribute any products, processes or services deriving from such patents, including Keyzilen®, in any country in which these patent applications have been filed during the term of the agreement. We alone are entitled to grant manufacturing or sales licenses for any patents to our subsidiaries and/or third parties. INSERM is entitled to use the inventions covered by the patents and applications for its own research purposes, free of charge, but may not generate any direct or indirect profits from such use. We have agreed to finance any additional research and development work necessary to obtain marketing authorizations for inventions covered by these patents and applications. If we fail to use reasonable efforts in carrying out this additional research, then INSERM may revoke the exclusivity of exploitation granted to us under this agreement. Additionally, we have an exclusive worldwide license from Xigen for the application of Xigen’s novel intracellular peptide therapeutics in the area of ear disorders. These intellectual property rights have been the basis of our research and development of Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi®.

Good relationships with INSERM and Xigen are important for our business prospects. If our relationships with INSERM or Xigen were to deteriorate substantially or INSERM or Xigen were to challenge our use of their intellectual property or our calculations of the payments we owe under our agreements, our business, financial condition, commercialization prospects and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

We may seek to form additional strategic alliances in the future with respect to our product candidates, and if we do not realize the benefits of such alliance, our business, financial condition, commercialization prospects and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

Our product development programs and the potential commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses and may require expertise, such as sales and marketing expertise, which we do not currently possess. Therefore, in addition to our relationships with INSERM and Xigen, for our Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® product candidates respectively, for one or more of our product candidates, we may decide to enter into strategic alliances, or create joint ventures or collaborations with pharmaceutical or biopharmaceutical companies for the further development and potential commercialization of those product candidates.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. Any delays in entering into new strategic partnership agreements related to our product candidates could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates and reduce their competitiveness even if they reach the market. We may also be restricted under existing and future collaboration agreements from entering into strategic partnerships or collaboration agreements on certain terms with other potential collaborators. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on acceptable terms, or at all, for any of our existing or future product candidates and programs because the potential partner may consider that our research and development pipeline is

30

insufficiently developed to justify a collaborative effort, or that our product candidates and programs do not have the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy in the target population. If we are unsuccessful in establishing and maintaining a collaboration with respect to a particular product candidate, we may have to curtail the development of that product candidate, reduce the scope of or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of our sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense for which we have not budgeted. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we will not be able to bring our product candidates to market and generate product revenue. Even if we are successful in establishing a new strategic partnership or entering into a collaboration agreement, we cannot be certain that, following such a strategic transaction or license, we will be able to progress the development and commercialization of the applicable product candidates as envisaged, or that we will achieve the revenues that would justify such transaction, and we could be subject to the following risks, each of which may materially harm our business, commercialization prospects and financial condition:

•

we may not be able to control the amount and timing of resources that the collaboration partner devotes to the product development program;

​

•

the collaboration partner may experience financial difficulties;

​

•

we may be required to relinquish important rights such as marketing, distribution and intellectual property rights;

​

•

a collaboration partner could move forward with a competing product developed either independently or in collaboration with third parties, including our competitors; or

​

•

business combinations or significant changes in a collaboration partner’s business strategy may adversely affect our willingness to complete our obligations under any arrangement.

​

We rely on third parties to conduct our nonclinical and clinical trials and perform other tasks for us. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines, or comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party CROs to monitor and manage data for our ongoing nonclinical and clinical programs, including the clinical trials of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201. We rely on these parties for execution of our nonclinical and clinical studies and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs and other vendors are required to comply with cGMP, cGCP, and Good Laboratory Practice, or GLP, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Union and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in nonclinical and clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these regulations through periodic inspections of study sponsors, principal investigators, trial sites and other contractors. If we or any of our CROs or vendors fail to comply with applicable regulations, the data generated in our nonclinical and clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the EMA, FDA, other regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional nonclinical and clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that all of our clinical trials comply with cGCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminates, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our on-going nonclinical and

31

clinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our protocols, regulatory requirements, or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed, or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. CROs may also generate higher costs than anticipated. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and prospects.

We currently rely on third-party suppliers and other third parties for production of our product candidates and our dependence on these third parties may impair the advancement of our research and development programs and the development of our product candidates.

We currently rely on and expect to continue to rely on third parties, for the manufacturing and supply of chemical compounds for the clinical trials of our product candidates, including Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201, and others for the manufacturing and supply of pre-filled syringes and spray pumps. For the foreseeable future, we expect to continue to rely on such third parties for the manufacture of any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale, if any of our product candidates receives regulatory approval. Reliance on third-party providers may expose us to different risks than if we were to manufacture product candidates ourselves. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit our NDA or comparable marketing application to the FDA or other regulatory authority. Although we have auditing rights with all our manufacturing counterparties, we do not have control over a supplier’s or manufacturer’s compliance with these laws, regulations and applicable cGMP standards and other laws and regulations, such as those related to environmental health and safety matters. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Any failure to achieve and maintain compliance with these laws, regulations and standards could subject us to the risk that we may have to suspend the manufacturing of our product candidates or that obtained approvals could be revoked, which would adversely affect our business and reputation. Furthermore, third-party providers may breach agreements they have with us because of factors beyond our control. They may also terminate or refuse to renew their agreements because of their own financial difficulties or business priorities, potentially at a time that is costly or otherwise inconvenient for us. If we were unable to find adequate replacement or another acceptable solution in time, our clinical trials could be delayed or our commercial activities could be harmed.

In addition, the fact that we are dependent on our suppliers and other third parties for the manufacture, storage and distribution of our product candidates means that we are subject to the risk that our product candidates and, if approved, commercial products may have manufacturing defects that we have limited ability to prevent or control. The sale of products containing such defects could result in recalls or regulatory enforcement action that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Growth in the costs and expenses of components or raw materials may also adversely influence our business, financial condition and results of operations. Supply sources could be interrupted from time to time and, if interrupted, that supplies could be resumed (whether in part or in whole) within a reasonable time frame and at an acceptable cost or at all.

32

Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacturing of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and any other product candidate that we develop may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any products that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

The drug substance and drug product for our product candidates are currently acquired from single-source suppliers. The loss of these suppliers, or their failure to supply us with the drug substance or drug product, could materially and adversely affect our business.

We do not currently, and do not expect to in the future, independently conduct manufacturing activities for our product candidates, including Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201. We currently have a relationship with one supplier each, for the supply of the API of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201. We are reliant upon single source third-party contract manufacturing organizations to manufacture and supply the drug substance and drug product and components thereof for each of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201. We do not currently have any other suppliers for the drug substance or drug product of our product candidates and, although we believe that there are alternate sources of supply that could satisfy our clinical and commercial requirements, and we have performed some preliminary investigations to assess this availability, we cannot assure you that identifying alternate sources and establishing relationships with such sources would not result in significant delay in the development of our product candidates. Additionally, we may not be able to enter into supply arrangements with alternative suppliers on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. A delay in the development of our product candidates or having to enter into a new agreement with a different third party on less favorable terms than we have with our current suppliers could have a material adverse impact upon on our business.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

If we or our licensors are unable to obtain and maintain effective patent rights for our technologies, product candidates or any future product candidates, or if the scope of the patent rights obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection, and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies and product candidates. Our success depends in large part on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and in other countries with respect to our proprietary technology and products.

We have sought to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel technologies and products that are important to our business. This process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost, in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Moreover, in some circumstances, we do not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from third parties. Therefore, these patents and applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions for which legal principles remain unsolved. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions remain confidential for a period of time after filing, and some remain so until issued. We cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to our product candidates, or whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned patents or pending patent applications, nor can we know whether those from whom we license patents were the first to make the inventions claimed or were the first to file. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. There is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can invalidate a

33

patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue, and even if such patents cover our product candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability, or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, found unenforceable or invalidated, which could allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third party patent rights. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product candidates, prevent others from designing around our claims or provide us with a competitive advantage. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

We, independently or together with our licensors, have filed several patent applications covering various aspects of our product candidates. We cannot offer any assurances about which, if any, patents will issue, the breadth of any such patent or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be challenged by third parties. Any successful opposition to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us after patent issuance could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced.

We may not have sufficient patent terms to effectively protect our products and business.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours or otherwise provide us with a competitive advantage. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product, we may be open to competition from generic medications.

While patent term extensions under the Hatch-Waxman Act in the United States and under supplementary protection certificates in Europe may be available to extend the patent exclusivity term for Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201, we cannot provide any assurances that any such patent term extension will be obtained and, if so, for how long. In addition, upon issuance in the United States any patent term can be adjusted based on certain delays caused by the applicant(s) or the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO. For example, a patent term can be reduced based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution.

While in the United States there is a possibility of obtaining market protection independent from any patent protection for up to 3 and 5 years from approval, and in the European Union one may obtain data exclusivity of eight years from approval with an additional two years of market exclusivity (which can potentially be extended by one year), there is no assurance that we can obtain such data exclusivity and market protection with respect to Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125, or any of our other product candidates. Our issued patents and pending patent applications are expected to expire for Keyzilen® between 2025 and 2028, for Sonsuvi® between 2020 and 2027, and for AM-125 and AM-201 between 2025 and 2037, prior to any patent term extensions to which we may be entitled under applicable laws.

Patent policy and rule changes could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. The laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, in the United States prior to March 15, 2013, the first to make the claimed invention is entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application is entitled to the patent. After March 15, 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or

34

the Leahy-Smith Act, enacted on September 16, 2011, the United States has moved to a first to file system. The Leahy-Smith Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The effects of these changes are currently unclear as the USPTO must still implement various regulations, the courts have yet to address any of these provisions and the applicability of the act and new regulations on specific patents discussed herein have not been determined and would need to be reviewed. In general, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. In addition, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

If we are unable to maintain effective proprietary rights for our technologies, product candidates or any future product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. Moreover, if any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent such competitor from using that technology or information to compete with us, which could harm our competitive position.

Although we expect all of our employees and consultants to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors, and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating such trade secrets. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA, as part of its Transparency Initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all.

Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the U.S. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the U.S. and abroad. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, we will not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

35

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may expose us to substantial liability or prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technology without alleged or actual infringement, misappropriation, or other violation of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There have been many lawsuits and other proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions, and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO and corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous U.S.- and foreign-issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates. Some claimants may have substantially greater resources than we do and may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property litigation to a greater degree and for longer periods of time than we could. In addition, patent holding companies that focus solely on extracting royalties and settlements by enforcing patent rights may target us. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture, or methods of treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Although we generally conduct certain freedom to operate search and review with respect to our product candidates, we cannot guarantee that any of our search and review is complete and thorough, nor can we be sure that we have identified each and every patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant or necessary to the commercialization of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be invalid or unenforceable. Similarly, if any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture, or methods of use, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

Additional competitors could enter the market with generic versions of our products, which may result in a material decline in sales of affected products.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, seeking approval of a generic copy of an approved innovator product. Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a manufacturer may also submit an NDA under section 505(b)(2) that references the FDA’s prior approval of the innovator product. A 505(b)(2) NDA product may be for a new or improved version of the original innovator product. Hatch-Waxman also provides for certain periods of regulatory exclusivity, which preclude FDA approval (or in some circumstances, FDA filing and reviewing) of an

36

ANDA, or 505(b)(2) NDA. These include, subject to certain exceptions, the period during which an FDA-approved drug is subject to orphan drug exclusivity. In addition to the benefits of regulatory exclusivity, an innovator NDA holder may have patents claiming the active ingredient, product formulation or an approved use of the drug, which would be listed with the product in the FDA publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” known as the “Orange Book.” If there are patents listed in the Orange Book, a generic or 505(b)(2) applicant that seeks to market its product before expiration of the patents must include in the ANDA what is known as a “Paragraph IV certification,” challenging the validity or enforceability of, or claiming non-infringement of, the listed patent or patents. Notice of the certification must be given to the innovator, too, and if within 45 days of receiving notice the innovator sues to protect its patents, approval of the ANDA is stayed for 30 months, or as lengthened or shortened by the court.

Accordingly, if Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 are approved, competitors could file ANDAs for generic versions of Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201, or 505(b)(2) NDAs that reference Keyzilen®, AM-111 and AM-125, respectively. If there are patents listed for Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi®, AM-125 and AM-201 in the Orange Book, those ANDAs and 505(b)(2) NDAs would be required to include a certification as to each listed patent indicating whether the ANDA applicant does or does not intend to challenge the patent. We cannot predict whether any patents issuing from our pending patent applications will be eligible for listing in the Orange Book, how any generic competitor would address such patents, whether we would sue on any such patents, or the outcome of any such suit.

We may not be successful in securing or maintaining proprietary patent protection for products and technologies we develop or license. Moreover, if any patents that are granted and listed in the Orange Book are successfully challenged by way of a Paragraph IV certification and subsequent litigation, the affected product could immediately face generic competition and its sales would likely decline rapidly and materially. Should sales decline, we may have to write off a portion or all of the intangible assets associated with the affected product and our results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

The patent protection and patent prosecution for some of our product candidates is dependent on third parties.

While we normally seek to obtain the right to control prosecution, maintenance and enforcement of the patents relating to our product candidates, there may be times when the filing and prosecution activities for patents relating to our product candidates are controlled by our licensors. This is the case under our agreement with Xigen, where Xigen is entirely responsible for the prosecution and maintenance of the licensed patents and patent applications directed to Sonsuvi®. Xigen has no obligation to provide us any information with respect to such prosecution and we will not have access to any patent prosecution or maintenance information that is not publicly available. Although we monitor Xigen’s ongoing prosecution and maintenance of the licensed patents, if Xigen or any of our future licensing partners fail to prosecute, maintain and enforce such patents and patent applications in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business, including by payment of all applicable fees for patents covering Sonsuvi® or any of our product candidates, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to

37

those rights, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, and selling competing products. Specifically, Xigen is concurrently developing another indication for brimapitide (XG-102), the active substance of Sonsuvi®. This may cause a conflict of interest and adversely affect Xigen’s ability to prosecute the patent portfolio licensed to us in the best interest of our business. In addition, even where we have the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed from third parties including with respect to the patents and applications licensed to us under our co-ownership and exploitation agreement with INSERM for Keyzilen®, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over patent prosecution. We are required to consult and cooperate with INSERM regarding the prosecution, maintenance, and enforcement of, and in certain instances INSERM has the right to independently enforce, the relevant patents, which may place those patients at risk or hinder our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates or protect our patent rights.

If we fail to comply with the obligations in our intellectual property agreements, including those under which we license intellectual property and other rights from third parties, or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors and partners, we could lose intellectual property rights that are important to our business.

We are a party to a number of intellectual property license and co-ownership agreements that are important to our business and expect to enter into additional such agreements in the future. Our existing agreements impose, and we expect that future agreements will impose, various diligence, commercialization, milestone payment, royalty, and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, we may be required to make certain payments to the licensor, we may lose the exclusivity of our license, or the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we would not be able to develop or market products covered by the license. Moreover, if we fail to comply with our obligations under our co-ownership and exploitation agreement with INSERM for Keyzilen®, including certain commercialization requirements, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, INSERM may terminate the agreement and we may lose our rights to exclusively exploit and commercialize the applicable patents. In such event we would not be able to prevent INSERM from exploiting or licensing to the third parties the rights to exploit the applicable patents, which would have a material adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize the affected product candidates. Under our co-ownership agreement with INSERM we may be required to assign our rights in the relevant patents to INSERM if we choose not to or fail to continue to prosecute maintain or patents or patent applications in a given country or countries, in which event we would not be able to develop or market products covered by the applicable patents.

Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business, and scientific issues. Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing or co-ownership agreement, including:

•

the scope of rights granted under the agreement and other interpretation-related issues;

​

•

the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor or partner that is not subject to the agreement;

​

•

the sublicensing of patent and other rights;

​

•

our diligence and commercialization obligations under the agreement and what activities satisfy those obligations;

​

•

the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors or partners and us and our collaborators; and

​

•

the priority of invention of patented technology.

​

If disputes over intellectual property and other rights that we have licensed or co-own prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing or exclusivity arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates.

38

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses.

We currently have rights to the intellectual property, through licenses from third parties and under patents that we own, to develop our product candidates. Because our programs may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, maintain or use these proprietary rights. In addition, our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently and the rights to these formulations may be held by others. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources, and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we sometimes collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to accelerate our pre-clinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our applicable product candidate or program.

In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain a license to third-party intellectual property rights necessary for the development of a product candidate or program, we may have to abandon development of that product candidate or program and our business and financial condition could suffer.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time-consuming, and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter such infringement, we may be required to file claims against those competitors, which can be expensive and time-consuming. If we or one of our licensing partners were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid, overbroad and/or unenforceable, or that we infringe the defendant’s patents. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity, overbreadth and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. A court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to stop a third party from using the technology in question on the grounds that our patents do not cover that technology. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, which could adversely affect us.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our

39

research programs, license necessary technology from third parties, or enter into development partnerships that would help us bring our product candidates to market. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions, or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common shares.

On July 20, 2015, the USPTO declared Patent Interference No. 106,030 involving our issued U.S. patent No. 9,066,865 (the “‘865 Patent”) and Otonomy’s U.S. patent application No. 13/848,636 (the “‘636 Application”). The patent interference identified claims 1-9 in the ‘865 Patent as interfering with claims 38, 43 and 46-50 of the ‘636 Application. The ‘865 Patent discloses methods of treating inner or middle ear diseases with intratympanic injections of poloxamer-based compositions. The claims of the ‘865 Patent are directed to the use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics in poloxamer 407 compositions under certain specifications. On January 26, 2017, the USPTO issued a decision on the interference granting Auris benefit of priority. As a result of the decision, judgment was entered against Otonomy and all claims in the ‘636 Application were refused. In addition, claims 1-8 of the ‘865 Patent were cancelled as the result of the USPTO’s determination that the written description of the specification lacked full scope support for treating middle or inner ear disease with fluoroquinolone. However, claim 9, which is directed to a method of treating viral and bacterial infections with intratympanic injection of a fluoroquinolone antibiotic in a poloxamer 407 composition under certain specifications, was affirmed. On March 27, 2017, Otonomy submitted a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. To preserve its rights, Auris filed a notice of cross-appeal on April 5, 2017. Otonomy subsequently filed its opening brief on July 20, 2017, and Auris filed its principal and response brief on October 27, 2017. On January 5, 2018, Otonomy filed its opposition and reply brief. Auris filed its reply brief on February 2, 2018. On August 1, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination of priority in our favor relating to the July 2015 USPTO declaration of patent interference (No. 106,030) involving our issued ‘865 Patent and Otonomy’s ‘636 Application. We believe that this ruling will not materially impact any of our development programs.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.

We employ and utilize the services of individuals who were previously employed or provided services to universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants, and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any of our employee’s, consultant’s or independent contractor’s former employer or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Our reliance on our advisors, employees and third parties requires us to share our intellectual property and trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our intellectual property will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Because we rely on our advisors, employees and third-party contractors and consultants to research and develop and to manufacture our product candidates, we must, at times, share our intellectual property with them. We seek to protect our intellectual property and other proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or

40

other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of these advisors, employees and third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our intellectual property and trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with these advisors, employees and third parties, the need to share intellectual property and other confidential information increases the risk that such confidential information becomes known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the product development of others or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how, intellectual property and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our intellectual property or trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our intellectual property, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. For example, any academic institution that we may collaborate with in the future may expect to be granted rights to publish data arising out of such collaboration, provided that we are notified in advance and given the opportunity to delay publication for a limited time period in order for us to secure patent protection of intellectual property rights arising from the collaboration, in addition to the opportunity to remove confidential or trade secret information from any such publication. In the future, we may also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share intellectual property under the terms of our research and development or similar agreements. Despite our efforts to protect our intellectual property, our competitors may discover our trade secrets or know how, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our intellectual property would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship of our patents and other intellectual property.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or our ownership of our patents or other intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. As part of ordinary course prosecution and maintenance activities, we determine whether to seek patent protection outside the U.S. and in which countries. This also applies to patents we have acquired or in-licensed from third parties. In some cases this means that we, or our predecessors in interest or licensors of patents within our portfolio, have sought patent protection in a limited number of countries for patents covering our product candidates. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained or are unable to adequately enforce patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

41

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents, the reproduction of our manufacturing or other know-how or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Risks Related to Employee Matters and Managing Growth

Our future growth and ability to compete depends on retaining our key personnel and recruiting additional qualified personnel.

Our success depends upon the continued contributions of our key management, scientific and technical personnel, many of whom have substantial experience with or been instrumental for us and our projects. Key management includes our executive officers Thomas Meyer, our founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Hernan Levett, Chief Financial Officer.

The loss of key managers and senior scientists could delay our research and development activities. Laws and regulations on executive compensation, including legislation in Switzerland, may restrict our ability to attract, motivate and retain the required level of qualified personnel. If the Redomestication is not approved, we will remain impacted by legislation in Switzerland affecting public companies that, among other things, (a) imposes an annual binding shareholders’ “say on pay” vote with respect to the compensation of executive management, including executive officers and the board of directors, (b) prohibits severance, advances, transaction premiums and similar payments to executive officers and directors and (c) requires companies to specify various compensation-related matters in their articles of association, thus requiring them to be approved by a shareholders’ vote. In addition, the competition for qualified personnel in the biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical field is intense, and our future success depends upon our ability to attract, retain and motivate highly-skilled scientific, technical and managerial employees. We face competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions and other organizations. If our recruitment and retention efforts are unsuccessful in the future, it may be difficult for us to implement business strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We expect to expand our sales and marketing, development, and regulatory capabilities, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

We expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of sales and marketing, and to a lesser extent, drug development and regulatory affairs. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Due to our limited financial resources, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our business plans or disrupt our operations.

42

Risks Related to Our Common Shares

The price of our common shares may be volatile and may fluctuate due to factors beyond our control.

The share price of publicly traded emerging biopharmaceutical and drug discovery and development companies has been highly volatile and is likely to remain highly volatile in the future. The market price of our common shares may fluctuate significantly due to a variety of factors, including:

•

positive or negative results of testing and clinical trials by us, strategic partners, or competitors;

​

•

delays in entering into strategic relationships with respect to development and/or commercialization of our product candidates or entry into strategic relationships on terms that are not deemed to be favorable to us;

​

•

technological innovations or commercial product introductions by us or competitors;

​

•

changes in government regulations;

​

•

developments concerning proprietary rights, including patents and litigation matters;

​

•

public concern relating to the commercial value or safety of any of our product candidates;

​

•

financing or other corporate transactions;

​

•

publication of research reports or comments by securities or industry analysts;

​

•

general market conditions in the pharmaceutical industry or in the economy as a whole;

​

•

our ability to maintain the listing of our common shares on Nasdaq; or

​

•

other events and factors beyond our control.

​

Additionally, these factors may affect the liquidity of our common shares, which may hurt your ability to sell our common shares in the future. In addition, the stock market in general has recently experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of individual companies. Broad market and industry factors may materially affect the market price of companies’ stock, including ours, regardless of actual operating performance.

Our common shares may be involuntarily delisted from trading on The Nasdaq Capital Market if we fail to comply with the continued listing requirements. A delisting of our common shares is likely to reduce the liquidity of our common shares and may inhibit or preclude our ability to raise additional financing.

We are required to comply with certain Nasdaq continued listing requirements, including a series of financial tests relating to shareholder equity, market value of listed securities and number of market makers and shareholders. If we fail to maintain compliance with any of those requirements, our common shares could be delisted from The Nasdaq Capital Market.

We are currently not in compliance with the quantitative listing standards of the Nasdaq Capital Market, which require, among other things, that listed companies maintain a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per share. We failed to satisfy this threshold for 30 consecutive trading days and on July 30, 2018, we received a letter from Nasdaq indicating that we had been provided a period of 180 calendar days, or until January 28, 2019, to regain compliance. We did not regain compliance within the 180 days.

On February 6, 2019, we received a letter from Nasdaq stating that due to our continued non-compliance with the minimum $1.00 bid price requirement, our common shares were subject to delisting unless we timely requested a hearing before the Nasdaq Hearings Panel. We timely requested such a hearing on February 8, 2019, which request has stayed any delisting or suspension action by Nasdaq pending the hearing and the expiration of any additional extension period granted following the hearing.

At the hearing, we intend to present our plan to regain compliance with the minimum $1.00 bid price requirement; however, there can be no assurance that the Nasdaq Hearings Panel will grant our request for continued listing or that we will be able to evidence compliance with the applicable listing criteria prior to the expiration of any additional extension period that may be granted to us.

43

At the hearing, we intend to commit that in the event that the Nasdaq Hearings Panel grants us an additional compliance period and the bid price of our common shares fails to increase above the $1.00 minimum during such additional compliance period, we will pursue a reverse share split by consolidating our common shares (together with a corresponding increase in the par value thereof) in a ratio determined by the board of directors in order to regain compliance with the $1.00 bid price requirement. In the event shareholders approve the Redomestication, Auris Medical (Bermuda)’s board of directors would have the ability, after the Redomestication, to effect a reverse share split without further shareholders approval, by consolidating our common shares (together with a corresponding increase in the par value thereof) in a ratio determined by the board of directors. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully resolve such noncompliance.

In 2017, we also failed to maintain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement. To address that non-compliance, on March 13, 2018, we effected the Merger, pursuant to which we effected a “reverse share split” at a ratio of 10-for-1. Additionally, on January 11, 2018, we received a letter from Nasdaq indicating that we were not in compliance with Nasdaq’s market value of listed securities requirement. As a result of the July 2018 Registered Offering, we resolved the non-compliance with the market value of listed securities requirement by complying with Nasdaq’s minimum equity standard. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully maintain compliance with the several Nasdaq continued listing requirements.

If, for any reason, Nasdaq should delist our common shares from trading on its exchange and we are unable to obtain listing on another national securities exchange or take action to restore our compliance with the Nasdaq continued listing requirements, a reduction in some or all of the following may occur, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our shareholders:

•

the liquidity of our common shares;

​

•

the market price of our common shares;

​

•

our ability to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations;

​

•

the number of institutional and general investors that will consider investing in our common shares;

​

•

the number of investors in general that will consider investing in our common shares;

​

•

the number of market makers in our common shares;

​

•

the availability of information concerning the trading prices and volume of our common shares; and

​

•

the number of broker-dealers willing to execute trades in shares of our common shares.

​

In the event that our common shares are delisted from Nasdaq, U.S. broker-dealers may be discouraged from effecting transactions in shares of our common shares because they may be considered penny stocks and thus be subject to the penny stock rules.

On February 6, 2019, we received a letter from Nasdaq stating that due to our continued non-compliance with the minimum $1.00 bid price requirement, our common shares were subject to delisting unless we timely requested a hearing before the Nasdaq Hearings Panel. We timely requested such a hearing on February 8, 2019, which request has stayed any delisting or suspension action by Nasdaq pending the hearing and the expiration of any additional extension period granted following the hearing. If the Nasdaq Hearings Panel does not grant our request for continued listing and our common shares are delisted from trading on Nasdaq, our common shares may be considered to be “penny stock.”

The SEC has adopted a number of rules to regulate “penny stock” that restrict transactions involving stock which is deemed to be penny stock. Such rules include Rules 3a51-1, 15g-1, 15g-2, 15g-3, 15g-4, 15g-5, 15g-6, 15g-7, and 15g-9 under the Exchange Act. These rules may have the effect of reducing the liquidity of penny stocks. “Penny stocks” generally are equity securities with a price of less than $5.00 per share (other than securities registered on certain national securities exchanges or quoted on the Nasdaq Stock Market if current price and volume information with respect to transactions in such securities is provided

44

by the exchange or system). Our common shares have in the past constituted, and may again in the future constitute, “penny stock” within the meaning of the rules. The additional sales practice and disclosure requirements imposed upon U.S. broker-dealers may discourage such broker-dealers from effecting transactions in shares of our common shares, which could severely limit the market liquidity of such common shares and impede their sale in the secondary market.

A U.S. broker-dealer selling penny stock to anyone other than an established customer or “accredited investor” (generally, an individual with net worth in excess of  $1,000,000 or an annual income exceeding $200,000, or $300,000 together with his or her spouse) must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and must receive the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to sale, unless the broker-dealer or the transaction is otherwise exempt. In addition, the “penny stock” regulations require the U.S. broker-dealer to deliver, prior to any transaction involving a “penny stock”, a disclosure schedule prepared in accordance with SEC standards relating to the “penny stock” market, unless the broker-dealer or the transaction is otherwise exempt. A U.S. broker-dealer is also required to disclose commissions payable to the U.S. broker-dealer and the registered representative and current quotations for the securities. Finally, a U.S. broker-dealer is required to submit monthly statements disclosing recent price information with respect to the “penny stock” held in a customer’s account and information with respect to the limited market in “penny stocks.”

Shareholders should be aware that, according to the SEC, the market for “penny stocks” has suffered in recent years from patterns of fraud and abuse. Such patterns include (i) control of the market for the security by one or a few broker-dealers that are often related to the promoter or issuer; (ii) manipulation of prices through prearranged matching of purchases and sales and false and misleading press releases; (iii) “boiler room” practices involving high-pressure sales tactics and unrealistic price projections by inexperienced sales persons; (iv) excessive and undisclosed bid-ask differentials and markups by selling broker-dealers; and (v) the wholesale dumping of the same securities by promoters and broker-dealers after prices have been manipulated to a desired level, resulting in investor losses. Our management is aware of the abuses that have occurred historically in the penny stock market. Although we do not expect to be in a position to dictate the behavior of the market or of broker-dealers who participate in the market, management will strive within the confines of practical limitations to prevent the described patterns from being established with respect to our securities.

Certain principal shareholders and members of our executive team and board of directors own a majority of our common shares and as a result will be able to exercise significant control over us, and your interests may conflict with the interests of such shareholders.

Certain principal shareholders and their affiliated entities as well as members of our executive team and board of directors own approximately 17% of our common shares. Depending on the level of attendance at our general meetings of shareholders, these shareholders may be in a position to determine the outcome of decisions taken at any such general meeting. Any shareholder or group of shareholders controlling more than 50% of the shares represented at our general meetings of shareholders may control any shareholder resolution requiring an absolute majority of the shares represented, including the election of members to the board of directors of the Company, certain decisions relating to our capital structure, the approval of certain significant corporate transactions and certain amendments to our articles of association. To the extent that the interests of these shareholders may differ from the interests of the Company’s other shareholders, the latter may be disadvantaged by any action that these shareholders may seek to pursue. Among other consequences, this concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and might therefore negatively affect the market price of our common shares.

Future sales, or the possibility of future sales, of a substantial number of our common shares could adversely affect the price of our common shares.

Future sales of a substantial number of our common shares, or the perception that such sales will occur, could cause a decline in the market price of our common shares. Approximately 17% of our common shares outstanding are held by affiliates. If these shareholders sell substantial amounts of common shares in the public market, or the market perceives that such sales may occur, the market price of our common

45

shares and our ability to raise capital through an issue of equity securities could be adversely affected. Additionally, as of the date of this prospectus we have warrants outstanding, which are exercisable for an aggregate of 6,544,791 common shares at a weighted average exercise price of  $2.33 per share, an equity commitment to sell up to approximately $9.0 million of additional common shares to Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC (“LPC”) pursuant to the commitment purchase agreement we entered into on May 2, 2018 with LPC (the “Purchase Agreement”) and an at-the-market offering program pursuant to the sales agreement we entered into with A.G.P./Alliance Global Partners (“A.G.P.”) on November 30, 2018 (the “A.G.P. Sales Agreement”) for sales of up to $25.0 million of additional common shares. In connection with the Redomestication, we will be unable to raise capital through the A.G.P. Sales Agreement unless we successfully renegotiate such agreement with A.G.P. We cannot be certain that we will be able to negotiate the A.G.P. Sales Agreement with the same terms and conditions, or at all. We have also entered into a registration rights agreement pursuant to which we have agreed under certain circumstances to file a registration statement to register the resale of common shares held by certain of our shareholders, as well as to cooperate in certain public offerings of such common shares. We have also filed registration statements to register the resale of the common shares underlying the warrants that we have offered and sold in unregistered transactions, the common shares that are sold to LPC and the common shares and other equity securities that we have issued under our prior equity incentive plans or may issue under our new omnibus equity compensation plan. These common shares may be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to certain limitations applicable to affiliates. In addition, we have filed a registration statement covering the issuance and sale by us of up to $100 million of common shares, debt securities, warrants, purchase contracts, units and common shares. We may issue such securities, including our common shares and warrants to purchase common shares, at any time and from time to time subject to the limitations set forth in General Instruction I.B.5 of Form F-3. If a large number of our common shares and/or warrants to purchase common shares are sold in the public market, the sales could reduce the trading price of our common shares and impede our ability to raise future capital. Following the Redomestication, we intend to update all of our existing registration statements to the extent necessary to allow for their continued use.

We do not expect to pay dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have not paid any dividends since our incorporation. Even if future operations lead to significant levels of distributable profits, we currently intend that any earnings will be reinvested in our business and that dividends will not be paid until we have an established revenue stream to support continuing dividends. Following the Redomestication, the proposal to pay future dividends to shareholders will in addition effectively be at the discretion of our board of directors after taking into account various factors including our business prospects, cash requirements, financial performance and new product development. In addition, payment of future dividends is subject to certain limitations pursuant to Swiss law or by our articles of association. If the Redomestication is effected, we will be subject to Bermuda law restrictions on the payment of dividends including that no dividends may be declared by our board of directors or paid by the Company if there are reasonable grounds for believing that: (i) we are, or would after the payment be, unable to pay our liabilities as they become due; or (ii) that the realizable value of our assets would thereby be less than our liabilities. Accordingly, investors cannot rely on dividend income from our common shares and any returns on an investment in our common shares will likely depend entirely upon any future appreciation in the price of our common shares.

Additionally, in connection with the Merger, the Swiss Federal Tax Administration took the position (on the basis of a tax ruling) that, as a result of the Merger, the existing Capital Contribution Reserves will be offset against the retained losses. This leads to a reduced amount of Capital Contribution Reserves. We do not intend to make distributions in the foreseeable future, but if the position of the tax authorities were to prevail, it is likely that any distributions exceeding the reduced amount of Capital Contributions Reserves would be treated as taxable dividends for Swiss tax purposes. If we ever decide to declare dividends, we expect to challenge the view under the tax ruling, but there can be no assurance that any such challenge would be successful.

We are a holding company with no material direct operations.

We are a holding company with no material direct operations. As a result, we would be dependent on dividends, other payments or loans from our subsidiaries in order to pay a dividend. Our subsidiaries are

46

subject to legal requirements of their respective jurisdictions of organization that may restrict their paying dividends or other payments, or making loans, to us.

We are a foreign private issuer and, as a result, we are not subject to U.S. proxy rules and are subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a U.S. domestic public company.

We report under the Exchange Act, as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act and although we are subject to Swiss laws and regulations with regard to such matters and intend to furnish quarterly financial information to the SEC, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (i) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act; (ii) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time; and (iii) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, or current reports on Form 8-K, upon the occurrence of specified significant events. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until four months after the end of each financial year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from the Regulation Fair Disclosure, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers.

As a foreign private issuer and as permitted by the listing requirements of Nasdaq, we follow certain home country governance practices rather than the corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq.

We are a foreign private issuer. As a result, in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5615(a)(3), we comply with home country governance requirements and certain exemptions thereunder rather than complying with certain of the corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq.

Neither Swiss law nor Bermuda law requires that a majority of our board of directors consists of independent directors. Our board of directors therefore may include fewer independent directors than would be required if we were subject to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(b)(1). In addition, we are not subject to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(b)(2), which requires that independent directors regularly have scheduled meetings at which only independent directors are present.

Although Swiss law also requires that we adopt a compensation committee, we follow home country requirements with respect to such committee. As a result, our practice varies from the requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(d), which sets forth certain requirements as to the responsibilities, composition and independence of compensation committees. We follow Swiss law requirements with respect to disclosure of compensation for our directors and executive officers. Neither Swiss law nor Bermuda law requires that we disclose information regarding third-party compensation of our directors or director nominee. As a result, our practice varies from the third-party compensation disclosure requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5250(b)(3). After the Redomestication, we intend to follow the requirements of Bermuda law with respect to our compensation committee, disclosure of compensation of our directors and executive officers and information regarding third-party compensation of our directors or director nominee, each of which differ from the requirements of the Nasdaq Listing Rules.

In addition, as permitted by Swiss law and Bermuda law, we have opted not to implement a standalone nominating committee. To this extent, our practice varies from the independent director oversight of director nominations requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(e).

Furthermore, in accordance with Swiss law and generally accepted business practices, our constitutive documents do not provide quorum requirements generally applicable to general meetings of shareholders. After the Redomestication, the quorum for a general meeting of shareholders will be as set out in the Bye-laws (as defined below), which will provide for a quorum of two or more persons present at the start of the meeting and representing in person or by proxy issued and outstanding voting shares in the company.

47

Our practice thus varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(c), which requires an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock. Our constitutive documents provide for an independent proxy holder elected by our shareholders, who may represent our shareholders at a general meeting of shareholders, and we must provide shareholders with an agenda and other relevant documents for the general meeting of shareholders. However, neither Swiss law nor Bermuda law has a regulatory regime for the solicitation of proxies, thus our practice varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(b), which sets forth certain requirements regarding the solicitation of proxies. In addition, we have opted out of shareholder approval requirements for the issuance of securities in connection with certain events such as the acquisition of stock or assets of another company, the establishment of or amendments to equity-based compensation plans for employees, a change of control of us and certain private placements. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5635, which generally requires an issuer to obtain shareholder approval for the issuance of securities in connection with such events.

As a result of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status, which would then require us to comply with the Exchange Act’s domestic reporting regime and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

We are a foreign private issuer and therefore we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. In order to maintain our current status as a foreign private issuer, either (a) a majority of our common shares must be either directly or indirectly owned of record by non-residents of the United States or (b)(i) a majority of our executive officers or directors may not be United States citizens or residents, (ii) more than 50 percent of our assets cannot be located in the United States and (iii) our business must be administered principally outside the United States. These criteria are tested on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter, each year. If we lost this status, we would be required to comply with the Exchange Act reporting and other requirements applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We may also be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and stock exchange rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws if we are required to comply with the reporting requirements applicable to a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher than the cost we would incur as a foreign private issuer. As a result, we expect that a loss of foreign private issuer status would increase our legal and financial compliance costs and would make some activities highly time-consuming and costly. We also expect that if we were required to comply with the rules and regulations applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, it would make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” and we cannot be certain if the reduced reporting requirements applicable to “emerging growth companies” will make our common shares less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an “emerging growth company,” we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies,” including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We could be an “emerging growth company” until 2019, although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if the market value of our common shares held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of any June 30 (the end of our second fiscal quarter) before that time, in which case we would no longer be an “emerging growth company” as of the following December 31 (our fiscal year end). We cannot predict if investors will find our common shares less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common shares and the price of our common shares may be more volatile.

48

We believe that we were a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes for our 2018 taxable year, and we expect to be a PFIC for our current year and for the foreseeable future.

We believe that we were a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes for our 2018 taxable year, and we expect to be a PFIC for our current year and for the foreseeable future. In addition, we may, directly or indirectly, hold equity interests in other PFICs. Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, we will be a PFIC for any taxable year in which (i) 75% or more of our gross income consists of passive income or (ii) 50% or more of the average quarterly value of our assets consists of assets that produce, or are held for the production of, passive income. For purposes of the above calculations, a non-U.S. corporation that directly or indirectly owns at least 25% by value of the shares of another corporation is treated as if it held its proportionate share of the assets of the other corporation and received directly its proportionate share of the income of the other corporation. Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, rents, royalties and capital gains.

If we are a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. investor holds our shares, the U.S. investor may be subject to adverse tax consequences, including (i) the treatment of all or a portion of any gain on disposition as ordinary income, (ii) the application of a deferred interest charge on such gain and the receipt of certain dividends and (iii) compliance with certain reporting requirements.

For further discussion of the adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences of our classification as a PFIC, see “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations for U.S. Holders.”

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, shareholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our common shares.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also subject us to regulatory scrutiny and sanctions, impair our ability to raise revenue and cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our common shares.

We will be required to disclose changes made in our internal controls and procedures and our management will be required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. However, for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404. We could be an “emerging growth company” until August 2019. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research, or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research, about our business, the price of our common shares and our trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common shares depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not have any control over these analysts. We cannot assure you that analysts will cover us or provide favorable coverage. If one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade our common shares or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our common shares would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of the Company or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our common shares could decrease, which might cause the price of our common shares and trading volume to decline.

49

Risks Related to the Change in Our Jurisdiction of Incorporation

Currently, your rights as a shareholder of Auris Medical Holding AG arise under Swiss law as well as our existing Swiss articles of association. Upon Redomestication, your rights as a shareholder of Auris Medical (Bermuda) will arise under Bermuda law, the Memorandum of Continuance and the Bye-laws to be adopted in accordance with Bermuda law.

The Memorandum of Continuance (the “Memorandum of Continuance”) and the Bye-laws (the “Bye-laws”) of Auris Medical (Bermuda) will be the constitutive documents of Auris Medical (Bermuda) upon Redomestication, assuming shareholder approval of the Redomestication, the Memorandum of Continuance and the Bye-laws. These new constitutive documents and Bermuda law will contain provisions that differ from those in our current constitutive documents and Swiss law and, therefore, your rights as a shareholder of Auris Medical (Bermuda) could differ materially from the rights you currently possess as a shareholder of Auris Medical Holding AG. For instance, upon effectiveness of the Redomestication, the Swiss OaEC (VegüV) will no longer apply to the Company. The OaEC contains numerous provisions that serve to increase the transparency and provide shareholders with a right to voice their opinions on compensation matters. Pursuant to the OaEC, Swiss companies are, among others, obliged to have a framework in place according to which (i) the shareholders each year elect the members of the board of directors separately, (ii) the shareholders each year elect the chairman of the board of directors, (iii) the shareholders each year elect the members of the compensation committee and the independent proxy and (iv) the shareholders each year separately approve the compensation of the members of the board of directors, the management and the advisory board. The OaEC further contains provisions according to which the board of directors for each year has to prepare a written compensation report which has to be approved by the shareholders, detailing the compensations paid to each member of the board of directors, the management and the advisory board. In addition, companies that are subject to the OaEC are generally not allowed to make severance payments, advance compensations and to pay commissions for restructuring within the group. Under Bermuda law, directors are subject to election each year at the annual general meeting of the company, but there is no requirement that the chairman of the board of directors be elected by the shareholders. There is also no requirement under Bermuda law for shareholders to elect members of a company’s compensation committee, or for shareholders to approve the compensation of the members of the board of directors or the company’s management; the foregoing matters are typically determined by the company’s board of directors. In addition, under Bermuda law there is no requirement to submit a written compensation report for approval to shareholders, and there are no general restrictions on severance payments, advance compensation or the payment of commissions for restructuring within the group. See “Risk Factors — Your rights as a shareholder of the Company will change as a result of the Redomestication. The Bye-laws grants certain powers to the board of directors that differs from our current articles of association. Such changes may adversely affect your rights as a shareholder of the Company.”

Upon effectiveness of the Redomestication, we will be a Bermuda company and it may be difficult for you to enforce judgments against us or our directors and executive officers.

Upon our continuance in Bermuda, we will be a Bermuda exempted company. As a result, the rights of holders of our common shares will be governed by Bermuda law and our Memorandum of Continuance and Bye-laws. The rights of shareholders under Bermuda law may differ from the rights of shareholders of companies incorporated in other jurisdictions. Many of our directors and the named experts referred to in this prospectus are not residents of the United States, and a substantial portion of our assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for investors to effect service of process on those persons in the United States or to enforce in the United States judgments obtained in U.S. courts against us or those persons based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. securities laws. It is doubtful whether courts in Bermuda will enforce judgments obtained in other jurisdictions, including the United States, against us or our directors or officers under the securities laws of those jurisdictions or entertain actions in Bermuda against us or our directors or officers under the securities laws of other jurisdictions.

Your rights as a shareholder of the Company will change as a result of the Redomestication. The Bye-laws grants certain powers to the board of directors that differs from our current articles of association. Such changes may adversely affect your rights as a shareholder of the Company.

Because of the differences between Swiss law and Bermuda law, your rights as a shareholder will change if the Redomestication is completed. The Bye-laws grant certain powers to the board of directors

50

that differ from our current articles of association. Generally, under Swiss law, shareholders are allowed to vote in matters related to an issuance of preferred shares or to alter the company’s share capital by dividing, consolidating or sub-dividing the company’s shares (including a reverse share split effected by consolidating our common shares (together with a corresponding increase in the par value thereof) in a ratio determined by the board of directors, while under Bermuda law, the board of directors have the power and authority to perform such acts without the shareholders’ approval. Also, the presence and voting quorum requirements for certain shareholder resolutions under Swiss and Bermuda law differ in some instances. For example, the Bye-laws provide that, where certain business combination restrictions do not apply and the merger or amalgamation is approved by the board of directors, a merger or an amalgamation generally requires the approval of a majority of the votes cast at a general meeting at which the presence quorum is two or more persons present in person and representing in person or by proxy issued and outstanding voting shares. Whereas, under Swiss law, with certain exceptions, the approval of two thirds of the shares represented at the respective general meeting is required for a merger or an amalgamation. Additionally, under both Bermuda and Swiss law, shareholders may put proposals to the general meeting, but the exact framework and required shareholder and quorum requirements vary. Another matter that Bermuda and Swiss law differs is related to dividend payments. Under Swiss law, dividend payments are subject to the approval of the general meeting of shareholders. The board of directors may propose to shareholders that a dividend shall be paid but cannot itself authorize the distribution. Whereas, under Bermuda law, the board of directors may declare a dividend without shareholder approval, but a company may not declare or pay dividends if there are reasonable grounds for believing that: (i) the company is, or would after the payment be, unable to pay its liabilities as they become due; or (ii) that the realizable value of its assets would thereby be less than its liabilities. Also, the Bye-laws include anti-takeover provisions that our current articles of association do not contemplate. Such provisions give power and authority for the board of directors to require an increased majority for shareholder approval on a change of control. See “We have anti-takeover provisions in our proposed Bye-laws that may discourage a change of control.” Such changes may adversely affect your rights as a shareholder of the Company.

Bermuda law differs from the laws in effect in the United States and may afford less protection to holders of our common shares.

Upon our continuance in Bermuda, we will be subject to the laws of Bermuda. As a result, our corporate affairs will be governed by the Companies Act, which differs in some material respects from laws typically applicable to U.S. corporations and shareholders, including the provisions relating to interested directors, amalgamations, mergers and acquisitions, takeovers, shareholder lawsuits and indemnification of directors. Generally, the duties of directors and officers of a Bermuda company are owed to the company only. Shareholders of Bermuda companies typically do not have rights to take action against directors or officers of the company and may only do so in limited circumstances. Class actions are not available under Bermuda law. The circumstances in which derivative actions may be available under Bermuda law are substantially more proscribed and less clear than they would be to shareholders of U.S. corporations. The Bermuda courts, however, would ordinarily be expected to permit a shareholder to commence an action in the name of a company to remedy a wrong to the company where the act complained of is alleged to be beyond the corporate power of the company or illegal, or would result in the violation of the company’s memorandum of association or bye-laws. Furthermore, consideration would be given by a Bermuda court to acts that are alleged to constitute a fraud against the minority shareholders or, for instance, where an act requires the approval of a greater percentage of the company’s shareholders than that which actually approved it.

When the affairs of a company are being conducted in a manner that is oppressive or prejudicial to the interests of some shareholders, one or more shareholders may apply to the Supreme Court of Bermuda, which may make such order as it sees fit, including an order regulating the conduct of the company’s affairs in the future or ordering the purchase of the shares of any shareholders by other shareholders or by the company. Additionally, under our proposed Bye-laws and as permitted by Bermuda law, each shareholder has waived any claim or right of action against our directors or officers for any action taken by directors or officers in the performance of their duties, except for actions involving fraud or dishonesty. In addition, the rights of holders of our common shares and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors under Bermuda

51

law are not as clearly established as under statutes or judicial precedent in existence in jurisdictions in the United States, particularly the State of Delaware. Therefore, holders of our common shares may have more difficulty protecting their interests than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction within the United States.

Our proposed Bye-laws restrict shareholders from bringing legal action against our officers and directors.

Our proposed Bye-laws contain a broad waiver by our shareholders of any claim or right of action, both individually and on our behalf, against any of our officers or directors. The waiver applies to any action taken by an officer or director, or the failure of an officer or director to take any action, in the performance of his or her duties, except with respect to any matter involving any fraud or dishonesty on the part of the officer or director. This waiver limits the right of shareholders to assert claims against our officers and directors unless the act or failure to act involves fraud or dishonesty.

We have anti-takeover provisions in our proposed Bye-laws that may discourage a change of control.

Our proposed Bye-laws contain provisions that could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us without the consent of our board of directors. These provisions provide for:

•

directors only to be removed for cause;

​

•

restrictions on the time period in which directors may be nominated;

​

•

our board of directors to determine the powers, preferences and rights of our preference shares and to issue the preference shares without shareholder approval; and

​

•

an affirmative vote of 662∕3% of our voting shares for certain “business combination” transactions which have not been approved by our board of directors.

​

These provisions could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if the third party’s offer may be considered beneficial by many shareholders. As a result, shareholders may be limited in their ability to obtain a premium for their shares.

If the Redomestication is effected, legislation enacted in Bermuda in response to the European Union’s review of harmful tax competition could adversely affect our operations.

During 2017, the European Union (“EU”) Economic and Financial Affairs Council (“ECOFIN”) released a list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes. The stated aim of this list, and accompanying report, was to promote good governance worldwide in order to maximize efforts to prevent tax fraud and tax evasion. Bermuda was not on the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions, but did feature in the report (along with approximately 40 other jurisdictions) as having committed to address concerns relating to economic substance by December 31, 2018. In accordance with that commitment, Bermuda has enacted legislation that requires certain entities in Bermuda engaged in “relevant activities” to maintain a substantial economic presence in Bermuda and to satisfy economic substance requirements. The list of “relevant activities” includes carrying on as a business any one or more of: banking, insurance, fund management, financing, leasing, headquarters, shipping, distribution and service center, intellectual property and holding entities. At present, it is unclear what (if anything) Auris Medical (Bermuda) would be required to do in order to satisfy economic substance requirements in Bermuda, but to the extent we are required to increase our substance in Bermuda to satisfy such requirements, it could result in additional costs that could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations. If we were required to satisfy economic substance requirements in Bermuda but failed to do so, we could face automatic disclosure to competent authorities in the EU of the information filed by the entity with the Bermuda Registrar of Companies in connection with the economic substance requirements and may also face financial penalties, restriction or regulation of its business activities and/or may be struck off as a registered entity in Bermuda.

52

Risks Related to this Offering

We will have broad discretion in how we use the proceeds, and we may use the proceeds in ways in which you and other shareholders may disagree.

We intend to use the net proceeds we receive from the issuance of common shares to LPC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement for working capital and general corporate purposes. Our management will have broad discretion in the application of the proceeds from this offering and could spend the proceeds in ways that do not necessarily improve our operating results or enhance the value of our common shares.

You will experience immediate and substantial dilution in the net tangible book value per share of the common shares you purchase in this offering.

The assumed offering price of our common shares will be substantially higher than the as adjusted net tangible book value per common share. Therefore, investors purchasing our common shares in this offering will pay a price per common share that substantially exceeds our as adjusted net tangible book value per common share after this offering. To the extent outstanding options or warrants are exercised, such investors will incur further dilution. For example, LPC will incur immediate and substantial dilution of $0.33 per common share, after giving effect to the assumed issuance of an aggregate of 10,000,000 of our common shares at an assumed offering price of  $0.36 per common share, the closing price of our common shares as listed on Nasdaq on February 12, 2019, and after deducting estimated offering expenses payable by us. See “Dilution”.

53

PRESENTATION OF FINANCIAL AND OTHER INFORMATION

We report under IFRS in Swiss Francs. None of the consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States.

The terms “dollar,” “USD” or “$” refer to U.S. dollars, the term, “Swiss Francs” or “CHF” refers to the legal currency of Switzerland and the terms “€” or “euro” are to the currency introduced at the start of the third stage of European economic and monetary union pursuant to the treaty establishing the European Community, as amended. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to currency amounts in this prospectus are in Swiss Francs.

We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures included in this prospectus. Accordingly, numerical figures shown as totals in some tables may not be an arithmetic aggregation of the figures that preceded them.

MARKET AND INDUSTRY DATA

This prospectus contains industry, market and competitive position data that are based on industry publications and studies conducted by third parties as well as our own internal estimates and research. These industry publications and third party studies generally state that the information that they contain has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, although they do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of such information.

54

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements, including statements concerning our industry, our operations, our anticipated financial performance and financial condition, and our business plans and growth strategy and product development efforts. These statements constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. The words “may,” “might,” “will,” “should,” “estimate,” “project,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “intend,” “outlook,” “believe” and other similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of their dates. These forward-looking statements are based on estimates and assumptions by our management that, although we believe to be reasonable, are inherently uncertain and subject to a number of risks and uncertainties.

Forward-looking statements appear in a number of places in this prospectus and include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our intent, belief or current expectations. Forward-looking statements are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to our management. Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to various factors, including, but not limited to:

•

our operation as a development-stage company with limited operating history and a history of operating losses;

​

•

our need for substantial additional funding to continue the development of our product candidates before we can expect to become profitable from sales of our products and the possibility that we may be unable to raise additional capital when needed;

​

•

the outcome of our review of strategic options and of any action that we may pursue as a result of such review;

​

•

our dependence on the success of AM-125, AM-201, Keyzilen® (AM-101) and Sonsuvi® (AM-111), which are still in clinical development, may eventually prove to be unsuccessful;

​

•

the chance that we may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims resulting from the testing of our product candidates in the clinic or in the commercial stage;

​

•

the chance our clinical trials may not be completed on schedule, or at all, as a result of factors such as delayed enrollment or the identification of adverse effects;

​

•

uncertainty surrounding whether any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized;

​

•

if our product candidates obtain regulatory approval, our product candidates being subject to expensive, ongoing obligations and continued regulatory overview;

​

•

enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval and commercialization;

​

•

the chance that we do not obtain orphan drug exclusivity for Sonsuvi®, which would allow our competitors to sell products that treat the same conditions;

​

•

dependence on governmental authorities and health insurers establishing adequate reimbursement levels and pricing policies;

​

•

our products may not gain market acceptance, in which case we may not be able to generate product revenues;

​

•

our reliance on our current strategic relationships with INSERM or Xigen and the potential success or failure of strategic relationships, joint ventures or mergers and acquisitions transactions;

​

•

our reliance on third parties to conduct our nonclinical and clinical trials and on third-party, single-source suppliers to supply or produce our product candidates;

​

55

•

our ability to obtain, maintain and protect our intellectual property rights and operate our business without infringing or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of others;

​

•

our ability to comply with the requirements under our term loan facility with Hercules Capital, Inc., including repayment of amounts outstanding when due;

​

•

our ability to meet the continuing listing requirements of Nasdaq and remain listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market;

​

•

the chance that certain intangible assets related to our product candidates will be impaired; and

​

•

other risk factors discussed under “Risk Factors.”

​

Our actual results or performance could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, any forward-looking statements relating to those matters. Accordingly, no assurances can be given that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking statements will transpire or occur, or if any of them do so, what impact they will have on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. Except as required by law, we are under no obligation, and expressly disclaim any obligation, to update, alter or otherwise revise any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

56

MARKET FOR OUR COMMON SHARES

Our common shares are quoted on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “EARS.” The following table sets forth on a per share basis the low and high closing sale prices of our common shares as reported by the Nasdaq Capital Market for the periods presented.

*

On March 13, 2018, we effected the equivalent of a 10:1 “reverse share split” through the Merger.

​

As of February 8, 2019, we had 37,495,859 common shares issued and outstanding held by 7 registered holders, one of which is Cede & Co., a nominee for The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”). All of the common shares held by brokerage firms, banks and other financial institutions as nominees for beneficial owners are deposited into participant accounts at DTC and therefore are considered to be held of record by Cede & Co. as one shareholder.

57

USE OF PROCEEDS

We will not receive any proceeds from the sales of our common shares by LPC. We may receive gross proceeds of up to $8,989,225 under the Purchase Agreement over the remaining portion of the 30-month period following the Commencement, assuming that we issue all of the common shares available thereunder and excluding estimated offering fees and expenses. However, there can be no assurance we will issue any or all of the common shares to LPC or that they will resell such common shares offered hereby. Because there is no minimum offering amount required, we may issue less than all of the common shares offered hereby, which may significantly reduce the amount of proceeds received by us.

We estimate that the net proceeds to us from the issuance of our common shares to LPC pursuant to the Purchase Agreement will be up to approximately $8,989,225 over the remaining portion of the 30-month period following the Commencement, assuming that we issue the full amount of our common shares that we have the right, but not the obligation, to issue to LPC under that agreement and including estimated offering fees and expenses.

We intend to use the net proceeds from the issuance of the securities for working capital and general corporate purposes. Such purposes may include research and development expenditures and capital expenditures. Pending the use of the net proceeds, we intend to invest the net proceeds in interest-bearing, investment-grade securities. Accordingly, our management will have significant flexibility in applying any net proceeds that we receive pursuant to the Purchase Agreement.

58

SELLING SHAREHOLDER

We are filing the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part pursuant to the provisions of the Registration Rights Agreement, which we entered into with LPC on May 2, 2018 concurrently with our execution of the Purchase Agreement, pursuant to which we agreed to provide certain registration rights with respect to sales by LPC of our common shares that may be issued to LPC under the Purchase Agreement. The selling shareholder may, from time to time, offer and sell pursuant to this prospectus any or all of the common shares that it holds or that may be acquired by it from the Company. The selling shareholder may sell some, all or none of its common shares. We do not know how long the selling shareholder will hold the common shares before selling them, and we currently have no agreements, arrangements or understandings with the selling shareholder regarding its resale of any of the common shares.

The following table presents information regarding the selling shareholder and the common shares that it may offer and sell from time to time under this prospectus. The table is prepared based on information supplied to us by the selling shareholder and reflects its beneficial ownership of our common shares as of February 8, 2019. Neither the selling shareholder nor any of its affiliates have held a position or office, or had any other material relationship, with us or any of our predecessors or affiliates. Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with Rule 13d-3(d) promulgated by the SEC under the Exchange Act. The percentage of common shares beneficially owned prior to the offering is based on 37,495,859 common shares outstanding as of February 8, 2019.

(1)

Represents 570,000 of our common shares beneficially owned by LPC as of February 8, 2019. We have excluded from the number of common shares beneficially owned prior to the offering all of the common shares that LPC may be required to purchase under the Purchase Agreement, because the issuance and sale of such common shares to LPC is solely at our discretion and is subject to satisfaction of the conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement that are outside of LPC’s control, including the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part being declared effective by the SEC.

​

(2)

Assumes the issuance and sale of all of the common shares offered by the selling shareholder pursuant to this prospectus.

​

(3)

The selling shareholder is an “underwriter” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(11) of the Securities Act. Josh Scheinfeld and Jonathan Cope, the Managing Members of Lincoln Park Capital, LLC, the manager of the selling shareholder, are deemed to be beneficial owners of all of the common shares owned by the selling shareholder. Messrs. Cope and Scheinfeld have shared voting and investment power over the common shares being offered under this prospectus. Neither Lincoln Park Capital, LLC, nor the selling shareholder, is a licensed broker-dealer or an affiliate of a licensed broker-dealer.

​

59

THE LPC TRANSACTION

General

On May 2, 2018, we entered into the Purchase Agreement and the Registration Rights Agreement with LPC. Pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement, LPC has agreed to subscribe for up to $10,000,000 of newly issued Company common shares (subject to certain limitations) from time to time over a 30-month period. Pursuant to the terms of the Registration Rights Agreement, we have filed with the SEC the registration statement that includes this prospectus to register for resale under the Securities Act the common shares that have been or may be issued to LPC under the Purchase Agreement.

Concurrently with the execution of the Purchase Agreement on May 2, 2018, we agreed to pay to LPC $250,000 in cash as a fee for its commitment to subscribe common shares under the Purchase Agreement. We have the right, from time to time at our sole discretion over the 30-month period from and after the Commencement, to require LPC to subscribe for up to 250,000 common shares in a Regular Purchase, which amount may be increased to up to 400,000 common shares, provided that certain thresholds on the closing price of our common shares and the number of our outstanding common shares set forth in the Purchase Agreement are satisfied; provided that LPC’s maximum commitment obligation under any single Regular Purchase will not exceed $1,000,000. Additionally, we may direct LPC to subscribe for common shares in Additional Purchases under certain circumstances set forth in the Purchase Agreement.

As of the date of this prospectus, we have sold 1,750,000 of our common shares for an aggregate offering price of approximately $1.0 million pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, which represents the full number of shares registered under the Registration Statement on Form F-1 previously filed by us with the SEC under the terms of the Purchase Agreement and the Registration Rights Agreement and declared effective by the SEC.

Purchases of Common Shares Under the Purchase Agreement

The Purchase Agreement provides that, from time to time at our sole discretion over the 30-month period from and after the Commencement, so long as at least one business day has passed since the most recent prior Regular Purchase was completed in accordance with the Purchase Agreement, we may require LPC to subscribe for up to 250,000 of our common shares in a Regular Purchase. We may increase the amount of common shares we may issue to LPC pursuant to a Regular Purchase to up to (i) 300,000 of our common shares, provided that the total number of outstanding common shares on the purchase date exceeds 10,000,000, (ii) 350,000 of our common shares, provided that the closing sale price of our common shares is not below $1.00 on the purchase date and the total number of outstanding common shares on the purchase date exceeds 12,500,000 and (iii) 400,000 of our common shares, provided that the closing sale price of our common shares is not below $1.00 on the purchase date and the total number of outstanding common shares on the purchase date exceeds 15,000,000. The Regular Purchase Share Limit is subject to proportionate adjustment in the event of a reorganization, recapitalization, non-cash dividend, stock split or other similar transaction; provided, that if after giving effect to such full proportionate adjustment, the adjusted Regular Purchase Share Limit would preclude us from requiring LPC to subscribe for common shares at an aggregate purchase price equal to or greater than $100,000 in any single Regular Purchase, then the Regular Purchase Share Limit for such Regular Purchase will not be fully adjusted, but rather the Regular Purchase Share Limit for such Regular Purchase shall be adjusted as specified in the Purchase Agreement, such that, after giving effect to such adjustment, the Regular Purchase Share Limit will be equal to (or as close as can be derived from such adjustment without exceeding) $100,000. We may not require LPC to purchase in any single Regular Purchase common shares having an aggregate purchase price greater than $1,000,000. We may not issue any of our common shares as a Regular Purchase on a date in which the closing sale price of our common shares is below $0.25 (subject to adjustment for any reorganization, recapitalization, non-cash dividend, stock split or other similar transaction). The purchase price for Regular Purchases shall be equal to the lesser of  (i) the lowest sale price of our common shares on the applicable purchase date and (ii) the average of the three lowest closing sale prices of our common shares during the 10 business days immediately prior to the applicable purchase date, as reported on the Nasdaq Capital Market.

60

We also have the right, at our sole discretion, to require LPC to make Additional Purchases of our common shares, up to a maximum aggregate amount of  $2,000,000, in individual purchases of not less than $100,000 and up to $500,000 each, at a purchase price equal to the lesser of  (i) $5.00 per common share and (ii) 96% of the purchase price that would apply to a Regular Purchase made at such time, provided that (a) the closing price of the common shares is not below $1.00 on the applicable purchase date for the Additional Purchase, (b) the total number of outstanding common shares exceeds 12,500,000 and (c) at least 15 business days have passed since any prior Additional Purchase was completed.

There is no upper limit on the price per share that LPC could be obligated to pay for the common shares under any Regular Purchase under the Purchase Agreement. In the case of Regular Purchases and Additional Purchases, the purchase price per common share will be equitably adjusted for any reorganization, recapitalization, non-cash dividend, stock split or other similar transaction occurring during the business days used to compute the applicable purchase price.

In all instances, we may not issue common shares to LPC under the Purchase Agreement if it would result in LPC beneficially owning more than 4.99% of our outstanding common shares.

Other than as set forth above, there are no trading volume requirements or restrictions under the Purchase Agreement, and we will control the timing and amount of any issuances of our common shares to LPC.

Events of Default

Events of default under the Purchase Agreement include the following:

•

the effectiveness of the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part, or any future registration statement relating to the resale of shares issuable pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, lapses for any reason (including, without limitation, the issuance of a stop order), or any required prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus are unavailable for the resale by LPC of our common shares offered hereby, and such lapse or unavailability continues for a period of 10 consecutive business days or for more than an aggregate of 30 business days in any 365-day period;

​

•

suspension by our principal market of our common shares from trading for a period of one full business day;

​

•

the de-listing of our common shares from the NASDAQ Capital Market, provided our common shares are not immediately thereafter trading on The NASDAQ Global Market, The NASDAQ Global Select Market, the NYSE American, the NYSE Arca, the OTC Bulletin Board or OTC Markets (or nationally recognized successor to any of the foregoing);

​

•

our transfer agent’s failure for three business days to issue to LPC the common shares which LPC is entitled to receive under the Purchase Agreement;

​

•

our breach of any representation, warranty, covenant or other term or condition contained in the Purchase Agreement or any related agreement which would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on us, subject to a cure period of five business days;

​

•

any voluntary or involuntary participation or threatened participation in insolvency or bankruptcy proceedings by or against us; or

​

•

if at any time we are not eligible to transfer our common shares electronically.

​

LPC does not have the right to terminate the Purchase Agreement upon any of the events of default set forth above. During an event of default, all of which are outside of LPC’s control, we cannot initiate any Regular Purchases or Additional Purchases under the Purchase Agreement.

Termination Rights

We have the right to terminate the Purchase Agreement, without any cost to us, at any time for any reason upon one business day’s prior written notice to LPC. In the event of bankruptcy proceedings by or against us, the Purchase Agreement will automatically terminate without action of any party.

61

LPC may not assign or transfer its rights and obligations under the Purchase Agreement.

No Short-Selling or Hedging by LPC

LPC has represented to us that at no time prior to the Purchase Agreement has LPC or its agents, representatives or affiliates engaged in or effected, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, any short sale (as such term is defined in Rule 200 of Regulation SHO of the Exchange Act) of our common shares or any hedging transaction, which establishes a net short position with respect to our common shares. LPC agreed that during the term of the Purchase Agreement, it, its agents, representatives or affiliates will not enter into or effect, directly or indirectly, any of the foregoing transactions.

Prohibition of Certain Continuous Offerings

We agreed with Lincoln Park that we will not, for a period commencing on the date of the Purchase Agreement and ending on the later of: (i) the 30-month anniversary of the date of the Purchase Agreement and (ii) the 30-month anniversary of the date of Commencement, in either case irrespective of any earlier termination of the Purchase Agreement, enter into any agreement relating to or otherwise effect any issuance of our securities in certain types of continuous offerings in which we may issue securities at a future determined price.

Effect of Performance of the Purchase Agreement on Our Shareholders

All 10,000,000 shares registered in this offering are expected to be freely tradable. The sale by LPC of a significant amount of shares registered in this offering at any given time could cause the market price of our common shares to decline and to be highly volatile. LPC may ultimately purchase all, some or none of the 10,000,000 shares of common shares registered in this offering. If we issue these shares to LPC, LPC may issue all, some or none of such shares. Therefore, issuances to LPC by us under the Purchase Agreement may result in substantial dilution to the interests of other holders of our common shares. In addition, if we issue a substantial number of shares to LPC under the Purchase Agreement, or if investors expect that we will do so, the actual issuance of shares or the mere existence of our arrangement with LPC may make it more difficult for us to issue equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and at a price that we might otherwise wish to effect such issuances. However, we have the right to control the timing and amount of any issuances of our shares to LPC and the Purchase Agreement may be terminated by us at any time at our discretion without any cost to us upon one business day’s prior written notice to LPC.

Pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement, we have the right, but not the obligation, to direct LPC to subscribe for up to $10,000,000 of our common shares, of which LPC has already purchased an aggregate of  $1,010,775 of our common shares as of the date of this prospectus. Depending on the price per share at which we issue our common shares to LPC, we may be authorized to issue to LPC under the Purchase Agreement more shares of our common shares than are offered under this prospectus. If we choose to do so, we must first register for resale under the Securities Act any such additional shares, which could cause additional substantial dilution to our shareholders. The number of shares ultimately offered for resale by LPC under this prospectus is dependent upon the number of shares we direct LPC to purchase under the Purchase Agreement.

The following table sets forth the amount of gross proceeds we would receive from LPC from the issuance of a number of shares to LPC equal to the number of shares registered hereunder pursuant to the Purchase Agreement at varying purchase prices:

62

(1)

Although the Purchase Agreement provides that we may issue up to a remaining $8,989,225 of our common shares to LPC, we are only registering 10,000,000 common shares under this prospectus, which may or may not cover all of the common shares we ultimately issue to LPC under the Purchase Agreement, depending on the purchase price per common share. As a result, we have included in this column only the common shares that we are registering in this offering.

​

(2)

The denominator is based on 37,495,859 common shares outstanding as of February 8, 2019, plus the number of shares set forth in the adjacent column which we would have sold to LPC at the applicable assumed average purchase price per share. The number of shares in such column does not include shares that may be issued to LPC under the Purchase Agreement which are not registered in this offering. The table does not give effect to the prohibition contained in the Purchase Agreement that prevents us from issuing to LPC shares such that, after giving effect to such issuance, LPC would beneficially own more than 4.99% of our common shares.

​

(3)

The U.S. Dollar equivalent of the nominal value of a single Common Share translated at a rate of CHF 1.0000 to USD 1.00, the official exchange rate quoted as of February 8, 2019 by the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank.

​

(4)

The closing sale price of our common shares on February 12, 2019.

​

(5)

The maximum amount of gross proceeds remaining under the Purchase Agreement is $8,989,225.

​

63

DIVIDEND POLICY

We have never paid a dividend, and we do not anticipate paying dividends in the foreseeable future. We intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to fund the development and expansion of our business. As a result, investors in our common shares will benefit in the foreseeable future only if our common shares appreciate in value.

Under Swiss law, any dividend must be proposed by our board of directors and approved by a shareholders’ meeting. In addition, our auditors must confirm that the dividend proposal of our board of directors conforms to Swiss statutory law and our articles of association. A Swiss corporation may pay dividends only if it has sufficient distributable profits brought forward from the previous business years (“Gewinnvortrag”) or if it has distributable reserves (“frei verfügbare Reserven”), each as evidenced by its audited standalone statutory balance sheet prepared pursuant to Swiss law and after allocations to reserves required by Swiss law and its articles of association have been deducted. Distributable reserves are generally booked either as “free reserves” (“freie Reserven”) or as “reserve from capital contributions” (“Reserven aus Kapitaleinlagen”). Distributions out of issued share capital, which is the aggregate nominal value of a corporation’s issued shares, may be made only by way of a share capital reduction. See “Description of Share Capital and Articles of Association.”

We are a holding company with no material direct operations. As a result, we would be dependent on dividends, other payments or loans from our subsidiaries in order to pay a dividend. Our subsidiaries are subject to legal requirements of their respective jurisdictions of organization that may restrict their paying dividends or other payments, or making loans, to us.

64

CAPITALIZATION

The table below sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and our total capitalization (defined as total debt and shareholders’ equity) as of September 30, 2018:

•

on an actual basis;

​

•

on an as adjusted basis to give effect to the issuance of 10,000,000 common shares we are registering on behalf of the selling shareholder based upon an assumed offering price of  $0.36 per common share, the closing price of our common shares as listed on Nasdaq on February 12, 2019 and after deducting approximately $78,651 in estimated offering expenses payable by us.

​

Investors should read this table in conjunction with our unaudited consolidated interim financial statements and related notes as of and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and management’s discussion and analysis thereon, included elsewhere in this prospectus as well as “Use of Proceeds” in this prospectus.

U.S. dollar amounts have been translated into Swiss Francs at a rate of CHF 0.9758 to USD 1.00, the official exchange rate quoted as of September 28, 2018 by the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank (as no exchange rate is quoted for September 30, 2018). Such Swiss Franc amounts are not necessarily indicative of the amounts of Swiss Francs that could actually have been purchased upon exchange of U.S. dollars on September 30, 2018 and have been provided solely for the convenience of the reader. On February 8, 2019, the exchange rate as reported by the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank was CHF 1.0000 to USD 1.00.

(1)

Since September 30, 2018, we have issued (i) an aggregate of 1,750,000 common shares for aggregate proceeds of  $1,010,775 to LPC under the LPC Purchase Agreement, (ii) an aggregate of 5,768,940 common shares for aggregate proceeds of CHF 2,249,887 pursuant to exercises of warrants issued in the July 2018 Registered Offering, (iii) an aggregate of 3,315,000 common shares in the two registered direct offerings in November and December 2018 for aggregate proceeds of  $1.6 million and (iv) an aggregate of 2,595,814 common shares for aggregate proceeds of  $1,331,849 to A.G.P. pursuant to the A.G.P. Sales Agreement. These subsequent issuances and the proceeds therefrom are not reflected in the table as they occurred after September 30, 2018.

​

(2)

Total debt is comprised of the $12.5 million drawn on July 19, 2016 under our secured term loan facility with Hercules as administrative agent. The loan was initially recognized at transaction value less the fair value of the warrant issued to Hercules in connection with the loan as of the transaction date and less directly attributable transactions costs. Following the initial recognition, the loan is

​

65

measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method. As of September 30, 2018, the loan has a carrying value of CHF 2,144,235 classified as current liability. The amortization payments, including the end of term charge, due within the 12 months after September 30, 2018, amount to CHF 2.5 million. As of January 28, 2018, the amount outstanding under our secured term loan facility with Hercules was $1.1 million. On January 31, 2019, we made the final payment to Hercules under the facility, comprising the last amortization rate as well as an end of term charge.

(3)

The fair value calculation of the warrants is determined according to the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Assumptions are made regarding inputs such as volatility and the risk free rate in order to determine the fair value of the warrant. The fair value of the warrants is calculated based on assumptions made at September 30, 2018.

​

The above discussion and table are based on 24,066,105 common shares outstanding as of September 30, 2018 and excludes:

•

915,000 of our common shares available for issuance pursuant to our conditional share capital for equity incentive plans pursuant to our articles of association, including 438,050 of our common shares issuable upon the exercise of options outstanding as of September 30, 2018 at a weighted average exercise price of  $1.62 per common share;

​

•

8,760,175 of our common shares available for issuance pursuant to our conditional share capital for warrants and convertible bonds pursuant to our articles of association, including 15,673 common shares issuable upon the exercise of a warrant issued to Hercules at an exercise price of $39.40 per common share, 794,500 common shares issuable upon exercise of warrants issued on February 21, 2017 in a public offering at an exercise price of US$12.00 per common share, 750,002 common shares issuable upon the exercise of the January 2018 Warrants at an exercise price of  $5.00 per common share (each as adjusted, as a result of the “reverse share split” effected through the Merger) and 6,282,051 common shares issuable upon the exercise of the warrants issued in the July 2018 Registered Offering; at an exercise price of CHF 0.39 per common share; and

​

•

9,675,175 common shares available for issuance pursuant to our authorized capital pursuant to our articles of association, including 4,487,178 common shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants issued the July 2018 Registered Offering at an exercise price of CHF 0.39 per common share.

​

66

DILUTION

If you invest in our common shares, your interest will be diluted to the extent of the difference between the offering price per common share and the as adjusted net tangible book value per common share after this offering.

As of September 30, 2018, we had a net tangible book value of  -$2.5 million, corresponding to a net tangible book value of  -$0.10 per common share. Net tangible book value per share represents the amount of our total assets less our total liabilities, excluding intangible assets, divided by 24,066,105, the total number of our common shares outstanding as of September 30, 2018.

After giving effect to the issuance by us of 10,000,000 common shares to LPC at the assumed offering price of  $0.36 per common share, the closing price of our common shares as listed on Nasdaq on February 12, 2019, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us, our as adjusted net tangible book value estimated as of September 30, 2018 would have been $1.1 million, representing $0.03 per common share. This represents an immediate increase in net tangible book value of  $0.13 per common share to existing shareholders and an immediate dilution in net tangible book value of  $0.33 per common share to LPC. Dilution for this purpose represents the difference between the price per common share paid by LPC and net tangible book value per common share immediately after the completion of the offering.

The following table illustrates this dilution to LPC.

The above discussion and table are based on 24,066,105 common shares outstanding as of September 30, 2018 and excludes:

•

915,000 of our common shares available for issuance pursuant to our conditional share capital for equity incentive plans pursuant to our articles of association, including 438,050 of our common shares issuable upon the exercise of options outstanding as of September 30, 2018 at a weighted average exercise price of  $1.62 per common share;

​

•

8,760,175 of our common shares available for issuance pursuant to our conditional share capital for warrants and convertible bonds pursuant to our articles of association, including 15,673 common shares issuable upon the exercise of a warrant issued to Hercules at an exercise price of $39.40 per common share, 794,500 common shares issuable upon exercise of warrants issued on February 21, 2017 in a public offering at an exercise price of US$12.00 per common share, 750,002 common shares issuable upon the exercise of the January 2018 Warrants at an exercise price of  $5.00 per common share (each as adjusted, as a result of the “reverse share split” effected through the Merger) and 6,282,051 common shares issuable upon the exercise of the warrants issued in the July 2018 Registered Offering; at an exercise price of CHF 0.39 per common share; and

​

•

9,675,175 common shares available for issuance pursuant to our authorized capital pursuant to our articles of association, including 4,487,178 common shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants issued the July 2018 Registered Offering at an exercise price of CHF 0.39 per common share.

​

To the extent that outstanding options or warrants are exercised, you may experience further dilution. In addition, we may choose to raise additional capital due to market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. To the extent that additional capital is raised through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the issuance of these securities may result in further dilution to our shareholders.

67

Swiss Franc amounts have been translated into U.S. dollars at a rate of CHF 0.9758 to USD 1.00, the official exchange rate quoted as of September 28, 2018 by the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank (as no exchange rate is quoted for September 30, 2018). Such U.S. dollar amounts are not necessarily indicative of the amounts of U.S. dollars that could actually have been purchased upon exchange of Swiss Francs on September 30, 2018 and have been provided solely for the convenience of the reader.

68

EXCHANGE RATES

The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high, low, average and period-end exchange rates for the purchase of U.S. dollars expressed in CHF per U.S. dollar. The average rate is calculated by using the average of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank’s reported exchange rates on each day during a monthly period and on the last day of each month during an annual period. On February 8, 2019, the exchange rate as reported by the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank was CHF 1.0000 to $1.00.

69

Selected Consolidated Financial and Other Information

The following selected consolidated historical financial information should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” our unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements as of September 30, 2018 and as of and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, and our consolidated financial statements dated as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 and for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2017, including the notes thereto, included in this prospectus.

The numbers below have been derived from our unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements as of September 30, 2018 and as of and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, which have been prepared in accordance with International Accounting Standard (IAS) 34, and our consolidated financial statement as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 and for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2017, which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB. The consolidated financial data as of December 31, 2015 and for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 has been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB and which have not been included herein.

We maintain our books and records in Swiss Francs. We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures included in the table below. Accordingly, numerical figures shown as totals in some tables may not be an arithmetic aggregation of the figures that precede them. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to currency amounts in this discussion and analysis are in Swiss Francs.

70

(1)

For periods prior to the closing of our initial public offering, net loss per share includes preferred shares, which were converted on a one-for-one basis upon the closing of our initial public offering.

​

(2)

Basic net loss per common share and diluted net loss per common share are the same. See Note 21 to our audited consolidated financial statements on page F-43.

​

*

The basic and diluted loss per share for the nine months ended September 2017 is revised to reflect the reverse-split ratio of 10 to 1 following the Merger on March 13, 2018.

​

71

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with the information under “Selected Consolidated Financial and Other Information,” our unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements as of September 30, 2018 and as of and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, and our consolidated financial statements dated as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 and for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2017, including the notes thereto, included in this prospectus. Our unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements have been prepared in accordance with IAS 34, and on our consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB, which might differ in material respects from generally accepted accounting principles in other jurisdictions. The following discussion includes forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of many factors, including but not limited to those described under “Risk factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus.

We maintain our books and records in Swiss Francs. We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures included in this management’s discussion and analysis. Accordingly, numerical figures shown as totals in some tables may not be an arithmetic aggregation of the figures that precede them. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to currency amounts in this discussion and analysis are in Swiss Francs.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of novel products that address important unmet medical needs in neurotology and mental health supportive care. We are focusing on the development of intranasal betahistine for the treatment of vertigo (AM-125) and for the treatment of antipsychotic-induced weight gain and somnolence (AM-201). These programs have gone through two Phase 1 trials and will move into proof-of-concept studies in 2019. In addition, we have two Phase 3 programs under development: (i) Keyzilen® (AM-101), which is being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear tinnitus and (ii) Sonsuvi® (AM-111), which is being developed for the treatment of acute inner ear hearing loss. Sonsuvi® has been granted orphan drug status by the FDA and the EMA and has been granted fast track designation by the FDA.

To date, we have financed our operations through public offerings of our common shares, private placements of equity securities, and short- and long-term loans. We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenues from royalties or product sales. As of September 30, 2018, we had cash and cash equivalents of CHF 5.3 million. Based on our current plans, we do not expect to generate royalty or product revenues unless and until we obtain marketing approval for, and commercialize, Keyzilen®, Sonsuvi® or any of our other product candidates.

As of September 30, 2018, we had an accumulated deficit of CHF 142.5 million. We expect to continue incurring losses as we continue our clinical and pre-clinical development programs, apply for marketing approval for our product candidates and, subject to obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates, build a sales and marketing force in preparation for the potential commercialization of our product candidates.

INSERM

In 2006, we entered into a co-ownership/exploitation agreement with the INSERM, a publicly funded government science and technology agency in France. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, we were granted the exclusive right to exploit any products derived from patents that resulted from our joint research program with INSERM that was conducted in 2003 to 2005 and led to the development of Keyzilen®. Pursuant to the terms of the co-ownership/exploitation agreement, we were given the exclusive right to exploit the patents issuing from the filed patent applications for all claimed applications, including the treatment of tinnitus, in order to develop, promote, manufacture, cause to be manufactured, use, sell and distribute any products, processes or services deriving from such patents, including Keyzilen®, in any country in which these patent applications have been filed during the term of the agreement.

72

As consideration for the exclusive rights granted to us under the agreement, we agreed to pay INSERM a two tiered low single digit percentage royalty (where the higher rate is due on any net sales above a certain threshold) on the net sales of any product covered by the patents (including the use of Keyzilen® in the treatment of tinnitus triggered by cochlear glutamate excitotoxicity) earned in each country in which these patent applications have been filed during the term of the agreement. We have also agreed to pay INSERM a low double digit fee on any sums of any nature (except royalties and certain costs) collected by us in respect of the granting of licenses to third parties.

Xigen

In October 2003, we entered into a collaboration and license agreement with Xigen, pursuant to which Xigen granted us an exclusive worldwide license to use specified compounds to develop, manufacture and commercialize “pharmaceutical products as well as drug delivery devices and formulations for local administration of therapeutic substances to the inner ear for the treatment of ear disorders” (the Area). We also have a right of first refusal to license certain additional compounds developed by Xigen which may be used for the Area, specifically any cell permeable inhibitors to effectively block certain signal pathways in apoptotic processes.

Under this agreement, we made an upfront payment to Xigen of CHF 200,000 and we are obligated to make development milestone payments on an indication-by-indication basis of up to CHF 1.5 million and regulatory milestone payments on a product-by-product basis of up to CHF 2.5 million, subject to a mid-twenties percentage reduction for smaller indications, e.g., those qualifying for orphan drug status. To date, we have paid CHF 1.325 million to Xigen under the agreement. We will be required to pay Xigen a mid-single digit percentage royalty on net sales of each licensed product that uses a compound licensed under the agreement, which royalty for a given indication shall be partially offset by milestone payments we have paid for such indication, until the later of 10 years after the first commercial sale of any licensed product using such licensed compound in any country, and the first expiration of a patent owned by or exclusively licensed to Xigen that covers the use of such licensed compound in any country, subject to our obligation to enter into good faith negotiations with Xigen, upon expiration of the relevant patent on a licensed compound, about the conditions of our further use of such licensed compound.

Otifex

On February 2, 2017, we entered into an asset purchase agreement with Otifex Therapeutics Pty Ltd (“Otifex”), pursuant to which we agreed to purchase and Otifex has agreed to sell us certain preclinical and clinical assets related to a formulation for the intranasal application of betahistine, which we refer to as AM-125, as well as associated intellectual property rights. We plan to develop the formulation for the treatment of vertigo. The Otifex transaction closed in July 2017.

Financial Operations Overview

Research and development expense

Research and development expense consists principally of:

•

salaries for research and development staff and related expenses, including employee benefits;

​

•

costs for production of pre-clinical compounds and drug substances by contract manufacturers;

​

•

fees and other costs paid to contract research organizations in connection with additional pre-clinical testing and the performance of clinical trials;

​

•

costs of related facilities, materials and equipment;

​

•

costs associated with obtaining and maintaining patents;

​

•

costs related to the preparation of regulatory filings and fees; and

​

•

depreciation and amortization of tangible and intangible fixed assets used to develop our product candidates.

​

73

We expect that our operating expenses in 2018 will be in the range of CHF 10.0 to 13.0 million, the majority of which we expect to be research and development expense. Our research and development expense mainly relates to the following key programs:

•

Keyzilen® (AM-101).   We conducted a Phase 3 clinical development program with Keyzilen® comprising two Phase 3 trials and two open label follow-on trials. We completed enrollment of the last of these trials (TACTT3) in September 2017. On March 13, 2018, we announced preliminary top-line data from the TACTT3 trial which indicated that the study had not met its primary efficacy endpoint of a statistically significant improvement in the Tinnitus Functional Score from baseline to Day 84 in the active treated group compared to placebo either in the overall population or in the otitis media subpopulation. On May 15, 2018, we announced that further investigation of the trial’s outcomes confirmed these preliminary results and that we believe that the lack of separation between the active- and placebo-treated groups may be due to certain elements of the study design and conduct. We anticipate that one or more additional clinical trials will be necessary to move the Keyzilen® program forward, which we will seek to fund through partnering or research grants. Pending such funding, we expect our research and development expenses in connection with the Keyzilen® program to remain minimal.

​

•

Sonsuvi® (AM-111).   We conducted a Phase 3 clinical development program with Sonsuvi® comprising two Phase 3 trials in the treatment of ISSNHL, titled HEALOS and ASSENT. On November 28, 2017, we announced that the HEALOS trial did not meet the primary efficacy endpoint of a statistically significant improvement in hearing from baseline to Day 28 compared to placebo for either active treatment groups in the overall study population. However, a post-hoc analysis of the subpopulation with profound acute hearing loss revealed a clinically meaningful and nominally significant improvement in the Sonsuvi® 0.4 mg/mL treatment group. We terminated the ASSENT trial as it was very similar in design to the HEALOS trial and, based on the new findings, was no longer adequate for testing Sonsuvi®. Based on the HEALOS results, we submitted the design of a new pivotal trial with AM-111 0.4 mg/mL in patients suffering from acute profound hearing loss to the EMA and subsequently also to the FDA for review. Through a Protocol Assistance procedure the EMA endorsed the proposed trial design, choice of efficacy and safety endpoints, as well as the statistical methodology. In a Type C meeting with written responses, the proposed choice of primary and secondary efficacy endpoints, the safety endpoints, as well as the planned sample size and statistical methodology were also endorsed by the FDA. Following this feedback, we have mandated a transaction advisory firm to identify potential partners for the SONSUVI® development program and provide support for partnering discussions and negotiations. If successful, this may result in one or several sale, outlicensing or co-development transaction(s) on a global or regional scale. For 2019, we expect our research and development expenses in connection with the Sonsuvi® program to be lower than in 2019, reflecting the completion of the Phase 3 trials.

​

•

AM-125.   In the first half of 2018, we initiated a second randomized placebo-controlled Phase 1 trial in 72 healthy volunteers to further test the safety and tolerability and the pharmacokinetics of AM-125. On October 17, 2018 we announced positive results from the trial as superior bioavailability over a range of four intranasal betahistine doses compared to oral betahistine observed, with plasma exposure being 6 to 29 times higher (p-value between 0.056 and p < 0.0001). Further, it confirmed the good safety profile of intranasal betahistine and showed that the treatment was well tolerated when administered three times daily for three days. In 2019 we plan to initiate a Phase 2 clinical study with AM-125 in the first quarter, which will result in higher research and development expense for the AM-125 program than in 2018. The “TRAVERS” Phase 2 trial will enroll 138 patients suffering from acute vertigo following surgical removal of a vestibular schwannoma, a tumor growing behind the inner ear. It will be conducted in several European countries and potentially, Canada.

​

•

AM-201.   On May 15, 2018, we announced the expansion of our intranasal betahistine development program beyond the treatment of vertigo into mental health supportive care indications. Under project code AM-201 we intend to develop intranasal betahistine for the prevention of antipsychotic-induced weight gain. We plan to initiate a randomized

​

74

placebo-controlled Phase 1b proof-of-concept trial with AM-201 in healthy volunteers in the first quarter of 2019. The trial will be conducted in Europe and will enroll 50 healthy volunteers who will receive either AM-201 or placebo concomitantly with olanzapine over four weeks.

Other research and development expenses mainly relate to our pre-clinical studies of AM-102 (second generation tinnitus treatment). The expenses mainly consist of costs for production of the pre-clinical compounds and costs paid to academic and other research institutions in conjunction with pre-clinical testing.

For the nine months ended September 30, 2018, we spent CHF 1.1 million on research and development for Keyzilen®, CHF 1.9 million on research and development for Sonsuvi® and CHF 3.5 million on research and development for intranasal Betahistine. For the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, we spent CHF 6.5 million, CHF 15.3 million and CHF 19.7 million, respectively, on research and development expenses related to Keyzilen®. For the same time periods, we spent CHF 11.4 million, CHF 9.4 million and CHF 6.4 million, respectively, on research and development expenses related to Sonsuvi®. In addition, we incurred research and development expenses related to our earlier stage products. Following a market reduction in research and development expenses related to the conclusion of the Phase 3 trials with Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi®, their level is expected to start increasing again from 2020 onward as we advance the clinical development with AM-125 and AM-201. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the nature, timing and estimated costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the development of, or the period, if any, in which material net cash inflows may commence from, any of our product candidates. This is due to numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing drugs, including the uncertainty of:

•

the scope, rate of progress, results and cost of our clinical trials, nonclinical testing, and other related activities;

​

•

the cost of manufacturing clinical supplies, and establishing commercial supplies, of our product candidates and any products that we may develop;

​

•

the number and characteristics of product candidates that we pursue;

​

•

the cost, timing, and outcomes of regulatory approvals and payer discussions;

​

•

the cost and timing of establishing sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities; and

​

•

the terms and timing of any collaborative, licensing, and other arrangements that we may establish, including any required milestone and royalty payments thereunder.

​

A change in the outcome of any of these variables with respect to the development of AM-125, AM-201, Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® or any other product candidate that we may develop could mean a significant change in the costs and timing associated with the development of such product candidate. For example, if the FDA or other regulatory authority were to require us to conduct preclinical and clinical studies beyond those which we currently anticipate will be required for the completion of clinical development or if we experience significant delays in enrollment in any clinical trials, we could be required to expend significant additional financial resources and time on the completion of the clinical development.

General and administrative expense

Our general and administrative expense consists principally of:

•

salaries for general and administrative staff and related expenses, including employee benefits;

​

•

business development expenses, including travel expenses;

​

•

administration expenses including professional fees for auditors and other consulting expenses not related to research and development activities, professional fees for lawyers not related to the protection and maintenance of our intellectual property and IT expenses;

​

•

cost of facilities, communication and office expenses; and

​

•

depreciation and amortization of tangible and intangible fixed assets not related to research and development activities.

​

75

Interest income

Our policy is to invest funds in low risk investments including interest bearing deposits. Saving and deposit accounts generate a small amount of interest income.

Interest expense

Our interest expense consists principally of bank charges and interest expenses due to the Loan and Security Agreement with Hercules.

Revaluation gain from derivative financial instruments

In connection with the Hercules Loan and Security Agreement, the Company issued Hercules a warrant to purchase up to 241,117 of its common shares at an exercise price of  $3.94 per share. Revaluation gain/(loss) show the changes in fair value of the warrant issued to Hercules. As of March 13, 2018, following the consummation of the Merger, the Hercules warrant was exercisable for up to 15,673 common shares at an exercise price of  $39.40 per common share.

On February 21, 2017, we issued 10,000,000 warrants, each warrant entitling its holder to purchase 0.70 of a common share at an exercise price of  $1.20. Additionally, the underwriter was granted a 30-day option to purchase up to 1,500,000 additional common shares and/or 1,500,000 additional warrants. On February 15, 2017, the underwriter partially exercised its option for 1,350,000 warrants. Revaluation gain/(loss) show the changes in fair value of the warrant issued in connection with this offering. As of March 13, 2018, following the consummation of the Merger, the outstanding warrants issued in the February 2017 offering were exercisable for up to 794,500 common shares at an exercise price of  $12.00 per common share. As of September 30, 2018, the fair value of the warrants amounted to CHF 50,070. The revaluation gain of the derivative for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 amounted to CHF 1,763,343, which is an increase of CHF 63,221 when comparing to the same period in 2017. Since its initial recognition, the fair value decreased by CHF 5,040,393, resulting in a gain in the corresponding amount (fair value as of February 21, 2017: CHF 5,090,463).

Foreign currency exchange gain/(loss), net

Our foreign currency exchange gain/(loss), net, consists primarily of unrealized gains or losses on our USD and EUR denominated cash and cash equivalents.

Transaction costs

For the year ended December 31, 2017, transaction costs relates to the fees and transaction costs allocated to the warrants (derivative financial instrument) related to the public offering completed on February 21, 2017, and fees and transaction costs allocated to the Commitment Purchase Agreement entered in on October 10, 2017, representing LPC’s commitment to purchase shares at the option of the Company, subject to certain restrictions (derivative financial instrument).

For the nine months ended September 30, 2018, transaction costs relates to the fees and transaction costs allocated to the warrants (derivative financial instrument) related to the public offerings completed on January 2018 and July 2018, and the Purchase Agreement.

Other comprehensive loss

Remeasurements of the net defined benefit liability, which comprise actuarial gains and losses, the return on plan assets (excluding interest) and the effect of the asset ceiling (if any, excluding interest), are recognized in other comprehensive loss.

We determine the net interest expense or income on the net defined benefit liability or asset for the period by applying the discount rate used to measure the defined benefit obligation at the beginning of the annual period to the then-net defined benefit liability or asset, taking into account any changes in the net defined benefit liability or asset during the period as a result of contributions and benefit payments. Net interest expense and other expenses related to defined benefit plans are recognized in profit or loss.

76

Assets and liabilities of our subsidiaries with functional currency other than CHF are included in our consolidated financial statements by translating the assets and liabilities into CHF at the exchange rates applicable at the end of the reporting period. Income and expenses for each consolidated statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income are translated at average exchange rates (unless this average is not a reasonable approximation of the cumulative effect of the rates prevailing on the transaction dates, in which case income and expenses are translated at the dates of the transaction).

Foreign currency differences arising from translating the financial statements of our subsidiaries from currencies other than CHF are recognized in other comprehensive income and presented in the foreign currency translation reserve under equity in the statement of financial position. When a foreign operation is disposed of such that control, significant influence or joint control is lost, the cumulative amount in the translation reserve related to that foreign operation is reclassified to profit or loss as part of the gain or loss on disposal.

Results of Operations

The numbers below have been derived from our unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements and our audited consolidated financial statements. The discussion below should be read along with these financial statements and it is qualified in its entirety by reference to them.

Comparison of the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017

77

Comparison of the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017

Research and development expense

Research and development expenses amounted to CHF 1.7 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018. This represents a decrease of about CHF 2.5 million from research and development expenses of CHF 4.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2017. Research and development expenses reflected the following:

•

Clinical projects.   In the three months ended September, 2018 clinical expenses were lower than in the three months ended September 30, 2017 by CHF 1.9 million due to lower service and milestone costs for our Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® studies, mainly reflecting the completion of our late-stage clinical trials.

​

•

Pre-clinical projects.   In the three months ended September, 2018, pre-clinical expenses increased by CHF 0.2 million compared to the three months ended September, 2017, primarily due to higher expenses in our AM-125 program.

​

78

•

Drug manufacture and substance.   In the three months ended September 30, 2018, drug manufacture and substance related costs decreased by CHF 0.7 million compared to the three months ended September 30, 2017, due to lower Sonsuvi® project activities.

​

•

Employee benefits.   Employee expenses decreased by CHF 0.4 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the same period in 2017 primarily due to a reduction in headcount.

​

•

Other research and development expenses.   Other research and development expenses increased by CHF 0.2 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the same period in 2017 primarily due to intellectual property related activities.

​

Research and development expenses amounted to CHF 6.7 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2018. This represents a decrease of about CHF 8.2 million from research and development expenses of CHF 14.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2017. Research and development expenses reflected the following:

•

Clinical projects.   In the nine months ended September, 2018 clinical expenses were lower than in the nine months ended September 30, 2017 by CHF 7.1 million due to lower service and milestone costs for our Keyzilen® and Sonsuvi® studies, mainly reflecting the completion of our late-stage clinical trials.

​

•

Pre-clinical projects.   In the nine months ended September 30, 2018, pre-clinical expenses increased by CHF 0.3 million compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2017, primarily due to activities related to our AM-125 and AM-201 program.

​

•

Drug manufacture and substance.   In the nine months ended September 30, 2018, drug manufacture and substance related costs decreased by CHF 0.6 million compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2017, due to lower activities related to our AM-101 and Sonsuvi® project activities.

​

•

Employee benefits.   Employee expenses decreased by CHF 0.8 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the same period in 2017 primarily due to a reduction in headcount.

​

•

Other research and development expenses.   Other research and development expenses decreased by 54 thousand in the nine months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the same period in 2017 primarily due to a reduction in regulatory related activities.

​

79

General and administrative expense

General and administrative expense amounted to CHF 1.2 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018 compared to CHF 1.3 million in the same period in the previous year. Administration costs were lower mainly due to lower personnel cost expenses partly offset by higher depreciation of tangible assets.

General and administrative expense amounted to CHF 3.6 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2018 compared to CHF 4.0 million in the same period in the previous year. The decrease is related to lower employee benefits due to lower headcount and employee benefit-related expenses, partly offset by higher administration costs mainly due to higher legal fees related to the Merger.

Interest income

Interest income decreased by CHF 8 thousand in the three months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the three months ended September 30, 2017, due to the termination of short-term deposits.

Interest income decreased by CHF 54 thousand in the nine months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2017, due to the termination of short-term deposits.

Interest expense

Interest expense decreased in the three months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the same prior year period by CHF 0.3 million. The decrease relates to a reduction in the outstanding balance of the loan under the Loan and Security Agreement, as we commenced repayment of the loan facility in July 2017 and made an extraordinary repayment of  $5 million principal amount in April 2018.

Interest expense decreased in the nine months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the same prior year period by CHF 0.3 million. The decrease relates to a reduction in the outstanding balance of the loan under the Loan and Security Agreement, as we commenced repayment of the loan facility in July 2017.

80

Following the modification of the loan to repay $5 million, a loss of CHF 334,747 was recognized in connection with the modification of the loan and transaction costs. This loss is presented in the line interest expense in the condensed consolidated interim statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income or loss.

Foreign currency exchange gain/(loss), net

For the three months ended September 30, 2018, foreign currency exchange loss was CHF 0.1 million higher than during the same period in the previous year, due to the impact of the appreciation of the US$ currency and the increased US$ cash and cash equivalents held by the Company from the July 2018 Registered Offering.

For the nine months ended September 30, 2018, foreign currency exchange loss was CHF 0.7 million lower than during the same period in the previous year, due to the impact of the appreciation of the US$ currency and the increased US$ cash and cash equivalents held by the Company from the January 2018 Registered Offering and the July 2018 Registered Offering.

Revaluation gain/(loss) from derivative financial instruments

In connection with the Hercules Loan and Security Agreement, we issued Hercules a warrant to purchase up to 241,117 of the Company’s common shares at an exercise price of US$3.94 per share. As of March 13, 2018 following the consummation of the Merger, the warrant was exercisable for 15,673 common shares at an exercise price of  $39.40 per common share. As of September 30, 2018 the fair value of the warrant amounted to CHF 1,065. The revaluation gain of the derivative for the nine months ended September, 2018 amounted to CHF 22,285, which is a decrease of CHF 39,384 when comparing to the same period in 2017. Since its initial recognition, the fair value decreased by CHF 407,115 resulting in a revaluation gain in the corresponding amount (fair value as of July 19, 2016: CHF 408,180).

On February 21, 2017 we issued 10,000,000 warrants in connection with the January 2018 Registered Offering, each warrant entitling its holder to purchase 0.70 of a common share at an exercise price of US$1.20 per common share. Additionally, the underwriter was granted a 30-day option to purchase up to 1,500,000 additional common shares and/or 1,500,000 additional warrants, of which the underwriter partially exercised its option for 1,350,000 warrants. As of March 13, 2018, following the consummation of the Merger, the warrants became exercisable for an aggregate of 794,000 of our common shares, at an exercise price of  $12.00 per common share. As of September 30, 2018, the fair value of the warrants amounted to CHF 50,070. The revaluation gain of the derivative for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 amounted to CHF 1,763,343, which is an increase of CHF 63,221 when comparing to the same period in 2017. Since its initial recognition, the fair value decreased by CHF 5,040,393, resulting in a gain in the corresponding amount (fair value as of February 21, 2017: CHF 5,090,463).

On January 30, 2018 we issued 7,499,999 warrants in connection with a direct offering of 12,499,999 common shares, each warrant entitling its holder to purchase one common share at an exercise price of $0.50 per common share. As of March 13, 2018, following the consummation of the Merger, the warrants became exercisable for an aggregate of 750,002 of our common shares (assuming we decide to round up fractional common shares to the next whole common share), at an exercise price of  $5.00 per common share. As of September 30, 2018 the fair value of the warrants amounted CHF 161,737. Since its initial recognition, the fair value of the warrants has decreased by CHF 2,322,010, resulting in a gain in the corresponding amount (fair value as of January 30, 2018: CHF 2,483,747).

On July 17, 2018 we issued 6,282,050 Series A warrants and 4,487,179 Series B warrants in connection with the July 2018 Registered Offering of 17,948,717 common shares, each warrant entitling its holder to purchase one common share at an exercise price of CHF 0.39 per common share. As of September 30, 2018 the fair value of the warrants amounted CHF 872,217. Since its initial recognition, the fair value of the warrants has decreased by CHF 24,224, resulting in a gain in the corresponding amount (fair value as of July 17, 2018: CHF 896,441).

81

Transaction costs

Transaction costs increased by CHF 0.1 million in the three months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the previous period, due to transaction costs related to the July 2018 Registered Offering.

Transaction costs increased by CHF 14 thousand in the nine months ended September 30, 2018 compared to the previous period, due to higher fees and transaction costs related to the equity offering in the first quarter of 2018 and the July 2018 Registered Offering compared to the equity offering in the first quarter of 2017.

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

Research and development expense

82

Research and development expense decreased by 22% from CHF 24.8 million in 2016 to CHF 19.2 million in 2017. Our research and development expense is dependent on the development phases of our research projects and may therefore fluctuate significantly from year to year. The variances in expense between 2016 and 2017 are mainly due to the following factors:

•

Clinical projects.   In 2017, we incurred lower service and milestone costs for our Keyzilen® studies, mainly reflecting the completion of TACTT2, AMPACT1 and AMPACT2 and progression towards completion of TACTT3 were partly offset by higher Sonsuvi® related expenses due to progression of our HEALOS and ASSENT trials.

​

•

Preclinical projects.   In 2017 preclinical expenses increased by 18% due to an increase in activities in our early stage program AM-102.

​

•

Drug manufacture and substance.   In 2017 costs related to raw material purchases and expenses decreased by 22% mainly due to lower costs for process validation related to Keyzilen®, which were partly offset by increases related to Sonsuvi®.

​

•

Employee benefits.   Employee benefit costs decreased in 2017 due to lower headcount and lower recruiting fees.

​

General and administrative expense

General and administrative expenses decreased by 5% from CHF 5.4 million in 2016 to CHF 5.2 million in 2017.

•

Employee benefits.   In 2017, headcount was similar to 2016 and in line with the planned organization of administrative staff and the management team. Employee benefits expenses decreased as a result of lower personnel cost due to certain positions temporarily being unfilled and lower recruiting fees.

​

•

Business development.   Business development expenses increased from CHF 0.05 million to CHF 0.2 million as a result of higher consulting fees.

​

•

Administration expenses.   The decrease of 15% from CHF 3.0 million in 2016 to CHF 2.5 million in 2017, primarily due to lower consultancy fees.

​

Interest income

Interest income decreased in 2017 compared to 2016 due to lower amounts earned on short-term deposits.

Interest expense

Interest expense increased substantially in 2017 to CHF 1.6 million compared to CHF 0.8 million in 2016, as a result of the Hercules Loan and Security Agreement. On June 19, 2016, we drew $12.5 million under the facility. The loan was initially recognized at transaction value less the fair value of the warrant as

83

of the transaction date and less directly attributable transactions costs. Following the initial recognition, the loan is measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method. Changes in amortized cost as well as interest paid to Hercules are recognized as interest expense. In addition, we recognized bank charges as interest expense.

Foreign currency exchange gain/(loss), net

Foreign currency exchange gains/(loss), net increased in 2017 mainly due to the depreciation of the U.S. dollar against the Swiss Franc which triggered a net foreign unrealized currency loss on U.S. dollar denominated cash and cash equivalents

Revaluation gain/(loss) from derivative financial instruments

In connection with the Hercules Loan and Security Agreement, the Company issued Hercules a warrant to purchase up to 241,117 of its common shares at an exercise price of  $3.94 per share. As of March 13, 2018, following the consummation of the Merger, the warrant was exercisable for 15,673 common shares at an exercise price of  $39.40 per common share. The fair value of the warrant on December 31, 2017 amounted to CHF 23,350. The revaluation gain of the derivative for 2017 amounted to CHF 93,782 (2016: revaluation gain of CHF 291,048).

On February 21, 2017, we issued 10,000,000 warrants, each warrant entitling its holder to purchase 0.70 of a common share at an exercise price of  $1.20. Additionally, the underwriter was granted a 30-day option to purchase up to 1,500,000 additional common shares and/or 1,500,000 additional warrants. On February 15, 2017, the underwriter partially exercised its option for 1,350,000 warrants. As of December 31, 2017, the fair value of the warrants amounted CHF 1,813,412. Since its initial recognition, the fair value of the warrants have decreased by CHF 3,278,404, resulting in a gain in the corresponding amount (fair value as of February 21, 2017: CHF 5,090,463). As of March 13, 2018, following the consummation of the Merger, the outstanding warrants issued in the February 2017 offering were exercisable for 794,500 common shares at an exercise price of  $12.00 per common share.

Transaction costs

Transaction costs increased by CHF 1.0 million in 2017 compared to 2016. The increase relates to the fees and transaction costs related to the warrants issued as part of the public offering completed on February 21, 2017 and for obtaining the 2017 Commitment Purchase Agreement (as defined below), representing LPC’s commitment to purchase shares at the option of the Company, subject to certain restrictions.

Income tax gain

Income tax gain reflects the reassessment of deferred tax assets and liabilities booked in the 2014 and 2015 fiscal years.

Remeasurements of defined benefits liability

Remeasurements of the net defined benefits liability, which comprise actuarial gains and losses, the return on plan assets (excluding interest) and the effect of the asset ceiling (if any, excluding interest), decreased by 169% from 2016 to 2017. The increase was due a change in the discount rate and a change in demographic assumptions.

Foreign currency translation differences

Foreign currency translation differences decreased by 350% from 2016 to 2017. The decrease was primarily related to changes in the opening and closing balance of the group’s currency translation differences.

84

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015