Edgar Filing: FIBROGEN INC

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

x (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

Form 10-Q

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-Q

(Mark One)

x	QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2015

¨	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission file number: 001-36740

FIBROGEN, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

77-0357827

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

409 Illinois Street

San Francisco, CA

94158

(Address of principal executive offices)

(zip code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (415) 978-1200

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act:

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes ¨ No x

The number of shares of common stock outstanding as of July 31, 2015 was 60,564,900.

FIBROGEN, INC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS


		Page
PART I—FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.	Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements		3
	Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014		3
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014		4
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014		5
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014		6
	Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements		7
Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		20
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk		30
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures		30

PART II—OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1.	Legal Proceedings		31
Item 1A.	Risk Factors		31
Item 2.	Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds		66
Item 3.	Defaults Upon Senior Securities		67
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures		67
Item 5.	Other Information		67
Item 6.	Exhibits		67
	Signatures		68
	Exhibit Index		69

FIBROGEN, INC.

PART I—FINANCIAL INFORMATION

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(In thousands, except per share amounts)

(Unaudited)


	June 30, 2015			December 31, 2014
	(Unaudited)			(Note 1)
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	236,536		$	165,455
Short-term investments		12,129			14,364
Accounts receivable ($10,331 and $5,033 from a related party)		12,183			13,453
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		2,731			4,966

Total current assets		263,579			198,238

Restricted cash		7,254			7,254
Long-term investments		138,310			144,269
Property and equipment, net		130,451			132,171
Other assets		1,801			1,596

Total assets	$	541,395		$	483,528

Liabilities, stockholders’ equity and non-controlling interests
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	3,915		$	4,551
Accrued liabilities ($5,817 and $4,594 to related parties)		46,240			48,985
Deferred revenue		13,347			9,218

Total current liabilities		63,502			62,754

Long-term portion of lease financing obligations		96,929			96,818
Product development obligations		15,186			16,465
Deferred rent		4,917			5,131
Deferred revenue, net of current		87,273			60,988
Other long-term liabilities		702			696

Total liabilities		268,509			242,852

Commitments and Contingencies

Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 125,000 shares authorized at June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014; no shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014		—			—
Common stock, $0.01 par value; 225,000 shares authorized at June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014; 60,370 and 59,046 shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014		604			590
Additional paid-in capital		565,229			546,247
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(623	)		(3,149	)
Accumulated deficit		(311,595	)		(322,283	)

Total stockholders’ equity		253,615			221,405
Non-controlling interests		19,271			19,271

Total equity		272,886			240,676

Total liabilities and equity	$	541,395		$	483,528

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements

FIBROGEN, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(In thousands, except per share amounts)

(Unaudited)


	Quarter Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015			2014			2015			2014
Revenue:
License and milestone revenue (includes $4,860, $3,718, $9,552 and $6,460 from a related party)	$	106,879		$	82,463		$	118,385		$	97,148
Collaboration services and other revenue (includes $719, $866, $1,353 and $1,617 from a related party)		13,671			7,495			18,463			10,686

Total revenue		120,550			89,958			136,848			107,834
Operating expenses:
Research and development		51,555			33,269			102,094			58,919
General and administrative		9,680			7,516			20,162			13,948

Total operating expenses		61,235			40,785			122,256			72,867

Income from operations		59,315			49,173			14,592			34,967
Interest expense		(2,762	)		(2,725	)		(5,520	)		(5,451	)
Interest and other income, net		707			383			1,550			1,075

Income before income taxes		57,260			46,831			10,622			30,591
Provision (benefit) from income taxes		205			—			(66	)		—

Net income	$	57,055		$	46,831		$	10,688		$	30,591

Net income per share:
Basic	$	0.95		$	1.36		$	0.18		$	0.74
Diluted	$	0.83		$	0.58		$	0.15		$	0.46
Weighted average number of common shares used to calculate net income per share:
Basic		59,798			13,347			59,499			13,279
Diluted		68,752			37,106			69,354			21,639

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements

FIBROGEN, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(In thousands)

(Unaudited)


	Quarter Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015			2014			2015			2014
Net income	$	57,055		$	46,831		$	10,688		$	30,591
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Foreign currency translation adjustments		508			185			2,213			195
Available-for-sale investments:
Unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax effect		(368	)		(280	)		343			(820	)
Reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive loss		(25	)		—			(30	)		—

Net change in unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale investments		(393	)		(280	)		313			(820	)

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes		115			(95	)		2,526			(625	)

Comprehensive income	$	57,170		$	46,736		$	13,214		$	29,966

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements

FIBROGEN, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(In thousands)

(Unaudited)


	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015			2014
Operating activities
Net income	$	10,688		$	30,591
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation		2,796			1,843
Amortization of premium on investments		1,538			307
Loss on disposal of property and equipment		100			—
Stock-based compensation		13,388			1,465
Tax benefit on unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities		(66	)		—
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		1,270			1,329
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		2,235			964
Other assets		(205	)		(694	)
Accounts payable		(636	)		190
Accrued liabilities		(3,140	)		4,828
Deferred revenue		30,414			36,287
Lease financing liability		312			306
Other long-term liabilities		163			(178	)

Net cash provided by operating activities		58,857			77,238

Investing activities
Purchases of property and equipment		(989	)		(3,952	)
Proceeds from maturities of available-for-sale securities		7,035			33,546

Net cash provided by investing activities		6,046			29,594

Financing activities
Repayments of lease liability		(201	)		(201	)
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net		5,608			831
Payments of equity issuance costs		—			(1,167	)

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities		5,407			(537	)

Effect of exchange rate change on cash and cash equivalents		771			35

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		71,081			106,330
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		165,455			76,332

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	236,536		$	182,662

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements

FIBROGEN, INC.

NOTES TO THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Unaudited)

1.	Description of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Operations

FibroGen, Inc. (“FibroGen,” the “Company,” or “we” and other similar pronouns) was incorporated in 1993 in Delaware and is a research-based biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of novel therapeutics to treat serious unmet medical needs. Our focus in the areas of fibrosis and hypoxia-inducible factor (“HIF”) biology has generated multiple programs targeting various therapeutic areas. Our most advanced product candidate, roxadustat, or FG-4592, is an oral small molecule inhibitor of HIF prolyl hydroxylases (“HIF-PHs”) in Phase 3 clinical development for the treatment of anemia in chronic kidney disease (“CKD”). FG-3019 is our monoclonal antibody in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (“IPF”), pancreatic cancer and liver fibrosis. We have taken a global approach with respect to the development and future commercialization of our product candidates, and this includes development and commercialization in the People’s Republic of China (“China”).

On November 10, 2014, we effected a 1-for-2.5 reverse split of our common stock. Upon the effectiveness of the reverse stock split, (i) every 2.5 shares of outstanding common stock were combined into one share of common stock, (ii) the number of shares of common stock for which each outstanding option or warrant to purchase common stock is exercisable was proportionally decreased on a 1-for-2.5 basis, (iii) the exercise price of each outstanding option or warrant to purchase common stock was proportionately increased on a 1-for- 2.5 basis, (iv) the exchange ratio for each share of outstanding FibroGen Europe Oy (“FibroGen Europe”) share of stock which is exchangeable into our common stock was proportionately reduced on a 1-for-2.5 basis, and (v) the conversion ratio for each share of outstanding preferred stock which is convertible into our common stock was proportionately reduced on a 1-for-2.5 basis. All of the outstanding common stock share numbers (including shares of common stock which our outstanding preferred stock shares were convertible into), common stock warrants, share prices, exercise prices and per share amounts have been adjusted in these condensed consolidated financial statements, on a retroactive basis, to reflect this 1-for-2.5 reverse stock split for all periods presented. The par value per share and the authorized number of shares of common stock and preferred stock were not adjusted as a result of the reverse stock split.

On November 19, 2014, we closed the initial public offering (“IPO”) of our common stock. In our IPO, we sold 9,315,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $18.00 per share. Net proceeds from our IPO and concurrent private placement were $171.8 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions of $11.7 million and offering expenses of $4.1 million. AstraZeneca AB (“AstraZeneca”), one of our collaboration partners, agreed to purchase from us concurrently with the closing of our IPO in a private placement shares of our common stock with an aggregate purchase price of $20.0 million at a price per share equal to the IPO price. Upon the closing of our IPO, all outstanding shares of our convertible preferred stock automatically converted into 33,919,954 shares of common stock and 958,996 shares of FibroGen Europe convertible preferred stock were converted into shares of our common stock. Our proceeds from the sale of the common stock sold in the concurrent private placement were $20.0 million.

Basis of Presentation

The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of FibroGen, its wholly owned subsidiaries and its majority-owned subsidiaries, FibroGen Europe and FibroGen China Anemia Holdings, Ltd. All inter-company transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. We operate in one segment—the discovery, development and commercialization of novel therapeutics to treat serious unmet medical needs.

The condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for interim financial reporting and the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and, therefore, do not include all information and footnote disclosures normally included in the annual consolidated financial statements. The December 31, 2014 condensed consolidated balance sheet data contained within this Form 10-Q was derived from audited consolidated financial statements included in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, but does not include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

The preparation of the condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. In our opinion, the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include all normal recurring adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of our financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the interim periods presented.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

We define fair value as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date.

Our valuation techniques are based on observable and unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect readily obtainable data from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our market assumptions. We classify these inputs into the following hierarchy:

Level 1—Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets.

Level 2—Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations whose inputs are observable or whose significant value drivers are observable.

Level 3—Unobservable inputs and little, if any, market activity for the assets.

The assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires management to make judgments and considers factors specific to the asset or liability. In addition, the categories presented do not suggest how prices may be affected by the size of the purchases or sales, particularly with the largest highly liquid financial issuers who are in markets continuously with non-equity instruments, or how any such financial assets may be impacted by other factors such as U.S. government guarantees. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.

Carrying amounts of certain of our financial instruments including cash equivalents, investments, receivables, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate fair value due to their short maturities.

Revenue Recognition

Substantially all of our revenues to date have been generated from our collaboration agreements.

Our collaboration agreements include multiple deliverables, and we, therefore, follow the guidance in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 605-25, “Revenue Recognition–Multiple-Element Arrangements” (“ASC 605-25”). ASC 605-25:

•

provides guidance on how revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables should be separated and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated among the separate units of accounting;

•

requires an entity to determine the selling price of a separate deliverable using a hierarchy of (i) vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”), (ii) third-party evidence (“TPE”), or (iii) best estimate of selling price (“BESP”); and

•

requires the allocation of the arrangement consideration, at the inception of the arrangement, to the separate units of accounting based on relative selling price.

We evaluate all deliverables within an arrangement to determine whether or not they provide value on a stand-alone basis. Based on this evaluation, the deliverables are separated into units of accounting. The arrangement consideration that is fixed or determinable at the inception of the arrangement is allocated to the separate units of accounting based on their relative selling prices. Significant judgment may be required in determining whether a deliverable provides stand-alone value, determining the amount of arrangement consideration that is fixed or determinable, and estimating the stand-alone selling price of each unit of accounting.

To date, we have determined that the selling price for the deliverables within our collaboration agreements should be determined using BESP, as neither VSOE nor TPE is available. The process for determining BESP involves significant judgment on our part and includes consideration of multiple factors, including assumptions related to the market opportunity and the time needed to commercialize a product candidate pursuant to the relevant license, estimated direct expenses and other costs, which include the rates normally charged by contract research and contract manufacturing organizations for development and manufacturing obligations, and rates that would be charged by qualified outsiders for committee services.

For each unit of accounting identified within an arrangement, we determine the period over which the deliverables are provided and the performance obligation is satisfied. Service revenue is recognized using a proportional performance method. Direct labor hours or full time equivalents are typically used as the measurement of performance. Revenue may be recognized using a straight line method when performance is expected to occur roughly consistently over a period of time.

Payments or reimbursements resulting from our research and development efforts for those arrangements where such efforts are considered as deliverables are recognized as the services are performed and are presented on a gross basis. To the extent payments are required to be made to the collaboration partners pursuant to research and development efforts, those costs are charged to research and development using the guidance pursuant to ASC Topic 605-250, “Customer Payments and Incentives”, which states that cash consideration given by a vendor to a customer is presumed to be a reduction of the selling prices unless the vendor receives an identifiable benefit in exchange for the consideration that is sufficiently separable from the recipient’s purchase of the vendor’s products, and the vendor can reasonably estimate the fair value of the benefit.

Each of our collaboration agreements includes milestones for which we follow ASC Topic 605-28, “Revenue Recognition—Milestone Method” (“ASC 605-28”). ASC 605-28 establishes the milestone method as an acceptable method of revenue recognition for certain contingent event-based payments under research and development arrangements. Under the milestone method, a payment that is contingent upon the achievement of a substantive milestone is recognized in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. A milestone is an event (i) that can only be achieved based in whole or in part on either our performance or on the occurrence of a specific outcome resulting from our performance, (ii) for which there is substantive uncertainty at the date the arrangement is entered into that the event will be achieved and (iii) that would result in additional payments being due to us. Determining whether a milestone is substantive is a matter of judgment and that assessment must be made at the inception of the arrangement. Milestones are considered substantive when the consideration earned from the achievement of the milestone is (i) commensurate with either our performance to achieve the milestone or the enhancement of the value of the item delivered as a result of a specific outcome resulting from our performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) relates solely to past performance and (iii) is reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement. Payments for achieving milestones which are not considered substantive are treated as additional arrangement consideration and are allocated following the relative selling price method previously described.

Net Income per Share

Immediately prior to the IPO, the Company had authorized 125,000,000 shares of Preferred Stock with a par value of $0.01 per share. The Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock, Series C Preferred Stock, Series D Preferred Stock, Royalty Acquisition Preferred Stock and Series G-1 Preferred Stock are collectively referred to as the “Junior Preferred Stock”. The Series E Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock and Series F Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock are collectively referred to as the “Senior Preferred Stock”. As of December 31, 2014, there was no outstanding convertible preferred stock as all issued and outstanding preferred stock were converted to common stock at the closing of the Company’s IPO in November 2014.

Prior to the IPO, we applied the two-class method to calculate basic and diluted net income per share of common stock. The two-class method is an earnings allocation method under which earnings per share is calculated for common stock considering a participating security’s rights to undistributed earnings as if all such earnings had been distributed during the period. The Junior Preferred Stock were participating securities due to their dividend rights and the Senior Preferred Stock had stated dividend rates. During periods of net income, the calculation of basic net income per share was reclassified to exclude the income attributable to all participating securities from the numerator and exclude the dilutive impact of those shares from the denominator. During periods of net loss, all participating securities were not included in the calculation of net loss per share because the preferred stockholders had no contractual obligation to participate in losses.

The following is a reconciliation of the basic and diluted net income per share calculation for the periods presented (in thousands, except per share data):


	Quarter Ended June 30,					Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015		2014			2015		2014
Net income	$	57,055	$	46,831		$	10,688	$	30,591
Less: Undistributed earnings allocated to Junior Preferred stockholders		—		(25,234	)		—		(13,790	)

Net income attributable to Senior Preferred and common stockholders	$	57,055	$	21,597		$	10,688	$	16,801
Less: Undistributed earnings allocated to Senior Preferred stockholders	$	—	$	(3,474	)	$	—	$	(6,948	)

Net income attributable to common stockholders	$	57,055	$	18,123		$	10,688	$	9,853

Weighted average shares used to compute net income per share:
Basic		59,798		13,347			59,499		13,279
Dilutive effect of Senior Preferred stock		—		15,336			—		—
Dilutive effect of potential common shares		8,954		8,423			9,855		8,360

Diluted		68,752		37,106			69,354		21,639

Net income per share:
Basic	$	0.95	$	1.36		$	0.18	$	0.74
Diluted	$	0.83	$	0.58		$	0.15	$	0.46

Diluted net income per share does not include the effect of 3.8 million and 18.6 million securities for the quarters ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 and 1.8 million and 33.9 million securities for the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in ASC 605, Revenue Recognition. ASU 2014-09 is based on the principle that revenue is recognized to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 also requires additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. The effective date for ASU 2014-09was initially for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016. In July 2015, the FASB approved a one year deferral of this standard with a new effective date for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. The new guidelines can be implemented using either of the following transition methods: (i) a full retrospective approach reflecting the application of the standard in each prior reporting period with the option to elect certain practical expedients, or (ii) a retrospective approach with the cumulative effect of initially adopting ASU 2014-09 recognized at the date of adoption. We are currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on our consolidated financial statements.

2.	Collaboration Agreements

Astellas Agreements

Japan Agreement

In June 2005, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Astellas Pharma Inc. (“Astellas”) for the development and commercialization (but not manufacture) of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in Japan (“Japan Agreement”). Under this agreement, Astellas paid license fees and other consideration totaling $40.1 million (such amounts were fully received as of February 2009). The Japan Agreement also provides for additional development and regulatory approval milestone payments up to $117.5 million, a commercial sales related milestone of $15.0 million and additional consideration based on net sales (as defined) in the low 20% range after commercial launch. A clinical milestone payment of $12.5 million was received in 2013. We evaluated the criteria under ASC 605-28 (as disclosed in Note 1) and concluded that the aforementioned milestone was substantive.

Europe Agreement

In April 2006, we entered into a separate collaboration agreement with Astellas for the development and commercialization of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in Europe, the Middle East, the Commonwealth of Independent States and South Africa (“Europe Agreement”). Under the terms of the Europe Agreement, Astellas paid license fees and other upfront consideration totaling $320.0 million (such amounts were fully received as of February 2009). The Europe Agreement also provides for additional development and regulatory approval milestone payments up to $425.0 million. Clinical milestone payments of $40.0 million and $50.0 million were received in 2010 and 2012. We evaluated the criteria under ASC 605-28 (as disclosed in Note 1) and concluded that each of those milestones was substantive. Under the Europe Agreement, Astellas committed to fund 50% of joint development costs for Europe and North America, and all territory-specific costs. The Europe Agreement also provides for tiered payments based on net sales of product (as defined) in the low 20% range.

AstraZeneca Agreements

U.S./Rest of World Agreement

Effective July 30, 2013, we entered into a collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca for the development and commercialization of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in the United States and all other countries in the world, other than China, not previously licensed under the Astellas Europe and Astellas Japan Agreements (“U.S./RoW Agreement”). It also excludes China, which is covered by a separate agreement with AstraZeneca described below. Under the terms of the U.S./RoW Agreement, AstraZeneca has agreed to pay upfront, non-contingent and time-based payments totaling $374.0 million, which we expect to receive in various amounts through June 2016, of which $312.0 million was received as of June 30, 2015. In addition, the U.S./RoW Agreement also provides for development and regulatory approval based milestone payments of up to $550.0 million, which include potential future indications which the companies choose to pursue, and commercial related milestone payments of up to $325.0 million. During the second quarter of 2015, we received a $15.0 million development milestone payment as a result of the finalization of our two audited pre-clinical carcinogenicity study reports. We evaluated the criteria under ASC 605-28 (as disclosed in Note 1) and concluded that each of those milestones was substantive.

Under the U.S./RoW Agreement, we and AstraZeneca will share equally in the development costs of roxadustat not already paid for by Astellas, up to a total of $233.0 million. Any additional development costs incurred by us during the development period in excess of the $233.0 million (aggregated spend) will be fully reimbursed by AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca will pay us tiered royalty payments on AstraZeneca’s future net sales (as defined in the agreement) of roxadustat in the low 20% range. In addition we will receive a transfer price for delivery of commercial product based on a percentage of AstraZeneca’s net sales (as defined in the agreement) in the low- to mid-single digit range.

China Agreement

Effective July 30, 2013, we (through our subsidiaries affiliated with China) entered into a collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca for the development and commercialization (but not manufacture) of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia in China (“China Agreement”). Under the terms of the China Agreement, AstraZeneca agreed to pay upfront consideration totaling $28.2 million (such amounts were fully received as of March 31, 2014). In addition, the China Agreement provides for AstraZeneca to pay regulatory approval and other approval related milestones of up to $161.0 million. The China Agreement also provides for sales related milestone payments of up to $167.5 million and contingent payments of $20.0 million related to possible future compounds. The China Agreement is structured as a 50/50 profit or loss share (as defined) and provides for joint development costs (including capital and equipment costs for construction of the manufacturing plant in China), to be shared equally during the development.

Accounting for the Astellas Agreements

For each of the Astellas agreements, we evaluated the deliverables within the respective arrangements and separated them into various units of accounting.

Deliverables that did not provide standalone value have been combined with other deliverables to form a unit of accounting that collectively has standalone value, with revenue being recognized on the combined unit of accounting, rather than the individual deliverables. There are no right-of-return provisions for the delivered items in the Astellas agreements.

For the Astellas agreements, we allocated arrangement consideration to various units of accounting based on BESP of each deliverable within each unit of accounting using the relative selling price method as we did not have VSOE or TPE of selling price for such deliverables. Arrangement consideration includes non-contingent upfront payments of $360.1 million and cumulative co-development billings of $114.5 million (for the Europe Agreement) as of June 30, 2015.

For the technology license under the Japan Agreement and Europe Agreement, BESP was determined primarily by using the discounted cash flow (“DCF”) method, which aggregates the present value of future cash flows to determine the valuation as of the

effective date of each of the agreements. The DCF method involves the following key steps: 1) the determination of cash flow forecasts and 2) the selection of a range of comparative risk-adjusted discount rates to apply against the cash flow forecasts. The discount rates selected were based on expectations of the total rate of return, the rate at which capital would be attracted to the Company and the level of risk inherent within the Company. The discounts applied in the DCF analysis ranged from 17.5% to 20.0%. Our cash flow forecasts were derived from probability-adjusted revenue and expense projections by territory. Such projections included consideration of taxes and cash flow adjustments. The probability adjustments were made after considering the likelihood of technical success at various stages of clinical trials and regulatory approval phases. BESP also considered certain future royalty payments associated with commercial performance of our compounds, transfer prices and expected gross margins.

The units of accounting that were analyzed, along with their general timing of delivery or performance of service and general timing of revenue recognition, are as follows:

•

License to our technology existing at the effective date of the agreements. For both of the Astellas agreements, the license was delivered at the beginning of the agreement terms, or when the agreements were signed, and any contingencies had been removed. In both cases, we concluded at the time of the agreement that our collaboration partner, Astellas, would have the knowledge and capabilities to exploit the licenses without our further involvement. However, the Japan Agreement with Astellas has contractual limitations that might affect Astellas’ ability to exploit the license and therefore, potentially, the conclusion as to whether the license provides stand-alone value. In the Japan agreement, Astellas does not have the right to manufacture commercial supplies of the drug. In order to determine whether this characteristic of the agreement should lead to a conclusion that the license did not have stand-alone value, we considered the intent of the parties and the substantive reasons that led to that feature of the agreement.

•

Manufacturing rights. In the case of the Japan Agreement, we retained manufacturing rights largely because of the way the parties chose for FibroGen to be compensated under the agreement. At the time the agreement was signed, we believed that it was more advantageous upon commercialization to have a transfer price revenue model in place as opposed to a traditional sales-based model. We and Astellas could have structured the arrangement with a transfer of manufacturing rights and compensated us through a royalty or other feature without significantly diminishing the prospects of the drug product. Therefore, we determined that the license in Japan provides stand-alone value to the customer despite the lack of manufacturing rights.

•

License to our technology developed during the term of the agreement and development (referred to as “when and if available”) and information sharing services. These deliverables are generally delivered throughout the term of the agreements and are recognized as revenue as the services are provided.

•

Co-development services (Europe Agreement). This deliverable relates to co-development services that were reasonably expected to be performed by us at the time the collaboration agreement was signed. Revenue is recognized as reimbursements for such co-development services are earned. The period related to this deliverable represented our determination of the non-contingent performance period, which was estimated to be 36 months for the Europe Agreement from the signing of the agreement. There was no provision for co-development services in the Japan agreement.

•

Manufacturing of clinical supplies of products. This deliverable is satisfied as supplies for clinical product are delivered for use in our clinical trial programs during the development period, or pre-commercialization period. Revenue is recognized based on the estimated proportion of the development services performed during the development period. These estimates are made at the beginning of each accounting period and will likely change throughout the course of the terms of both agreements. As new information related to these estimates becomes available, we may adjust the timing of revenue recognition related to this unit of accounting.

•

Manufacturing commercial supplies of products. This deliverable is satisfied and revenue is recognized as supplies are shipped for commercial use during the commercialization period. As this deliverable is considered a contingent deliverable, it is outside the scope of the initial allocation of upfront and other consideration.

•

Committee service. This deliverable is satisfied and revenue is recognized throughout the course of the various agreements as meetings are attended.

Any consideration received for each Astellas agreement after the initial proceeds on the agreement signing date were also (and will be also) allocated to the various units of accounting above per agreement using the relative selling price method under ASC 605-25-30-2 and 30-5.

Under the Japan Agreement, we are also eligible to receive from Astellas an aggregate of approximately $132.5 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $22.5 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified

clinical and development milestone events, (ii) up to $95.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, and (iii) up to approximately $15.0 million in milestone payments upon the achievement of specified commercial sales milestone.

Under the Europe Agreement, we are also eligible to receive from Astellas an aggregate of approximately $425.0 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $90.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events, (ii) up to $335.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, including up to $25.0 million in milestone payments in connection with receipt of marketing approval in Russia.

Accounting for the AstraZeneca Agreements

We evaluated whether or not the U.S./RoW and China Agreements should be accounted for as a single arrangement and concluded that the agreements should be accounted for as a single arrangement with the presumption that two or more agreements executed with a single customer at or around the same time are a single arrangement. Accordingly, upfront and other non-contingent arrangement consideration received and to be received has been and will be pooled together and allocated to each of the units of accounting in both the U.S./RoW and China Agreements based on their relative fair values.

We evaluated the deliverables within the arrangement and separated them into various units of accounting. Deliverables that did not provide stand-alone value have been combined with other deliverables to form a unit of accounting that collectively has stand-alone value, with revenue being recognized on the combined unit of accounting, rather than the individual deliverables. There are no right-of-return provisions for the delivered items in the agreements.

For the technology license under the AstraZeneca U.S./RoW Agreement, BESP was determined based on a two-step process. The first step involved determining an implied royalty rate that would result in the net present value of future cash flows to equal to zero (i.e. where the IRR on the transaction would equal the target return for the investment). This results in an upper bound estimation of the magnitude of royalties that a hypothetical acquirer would reasonably pay for the forecasted cash flow stream. Our cash flow forecasts were derived from probability-adjusted revenue and expense projections. Such projections included consideration of taxes and cash flow adjustments. The probability adjustments were made after considering the likelihood of technical success at various stages of clinical trials and regulatory approval phases. The second step involved applying the implied royalty rate, which was determined to be 40%, against the probability-adjusted projected net revenues by territory and determining the value of the license as the net present value of future cash flows after adjusting for taxes. The discount rate utilized was 17.5%.

U.S./RoW Agreement:

The units of accounting that were analyzed, along with their general timing of delivery or performance of service and general timing of revenue recognition, are as follows:

•

License to our technology existing at the effective date of the agreements. For the U.S./RoW Agreement, the license was delivered at the beginning of the agreement terms as all contingencies had been removed. We concluded that AstraZeneca has the knowledge and capabilities to exploit the U.S./RoW license without our further involvement.

•

Co-development services. This deliverable relates to co-development services which were reasonably expected to be performed by us at the time the U.S./RoW Agreement was signed. Revenue is recognized as reimbursements for such co-development services are earned. The period related to this deliverable represented our determination of the non-contingent performance period, which was estimated to be 65 months from the signing of the U.S./RoW Agreement.

•

Manufacturing of clinical supplies of products. This deliverable is satisfied as supplies for clinical product are delivered for use in our clinical trial programs during the development period, or pre-commercialization period. Revenue is recognized based on the estimated proportion of the development services performed during the development period. These estimates are made at the beginning of each accounting period and will likely change throughout the course of the agreements. As new information related to these estimates becomes available, we may adjust the timing of revenue recognition related to this unit of accounting.

•

Committee service. This deliverable is satisfied and revenue is recognized throughout the course of the various agreements as meetings are attended.

Under the terms of the U.S./RoW Agreement, AstraZeneca has agreed to pay upfront, non-contingent and time-based payments totaling $374.0 million, which we expect to receive in various amounts through June 2016, of which $82.0 million was received as of December 31, 2013 and was determined to be fixed and determinable upon the execution of the collaboration agreement. Out of the remaining payments of $292.0 million, which are contractually due, $230.0 million have extended payment terms and, accordingly, were not considered to be fixed or determinable upon the execution of the agreement. As such, for these remaining payments, the amount of revenue recognized is limited to the amount of cash consideration received; additionally, for each of the amounts received, the amount of revenue recognized is determined on the basis of applying the relative selling price method to each of the units of accounting underlying the agreement. Further, $62.0 million of the remaining payment is contingent upon the occurrence of a specified event and accordingly is also not considered fixed or determinable.

Under the U.S./RoW Agreement, we are also eligible to receive from AstraZeneca an aggregate of approximately $875.0 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $65.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events, (ii) up to $325.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, (iii) up to $160.0 million in a non-substantive deferred approval milestone, which would be paid if certain competitors do not launch a HIF compound in the U.S. on or before January 1, 2023, and (iv) up to approximately $325.0 million in milestone payments upon the achievement of specified commercial sales events.

China Agreement:

The units of accounting that were analyzed, along with their general timing of delivery or performance of service and general timing of revenue recognition, are as follows:

•

License to our technology existing at the effective date of the agreement. The license was delivered at the beginning of the agreement term as all contingencies had been removed. However, the China Agreement with AstraZeneca has contractual limitations that might affect AstraZeneca’s ability to exploit the license and therefore, potentially, the conclusion as to whether the license provides stand-alone value. In the China Agreement, AstraZeneca does not have the right to manufacture commercial supplies of the drug. In order to determine whether this characteristic of the arrangement should lead to a conclusion that the license did not have stand-alone value, we considered the intent of the parties and the substantive reasons that led to that feature of the agreement.

For the China Agreement, we retained manufacturing rights as an essential part of a strategy to pursue domestic regulatory pathway for product approval which requires the regulatory licensure of the manufacturing facility in order to commence commercial shipment. The prospects for the collaboration as a whole would have been substantially different had manufacturing rights been provided to AstraZeneca. Because the retention of manufacturing rights by us was a significant factor in the collaboration strategy, rather than simply a mechanism to properly compensate us, we concluded that the license and development services do not have stand-alone value apart from the manufacturing rights. Accordingly, all the deliverables identified, including co-development services, under the China Agreement have been treated as a single unit of account and all revenue allocable to this unit of account is deferred until delivery of commercial drug product has begun. Upon commencement of delivery of commercial drug product, revenue would be recognized in a pattern consistent with estimated deliveries of the commercial drug product.

Under the terms of the China Agreement, AstraZeneca agreed to pay upfront consideration totaling $28.2 million, of which $16.2 million was received as of December 31, 2013 and was determined to be fixed and determinable upon the execution of the collaboration agreement. The remainder of the upfront payments of $12.0 million had extended payment terms and, accordingly, is not considered to be fixed or determinable upon the execution of the agreement. This payment of $12.0 million was received as of March 31, 2014.

Under the China Agreement, we are also eligible to receive from AstraZeneca an aggregate of approximately $328.5 million in potential milestone payments, comprised of (i) up to $15.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified clinical and development milestone events, (ii) up to $146.0 million in substantive milestone payments upon achievement of specified regulatory milestone events, and (iii) up to approximately $167.5 million in milestone payments upon the achievement of specified commercial sales events.

As we are accounting for both the U.S./RoW and China Agreements as one arrangement, any consideration received after the initial proceeds on the agreement signing date were also (and will be also) allocated to the various units of accounting above using the relative selling price method under ASC 605-25-30-2 and 30-5.

Summary of revenue recognized under the collaboration agreements

The table below summarizes the accounting treatment for the various deliverables pursuant to each of the Astellas and AstraZeneca agreements. License amounts identified below are included in the “License and milestone revenue” line item in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. All other elements identified below are included in the “Collaboration services and other revenue” line item in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Amounts recognized as revenue under the Japan Agreement were as follows (in thousands):


		Quarter Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
Agreement	Deliverable	2015		2014		2015		2014
Japan	License	$	91	$	155	$	528	$	230
	Milestones		—		—		—		—

	Total license and milestone revenue		91		155		528		230
	Collaboration services revenue*	$	42	$	89	$	100	$	176

As of June 30, 2015, the total arrangement consideration has been allocated to each of the following deliverables under the Japan Agreement, along with any associated deferred revenue as follows (in thousands):


	Cumulative Revenue Through June 30, 2015		Deferred Revenue at June 30, 2015		Total Consideration Through June 30, 2015
License	$	41,749	$	—	$	41,749
When and if available compounds		12		29		41
Manufacturing—clinical supplies		1,871		72		1,943
Committee services		15		2		17

Total license and collaboration services revenue	$	43,647	$	103	$	43,750

When and if available compounds, manufacturing—clinical supplies and committee services have each been identified as separate units of accounting with standalone value and amounts allocable to these elements have been recognized and classified within the collaboration services revenue line item within the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Amounts recognized as revenue under the Europe Agreement were as follows (in thousands):


		Quarter Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
Agreement	Deliverable	2015		2014		2015		2014
Europe	License	$	4,769	$	3,563	$	9,024	$	6,230
	Milestones		—		—		—		—

	Total license and milestone revenue		4,769		3,563		9,024		6,230
	Collaboration services revenue*	$	677	$	777	$	1,253	$	1,441

As of June 30, 2015, the total arrangement consideration has been allocated to each of the following deliverables under the Europe Agreement, along with any associated deferred revenue as follows (in thousands):


	Cumulative Revenue Through June 30, 2015		Deferred Revenue at June 30, 2015		Total Consideration Through June 30, 2015
License	$	392,663	$	—	$	392,663
When and if available compounds		305		442		747
Manufacturing—clinical supplies		8,911		494		9,405
Development services—in progress		31,460		—		31,460
Committee services		256		16		272

Total license and collaboration services revenue	$	433,595	$	952	$	434,547

When and if available compounds, manufacturing—clinical supplies, development services—in progress at the time of signing of the agreement, and committee services have each been identified as a separate unit of accounting with standalone value and amounts allocable to these units have been recognized in revenue as services are performed and classified within the collaboration services revenue line item within the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Amounts recognized as revenue under the U.S./RoW Agreement were as follows (in thousands):


		Quarter Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
Agreement	Deliverable	2015		2014		2015		2014
U.S. / RoW	License	$	87,019	$	78,745	$	93,833	$	90,688
	Milestones		15,000		—		15,000		—

	Total license and milestone revenue		102,019		78,745		108,833		90,688
	Collaboration services revenue*		12,942		6,590		17,080		9,025
	China single unit of accounting**	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

As of June 30, 2015, the total arrangement consideration has been allocated to each of the following deliverables under the U.S./RoW Agreement, along with any associated deferred revenue as follows (in thousands):


	Cumulative Revenue Through June 30, 2015		Deferred Revenue at June 30, 2015		Total Consideration Through June 30, 2015
License	$	269,207	$	—	$	269,207
Co-development, information sharing & committee services		37,589		44,259		81,848
Manufacturing—clinical supplies		154		126		280
China-single unit of accounting		—		55,180		55,180

Total license and collaboration services revenue	$	306,950	$	99,565	$	406,515

Co-development, information sharing, and committee services have been combined into a single unit of accounting because the requirements to share information and serve on committees are useful only in combination with the development services, and because all three items are delivered over the same period while manufacturing—clinical supplies has been identified as a separate unit of accounting with standalone value and amounts allocable to this unit of accounting have been recognized and classified within the collaboration services revenue line item within the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

All revenues attributable to the China unit of accounting are deferred until all deliverables are met. The China license and collaboration services elements have been combined into a single unit of accounting and consideration allocable to this unit is being deferred due to FibroGen’s retention of manufacturing rights and lack of standalone value.

Other Revenues

Other revenues consist of royalty payments received, which are recorded on a monthly basis as they are reported to us, and collagen feasibility sales. Other revenues were immaterial for all periods presented.

Deferred Revenue

Deferred revenue represents amounts billed to our collaboration partners for which the related revenues have not been recognized because one or more of the revenue recognition criteria have not been met. The current portion of deferred revenue represents the amount to be recognized within one year from the balance sheet date based on the estimated performance period of the underlying deliverables. The long term portion of deferred revenue represents amounts to be recognized after one year through the end of the non-contingent performance period of the underlying deliverables. The long term portion of deferred revenue also includes amounts allocated to the China unit of accounting under the AstraZeneca arrangement as revenue recognition associated with this unit of accounting is tied to the commercial launch of the products within China, which is not expected to occur within the next year.

3.	Fair Value Measurements

The fair values of our financial assets that are measured on a recurring basis are as follows (in thousands):


	June 30, 2015
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Corporate bonds	$	—	$	150,240	$	—	$	150,240
Equity investments		199		—		—		199

Sub-total		199		150,240		—		150,439
Money market funds		127,643		—		—		127,643

Total	$	127,842	$	150,240	$	—	$	278,082


	December 31, 2014
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Corporate bonds	$	—	$	158,432	$	—	$	158,432
Equity investments		201		—		—		201

Sub-total		201		158,432		—		158,633
Money market funds		13,802		—		—		13,802

Total	$	14,003	$	158,432	$	—	$	172,435

Our Level 2 investments are valued using third-party pricing sources. The pricing services utilize industry standard valuation models, including both income and market-based approaches, for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly, to estimate fair value. These inputs include reported trades of and broker/dealer quotes on the same or similar investments, issuer credit spreads, benchmark investments, prepayment/default projections based on historical data and other observable inputs.

The fair values of our financial liabilities that are carried at historical cost are as follows (in thousands):


	June 30, 2015
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Lease financing obligations	$	—	$	—	$	97,332	$	97,332

	December 31, 2014
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Cease-use liability	$	—	$	—	$	184	$	184
Lease financing obligations		—		—		97,221		97,221

Total	$	—	$	—	$	97,405	$	97,405

The fair values of our financial liabilities were derived by using an income approach, which required Level 3 inputs such as discounted estimated future cash flows.

There were no transfers of assets or liabilities between levels for any of the periods presented.

4.	Balance Sheet Components

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents consisted of the following (in thousands):


	June 30, 2015		December 31, 2014
Cash	$	108,893	$	151,653
Money market funds		127,643		13,802

Total cash and cash equivalents	$	236,536	$	165,455

Investments

All investments are classified as available-for-sale. The amortized cost, gross unrealized holding gains or losses, and fair value of our available-for-sale investments by major investments type are summarized in the tables below (in thousands):


	June 30, 2015
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Holding Gains		Gross Unrealized Holding Losses			Estimated Fair Value
Corporate bonds	$	150,119	$	287	$	(166	)	$	150,240
Equity investments		124		75		—			199

Total investments	$	150,243	$	362	$	(166	)	$	150,439


	December 31, 2014
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Holding Gains		Gross Unrealized Holding Losses			Estimated Fair Value
Corporate bonds	$	158,692	$	254	$	(514	)	$	158,432
Equity investments		124		77		—			201

Total investments	$	158,816	$	331	$	(514	)	$	158,633

At June 30, 2015 all of the available-for-sale investments had contractual maturities within four years. We periodically review our available-for-sale investments for other-than-temporary impairment. We consider factors such as the duration, severity and the reason for the decline in value, the potential recovery period and our intent to sell. For debt securities, we also consider whether (i) it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the debt securities before recovery of their amortized cost basis, and (ii) the amortized cost basis cannot be recovered as a result of credit losses. During the quarters and six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014, we did not recognize any other-than-temporary impairment loss.

At June 30, 2015, a total of $30.9 million of our cash and cash equivalents were held outside of the U.S. in our foreign subsidiaries to be used primarily for our China operations.

Accrued Liabilities

Accrued liabilities consisted of the following (in thousands):


	June 30, 2015		December 31, 2014
Preclinical and clinical trial accruals	$	32,251	$	25,418
Payroll and related accruals		9,625		15,608
Professional services		1,121		2,401
Other		3,243		5,558

Total accrued liabilities	$	46,240	$	48,985

5.	Stock-Based Compensation

Stock-based compensation expense was allocated to research and development and general and administrative expense for the periods presented as follows (in thousands):


	Quarter Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015		2014		2015		2014
Research and development	$	4,434	$	408	$	8,656	$	883
General and administrative		2,508		262		4,732		582

Total stock-based compensation expense	$	6,942	$	670	$	13,388	$	1,465

The weighted-average assumptions used to estimate the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option valuation model and the resulting weighted average fair value of stock options granted during the periods presented were as follows:


	Quarter Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015			2014			2015			2014
Stock Options
Expected term (in years)		5.2			—			5.2			—
Expected volatility		70	%		—	%		70	%		—	%
Risk-free interest rate		1.7			—			1.7			—
Expected dividend yield		—			—			—			—
Weighted average estimated fair value	$	12.27		$	—		$	16.68		$	—

Employee Stock Purchase Plans
Expected term (in years)		1.3			—			1.3			—
Expected volatility		65	%		—	%		65	%		—	%
Risk-free interest rate		0.3			—			0.3			—
Expected dividend yield		—			—			—			—
Weighted average estimated fair value	$	9.75		$	—		$	9.75		$	—

6.	Income Taxes

We recorded a provision for income taxes for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 due to the discrete tax effect arising from a change in the valuation of our available-for-sale securities portfolio. We recorded a benefit for income taxes for the six months ended June 30, 2015 due to the discrete tax effect arising from other comprehensive income related to available-for-sale securities. We did not record a provision for income taxes for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2014 as we generated a net operating loss for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Based upon the weight of available evidence, which includes our historical operating performance, reported cumulative net losses since inception and expected continuing net loss, we have established and continue to maintain a full valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets as we do not currently believe that realization of those assets is more likely than not.

7.	Related Party Transactions

Astellas is an equity investor of ours and, therefore, considered a related party. We recorded revenue related to collaboration agreements with Astellas of $5.6 million and $4.6 million during the quarter ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 and $10.9 million and $8.1 million during the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014. We recorded expense related to collaboration agreements with Astellas of $1.3 million and $2.4 million during the quarter ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 and $4.4 million and $4.5 million during the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014.

As of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, accounts receivable from Astellas were $10.3 million and $5.0 million and amounts due to Astellas were $5.8 million and $4.3 million.

Julian N. Stern, a director of ours since November 1996, is of counsel to the law firm of Goodwin Procter LLP, which he joined in 2008. He has received, and continues to receive, no compensation from Goodwin Procter LLP since joining it as of counsel. We retain Goodwin Procter LLP as legal counsel for various matters, primarily consisting of intellectual property. During the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014, the payments made by us to Goodwin Procter LLP were not material. As of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, amounts due to Goodwin Proctor LLP were not material.

ITEM 2. 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 in conjunction with the condensed consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and in our SEC filings, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 filed with the SEC on March 26, 2015.

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

The following discussion and information contained elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) and within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are often identified by the use of words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “could,” “should,” “estimate,” or “continue,” and similar expressions or variations. Such forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results and the timing of certain events to differ materially from future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in the section titled “Risk Factors,” set forth in Part II, Item 1A of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The forward-looking statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q represent our views as of the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our views to change. New risks emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. In light of these risks, uncertainties, and assumptions, the forward-looking events and circumstances discussed in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q may not occur, and actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements. While we may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we have no current intention of doing so except to the extent required by applicable law. You should, therefore, not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing our views as of any date subsequent to the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.

Business Overview

We were incorporated in 1993 in Delaware and are a research-based, biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of novel therapeutics to treat serious unmet medical needs. We have capitalized on our extensive experience in fibrosis and hypoxia-inducible factor (“HIF”) biology to generate multiple programs targeting various therapeutic areas. Roxadustat, or FG-4592, is an oral small molecule inhibitor of HIF prolyl hydroxylases (“HIF-PHs”) in Phase 3 clinical development for the treatment of anemia in chronic kidney disease (“CKD”). FG-3019 is our monoclonal antibody in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (“IPF”), pancreatic cancer and liver fibrosis. We have taken a global approach with respect to our product candidates, and this includes development and commercialization of product candidates in the People’s Republic of China (“China”).

converted into 33,919,954 shares of common stock and 958,996 shares of FibroGen Europe convertible preferred stock were converted into shares of our common stock. Our proceeds from the sale of the common stock sold in the concurrent private placement were $20.0 million.

Financial Highlights

During the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015, we had net income of $57.1 million and $10.7 million, or net income per diluted share of $0.83 and $0.15. The increase in net income and net income per diluted share for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 compared to the same period a year ago is primarily due to an increase in revenue, partially offset by an increase in operating expenses. The decrease in net income and net income per diluted share for the six months ended June 30, 2015 is primarily due to an increase in operating expenses, partially offset by an increase in revenue. The increase in revenue is primarily due to an upfront payment of $120.0 million and a development milestone payment of $15.0 million received in the second quarter of 2015 under the collaboration agreements with AstraZeneca. The increase in operating expenses resulted primarily from the progression of our clinical trials and expenses to support our new requirements as a public company.

Cash, cash equivalents, investments and receivables, excluding restricted cash, totaled $399.2 million at June 30, 2015, an increase of $61.6 million from December 31, 2014, primarily due to payments received from AstraZeneca, partially offset by cash used in operations.

Programs

During the first half of 2015, we continued to make progress in the development of our major programs.

Roxadustat is the first HIF-PH inhibitor to enter Phase 3 clinical development and acts by stimulating the body’s natural pathway of erythropoiesis, or red blood cell production. We, along with our collaboration partners Astellas Pharma Inc. (“Astellas”) and AstraZeneca, continue to advance roxadustat through our global Phase 3 program to support regulatory approval of roxadustat in both dialysis-dependent CKD (“DD-CKD”) patients and CKD patients who are not dialysis-dependent (“NDD-CKD”) in multiple geographies. For the three FibroGen roxadustat Phase 3 studies we have reached approximately two-thirds of our cumulative target enrollment. Our base plan is to meet target enrollment for these studies in March to April 2016, and we believe the third study could reach target enrollment by year end 2015. We currently anticipate submitting a New Drug Application (“NDA”) for roxadustat in the United States in 2018 and in China in 2016. In China, we completed manufacture of our NDA registration campaign for drug substance and finished drug product for roxadustat at our Beijing manufacturing facility in the second quarter of 2015. We have been informed that technical review of our Phase 3 clinical trial application has been completed by the CDE, and we believe the remaining steps in the Clinical Trial Application approval are largely perfunctory. We plan to begin opening study sites and enrolling patients in two Phase 3 studies in China in the fourth quarter of 2015.

FG-3019 is our fully-human monoclonal antibody that inhibits the activity of connective tissue growth factor (“CTGF”), a critical common element in the progression of fibrosis and associated serious diseases. We continue to conduct an open-label Phase 2 extension study in IPF and continue to enroll patients in a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled Phase 2 trial in patients with IPF. The presence of approved therapies in IPF, such as Roche’s pirfenidone, which is approved for marketing in Europe, Canada, Japan and the United States, and Boehringer Ingelheim’s nintedanib, which has been approved in the United States and EU, has made enrollment in our placebo-controlled Phase 2 IPF trial more challenging. Our ability to complete enrollment of this IPF trial in the expected timeframe is dependent on opening additional clinical sites outside of the United States in the third quarter of 2015. In addition, we are evaluating expanding this IPF trial to include one or more comparator arms with approved therapy, which may increase the patient number in our trial to approximately 250 subjects.

We also continue to enroll an open-label Phase 2 trial in pancreatic cancer to determine whether the FG-3019, in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel, can convert inoperable pancreatic cancer to operable cancer. Patients with inoperable Stage 3 pancreatic cancer have survival similar to patients with metastatic cancer with studies showing only half of these patients survive approximately 8 to 12 months after diagnosis and few studies even report 5 year survival. Outlook for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer is considerably better with studies showing half survive between 17 to 27 months after diagnosis and 20% alive at 5 years. We expect to review the preliminary data from this pancreatic cancer study when we have sufficient data to detect substantial differences in the context of assessing whether to expand the program, or continue or stop the study. We plan to submit an abstract of the initial study results for presentation at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Gastrointestinal meeting, which will be held in January of 2016. We plan to open a trial, for which we recently received Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) clearance for our Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application, to study FG-3019 in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (“DMD”) in the second half of 2015. In addition, in the second quarter of 2015 we closed a trial in subjects with liver fibrosis due to the hepatitis B virus. To date, we have retained exclusive worldwide rights for FG-3019.

We are also currently pursuing our corneal implant FG-5200 for treatment of corneal blindness resulting from partial thickness corneal damage in China.

Collaboration Partnerships for Roxadustat

Our current and future research, development, manufacturing and commercialization efforts with respect to roxadustat and our other product candidates currently in development depend on funds from our collaboration agreements with Astellas and AstraZeneca as described below.

Astellas

We have two agreements with Astellas for the development and commercialization of roxadustat, one for Japan, and one for Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Middle East and South Africa. Under these agreements, we provided Astellas the right to develop and commercialize roxadustat for anemia in these territories.

We share responsibility with Astellas for clinical development activities required for United States and EU regulatory approval of roxadustat, and share equally those development costs under the agreed development plan for such activities. Astellas will be responsible for clinical development activities and all associated costs required for regulatory approval in all other countries in the Astellas territories. Astellas will own and have responsibility for regulatory filings in its territories. We are responsible, either directly or through our contract manufacturers, for the manufacture and supply of all quantities of roxadustat to be used in development and commercialization under the agreements.

The Astellas agreements will continue in effect until terminated. Either party may terminate the agreements for certain material breaches by the other party. In addition, Astellas will have the right to terminate the agreements for certain specified technical product failures, upon generic sales reaching a particular threshold, upon certain regulatory actions, or upon our entering into a settlement admitting the invalidity or unenforceability of our licensed patents. Astellas may also terminate the agreements for convenience upon advance written notice to us. In the event of any termination of the agreements, Astellas will transfer and assign to us the regulatory filings for roxadustat and will assign or license to us the relevant trademarks used with the products in the Astellas territories. Under certain terminations, Astellas is also obligated to pay us a termination fee.

Consideration under these agreements includes a total of $360.1 million in upfront and non-contingent payments, and milestone payments totaling $557.5 million, of which $542.5 million are development and regulatory milestones, and $15.0 million are commercial-based milestones. Total consideration, excluding development cost reimbursement and product sales-related payments, could reach $917.6 million. The aggregate amount of such consideration received through June 30, 2015 totals $462.6 million.

Additionally, under these agreements, Astellas pays 100% of the commercialization costs in its territories. Astellas will pay us a transfer price, based on net sales, in the low 20% range for our manufacture and delivery of roxadustat.

In addition, as of June 30, 2015 Astellas has separately invested $80.5 million in the equity of FibroGen, Inc.

AstraZeneca

We also have two agreements with AstraZeneca for the development and commercialization of roxadustat for anemia, one for China (“China Agreement”) and one for the United States and all other countries (“RoW”) not previously licensed to Astellas (“U.S./RoW Agreement”). Under these agreements we provided AstraZeneca the right to develop and commercialize roxadustat for anemia in these territories.

We will share responsibility with AstraZeneca for clinical development activities required for United States regulatory approval of roxadustat. AstraZeneca will be responsible for all of our development costs incurred under the agreed development plan for roxadustat in the United States and EU, to the extent those costs are not covered by Astellas, after an initial 50% development cost sharing period in which our funding obligations are limited to a total of $116.5 million. Thereafter, AstraZeneca will be solely responsible for additional development costs. In China, FibroGen China Anemia Holdings, Ltd. (“FibroGen China”) will conduct the development work for CKD anemia and its subsidiary, FibroGen (China) Medical Technology Development Co., Ltd. (“FibroGen Beijing”), will hold all of the regulatory licenses issued by China regulatory authorities and FibroGen China will be primarily responsible for regulatory, clinical and manufacturing. China development costs are shared 50/50. AstraZeneca is also responsible for 100% of development expenses in all other licensed territories outside of China. We are responsible, through our contract manufacturers, for the manufacture and supply of all quantities of roxadustat to be used in development and commercialization under the AstraZeneca agreements.

Under the AstraZeneca agreements, we will receive upfront and subsequent non-contingent payments totaling $402.2 million, a portion of which we have received and the remainder of which we expect to receive in various amounts through 2016, including a $62.0 million time based development milestone, which became non-contingent as of July 30, 2014. Potential milestone payments under the agreements total $1.2 billion, of which $571.0 million are development and regulatory milestones, and $652.5 million are commercial-based milestones. Total consideration under the agreements, excluding development cost reimbursement, transfer price payments, royalties and profit share, could reach $1.6 billion. The aggregate amount of such consideration received through June 30, 2015 totals $355.2 million.

During the second quarter of 2015, we received an upfront payment of $120.0 million and a development milestone payment of $15.0 million under the under the U.S./RoW Agreement. The development milestone payment resulted from the finalization of our two audited pre-clinical carcinogenicity study reports.

Payments under these agreements include over $500.0 million in upfront, non-contingent and other payments received or expected to be received prior to the first U.S. approval, excluding development expense reimbursement.

AstraZeneca purchased 1,111,111 shares of our common stock at the IPO price for an aggregate purchase price of $20.0 million in a private placement concurrent with our IPO.

Under the U.S./RoW Agreement, AstraZeneca will pay for all commercialization costs in the U.S. and RoW and AstraZeneca will be responsible for the United States commercialization of roxadustat, with FibroGen undertaking specified promotional activities in the end stage renal disease (“ESRD”) segment in the United States. In addition, we will receive a transfer price for delivery of commercial product based on a percentage of net sales in the low- to mid-single digit range and AstraZeneca will pay us a tiered royalty on net sales of roxadustat in the low 20% range.

Under the China Agreement, which is conducted through FibroGen China, the commercial collaboration is structured as a 50/50 profit share. AstraZeneca will conduct commercialization activities in China as well as serve as the master distributor for roxadustat and will fund roxadustat launch costs in China until FibroGen Beijing has achieved profitability. At that time, AstraZeneca will recoup 50% of their historical launch costs out of initial roxadustat profits in China.

AstraZeneca may terminate the U.S./RoW Agreement upon specified events, including our bankruptcy or insolvency, our uncured material breach, technical product failure, or upon 180 days prior written notice at will. If AstraZeneca terminates the U.S./RoW Agreement at will, in addition to any unpaid non-contingent payments, it will be responsible to pay for a substantial portion of the post-termination development costs under the agreed development plan until regulatory approval.

AstraZeneca may terminate the China Agreement upon specified events, including our bankruptcy or insolvency, our uncured material breach, technical product failure, or upon advance prior written notice at will. If AstraZeneca terminates our China Agreement at will, it will be responsible to pay for transition costs as well as make a specified payment to FibroGen China.

In the event of any termination of the agreements, but subject to modification upon termination for technical product failure, AstraZeneca will transfer and assign to us any regulatory filings and approvals for roxadustat in the affected territories that they may hold under our agreements, grant us licenses and conduct certain transition activities.

Results of Operations

Revenue

Our revenue to date has been generated primarily from our collaboration agreements with Astellas and AstraZeneca. The sources of our revenue for the periods presented were as follows:


	Quarter Ended June 30,				Change					Six Months Ended June 30,				Change
	2015		2014		$		%			2015		2014		$		%
	(In thousands)
Revenue:
License and milestone revenue	$	106,879	$	82,463	$	24,416		30	%	$	118,385	$	97,148	$	21,237		22	%
Collaboration services and other revenue		13,671		7,495		6,176		82			18,463		10,686		7,777		73

Total revenue	$	120,550	$	89,958	$	30,592		34	%	$	136,848	$	107,834	$	29,014		27	%

Under our revenue recognition policy, license revenue includes amounts from upfront, non-refundable license payments and amounts allocated pursuant to the relative selling price method from other consideration received (other than substantive milestone payments) during the periods. This revenue is generally recognized as deliverables are met and services are performed. Milestone revenue includes payments from milestones which are deemed to be substantive in nature and is recognized in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. License and milestone revenues represented 89% and 92% of total revenue for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 and 87% and 90% of total revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014.

Collaboration services include co-development services, manufacturing of clinical supplies, committee services and information sharing. Collaboration services revenues are recognized over the non-contingent performance period, ranging from 36 to

65 months. Other revenues consist of royalty payments received, which are recorded on a monthly basis as they are reported to us, and have been included with collaboration services and other revenue in the condensed consolidated statements of operations, as they have not been material for any of the periods presented. Collaboration services and other revenues represented 11% and 8% of total revenue for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 and 13% and 10% of total revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014.

The increase in total revenue for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 compared to the same periods a year ago is more fully discussed in the sections below.

Total cash consideration received through June 30, 2015 and potential cash consideration, other than development cost reimbursement, transfer price payments, royalties and profit share, pursuant to our existing collaboration agreements are as follows (in thousands):


	Cash Received Through June 30, 2015		Additional Potential Cash Payments		Total Potential Cash Payments
Astellas—related-party:
Japan Agreement	$	52,593	$	120,000	$	172,593
Europe Agreement		410,000		335,000		745,000

Total Astellas		462,593		455,000		917,593
AstraZeneca:
U.S. / RoW Agreement		327,000		922,000		1,249,000
China Agreement		28,200		348,500		376,700

Total AstraZeneca		355,200		1,270,500		1,625,700

Total revenue	$	817,793	$	1,725,500	$	2,543,293

These collaboration agreements also provide for reimbursement of certain fully burdened research and development costs as well as direct out of pocket expenses.

License and Milestone Revenue


	Quarter Ended June 30,				Change					Six Months Ended June 30,				Change
	2015		2014		$		%			2015		2014		$		%
	(In thousands)									(In thousands)
License and milestone revenue:
Astellas	$	4,860	$	3,718	$	1,142		31	%	$	9,552	$	6,460	$	3,092		48	%
AstraZeneca		102,019		78,745		23,274		30			108,833		90,688		18,145		20

Total license and milestone revenue	$	106,879	$	82,463	$	24,416		30	%	$	118,385	$	97,148	$	21,237		22	%

License and milestone revenue recognized under our collaboration agreements with AstraZeneca increased primarily due to an upfront payment of $120.0 million and a development milestone payment of $15.0 million received during the second quarter of 2015 compared to an upfront payment of $110.0 million received during the second quarter of 2014. A portion of each of the upfront payments received under the collaboration agreements with AstraZeneca were deferred as a result of applying the relative selling price method and assessing the timing of the provision of various deliverables. The milestone payment was recognized in its entirety upon receipt. In addition, license and milestone revenue recognized under our collaboration agreements with both Astellas and Astra Zeneca increased due to an increase in reimbursable co-development costs allocated to license and milestone revenue.

Collaboration Services and Other Revenue

Collaboration services revenue increased $6.2 million and $7.8 million for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 compared to the same periods a year ago primarily due to the allocation of the upfront payment of $120.0 million received during the second quarter of 2015 and an increase in reimbursable co-development costs under our collaboration agreements with AstraZeneca and Astellas.

Operating Expenses


	Quarter Ended June 30,				Change					Six Months Ended June 30,				Change
	2015		2014		$		%			2015		2014		$		%
	(In thousands)									(In thousands)
Operating expenses
Research and development	$	51,555	$	33,269	$	18,286		55	%	$	102,094	$	58,919	$	43,175		73	%
General and administrative		9,680		7,516		2,164		29			20,162		13,948		6,214		45

Total operating expenses	$	61,235	$	40,785	$	20,450		50	%	$	122,256	$	72,867	$	49,389		68	%

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist of third party research and development costs and the fully-burdened amount of costs associated with work performed under collaboration agreements. Research and development costs include employee-related expenses for research and development functions, expenses incurred under agreements with clinical research organizations (“CROs”), other clinical and preclinical costs and allocated direct and indirect overhead costs, such as facilities costs, information technology costs and other overhead. Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Costs for certain development activities are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information and data provided to us by our vendors and our clinical sites.

Research and development expenses incurred by program for the periods presented were as follows (in thousands):


		Quarter Ended June 30, 2015				Six Month Ended June 30,
Product Candidate	Phase of Development	2015		2014		2015		2014
Roxadustat	Phase 3	$	36,336	$	20,713	$	72,393	$	34,468
FG-3019	Phase 2		8,374		5,171		15,707		10,286
FG-6874	Phase 1		472		1,051		974		1,915
FG-5200	Preclinical		1,331		1,029		2,661		1,866
Other research and development expenses			5,042		5,305		10,359		10,384

Total research and development expenses		$	51,555	$	33,269	$	102,094	$	58,919

The program-specific expenses summarized in the table above include costs we directly attribute to our product candidates. We allocate research and development salaries, benefits, stock-based compensation and other indirect costs to our product candidates on a program-specific basis, and we include these costs in the program-specific expenses.

Research and development expenses increased for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 compared to the same periods a year ago. The increase for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 was primarily due to an increase in clinical trial, outside services and drug development related costs of $12.2 million, stock-based compensation expense of $4.0 million and employee-related costs of $1.9 million. The increase for the six months ended June 30, 2015 was primarily due to an increase in clinical trial, outside services and drug development related costs of $29.7 million, stock-based compensation expense of $7.8 million and employee-related costs of $4.6 million. Clinical trial, outside services and drug development related costs increased as a result of the progression of the Phase 3 trials for FG-4592 and the ongoing Phase 2 trials for FG-3019. Stock-based compensation expense increased primarily due to a higher valuation for stock option grants and expense related to the Employee Share Purchase Program (“ESPP”), which we implemented in November 2014. Employee-related costs increased as a result of additional headcount to support our clinical trials.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses for executive, operational, finance, legal, compliance and human resource functions. Other general and administrative expenses include facility-related costs and professional fees, accounting and legal services, other outside services, recruiting fees and expenses associated with obtaining and maintaining patents.

General and administrative expenses increased for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015 compared to the same periods a year ago. The increase for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 was primarily due to an increase in stock-based compensation expense of $2.2 million. The increase for the six months ended June 30, 2015 was primarily due to an increase in stock-based compensation expense of $4.2 million, legal fees of $1.2 million and employee-related costs of $1.0 million. Stock-based compensation expenses increased primarily due to a higher valuation of stock option grants and expense related to the ESPP. Legal fees increased for the six months ended June 30, 2015 compared to the same period a year ago primarily as a result of incremental maintenance costs associated with our intellectual property portfolio. Employee-related costs increased primarily as a result of additional headcount to support being a public company.

Operating Expenses for Roxadustat Covered Under Collaboration Agreements

We share responsibility with AstraZeneca for clinical development activities required for United States regulatory approval of roxadustat. AstraZeneca is responsible for all of our development costs incurred under the agreed development plan for roxadustat in the United States, Europe, Japan and all other markets outside of China, to the extent those costs are not covered by Astellas, after an initial 50% development cost sharing period in which our funding obligations are limited to a total of $116.5 million, of which $83.4 million has been incurred as of June 30, 2015. We expect to reach this $116.5 million cap in late 2015. After we have reached the $116.5 million cap, AstraZeneca will be solely responsible for all future development costs. In China, our subsidiary FibroGen China will conduct the development work for CKD anemia and its subsidiary, FibroGen Beijing, will hold all of the regulatory licenses issued by China regulatory authorities and FibroGen China will be primarily responsible for regulatory, clinical and manufacturing. All development and commercialization costs for roxadustat in China will be shared equally with AstraZeneca.

Interest and Other Income (Expense), Net


	Quarter Ended June 30,						Change						Six Months Ended June 30,						Change
	2015			2014			$			%			2015			2014			$			%
	(In thousands)												(In thousands)
Interest and other income (expense), net:
Interest expense	$	(2,762	)	$	(2,725	)	$	(37	)		1	%	$	(5,520	)	$	(5,451	)	$	(69	)		1	%
Interest and other income, net		707			383			324			85			1,550			1,075			475			44

Total interest and other income (expense), net	$	(2,055	)	$	(2,342	)	$	287			(12	)%	$	(3,970	)	$	(4,376	)	$	406			(9	)%

Interest expense approximated the same periods a year ago and includes payments made for imputed interest related to the facility lease financing obligations for our leased facilities in San Francisco and China as well as interest related to the TEKES product development obligations.

Interest and other income, net increased primarily due to higher average balances of cash equivalents and investments.

Provision (Benefit) from Income Taxes

We recorded a provision for income taxes for the quarter ended June 30, 2015 due to the discrete tax effect arising from a change in the valuation of our available-for-sale securities portfolio. We recorded a benefit for income taxes for the six months ended June 30, 2015 primarily due to the discrete tax effect arising from other comprehensive income related to available-for-sale securities. We did not record a provision for income taxes for the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2014 as we generated a net operating loss for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We have historically funded our operations principally from the sale of convertible preferred stock and common stock and from the execution of certain collaboration agreements involving license payments, milestones and reimbursement for development services. On November 19, 2014, we closed our IPO and concurrent private placement in which we issued and sold a total of 10,426,111 shares of common stock, resulting in net proceeds of $171.8 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions of $11.7 million and offering expenses of $4.1 million for our IPO. Upon the closing of our IPO, all of our outstanding convertible preferred stock automatically converted into 33,919,954 shares of common stock, based on the shares of convertible preferred stock outstanding as of November 18, 2014.

During the second quarter of 2015, we received a $120.0 million upfront payment and a $15.0 million development milestone payment under the U.S./RoW Agreement. The development milestone payment was related to the finalization of our two audited pre-clinical carcinogenicity study reports.

To date, we have not generated any revenue from product sales. We do not know when, or if, we will generate any revenue from product sales. We do not expect to generate significant revenue from product sales unless and until we obtain regulatory approval of and commercialize one or more of our current or future product candidates. We anticipate that we will continue to generate losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect the losses to increase as we continue the development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates, and begin to commercialize any approved products. We are subject to all the risks related to the development and commercialization of novel therapeutics, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. As a newly public company, we expect to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. We anticipate that we will need substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations.

As of June 30, 2015, we had cash and cash equivalents of $236.5 million. Cash is invested in accordance with our investment policy, primarily to provide liquidity and preserve capital. Investments, consisting principally of corporate debt securities stated at fair value, are also available as a source of liquidity. As of June 30, 2015, we had short- and long-term investments of $12.1 million and $138.3 million. As of June 30, 2015, a total of $30.9 million of our cash and cash equivalents was held outside of the U.S. in our foreign subsidiaries to be used primarily for our China operations.

We believe our existing cash and cash equivalents, investments and payments due under our license and collaboration agreements will be sufficient to meet our working capital and capital expenditure needs for at least the next 12 months. However, our liquidity assumptions may change over time, and we could utilize our available financial resources sooner than we currently expect. In addition, we may elect to raise additional funds at any time through equity, equity-linked or debt financing arrangements. Our future capital requirements and the adequacy of available funds will depend on many factors, including those set forth under Part I, Item 1A: “Risk Factors” in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. We may not be able to secure additional financing to meet our operating requirements on acceptable terms, or at all. If we raise additional funds by issuing equity or equity-linked securities, the ownership of our existing stockholders will be diluted. If we raise additional financing by the incurrence of indebtedness, we will be subject to increased fixed payment obligations and could also be subject to restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we are unable to obtain needed additional funds, we will have to reduce our operating expenses, which would impair our growth prospects and could otherwise negatively impact our business.

Cash Flows

The following table sets forth the primary sources and uses of cash (in thousands):


	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2015		2014			Change
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities	$	58,857	$	77,238		$	(18,381	)
Investing activities		6,046		29,594			(23,548	)
Financing activities		5,407		(537	)		5,944
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash		771		35			736

Net change in cash and cash equivalents	$	71,081	$	106,330		$	(35,249	)

Operating Activities

Net cash provided by operating activities was $58.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2015 and consisted primarily of net income of $10.7 million adjusted for non-cash items of $17.8 million, which includes stock-based compensation expense of $13.4 million, depreciation expense of $2.8 million, amortization of the premium on investments of $1.5 million, and a net increase in operating assets and liabilities of $30.4 million. The significant items in the change in operating assets and liabilities include an increase in deferred revenue of $30.4 million, an increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $2.2 million, an increase in accounts receivable of $1.3 million, a decrease in accrued liabilities of $3.1 million and a decrease in accounts payable of $0.6 million. The change in deferred revenue relate to the timing of the receipt of upfront payments and recognition of revenues under our collaboration agreements with Astellas and AstraZeneca. The change in accounts receivable and prepaid expenses and other current assets relates to the timing of payments. The changes in accounts payable and accrued liabilities is driven by clinical trial activity related to upcoming Phase 3 trials for roxadustat and the timing of payments.

Net cash provided by operating activities was $77.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2014, and consisted primarily of net income of $30.6 million adjusted for non-cash items including stock-based compensation expense of $1.5 million, depreciation expense of $1.8 million, amortization of bond premium/discount of $0.3 million and a net increase in operating assets and liabilities of $43.0 million. The significant items in the change in operating assets and liabilities include an increase in deferred revenue of $36.3 million and an increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses of $5.0 million. The increase in deferred revenue relates to the timing of upfront payments and recognition of revenues under our collaboration agreements with Astellas and AstraZeneca. The increase in accrued expenses is driven by the increase in clinical trial activity related to upcoming Phase 3 trials for roxadustat.

Investing Activities

Investing activities consist primarily of purchases of property and equipment and proceeds from the maturities of investments.

Financing Activities

Financing activities primarily reflect proceeds from the issuance of our common stock, repayments of our lease liability and payments of equity issuance costs associated with the planned public offering of our securities.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

During the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015, we did not have any relationships with unconsolidated organizations or financial partnerships, such as structured finance or special purpose entities that would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

There have been no material changes in our contractual obligations compared to those disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in our financial statements. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events, and various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. There have been no material changes in our critical accounting policies, estimates and judgments during the quarter ended June 30, 2015 compared with the disclosures in Part II, Item 7 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014. We believe that the accounting policies discussed below are critical to understanding our historical and future performance, as these policies relate to the more significant areas involving management’s judgments and estimates.

Revenue Recognition

Substantially all of our revenues to date have been generated from our collaboration agreements.

Our collaboration agreements include multiple deliverables, and we follow the guidance in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 605-25, “Revenue Recognition—Multiple-Element Arrangements,” (“ASC 605-25”). ASC 605-25:

•

provides guidance on how revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables should be separated and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated among the separate units of accounting;

•

requires the allocation of the arrangement consideration, at the inception of the arrangement, to the separate units of accounting based on relative selling price.

For each unit of accounting identified within an arrangement, we determine the period over which the deliverables are provided and the performance obligation is satisfied. Service revenue is recognized using a proportional performance method. Direct labor hours or full time equivalents are used as the measurement of performance. Revenue may be recognized using a straight line method when performance is expected to occur consistently over a period of time.

Payments or reimbursements resulting from our research and development efforts for those arrangements where such efforts are considered as deliverables are recognized as the services are performed and are presented on a gross basis. To the extent payments are required to be made to our collaboration partners pursuant to research and development efforts, those costs are charged to research and development using the guidance pursuant to ASC Topic 605-250, “Customer Payments and Incentives”, which states that cash consideration given by a vendor to a customer is presumed to be a reduction of the selling prices unless the vendor receives an identifiable benefit in exchange for the consideration that is sufficiently separable from the recipient’s purchase of the vendor’s products, and the vendor can reasonably estimate the fair value of the benefit.

Each of our collaboration agreements includes milestones for which we follow ASC Topic 605-28, “Revenue Recognition—Milestone Method” (“ASC 605-28”). ASC 605-28 establishes the milestone method as an acceptable method of revenue recognition for certain contingent event-based payments under research and development arrangements. Under the milestone method, a payment that is contingent upon the achievement of a substantive milestone is recognized in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. A milestone is an event (i) that can only be achieved based in whole or in part on either our performance or on the occurrence of a specific outcome resulting from our performance, (ii) for which there is substantive uncertainty at the date the arrangement is entered into that the event will be achieved and (iii) that would result in additional payments being due to us. Determining whether a milestone is substantive is a matter of judgment and that assessment must be made at the inception of the arrangement. Milestones are considered substantive when the consideration earned from the achievement of the milestone (i) is commensurate with either our performance to achieve the milestone or the enhancement of the value of the item delivered as a result of a specific outcome resulting from our performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) relates solely to past performance and (iii) is reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement. Payments for achieving milestones which are not considered substantive are treated as additional arrangement consideration and are allocated following the relative selling price method previously described.

Recently Issued and Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

ITEM 3.

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.

We believe there has been no material change in our exposure to market risks as disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.

ITEM 4.

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our management, with the participation of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Rule 13a-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

Based on this evaluation, our chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that, as of June 30, 2015, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed at a reasonable assurance level and are effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended June 30, 2015 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls

In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In addition, the design of disclosure controls and procedures must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and that management is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

PART II—OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings.

ITEM 1A.

RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below in addition to the other information included or incorporated by reference in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including our condensed consolidated financial statements and the related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” before deciding whether to invest in our common stock. The occurrence of any of the events or developments described below could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In such an event, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. Although we have discussed all known material risks, the risks described below are not the only ones that we may face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations.

We have marked with an asterisk (*) those risks described below that reflect substantive changes from the risks described under Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and History of Operating Losses

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or sustain profitability. We may require additional financings in order to fund our operations.*

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with two lead product candidates in clinical development, roxadustat, or FG-4592 in anemia in chronic kidney disease (“CKD”), and FG-3019 in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (“IPF”), pancreatic cancer and liver fibrosis. Pharmaceutical product development is a highly risky undertaking. To date, we have focused our efforts and most of our resources on hypoxia-inducible factor, or HIF, and fibrosis biology research, as well as developing our lead product candidates. We are not profitable and, other than in 2006 and 2007 due to income received from our Astellas collaboration, have incurred losses in each year since our inception. We have not generated any significant revenue based on product sales to date. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. Although we had net income of $10.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2015, our net loss for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014 was $14.9 million and $59.5 million. As of June 30, 2015, we had an accumulated deficit of $311.6 million. As of June 30, 2015, we had capital resources consisting of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $248.7 million plus $138.3 million of long-term investments classified as available for sale securities. Despite contractual development and cost coverage commitments from our collaboration partners, AstraZeneca AB (“AstraZeneca”) and Astellas Pharma Inc. (“Astellas”), and the potential to receive milestone and other payments from these partners, we anticipate we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase as we continue our development of, and seek regulatory approval for our product candidates. If we do not successfully develop and obtain regulatory approval for our existing or any future product candidates and effectively manufacture, market and sell any product candidates that are approved, we may never generate product sales, and even if we do generate product sales, we may never achieve or sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Our failure to become and remain profitable would depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, diversify our product offerings or continue our operations.

We believe that we will continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future as we continue late-stage clinical development of roxadustat, grow our operations in China, expand our clinical development efforts on FG-3019, seek regulatory approval, prepare for the commercialization of our product candidates, and pursue additional indications. These expenditures will include costs associated with research and development, conducting preclinical trials and clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals in various jurisdictions, and manufacturing and supplying products and product candidates for ourselves and our partners. In particular, in our planned Phase 3 clinical trial program for roxadustat, which we believe will be the largest Phase 3 program ever conducted for an anemia product candidate, we are expecting to enroll approximately 7,000 to 8,000 patients worldwide. We are conducting this Phase 3 program in conjunction with Astellas and AstraZeneca, and we are substantially dependent on Astellas and AstraZeneca for the funding of this large program. The outcome of any clinical trial and/or regulatory approval process is highly uncertain and we are unable to fully estimate the actual costs necessary to successfully complete the development and regulatory approval process for our compounds in development and any future product candidates. We believe that the net proceeds from our initial public offering (“IPO”), our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments and expected third party collaboration revenues will allow us to fund our operating plans through at least the next 12 months. Our operating plans or third party

collaborations may change as a result of many factors, which are discussed in more detail below, and other factors that may not currently be known to us, and we therefore may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through offerings of public or private securities, debt financings or other sources, such as royalty monetization or other structured financings. Such financings may result in dilution to stockholders, imposition of debt covenants and repayment obligations, or other restrictions that may adversely affect our business. We may also seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we currently believe that we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans.

Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

•

the rate of progress in the development of our product candidates;

•

the costs of development efforts for our product candidates, such as FG-3019, that are not subject to reimbursement from our collaboration partners;

•

the costs necessary to obtain regulatory approvals, if any, for our product candidates in the United States, China and other jurisdictions, and the costs of post-marketing studies that could be required by regulatory authorities in jurisdictions where approval is obtained;

•

the continuation of our existing collaborations and entry into new collaborations;

•

the time and unreimbursed costs necessary to commercialize products in territories in which our product candidates are approved for sale;

•

the revenues from any future sales of our products as well as revenue earned from profit share, royalties and milestones;

•

the level of reimbursement or third party payor pricing available to our products;

•

the costs of establishing and maintaining manufacturing operations and obtaining third party commercial supplies of our products, if any, manufactured in accordance with regulatory requirements;

•

the costs we incur in maintaining domestic and foreign operations, including operations in China;

•

regulatory compliance costs; and

•

the costs we incur in the filing, prosecution, maintenance and defense of our extensive patent portfolio and other intellectual property rights.

Additional funds may not be available when we require them, or on terms that are acceptable to us. If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our research and development efforts or other operations or activities that may be necessary to commercialize our product candidates.

All of our recent revenue has been earned from collaboration partners for our product candidates under development.

During the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, 100%, 100% and 99% of our revenues recognized were from our collaboration partners.

We will require substantial additional capital to achieve our development and commercialization goals, which for our lead product candidate, roxadustat, is currently contemplated to be provided under our existing third party collaborations with Astellas and AstraZeneca.

If either or both of these collaborations were to be terminated, we could require significant additional capital in order to proceed with development and commercialization of our product candidates, or we may require additional partnering in order to help fund such development and commercialization. If adequate funds or partners are not available to us on a timely basis or on favorable terms, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our research and development efforts or other operations.

If we are unable to continue to progress our development efforts and achieve milestones under our collaboration agreements, our revenues may decrease and our activities may fail to lead to commercial products.

Substantially all of our revenues to date have been, and a significant portion of our future revenues are expected to be, derived from our existing collaboration agreements. Revenues from research and development collaborations depend upon continuation of the collaborations, reimbursement of development costs, the achievement of milestones and royalties and profits from our product sales, if any, derived from future products developed from our research. If we are unable to successfully advance the development of our product candidates or achieve milestones, revenues under our collaboration agreements will be substantially less than expected.

Risks Related to the Development and Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

We are substantially dependent on the success of our lead product candidate, roxadustat, and our second compound in development, FG-3019.

To date, we have invested a substantial portion of our efforts and financial resources in the research and development of roxadustat, which is currently our lead product candidate. Roxadustat is our only product candidate that has advanced into a potentially pivotal trial, and it may be years before the studies required for its approval are completed, if ever. Our other product candidates are less advanced in development and may never enter into pivotal studies. We have completed 26 Phase 1 and 2 clinical studies with roxadustat in North America, Europe and Asia, in which over 1,400 subjects have participated and for which we reported favorable primary and secondary safety and efficacy endpoint results. Based on our discussions with the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) we believe that we have an acceptable plan for the conduct of our Phase 3 clinical trial program. We have also had discussions with China regulatory authorities regarding the conduct of Phase 3 clinical trials in China, which are part of our global Phase 3 clinical trial program for safety data. We have also discussed our Phase 3 clinical development program with three national health authorities in the EU and obtained scientific advice from the European Medicines Agency. Our near-term prospects, including maintaining our existing collaborations with Astellas and AstraZeneca, will depend heavily on successful Phase 3 development and commercialization of roxadustat.

Our other lead product candidate, FG-3019, is currently in clinical development for IPF, pancreatic cancer and liver fibrosis. FG-3019 requires substantial further development and investment. We do not have a collaboration partner for support of this compound, and, while we have promising open-label safety data and potential signals of efficacy, we would need to complete larger and more extensive controlled clinical trials to validate the results to date in order to continue further development of this product candidate. In addition, although there are many potentially promising indications beyond IPF, pancreatic cancer and liver fibrosis, we are still exploring indications for which further development of, and investment for, FG-3019 may be appropriate. Accordingly, the costs and time to complete development and related risks are currently unknown. Moreover, FG-3019 is a monoclonal antibody, which may require experience and expertise that we may not currently possess as well as financial resources that are potentially greater than those required for our small molecule lead compound, roxadustat.

The clinical and commercial success of roxadustat and FG-3019 will depend on a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control, and we may be unable to complete the development or commercialization of roxadustat or FG-3019.

The clinical and commercial success of roxadustat and FG-3019 will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

•

the timely initiation, continuation and completion of our Phase 3 clinical trials for roxadustat, which will depend substantially upon requirements for such trials imposed by the FDA and other regulatory agencies and bodies and the continued commitment and coordinated and timely performance by our third party collaboration partners, AstraZeneca and Astellas;

•

the timely initiation and completion of our Phase 2 clinical trials for FG-3019, including in IPF and pancreatic cancer;

•

our ability to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates to the satisfaction of the relevant regulatory authorities;

•

whether we are required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities to conduct additional clinical trials, and the scope and nature of such clinical trials, prior to approval to market our products;

•

the timely receipt of necessary marketing approvals from the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities, including pricing and reimbursement determinations;

•

the ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved, for marketing and sale by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, whether alone or in collaboration with others;

•

our ability and the ability of our third party manufacturing partners to manufacture quantities of our product candidates at quality levels necessary to meet regulatory requirements and at a scale sufficient to meet anticipated demand at a cost that allows us to achieve profitability;

•

our success in educating health care providers and patients about the benefits, risks, administration and use of our product candidates, if approved;

•

acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, as safe and effective by patients and the healthcare community;

•

the success of efforts to enter into relationships with large dialysis organizations involving the administration of roxadustat to dialysis patients;

•

the achievement and maintenance of compliance with all regulatory requirements applicable to our product candidates;

•

the maintenance of an acceptable safety profile of our products following any approval;

•

the availability, perceived advantages, relative cost, relative safety, and relative efficacy of alternative and competitive treatments;

•

our ability to obtain and sustain an adequate level of pricing or reimbursement for our products by third party payors;

•

our ability to enforce successfully our intellectual property rights for our product candidates and against the products of potential competitors; and

•

our ability to avoid or succeed in third party patent interference or patent infringement claims.

Many of these factors are beyond our control. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to achieve profitability through the sale of, or royalties from, our product candidates. If we or our collaboration partners are not successful in obtaining approval for and commercializing our product candidates, or are delayed in completing those efforts, our business and operations would be adversely affected.

We may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, or such approval may be delayed or limited, due to a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control.*

The clinical trials and the manufacturing of our product candidates are and will continue to be, and the marketing of our product candidates will be, subject to extensive and rigorous review and regulation by numerous government authorities in the United States and in other countries where we intend to develop and, if approved, market any product candidates. Before obtaining regulatory approval for the commercial sale of any product candidate, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical trials and clinical trials that the product candidate is safe and effective for use in each indication for which approval is sought. The regulatory review and approval process is expensive and requires substantial resources and time, and in general very few product candidates that enter development receive regulatory approval. In addition, our collaboration partners for roxadustat have final control over development decisions in their respective territories and they may make decisions with respect to development or regulatory authorities that delay or limit the potential approval of roxadustat, or increase the cost of development or commercialization. Accordingly, we may be unable to successfully develop or commercialize roxadustat or FG-3019 or any of our other product candidates.

We have not obtained regulatory approval for any of our product candidates and it is possible that roxadustat and FG-3019 will never receive regulatory approval in any country. Regulatory authorities may take actions or impose requirements that delay, limit or deny approval of roxadustat or FG-3019 for many reasons, including, among others:

•

our failure to adequately demonstrate to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities that roxadustat is safe and effective in treating anemia in CKD or that FG-3019 is safe and effective in treating IPF, pancreatic cancer or liver fibrosis;

•

our failure to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;

•

the determination by regulatory authorities that additional clinical trials are necessary to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of roxadustat or FG-3019, or that ongoing clinical trials need to be modified in design, size, conduct or implementation;

•

our product candidates may exhibit an unacceptable safety signal as they advance through clinical trials, in particular controlled Phase 3 trials;

•

the contract research organizations (“CROs”) that conduct clinical trials on our behalf may take actions outside of our control that materially adversely impact our clinical trials;

•

we or third party contractors manufacturing our product candidates may not maintain current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”), successfully pass inspection or meet other applicable manufacturing regulatory requirements;

•

regulatory authorities may not agree with our interpretation of the data from our preclinical trials and clinical trials;

•

collaboration partners may not perform or complete their clinical programs in a timely manner, or at all; or

•

principal investigators may determine that one or more serious adverse events (“SAEs”) is related or possibly related to roxadustat, and any such determination may adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval, whether or not the determination is correct.

Any of these factors, many of which are beyond our control, could jeopardize our or our collaboration partners’ abilities to obtain regulatory approval for and successfully market roxadustat. Because our business and operations in the near-term are almost entirely dependent upon roxadustat, any significant delays or impediments to regulatory approval could have a material adverse effect on our business and prospects.

Furthermore, in both the United States and China, we also expect to be required to perform additional clinical trials in order to obtain approval or as a condition to maintaining approval due to post-marketing requirements. If the FDA requires a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”) for any of our product candidates if approved, the substantial cost and expense of complying with a REMS or other post-marketing requirements may limit our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

Our Phase 2 clinical trial results to date for roxadustat may not be indicative of the results that may be obtained in larger, controlled Phase 3 clinical trials required for approval.

Clinical development 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. Success in preclinical and early clinical trials may not be predictive of similar results in larger, controlled clinical trials, and successful results from early or small clinical trials may not be replicated or show as favorable an outcome, even if successful. For example, in the past we developed an earlier generation product candidate aimed at treating anemia in CKD that resulted in a clinical hold for a safety signal seen in that product in Phase 2 clinical trials. The clinical hold applied to that product candidate and roxadustat was lifted for both product candidates after submission of the requested data to the FDA. While we have not seen similar safety concerns involving roxadustat to date, our Phase 2 clinical trials have involved a relatively small number of patients exposed to roxadustat for a relatively short period of time compared to the Phase 3 clinical trials that we will be conducting, and only a fraction of the patients in the Phase 2 clinical trials were randomized to placebo. Accordingly, the Phase 2 clinical trials that we have conducted may not have uncovered safety issues, even if they exist. In addition, some of the safety concerns associated with the treatment of patients with anemia in CKD using Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agents (“ESAs”) did not emerge for many years until placebo-controlled studies had been conducted in large numbers of patients. The biochemical pathways that we believe are affected by roxadustat are implicated in a variety of biological processes and disease conditions, and it is possible that the use of roxadustat to treat larger numbers of patients will demonstrate unanticipated adverse effects, including possible drug interactions, which may negatively impact the safety profile, use and market acceptance of roxadustat. We studied the potential interaction between roxadustat and three statins (atorvastatin, rosuvastatin and simvastatin), which are used to lower levels of lipids in the blood. An adverse effect associated with increased statin plasma concentration is myopathy, which typically presents in a form of myalgia. The studies indicated the potential for increased exposure to those statins when roxadustat is taken simultaneously with those statins and suggested the need for statin dose reductions for patients receiving higher statin doses. We performed additional clinical pharmacology studies to evaluate if the effect of any such interaction could be minimized or eliminated by a modification of the dosing schedule that would separate the administration of roxadustat and the statin, however, such studies showed no minimization of effect. It is possible that the potential for interaction between roxadustat and statins could lead to label provisions for statins or roxadustat relating, for example, to dose scheduling or recommended statin dose limitations. In CKD patients statin therapy is often initiated earlier than treatment for anemia, and risks of myopathy have been shown to decrease with increased time on drug. While we believe the prior statin treatment history of such patients at established doses may reduce the risk of adverse effects from any interaction with roxadustat and facilitate any appropriate dose adjustments, we cannot be sure that this will be the case.

The FDA has informed us that our Phase 3 trials must include, as a safety endpoint, a major adverse cardiac events (“MACE”) endpoint, which is a composite endpoint designed to identify major safety concerns, in particular relating to cardiovascular events such as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke. In addition, we expect that our Phase 3 clinical trials supporting approval in Europe will be required to include MACE+ as a safety endpoint which, in addition to the MACE endpoints, also incorporates measurements of hospitalization rates due to heart failure or unstable angina. As a result, our ongoing and planned Phase 3 clinical trials may identify unanticipated safety concerns in the patient population under study. The FDA has also informed us that the MACE endpoint will need to be evaluated separately for our Phase 3 trials in non-dialysis dependent-CKD patients and our Phase 3 trials in dialysis dependent-CKD patients. The MACE endpoint will be evaluated in pooled analysis across Phase 3 studies of similar study populations and requires demonstration of non-inferiority relative to comparator, which means that the MACE event rate in roxadustat-treated patients must have less than a specified probability of exceeding the rate in the comparator trial by a specified hazard ratio. The number of patients necessary in order to permit a statistical analysis with adequate ability to detect the relative risk of MACE or MACE+ events in different arms of the trial, referred to as statistical power, depends on a number of factors, including the rate at which MACE or MACE+ events occur per patient-year in the trial, treatment duration of the patients, the required hazard ratio, and the required statistical power and confidence intervals.

In addition, we cannot be sure that the potential advantages that we believe roxadustat may have for treatment of patients with anemia in CKD as compared to the use of ESAs will be substantiated by our Phase 3 clinical trials or that we will be able to include a discussion of such advantages in our labeling should we obtain approval. We believe that roxadustat may have certain benefits as compared to ESAs based on the data from our Phase 2 clinical trials conducted to date, including safety benefits, the absence of a hypertensive effect, the potential to lower cholesterol levels and the potential to correct anemia without the use of IV iron. However, our belief that roxadustat may offer those benefits is based on a limited amount of data from our Phase 2 clinical trials and our understanding of the likely mechanisms of action for roxadustat. Some of these benefits, such as those associated with the apparent effects on blood pressure and cholesterol, are not fully understood and, even if roxadustat receives marketing approval, we do not expect that it will be approved for the treatment of high blood pressure or high cholesterol based on the data from our Phase 3 trials,

and we may not be able to refer to any such benefits in the labeling. While the data from our Phase 2 trials suggests roxadustat may reduce LDL, or low-density lipoprotein, and reduce the ratio of LDL to HDL, or high-density lipoprotein, the data show it may also reduce HDL, which may be a risk to patients. In addition, causes of the safety concerns associated with the use of ESAs to achieve specified target Hb levels have not been fully elucidated. While we believe that the issues giving rise to these concerns with ESAs are likely due to factors other than the Hb levels achieved, we cannot be certain that roxadustat will not be associated with similar, or more severe, safety concerns.

Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early stage development, and we may face similar setbacks. In addition, the CKD patient population has many afflictions that may cause severe illness or death, which may be attributed to roxadustat in a manner that negatively impacts the safety profile of our product candidate. If the results of our ongoing or future clinical trials for roxadustat are inconclusive with respect to efficacy, if we do not meet our clinical endpoints with statistical significance, or if there are unanticipated safety concerns or adverse events that emerge during clinical trials, we may be prevented from or delayed in obtaining marketing approval for roxadustat, and even if we obtain marketing approval, any sales of roxadustat may suffer.

Our Phase 2 results to date for FG-3019 may not be indicative of the results that may be obtained in larger, controlled Phase 2 clinical trials or Phase 3 clinical trials required for approval.

We have conducted only a limited number of Phase 2 clinical trials with FG-3019. We have conducted an open-label Phase 2 dose escalation study of FG-3019 for IPF in 89 patients and a Phase 2 dose finding trial of FG-3019 combined with gemcitabine plus erlotinib in 75 patients with pancreatic cancer. We cannot be sure that the results of these trials will be substantiated in double-blinded trials with larger numbers of patients, that larger trials will demonstrate the efficacy of FG-3019 for these or other indications or that safety issues will not be uncovered in further trials. In the Phase 2 clinical trial for IPF, we used quantitative high resolution computed tomography, or HRCT, to measure the extent of lung fibrosis. While we believe that quantitative HRCT is an accurate measure of lung fibrosis, it is a novel technology that has not yet been accepted by the FDA as a primary endpoint in pivotal clinical trials. In addition, while we believe that the animal studies that we have conducted to date demonstrate that FG-3019 has the potential to arrest or reverse fibrosis and reduce tumor mass, we cannot be sure that these results will be indicative of the effects of FG-3019 in human trials. In addition, the IPF and pancreatic cancer patient populations are extremely ill and routinely experience SAEs, including death, which may be attributed to FG-3019 in a manner that negatively impacts the safety profile of our product candidate. If the additional Phase 2 clinical trials that we are planning for FG-3019 in IPF and pancreatic cancer do not show favorable efficacy results or result in safety concerns, or if we do not meet our clinical endpoints with statistical significance, or demonstrate an acceptable risk-benefit profile, we may be prevented from or delayed in obtaining marketing approval for FG-3019 in one or both of these indications.

We do not know whether our ongoing or planned Phase 3 clinical trials in roxadustat or Phase 2 clinical trials in FG-3019 will need to be redesigned based on interim results, be able to achieve sufficient enrollment or be completed on schedule, if at all.

Clinical trials can be delayed or terminated for a variety of reasons, including delay or failure to:

•

address any physician or patient safety concerns that arise during the course of the trial;

•

obtain required regulatory or institutional review board (“IRB”) approval or guidance;

•

reach timely agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites;

•

recruit, enroll and retain patients through the completion of the trial;

•

maintain clinical sites in compliance with clinical trial protocols;

•

initiate or add a sufficient number of clinical trial sites; and

•

manufacture sufficient quantities of product candidate for use in clinical trials.

In addition, we could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the relevant IRBs at the sites at which such trials are being conducted, or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. A suspension or termination of clinical trials may result from any number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, changes in laws or regulations, or a principal investigator’s determination that a serious adverse event could be related to our product candidates. Any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase the costs of the trial, delay the product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence marketing and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may materially and adversely harm our business and operations and prospects.

Our product candidates may cause or have attributed to them undesirable side effects or have other properties that delay or prevent their regulatory approval or limit their commercial potential.

Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates or that may be identified as related to our product candidates by physician investigators conducting our clinical trials or even competing products in development that utilize a similar mechanism of action or act through a similar biological disease pathway could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities and potential product liability claims. Adverse events and SAEs that emerge during treatment with our product candidates or other compounds acting through similar biological pathways may be deemed to be related to our product candidate and may result in:

•

our Phase 3 clinical trial development plan becoming longer and more extensive;

•

regulatory authorities increasing the data and information required to approve our product candidates and imposing other requirements; and

•

our collaboration partners terminating our existing agreements.

The occurrence of any or all of these events may cause the development of our product candidates to be delayed or terminated, which could materially and adversely affect our business and prospects. Refer to “Business—Our Development Program for Roxadustat” and “Business—FG-3019 for the Treatment of Fibrosis and Cancer” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 for a discussion of the adverse events and serious adverse events that have emerged in clinical trials of roxadustat and FG-3019.

Clinical trials of our product candidates may not uncover all possible adverse effects that patients may experience.

Clinical trials are conducted in representative samples of the potential patient population which may have significant variability. Clinical trials are by design based on a limited number of subjects and of limited duration for exposure to the product used to determine whether, on a potentially statistically significant basis, the planned safety and efficacy of any product candidate can be achieved. As with the results of any statistical sampling, we cannot be sure that all side effects of our product candidates may be uncovered, and it may be the case that only with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the product candidate for a longer duration, may a more complete safety profile be identified. Further, even larger clinical trials may not identify rare serious adverse effects or the duration of such studies may not be sufficient to identify when those events may occur. There have been other products, including ESAs, that have been approved by the regulatory authorities but for which safety concerns have been uncovered following approval. Such safety concerns have led to labelling changes or withdrawal of ESAs products from the market, and any of our product candidates may be subject to similar risks. For example, roxadustat for use in anemia in CKD is being developed to address a very diverse patient population expected to have many serious health conditions at the time of administration of roxadustat, including diabetes, high blood pressure and declining kidney function.

Although to date we have not seen evidence of significant safety concerns with our product candidates currently in clinical trials, patients treated with our products, if approved, may experience adverse reactions and it is possible that the FDA or other regulatory authorities may ask for additional safety data as a condition of, or in connection with, our efforts to obtain approval of our product candidates. If safety problems occur or are identified after our product candidates reach the market, we may, or regulatory authorities may require us to amend the labeling of our products, recall our products or even withdraw approval for our products.

We may fail to enroll a sufficient number of patients in our clinical trials in a timely manner, which could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends on the rate at which we can recruit and enroll patients in testing our product candidates. Patients may be unwilling to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates for a variety of reasons, some of which may be beyond our control:

•

severity of the disease under investigation;

•

availability of alternative treatments;

•

size and nature of the patient population;

•

eligibility criteria for and design of the study in question;

•

perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study;

•

ongoing clinical trials of competitive agents;

•

physicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of our product candidates being studied in relation to available therapies or other products under development;

•

our, our CRO’s, and our trial sites’ efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;

•

patient referral practices of physicians; and

•

ability to monitor patients and collect patient data adequately during and after treatment.

Patients may be unwilling to participate in our clinical trials for roxadustat due to adverse events observed in other drug treatments of anemia in CKD, and patients currently controlling their disease with existing ESAs may be reluctant to participate in a clinical trial with an investigational drug. We may not be able to successfully initiate or continue clinical trials if we cannot rapidly enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in the clinical trials required by regulatory agencies. If we have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients to conduct our clinical trials as planned, we may need to delay, limit or terminate on-going or planned clinical trials, any of which could have a material and adverse effect on our business and prospects.

If we or third party manufacturers on which we rely cannot manufacture our product candidates and/or products at sufficient yields, we may experience delays in development, regulatory approval and commercialization.

Completion of our clinical trials and commercialization of our product candidates require access to, or development of, facilities to manufacture our product candidates at sufficient yields and at commercial scale. We have limited experience manufacturing, or managing third parties in manufacturing any of our product candidates in the volumes that are expected to be necessary to support large-scale clinical trials and sales. Our efforts to establish these capabilities may not meet our requirements as to scale-up, yield, cost, potency or quality in compliance with cGMP. Our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under applicable cGMP regulations. Failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Even an experienced third party manufacturer may encounter difficulties in production, which difficulties may include:

•

costs and challenges associated with scale-up and attaining sufficient manufacturing yields, in particular for biologic products such as FG-3019, which is a monoclonal antibody;

•

supply chain issues, including the timely availability and shelf life requirements of raw materials and supplies;

•

quality control and assurance;

•

shortages of qualified personnel and capital required to manufacture large quantities of product;

•

compliance with regulatory requirements that vary in each country where a product might be sold;

•

capacity limitations and scheduling availability in contracted facilities; and

•

natural disasters that affect facilities and possibly limit production.

For example, we have a limited amount of FG-3019 in storage and there are long lead times required to manufacture and scale-up the manufacture of additional supply. If we are unable to manufacture sufficient quantities of FG-3019 on a timely basis, it may limit our ability to replenish inventory or delay our development of FG-3019 in some or all indications. Any delay or interruption in the supply of our product candidates or products could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

Even if we are able to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, the label we obtain may limit the indicated uses for which our product candidates may be marketed.

With respect to roxadustat, we expect that regulatory approvals, if obtained at all, will limit the approved indicated uses for which roxadustat may be marketed, as ESAs have been subject to significant safety limitations on usage as directed by the “Black Box” warnings included in their labels. Refer to “Business—Roxadustat For the Treatment of Anemia in Chronic Kidney Disease—Limitations of the Current Standard of Care for Anemia in CKD” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014. In addition, in the past, an approved ESA was voluntarily withdrawn due to serious safety issues discovered after approval. The safety concerns relating to ESAs may result in labeling for roxadustat containing similar warnings even if our Phase 3 clinical trials do not suggest that roxadustat has similar safety issues. Even if the label for roxadustat does not contain all of the warnings contained in the Black Box warning for ESAs, the label for roxadustat may contain other warnings that limit the market opportunity for roxadustat. These warnings could include warnings against exceeding specified Hb targets and other warnings that derive from the lack of clarity regarding the basis for the safety issues associated with ESAs, even if our Phase 3 clinical trials do not themselves raise safety concerns.

As an organization, we have never completed a Phase 3 clinical trial or submitted a New Drug Application (“NDA”) before, and may be unable to do so efficiently or at all for roxadustat or any product candidate we are developing.*

We are currently conducting Phase 2 clinical trials for FG-3019 and we may need to conduct additional Phase 2 clinical trials before initiating our Phase 3 clinical trials for FG-3019. We have initiated Phase 3 clinical trials of roxadustat, and if our Phase 2 clinical trials are successful for FG-3019, we intend to conduct Phase 3 clinical trials for FG-3019. The conduct of Phase 3 clinical trials and the submission of a successful NDA is a complicated process. As an organization, we have not completed a Phase 3 clinical trial before, have limited experience in preparing, submitting and prosecuting regulatory filings, and have not submitted an NDA before. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to NDA submission and approval of roxadustat or for any other product candidate we are developing, even if our earlier stage clinical trials are successful. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials would prevent us from or delay us in commercializing roxadustat or any other product candidate we are developing.

In addition, in order for any Phase 3 clinical trial to support an NDA submission for approval, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities require compliance with regulations and standards, including good clinical practices (“GCP”) requirements for designing, conducting, monitoring, recording, analyzing and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results from trials are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. Although we rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials, we as the sponsor remain responsible for ensuring that each of these clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its general investigational plan and protocol under legal and regulatory requirements, including GCP. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or other regulatory authorities may require us to exclude the use of patient data from our clinical trials not conducted in compliance with GCP or perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP requirements or that our results may be used in support of our regulatory submissions.

If we are unable to establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or enter into or maintain agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may not be successful in commercializing our product candidates if and when they are approved.

We do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure and have no experience in the sales, marketing or distribution of pharmaceutical products in any country. To achieve commercial success for any product for which we obtain marketing approval, we will need to establish sales and marketing capabilities or make and maintain our existing arrangements with third parties to perform these services at a level sufficient to support our commercialization efforts.

To the extent that we would undertake sales and marketing of any of our products directly, there are risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our products on our own include:

•

our inability to recruit, train and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel;

•

the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or persuade adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe any future products;

•

our inability to effectively manage geographically dispersed sales and marketing teams;

•

the lack of complementary products to be offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more extensive product lines; and

•

unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization.

With respect to roxadustat, we are dependent on the commercialization capabilities of our collaboration partners, AstraZeneca and Astellas. If either such partner were to terminate its agreement with us, we would have to commercialize on our own or with another third party. We will have limited or little control over the commercialization efforts of such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products, if any, effectively. If they are not successful in commercializing our product candidates, our business and financial condition would suffer.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before, or more successfully, than we do.*

The development and commercialization of new pharmaceutical products is highly competitive. Our future success depends on our ability to achieve and maintain a competitive advantage with respect to the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our objective is to discover, develop and commercialize new products with superior efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety. We expect that in many cases, the products that we commercialize will compete with existing, market-leading products of companies that have large, established commercial organizations.

If roxadustat is approved and launched commercially, competing drugs are expected to include ESAs such as EPOGEN^® and Aranesp^®, commercialized by Amgen Inc., Procrit^® and Eprex^®, commercialized by Johnson & Johnson Inc., and Mircera^®, commercialized by Hoffmann-La Roche (“Roche”) outside of the United States, and by Galenica, a Roche licensee in the United States and Puerto Rico. ESAs have been used in the treatment of anemia in CKD for over 20 years, serving a significant majority of dialysis-dependent CKD (“DD-CKD”) patients on Medicare. It may be difficult to encourage treatment providers and patients to switch from products with which they have become familiar to roxadustat. In addition, the introduction of safer or more effective complement therapies to ESAs, such as safer iron supplementation therapies, may enhance the competitiveness of ESA therapy.

We may also face competition from potential new anemia therapies currently in clinical development. For example, there are several other HIF product candidates in various stages of active development for anemia indications that may be in competition with roxadustat for patient recruitment and enrollment for clinical trials and may be in direct competition with roxadustat if and when it is approved and launched commercially. These candidates are being developed by such companies as Akebia Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Akebia”), Bayer Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline plc and Japan Tobacco Inc. Some of these product candidates may enter the market prior to roxadustat. There may be new therapies for renal-related diseases that could limit the market or level of reimbursement available for roxadustat if and when it is commercialized. In addition, there are other companies developing biologic therapies for treatment of other anemia indications that we may also seek to pursue in the future.

The introduction of biosimilar ESAs into the market in the United States may occur by the time roxadustat enters the market and may increase the competition for roxadustat and alter the competitive and pricing landscape. A biosimilar product is a follow-on version of an existing, branded biologic product. Under current laws, an application for a biosimilar product should not be approved by the FDA until 12 years after the existing, patent-protected product was approved under a Biologics License Application (“BLA”). The patents for the existing, branded product must expire in a given market before biosimilars may enter that market with limited or no risk of being sued for patent infringement. The patents for epoetin alfa, a version of EPOGEN, expired in 2004 in the European Union, and the final material patents in the United States expired in May 2015 in the United States. Several biosimilar versions of currently marketed ESAs are available for sale in the EU, China and other territories. In the United States, a few ESA biosimilars are currently under development or regulatory review, including Hospira’s Retacrit™, an EPOGEN and Procrit biosimilar which has been marketed in Europe, and for which Hospira’s BLA was filed with the FDA in February 2015.

Furthermore, in the case of roxadustat, many of our existing and potential competitors have distribution relationships with leading dialysis providers and customers as well as brand recognition and reimbursement. Two of the largest operators of dialysis clinics in the United States, DaVita Healthcare Partners Inc. (“DaVita”) and Fresenius SE & Co. KGaA (“Fresenius”) represent more than 60% of the dialysis market in the United States and have entered into long-term sales agreements with Amgen that began in January 2012, which in the case of Fresenius, includes an exclusive relationship. Fresenius also entered into an agreement with Galenica regarding supply of Mircera for use in Fresenius dialysis centers. As a result, successful penetration of this market would require AstraZeneca to reach a significant agreement with Fresenius or DaVita, the two largest dialysis clinics in the United States, on favorable terms and on a timely basis.

If FG-3019 is approved and launched commercially to treat IPF, competing drugs are expected to include Roche’s pirfenidone, which is approved for marketing in Europe, Canada, Japan and the United States, and Boehringer Ingelheim’s nintedanib which has been approved in the United States and EU. Nintedanib is also in development for non-small cell lung cancer and ovarian cancer. Other potential competitive product candidates in various stages of Phase 2 development for IPF include Gilead Sciences, Inc.’s simtuzumab, Bristol-Myers Squibb’s BMS-986020, and Biogen Idec’s STX-100.

If FG-3019 is approved and launched commercially to treat pancreatic cancer, we expect it to be used in combination instead of as monotherapy, and, likely competition for FG-3019 would be from other agents also seeking approval in combination with gemcitibine and nab-paclitaxel from companies such as NewLink Genetics Corporation, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Oncomed Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc., Gilead Sciences Inc., Threshold Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. Gemcitabine and/or nab-paclitaxel are the current standard of care in the first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. Celgene Corporation’s Abraxane^® (nab-paclitaxel) was launched in the U.S. and Europe in 2013 and 2014, and was the first drug approved in this disease in nearly a decade. Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has completed a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial of MM-398 for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who have previously failed treatment with gemcitabine. In November 2014, Merrimack announced that it had received Fast Track designation from the FDA and intended to start the NDA submission process in December 2014 with the goal of completing the NDA submission in the first quarter, or early in the second quarter, of 2015.

If FG-3019 is approved and launched commercially to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy (“DMD”), FG-3019 may face competition for some patients from Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc, as well as BioMarin, and PTC Therapeutics, Santhera Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer,

Summit plc and Tivorsan Pharmaceuticals. BioMarin recently completed its acquisition of Prosensa Holding, N.V. Prosensa, along with Sarepta, have entered clinical development with therapeutics based on exon-skipping technology which seeks to help patients produce functioning forms of the dystrophin protein. PTC Therapeutics’ product ataluren (Translarna^TM) received conditional approval in Europe in 2014. Translarna targets a different set of DMD patients from those being targeted by Prosensa’s and Sarepta’s existing exon-skipping therapeutics (which skip exon-51); however it is also limited to a subset of patients who carry a specific mutation. Conversely, FG-3019 is intended to treat DMD patients without limitation to type of mutation. Santhera Pharmaceuticals recently reported positive Phase 3 data with its drug idebenone (Raxone^®/Catena^®) in a trial measuring changes in lung function for DMD patients. Idebenone is a synthetic short-chain benzoquinone and a cofactor for the enzyme NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase (NQO1). Pfizer’s product candidate, which is in Phase 2 development, is an antibody targeting myostatin which is a protein that regulates muscle growth. The goal of the program is to increase muscle growth and muscle strength in patients with DMD. Summit plc and Tivorsan Pharmaceuticals are both working on drugs involving the utrophin pathway. Utrophin is a protein similar to dystrophin. Summit is conducting a Phase 1b trial and Tivorsan is conducting preclinical work.

If FG-5200 is approved and launched to treat corneal blindness resulting from partial thickness corneal damage in China, it is likely to compete with other products designed to treat corneal damage. For example, in April 2015, a subsidiary of China Regenerative Medicine International Limited received approval for their acellular porcine cornea stroma medical device to treat patients in China with corneal ulcers.

The success of any or all of these potential competitive products may negatively impact the development and potential for success of FG-3019. In addition, any competitive products that are on the market or in development may compete with FG-3019 for patient recruitment and enrollment for clinical trials or may force us to change our clinical trial comparators, whether placebo or active, in order to compare FG-3019 against another drug, which may be the new standard of care.

Moreover, many of our competitors have significantly greater resources than we do. Large pharmaceutical companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients, manufacturing pharmaceutical products, and commercialization. In the potential anemia market for roxadustat, for example, large and established companies such as Amgen and Roche, among others, compete aggressively to maintain their market shares. In particular, these companies have greater experience and expertise in securing reimbursement, government contracts and relationships with key opinion leaders; conducting testing and clinical trials; obtaining and maintaining regulatory approvals and distribution relationships to market products; and marketing approved products. These companies also have significantly greater research and marketing capabilities than we do and may also have products that have been approved or are in later stages of development, and have collaboration agreements in our target markets with leading dialysis companies and research institutions. These competitors have in the past successfully prevented new and competing products from entering into the anemia market, and we expect that their resources will represent challenges for us and our collaboration partners, AstraZeneca and Astellas. If we and our collaboration partners are not able to compete effectively against existing and potential competitors, our business and financial condition may be materially and adversely affected.

Our future commercial success depends upon attaining significant market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, among physicians, patients, third party payors and others in the health care community.

Even if we obtain marketing approval for roxadustat, FG-3019 or any other product candidates that we may develop or acquire in the future, these product candidates may not gain market acceptance among physicians, third party payors, patients and others in the health care community. Market acceptance of any approved product depends on a number of other factors, including:

•

the clinical indications for which the product is approved and the labeling required by regulatory authorities for use with the product, including any warnings that may be required in the labeling;

•

acceptance by physicians and patients of the product as a safe and effective treatment and the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe new therapies;

•

the cost, safety, efficacy and convenience of treatment in relation to alternative treatments;

•

the restrictions on the use of our products together with other medications, if any;

•

the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement or pricing by third party payors and government authorities;

•

the ability of treatment providers, such as dialysis clinics, to enter into relationships with us without violating their existing agreement; and

•

the effectiveness of our sales and marketing efforts.

For example, in the case of roxadustat, two of the largest operators of dialysis clinics in the United States, DaVita and Fresenius, represent more than 60% of the dialysis market in the United States and have entered into long-term sales agreements with Amgen that began in January 2012, which in the case of Fresenius, includes an exclusive relationship.

Limited reimbursement or insurance coverage of our approved products, if any, by third party payors may render our products less attractive to patients and healthcare providers.

Market acceptance and sales of any approved products will depend significantly on reimbursement or coverage of our products by third party payors and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures or the prices of related products for which third party reimbursement applies. Coverage and reimbursement by a third party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

•

a covered benefit under its health plan;

•

safe, effective and medically necessary;

•

appropriate for the specific patient;

•

cost-effective; and

•

neither experimental nor investigational.

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third party payor is a time consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor, which we may not be able to provide. Furthermore, the reimbursement policies of third party payors may significantly change in a manner that renders our clinical data insufficient for adequate reimbursement or otherwise limits the successful marketing of our products. Even if we obtain coverage for our product candidates, third party payors may not establish adequate reimbursement amounts, which may reduce the demand for, or the price of, our products. If reimbursement is not available or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to commercialize certain of our products.

In countries outside of the United States, price controls may limit the price at which products such as roxadustat, if approved, are sold. For example, reference pricing is used by various European Union member states and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states, can further reduce prices. In some countries, we or our partner may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available products in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. Publication of discounts by third party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unacceptable levels, we or our partner may elect not to commercialize our products in such countries, and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

If our collaborations with Astellas or AstraZeneca were terminated, or if Astellas or AstraZeneca were to prioritize other initiatives over their collaborations with us, whether as a result of a change of control or otherwise, our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our lead product candidate, roxadustat, would suffer.

We have entered into collaboration agreements with respect to the development and commercialization of our lead product candidate, roxadustat, with Astellas and AstraZeneca. These agreements provide for reimbursement of our development costs by our collaboration partners and also provide for commercialization of roxadustat throughout the major territories of the world.

Our agreements with Astellas and AstraZeneca provide each of them with the right to terminate their respective agreements with us, upon the occurrence of negative clinical results, delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates or adverse regulatory requirements or guidance. The termination of any of our collaboration agreements would require us to fund and perform the further development and commercialization of roxadustat in the affected territory, or pursue another collaboration, which we may be unable to do, either of which could have an adverse effect on our business and operations. In addition, each of those agreements provides our respective partners the right to terminate any of those agreements upon written notice for convenience. Moreover, if Astellas or AstraZeneca, or any successor entity, were to determine that their collaborations with us are no longer a strategic priority, or if either of them or a successor were to reduce their level of commitment to their collaborations with us, our ability to develop and commercialize roxadustat could suffer. In addition, some of our collaborations are exclusive and preclude us from entering into additional collaboration agreements with other parties in the area or field of exclusivity.

If we fail to establish and maintain strategic collaborations related to our product candidates, we will bear all of the risk and costs related to the development and commercialization of any such product candidate, and we may need to seek additional financing, hire additional employees and otherwise develop expertise at significant cost. This in turn may negatively affect the development of our other product candidates as we direct resources to our most advanced product candidates.

Conflicts with our collaboration partners could jeopardize our collaboration agreements and our ability to commercialize product candidates.

Our collaboration partners have certain rights to control decisions regarding the development and commercialization of our product candidates with respect to which they are providing funding. If we have a disagreement over strategy and activities, our plans for obtaining approval may be revised and negatively affect the anticipated timing and potential for success of our product candidates. Even if a product under a collaboration agreement is approved, we will remain substantially dependent on the commercialization strategy and efforts of our collaboration partners, and neither of our collaboration partners has experience in commercialization of a novel drug such as roxadustat in the dialysis market.

With respect to our collaboration agreements for roxadustat, there are additional complexities in that we and our collaboration partners, Astellas and AstraZeneca, must reach consensus on our Phase 3 development program. Multi-party decision-making is complex and involves significant time and effort, and there can be no assurance that the parties will cooperate or reach consensus, or that one or both of our partners will not ask to proceed independently in some or all of their respective territories or functional areas of responsibility in which the applicable collaboration partner would otherwise be obligated to cooperate with us. Any disputes or lack of cooperation with us by either Astellas or AstraZeneca may negatively impact the timing or success of our planned Phase 3 clinical studies.

We intend to conduct proprietary research programs in specific disease areas that are not covered by our collaboration agreements. Our pursuit of such opportunities could, however, result in conflicts with our collaboration partners in the event that any of our collaboration partners takes the position that our internal activities overlap with those areas that are exclusive to our collaboration agreements, and we should be precluded from such internal activities. Moreover, disagreements with our collaboration partners could develop over rights to our intellectual property. In addition, our collaboration agreements may have provisions that give rise to disputes regarding the rights and obligations of the parties. Any conflict with our collaboration partners could lead to the termination of our collaboration agreements, delay collaborative activities, reduce our ability to renew agreements or obtain future collaboration agreements or result in litigation or arbitration and would negatively impact our relationship with existing collaboration partners.

Certain of our collaboration partners could also become our competitors in the future. If our collaboration partners develop competing products, fail to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, terminate their agreements with us prematurely or fail to devote sufficient resources to the development and commercialization of our product candidates, the development and commercialization of our product candidates and products could be delayed.

We rely on third parties for the conduct of most of our preclinical and clinical trials for our product candidates, and if our third party contractors do not properly and successfully perform their obligations under our agreements with them, we may not be able to obtain or may be delayed in receiving regulatory approvals for our product candidates.*

We rely heavily on university, hospital, dialysis centers and other institutions and third parties, including the principal investigators and their staff, to carry out our clinical trials in accordance with our clinical protocols and designs. We also rely on a number of third party CROs to assist in undertaking, managing, monitoring and executing our ongoing clinical trials, including those for roxadustat. We expect to continue to rely on CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators to conduct our development efforts in the future, including our Phase 3 development program for roxadustat. We compete with many other companies for the resources of these third parties, and large pharmaceutical companies often have significantly more extensive agreements and relationships with such third party providers, and such third party providers may prioritize the requirements of such large pharmaceutical companies over ours. The third parties on whom we rely may terminate their engagements with us at any time, which may cause delay in the development and commercialization of our product candidates. If any such third party terminates its engagement with us or fails to perform as agreed, we may be required to enter into alternative arrangements, which would result in significant cost and delay to our product development program. Moreover, our agreements with such third parties generally do not provide assurances regarding employee turnover and availability, which may cause interruptions in the research on our product candidates by such third parties.

Moreover, while our reliance on these third parties for certain development and management activities will reduce our control over these activities, it will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities require compliance with regulations and standards, including GCP requirements for designing, conducting, monitoring, recording, analyzing and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results from trials are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. Although we rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials, we, as the sponsor, remain responsible for ensuring that each of these clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its general investigational plan and protocol under legal and regulatory requirements, including GCP. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or other regulatory authorities may require us to exclude the use of patient data from our clinical trials not conducted in compliance with

GCP requirements or perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP requirements or that our results may be used in support of our regulatory submissions.

If CROs and other third parties do not successfully carry out their duties under their agreements with us, if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is be compromised due to their failure to adhere to trial protocols or to regulatory requirements, or if they otherwise fail to comply with regulations and trial protocols or meet expected standards or deadlines, the trials of our product candidates may not meet regulatory requirements. If trials do not meet regulatory requirements or if these third parties need to be replaced, the development of our product candidates may be delayed, suspended or terminated, or the results may not be acceptable. If any of these events occur, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates on a timely basis, at a reasonable cost, or at all.

We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct many aspects of our clinical studies and product manufacturing, and these third parties may not perform satisfactorily.

We do not have any operating manufacturing facilities at this time, and our current manufacturing facility plans in China are not expected to satisfy the requirements necessary to support roxadustat development and commercialization outside of China. Other than in and for China specifically, we do not expect to independently manufacture our products. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to scale-up, manufacture and supply roxadustat and our other product candidates outside of China. Risks arising from our reliance on third party manufacturers include:

•

reduced control and additional burdens of oversight as a result of using third party manufacturers for all aspects of manufacturing activities, including regulatory compliance and quality control and assurance;

•

termination or nonrenewal of manufacturing agreements with third parties in a manner or at a time that may negatively impact our planned development and commercialization activities;

•

the possible misappropriation of our proprietary technology, including our trade secrets and know-how; and

•

disruptions to the operations of our third party manufacturers or suppliers unrelated to our product, including the bankruptcy of the manufacturer or supplier or a catastrophic event affecting our manufacturers or suppliers.

Any of these events could lead to development delays or failure to obtain regulatory approval, or affect our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Some of these events could be the basis for action by the FDA or another regulatory authority, including injunction, recall, seizure or total or partial suspension of production.

The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must pass inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. Although, except for China, we do not control the manufacturing operations of, and expect to remain completely dependent on, our contract manufacturers for manufacture of drug substance and finished drug product, we are ultimately responsible for ensuring that our product candidates are manufactured in compliance with cGMP requirements. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our or our collaboration partners’ specifications, or the regulatory requirements of the FDA or other regulatory authorities, we may not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for our product candidates and our development or commercialization plans may be delayed. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. In addition, although our longer-term agreements are expected to provide for requirements to meet our quantity and quality requirements to manufacture our products candidates for clinical studies and commercial sale, we will have minimal direct control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel and we expect to rely on our audit rights to ensure that those qualifications are maintained to meet our requirements. If our contract manufacturers’ facilities do not pass inspection by regulatory authorities, or if regulatory authorities do not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our products, or withdraw any such approval in the future, we would need to identify and qualify alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our products, if approved. Moreover, any failure of our third party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us or adverse regulatory consequences, including clinical holds, warnings or untitled letters, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which would be expected to significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products to us and our collaboration partners.

Any of our third party manufacturers may terminate their engagement with us at any time and we have not yet entered into any commercial supply agreements for the manufacture of active pharmaceutical ingredients or drug products. With respect to roxadustat, AstraZeneca and Astellas have certain rights to assume manufacturing of roxadustat and the existence of those rights may limit our ability to enter into favorable long-term supply agreements, if at all, with other third party manufacturers. In addition, our product candidates and any products that we may develop may compete with other product candidates and products for access and

prioritization to manufacture. Certain third party manufacturers may be contractually prohibited from manufacturing our product due to non-compete agreements with our competitors or a commitment to grant another party priority relative to our products. There are a limited number of third party manufacturers that operate under cGMP and that might be capable of manufacturing to meet our requirements. Due to the limited number of third party manufacturers with the contractual freedom, expertise, required regulatory approvals and facilities to manufacture our products on a commercial scale, identifying and qualifying a replacement third party manufacturer would be expensive and time-consuming and may cause delay or interruptions in the production of our product candidates or products, which in turn may delay, prevent or impair our development and commercialization efforts.

We have a letter agreement with IRIX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“IRIX”), a third party manufacturer that we have used in the past, pursuant to which we agreed to negotiate a single source manufacturing agreement that included a right of first negotiation for the cGMP manufacture of HIF-PH inhibitors, including roxadustat, provided that IRIX is able to match any third party bids within 5%. The exclusive right to manufacture extends for five years after approval of an NDA for those compounds, and any agreement would provide that no minimum amounts would be specified until appropriate by forecast and that we and a commercialization partner would have the rights to contract with independent third parties that exceed IRIX’s internal manufacturing capabilities or in the event that we or our commercialization partner determines for reasons of continuity of supply and security that such a need exists, provided that IRIX would supply no less than 65% of the product if it is able to provide this level of supply. Subsequent to the letter agreement, we and IRIX have entered into several additional service agreements. IRIX has requested in writing that we honor the letter agreement with respect to the single source manufacturing agreement, and if we were to enter into any such exclusive manufacturing agreement, there can be no assurance that IRIX will not assert a claim for right to manufacture roxadustat or that IRIX could manufacture roxadustat successfully and in accordance with applicable regulations for a commercial product and the specifications of our collaboration partners. On March 4, 2015, Patheon, a business unit of DPx Holdings B.V. announced that it had entered into a definitive agreement to acquire IRIX within sixty days of the announcement.

If any third party manufacturer terminates its engagement with us or fails to perform as agreed, we may be required to find replacement manufacturers, which would result in significant cost and delay to our development programs. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture our product candidates, we may incur significant delays and added costs in identifying, qualifying and contracting with any such third party or potential second source manufacturer. In any event, with any third party manufacturer we expect to enter into technical transfer agreements and share our know-how with the third party manufacturer, which can be time-consuming and may result in delays. These delays could result in a suspension or delay of our Phase 3 clinical trials or, if roxadustat is approved and marketed, a failure to satisfy patient demand.

Certain of the components of our product candidates are acquired from single-source suppliers and have been purchased without long-term supply agreements. The loss of any of these suppliers, or their failure to supply us with supplies of sufficient quantity and quality to complete our drug substance or finished drug product of acceptable quality and an acceptable price, would materially and adversely affect our business.

We do not have an alternative supplier of certain components of our product candidates. To date, we have used purchase orders for the supply of materials that we use in our product candidates. We may be unable to enter into long-term commercial supply arrangements with our vendors, or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse impact upon our business. In addition, we currently rely on our contract manufacturers to purchase from third-party suppliers some of the materials necessary to produce our product candidates. We do not have direct control over the acquisition of those materials by our contract manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of those materials.

The logistics of our supply chain, which include shipment of materials and intermediates from countries such as China and India, add additional time and risk to the manufacture of our product candidates. While we have in the past maintained sufficient inventory of materials, active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”), and drug product to meet our and our collaboration partners’ needs for roxadustat to date, the lead time and regulatory approvals required to source from and into countries outside of the United States increase the risk of delay and potential shortages of supply.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If our efforts to protect our proprietary technologies are not adequate, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.*

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and contractual arrangements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies. We will only be able to protect our products and proprietary information and technology by preventing unauthorized use by third parties to the extent that our patents, trade secrets, and contractual position allow us to do so. Any disclosure to or misappropriation by third parties of our trade secrets or confidential information could compromise our competitive position. Moreover, we are involved in, have in the past been involved in, and may in the future be involved in legal or administrative proceedings involving our intellectual property and which have been, are or could be initiated by third parties, and which proceedings can result in significant costs and commitment of management time and attention. As our product candidates continue in development, third parties may attempt to challenge the validity and enforceability of our patents and proprietary information and technologies.

We also are involved in, have in the past been involved in, and may in the future be involved in initiating legal or administrative proceedings involving the product candidates and intellectual property of our competitors. These proceedings can result in significant costs and commitment of management time and attention, and there can be no assurance that our efforts would be successful in preventing or limiting the ability of our competitors to market competing products.

Composition-of-matter patents relating to the active pharmaceutical ingredient are generally considered to be the strongest form of intellectual property protection for pharmaceutical products, as such patents provide protection not limited to any one method of use. Method-of-use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method(s), and do not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method. We rely on a combination of these and other types of patents to protect our product candidates, and there can be no assurance that our intellectual property will create and sustain the competitive position of our product candidates.

Biotechnology and pharmaceutical product patents involve highly complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. Any patent applications that we own or license may fail to result in issued patents. Even if patents do successfully issue from our applications, third parties may challenge their validity or enforceability, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable. Even if our patents and patent applications are not challenged by third parties, those patents and patent applications may not prevent others from designing around our claims and may not otherwise adequately protect our product candidates. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patents and patent applications we hold with respect to our product candidates is threatened, competitors with significantly greater resources could threaten our ability to commercialize our product candidates. Discoveries are generally published in the scientific literature well after their actual development, and patent applications in the United States and other countries are typically not published until 18 months after filing, and in some cases are never published. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned and licensed patents or patent applications, or that we or our licensors were the first to file for patent protection covering such inventions. Subject to meeting other requirements for patentability, for United States patent applications filed prior to March 16, 2013, the first to invent the claimed invention is entitled to receive patent protection for that invention while, outside the United States, the first to file a patent application encompassing the invention is entitled to patent protection for the invention. The United States moved to a “first to file” system under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) effective March 16, 2013. The effects of this change and other elements of the AIA are currently unclear, as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) is still implementing associated regulations, and the applicability of the AIA and associated regulations to our patents and patent applications have not been fully determined. This new system also includes new procedures for challenging issued patents and pending patent applications, which creates additional uncertainty. We may become involved in opposition or interference proceedings challenging our patents and patent applications or the patents and patent applications of others, and the outcome of any such proceedings are highly uncertain. An unfavorable outcome in any such proceedings could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology and compete directly with us, or result in our inability to manufacture, develop or commercialize our product candidates without infringing the patent rights of others.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we seek to rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by our patents. Although our agreements require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and we require all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our trade secrets, proprietary know-how and other confidential information and technology to enter into appropriate confidentiality agreements, we cannot be certain that our trade secrets, proprietary know-how and other confidential information and technology will not be subject to unauthorized disclosure or that our competitors will not otherwise gain access to or independently develop substantially equivalent trade secrets, proprietary know-how and other information and technology. Furthermore, the laws of some foreign countries, in particular, China, where we have operations, do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property globally. If we are unable to prevent unauthorized disclosure of our intellectual property related to our product candidates and technology to third parties, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business and operations.

Intellectual property disputes with third parties and competitors may be costly and time consuming, and may negatively affect our competitive position.

Our commercial success may depend on our avoiding infringement of the patents and other proprietary rights of third parties as well as on enforcing our patents and other proprietary rights against third parties. Pharmaceutical and biotechnology intellectual property disputes are characterized by complex, lengthy and expensive litigation over patents and other intellectual property rights. We may initiate or become a party to, or be threatened with, future litigation or other proceedings regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates and competing products.

As our product candidates progress toward commercialization, we or our collaboration partners may be subject to patent infringement claims from third parties. We attempt to ensure that our product candidates do not infringe third party patents and other proprietary rights. However, the patent landscape in competitive product areas is highly complex, and there may be patents of third parties of which we are unaware that may result in claims of infringement. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that our product candidates do not infringe proprietary rights of third parties, and parties making claims against us may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could potentially block further efforts to develop and commercialize our product candidates including roxadustat or FG-3019. Any litigation involving defense against claims of infringement, regardless of the merit of such claims, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of management time.

We intend, if necessary, to vigorously enforce our intellectual property in order to protect the proprietary position of our product candidates, including roxadustat and FG-3019. Active efforts to enforce our patents may include litigation, administrative proceedings, or both, depending on the potential benefits that might be available from those actions and the costs associated with undertaking those efforts against third parties. We carefully review and monitor publicly available information regarding products that may be competitive with our product candidates and assert our intellectual property rights where appropriate. We previously prevailed in an administrative challenge initiated by a major biopharmaceutical company regarding our intellectual property rights, maintaining our intellectual property in all relevant scope, and will continue to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights. Moreover, third parties may continue to initiate new proceedings in the U.S. and foreign jurisdictions to challenge our patents from time to time.

We may consider administrative proceedings and other means for challenging third party patents and patent applications. Third parties may also challenge our patents and patent applications, through interference, reexamination, inter partes review, and post-grant review proceedings before the USPTO or through other comparable proceedings, such as oppositions or invalidation proceedings, before foreign patent offices. An unfavorable outcome in any such challenge could require us to cease using the related technology and to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing third party, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all, in which case our business could be harmed. Even if we are successful, participation in administrative proceedings before the USPTO or a foreign patent office may result in substantial costs and time on the part of our management and other employees. For example, on December 5, 2013, Akebia filed an opposition to our European Patent No. 1463823, or the ‘823 patent, with the European Patent Office, and Akebia and other third parties may initiate or pursue similar proceedings with the European Patent Office or other corresponding foreign jurisdictions. The granted claims of the ‘823 patent encompass the use of roxadustat for the treatment of anemia. While we believe the ‘823 patent will be upheld in its entirety, the ultimate outcome of the opposition remains uncertain, and ultimate resolution of the proceeding may take a number of years and result in substantial costs to us.

Furthermore, there is a risk that any public announcements concerning the status or outcomes of intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings may adversely affect the price of our stock. If securities analysts or our investors interpret such status or outcomes as negative or otherwise creating uncertainty, our common stock price may be adversely affected.

Our reliance on third parties and agreements with collaboration partners requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor may discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Our reliance on third party contractors to develop and manufacture our product candidates is based upon agreements that limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets and know-how. Despite the contractual provisions, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets and information are disclosed or used, even if unintentionally, in violation of these agreements. In the highly competitive markets in which our product candidates are expected to compete, protecting our trade secrets, including our strategies for addressing competing products, is imperative, and any unauthorized use or disclosure could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

In addition, our collaboration partners are larger, more complex organizations than ours, and the risk of inadvertent disclosure of our proprietary information may be increased despite their internal procedures and contractual obligations in place with our collaboration partners. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets and other confidential information, a competitor’s discovery of such trade secrets and information could impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

We have an extensive worldwide patent portfolio. The cost of maintaining our patent protection is high and maintaining our patent protection requires continuous review and compliance in order to maintain worldwide patent protection. We may not be able to effectively maintain our intellectual property position throughout the major markets of the world.

The USPTO and foreign patent authorities require maintenance fees and payments as well as continued compliance with a number of procedural and documentary requirements. Noncompliance may result in abandonment or lapse of the subject patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance may result in reduced royalty payments for lack of patent coverage in a particular jurisdiction from our collaboration partners or may result in competition, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We have made, and will continue to make, certain strategic decisions in balancing costs and the potential protection afforded by the patent laws of certain countries. As a result, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries throughout the world, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other countries. Third parties may use our technologies in territories in which we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may infringe our patents in territories which provide inadequate enforcement mechanisms, even if we have patent protection. Such third party products may compete with our product candidates, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

The laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States, and we may encounter significant problems in securing and defending our intellectual property rights outside the United States.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain countries. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries such as China, do not always favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property rights, particularly those relating to pharmaceutical and biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop infringement of our patents, misappropriation of our trade secrets, or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights. In China, our intended establishment of significant operations will depend in substantial part on our ability to effectively enforce our intellectual property rights in that country. Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights in foreign countries could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, and could put our patents in these territories at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, or our patent applications at risk of not being granted, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in all legal or other proceedings that we may initiate and, if we were to prevail, 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.

Intellectual property rights do not address all potential threats to any competitive advantage we may have.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and intellectual property rights may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. The following examples are illustrative:

•

Others may be able to make compounds that are the same as or similar to our current or future product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or have exclusively licensed.

•

We or any of our licensors or strategic partners might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patent or pending patent application that we own or have exclusively licensed.

•

We or any of our licensors or strategic partners might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions.

•

Others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights.

•

The prosecution of our pending patent applications may not result in granted patents.

•

Granted patents that we own or have exclusively licensed may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or may be held invalid or unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our competitors.

•

Patent protection on our product candidates may expire before we are able to develop and commercialize the product, or before we are able to recover our investment in the product.

•

Our competitors might conduct research and development activities in the United States and other countries that provide a safe harbor from patent infringement claims for such activities, as well as in countries in which we do not have patent rights, and may then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in markets where we intend to market our product candidates.

The existence of counterfeit pharmaceutical products in pharmaceutical markets may damage our brand and reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, operations and prospects.*

Counterfeit products, including counterfeit pharmaceutical products, are a significant problem, particularly in China. Counterfeit pharmaceuticals are products sold under the same or very similar brand names and/or having a similar appearance to genuine products,

but which are sold without proper licenses or approvals. Such products divert sales from genuine products, often are of lower cost, often are of lower quality (having different ingredients or formulations, for example), and have the potential to damage the reputation for quality and effectiveness of the genuine product. If counterfeit pharmaceuticals illegally sold under our brand name result in adverse side effects to consumers, we may be associated with any negative publicity resulting from such incidents. Consumers may buy counterfeit pharmaceuticals that are in direct competition with our pharmaceuticals, which could have an adverse impact on our revenues, business and results of operations. In addition, the use of counterfeit products could be used in non-clinical or clinical studies, or could otherwise produce undesirable side effects or adverse events that may be attributed to our products as well, which could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities and potential product liability claims. With respect to China, although the government has recently been increasingly active in policing counterfeit pharmaceuticals, there is not yet an effective counterfeit pharmaceutical regulation control and enforcement system in China. As a result, we may not be able to prevent third parties from selling or purporting to sell our products in China. The proliferation of counterfeit pharmaceuticals has grown in recent years and may continue to grow in the future. The existence of and any increase in the sales and production of counterfeit pharmaceuticals, or the technological capabilities of counterfeiters, could negatively impact our revenues, brand reputation, business and results of operations.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

The regulatory approval process is highly uncertain and we may not obtain regulatory approval for the commercialization of our product candidates.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities is unpredictable, but typically takes many years following the commencement of preclinical studies and clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that neither roxadustat nor FG-3019, nor any future product candidates we may discover, in-license or acquire and seek to develop in the future, will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities for many reasons, including:

•

disagreement over the design or implementation of our clinical trials;

•

failure to demonstrate that a product candidate is safe and effective for its proposed indication;

•

failure of clinical trials to meet the level of statistical significance required for approval;

•

failure to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;

•

disagreement over our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•

disagreement over whether to accept efficacy results from clinical trial sites outside the United States where the standard of care is potentially different from that in the United States;

•

the insufficiency of data collected from clinical trials of our present or future product candidates to support the submission and filing of an NDA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval;

•

disapproval of the manufacturing processes or facilities of either our manufacturing plant or third party manufacturers with whom we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; or

•

changes in the approval policies or regulations that render our preclinical and clinical data insufficient for approval.

The FDA or other regulatory authorities may require more information, including additional preclinical or clinical data to support approval, which may delay or prevent approval and our commercialization plans, or we may decide to abandon the development program altogether. Even if we do obtain regulatory approval, our product candidates may be approved for fewer or more limited indications than we request, approval may be contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or approval may require labeling that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. In addition, if our product candidates produce undesirable side effects or safety issues, the FDA may require the establishment of REMS or other regulatory authorities may require the establishment of a similar strategy, that may, restrict distribution of our approved products, if any, and impose burdensome implementation requirements on us. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.

Even if we believe our current or planned clinical trials are successful, regulatory authorities may not agree that our completed clinical trials provide adequate data on safety or efficacy. Approval by one regulatory authority does not ensure approval by any other

regulatory authority. However, a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others. We may not be able to file for regulatory approvals and even if we file we may not receive the necessary approvals to commercialize our product candidates in any market.

If our product candidates obtain marketing approval, we will be subject to more extensive healthcare laws, regulation and enforcement and our failure to comply with those laws could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

If we obtain approval for any of our product candidates, the regulatory requirements applicable to our operations, in particular our sales and marketing efforts, will increase significantly with respect to our operations and the potential for civil and criminal enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments will increase with respect to the conduct of our business. The laws that may affect our operations in the United States include:

•

the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce, or in return for, the purchase or recommendation of an item or service reimbursable under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs;

•

federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third party payors that are false or fraudulent;

•

the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), which created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program and making false statements relating to healthcare matters;

•

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), and its implementing regulations, which imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information;

•

the federal physician sunshine requirements under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively “PPACA”), which requires manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics, and medical supplies to report annually to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians, other healthcare providers, and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians and other healthcare providers and their immediate family members; and

•

foreign and state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”), anti-kickback and false claims laws that may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third party payor, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts.

The scope of these laws and our lack of experience in establishing the compliance programs necessary to comply with this complex and evolving regulatory environment increases the risks that we may violate the applicable laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and imprisonment, any of which could materially adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

The impact of recent United States healthcare reform and other changes in the healthcare industry and in healthcare spending is currently unknown, and may adversely affect our business model.*

The commercial potential for our approved products, if any, could be affected by changes in healthcare spending and policy in the United States and abroad. We operate in a highly regulated industry and new laws, regulations or judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or decisions, related to healthcare availability, the method of delivery or payment for healthcare products and services could negatively impact our business, operations and financial condition.

In the United States, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (the “MMA”), altered Medicare coverage and payments for pharmaceutical products. The legislation expanded Medicare coverage for drug purchases by the elderly and introduced a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for physician-administered drugs. The MMA also provided authority for limiting the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class and as a result, we expect that there will be additional pressure to reduce costs. For example, the CMS in implementing the MMA has enacted regulations that reduced capitated payments to dialysis providers. These cost reduction initiatives and other provisions of the MMA could decrease the scope of coverage and the price that may be received for any approved dialysis products and could seriously harm our business and financial condition. While the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, and any reduction in reimbursement that results from the MMA may cause a similar reduction in payments from private payors. Similar regulations or reimbursement policies have been enacted in many international markets which could similarly impact the commercial potential for our products.

Under the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (“MIPPA”), a basic case-mix adjusted composite, or bundled, payment system commenced in January 2011 and transitioned fully by January 2014 to a single reimbursement rate for drugs and all services furnished by renal dialysis centers for Medicare beneficiaries with end-stage renal disease. Specifically, under MIPPA the bundle now covers drugs, services, lab tests and supplies under a single treatment base rate for reimbursement by CMS based on the average cost per treatment, including the cost of ESAs and IV iron doses, typically without adjustment for usage. It is unknown whether roxadustat, if approved, will be included in the payment bundle. Under MIPPA, agents that have no IV equivalent in the bundle are currently expected to be excluded from the bundle until 2025. If roxadustat were included in the bundle, it may reduce the price that could be charged, and therefore potentially limit our profitability. Based on roxadustat’s differentiated mechanism of action and therapeutic effects, and discussions with our collaboration partner, we currently believe that roxadustat might not be included in the bundle. If roxadustat is reimbursed outside of the bundle, it may potentially limit or delay market penetration of roxadustat.

More recently, the PPACA was enacted in 2010 with a goal of reducing the cost of healthcare and substantially changing the way healthcare is financed by both government and private insurers. The PPACA, among other things, increases the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, establishes annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs, and creates a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the PPACA was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 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 of Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013.

It is likely that federal and state legislatures within the United States and foreign governments will continue to consider changes to existing healthcare legislation. We cannot predict the reform initiatives that may be adopted in the future or whether initiatives that have been adopted will be repealed or modified. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect:

•

the demand for any products that may be approved for sale;

•

the price and profitability of our products;

•

pricing, coverage and reimbursement applicable to our products;

•

the ability to successfully position and market any approved product; and

•

the taxes applicable to our pharmaceutical product revenues.

We may not be able to conduct, or contract others to conduct, animal testing in the future, which could harm our research and development activities.

Certain laws and regulations relating to drug development 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 or delayed.

Our employees may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could result in significant liability for us and harm our reputation.

We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct, including intentional failure to:

•

comply with FDA regulations or similar regulations of comparable foreign regulatory authorities;

•

provide accurate information to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities;

•

comply with manufacturing standards we have established;

•

comply with federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations and similar laws and regulations established and enforced by comparable foreign regulatory authorities;

•

comply with the FCPA and other anti-bribery laws.

•

report financial information or data accurately; or

•

disclose unauthorized activities to us.

Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions, delays in clinical trials, or serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct for our directors, officers and employees (“Code of Business Conduct and Ethics”), but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct. The precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, including through the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could harm our business.

We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with such laws and regulations. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations applicable to our operations in the United States and foreign countries. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or manufacturing efforts. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Risks Related to Our International Operations

We are establishing international operations and seeking approval to commercialize our product candidates outside of the United States, in particular in China, and a number of risks associated with international operations could materially and adversely affect our business.

We expect to be subject to a number risks related with our international operations, many of which may be beyond our control. These risks include:

•

different regulatory requirements for drug approvals in foreign countries;

•

different standards of care in various countries that could complicate the evaluation of our product candidates;

•

different United States and foreign drug import and export rules;

•

reduced protection for intellectual property rights in certain countries;

•

unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers and regulatory requirements;

•

different reimbursement systems and different competitive drugs indicated to treat the indications for which our product candidates are being developed;

•

economic weakness, including inflation, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;

•

compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad;

•

compliance with the FCPA and other anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws;

•

foreign taxes, including withholding of payroll taxes;

•

foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenues, and other obligations incident to doing business in another country;

•

workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the United States;

•

production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad;

•

potential liability resulting from development work conducted by foreign distributors; and

•

business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism, or natural disasters.

The pharmaceutical industry in China is highly regulated and such regulations are subject to change.

The pharmaceutical industry in China is subject to comprehensive government regulation and supervision, encompassing the approval, registration, manufacturing, packaging, licensing and marketing of new drugs. Refer to “Business—Government Regulation—Regulation in China” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 for a discussion of the regulatory requirements that are applicable to our current and planned business activities in China. In recent years, the regulatory framework in China regarding the pharmaceutical industry has undergone significant changes, and we expect that it will continue to undergo significant changes. Any such changes or amendments may result in increased compliance costs on our business or cause delays in or prevent the successful development or commercialization of our product candidates in China. Chinese authorities have become increasingly vigilant in enforcing laws in the pharmaceutical industry, in some cases launching industry-wide investigations, oftentimes appearing to focus on foreign companies. The costs and time necessary to respond to an investigation can be material. Any failure by us or our partners to maintain compliance with applicable laws and regulations or obtain and maintain required licenses and permits may result in the suspension or termination of our business activities in China.

Patients’ use of traditional Chinese medicine in violation of study protocols in our China studies may lead the CFDA and regulators in other jurisdictions in which we are seeking approval to suspend our studies, reject our study data and withhold approval for roxadustat.

A common issue encountered in conducting clinical studies in China is patients’ use of traditional Chinese medicine in violation of study protocols. We believe that many patients with anemia in CKD are currently being treated with traditional Chinese medicine, and it is possible that such patients may continue their use of traditional Chinese medicine after enrollment in our studies and in violation of study protocols. If the patients participating in our China clinical studies do not comply with study protocols and continue to use traditional Chinese medicine, adverse events may emerge in our studies that are due to such traditional Chinese medicine or the interaction between such traditional Chinese medicine and roxadustat. In addition, the use of traditional Chinese medicine by patients in our studies may confound our study results. The occurrence of such adverse events or the confounding of our study results may lead the China Food and Drug Administration (“CFDA”) and regulators in other jurisdictions in which we are seeking approval to, among other things, suspend our studies, reject our study data and withhold approval for roxadustat.

We are building our own manufacturing facility in China to produce roxadustat and clinical trial material for our corneal implant program. As an organization, we have limited experience in the construction or operation of a manufacturing plant, and, accordingly we cannot assure you we will be able to meet regulatory requirements to operate our plant and to sell our products.*

In 2014, we received a Pharmaceutical Production Permit for our facility in China in which we intend to manufacture roxadustat. The Pharmaceutical Production Permit allowed us to produce the NDA registration campaign of roxadustat according to GMP. However, we have not yet received a license for commercial manufacture of roxadustat. As an organization, we have limited experience building a manufacturing facility in the past and our facility must be constructed, licensed and operated in conformity with applicable cGMP requirements. We will be obligated to comply with continuing cGMP requirements and there can be no assurance that we will receive and maintain all of the appropriate licenses required to manufacture our product candidates for clinical and commercial use in China. In addition, we and our product suppliers must continually spend time, money and effort in production, record-keeping and quality assurance and appropriate controls in order to ensure that any products manufactured in our facility meet applicable specifications and other requirements for product safety, efficacy and quality and there can be no assurance that our efforts will succeed for licensure or continue to be successful in meeting these requirements.

We would require separate approval for the manufacture of FG-5200. In addition, we may convert our existing manufacturing process of FG-5200 to a semi-automated process which may require us to show that implants from our new manufacturing process are comparable to the implants from our existing manufacturing process. There can be no assurance that we will successfully receive licensure and maintain approval for the manufacture of either or both of roxadustat or FG-5200, either of which would be expected to delay or preclude our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates in China and may materially adversely affect our business and operations and prospects in China.

Manufacturing facilities in China are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the CFDA and other regulatory authorities. We expect to depend on these facilities for our product candidates and business operations in China. Natural disasters or other unanticipated catastrophic events, including power interruptions, water shortages, storms, fires, earthquakes, terrorist attacks, government appropriation of our facility, and wars, could significantly impair our ability to operate our manufacturing facility. Certain equipment, records and other materials located in these facilities would be difficult to replace or would require substantial replacement lead time that would impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates in China. The occurrence of any such event could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects.

Our decision to seek approval in China for roxadustat prior to approval in the United States or Europe is largely unprecedented and could be subject to significant risk, delay and expense.*

Our Chinese subsidiary, FibroGen (China) Medical Technology Development Co., Ltd. (“FibroGen Beijing”), plans to seek approval for roxadustat in China as a Domestic Class 1.1 Drug which we believe, if approved, would be the first CFDA approval of a first in class drug candidate while Phase 3 trials are ongoing in the United States and Europe. Because of this largely novel regulatory pathway, the CFDA approval process may take longer than we currently expect, or the CFDA may require us to submit additional data including data from the U.S. or European Phase 3 trials. In addition, negative data from the U.S. or European Phase 3 trials could impact the CFDA approval process. Any such development delays would result in significant delay in our commercialization plans for roxadustat in China. Elements of our plan for approval of roxadustat and other product candidates in China are based on communications with the CFDA, some of which are not reflected in formal written communications, regulations, findings or determinations. Accordingly, while we believe we have understandings with the CFDA regarding the domestic drug approval process and the clinical data currently required for approval, the regulatory authorities may later determine that changes are required in the drug approval process, that additional or different clinical data must be generated, any of which could significantly delay approval of roxadustat or any of our other product candidates, and materially and adversely affect our plans and operations in China. For example, the recent backlog of CFDA review of clinical trial applications has delayed the start of our Phase 3 clinical trials in China and potentially could delay market approval of roxadustat in China. It is also possible that other unforeseen delays in the China regulatory process could have a material adverse effect on our development and commercialization of roxadustat in China.

Even if roxadustat is approved in China, we and our collaboration partner in China, AstraZeneca, may experience difficulties in successfully generating sales of roxadustat in China.

We and AstraZeneca have a profit sharing arrangement with respect to roxadustat in China. Even if roxadustat is approved for sale in China, we and AstraZeneca may experience difficulties in our marketing, commercialization and sales efforts in China, and our business and operations could be adversely affected. In particular, sales of roxadustat in China may be limited due to the complex nature of the healthcare system, low average personal income, lack of patient cost reimbursement, pricing controls, poorly developed infrastructure and potentially rapid competition from other products.

The market for treatments of anemia in CKD in China is highly competitive.

Even if roxadustat is approved in China, it will face intense competition in the market for treatments of anemia in CKD. Roxadustat would compete with ESAs, which are offered by established multinational pharmaceutical companies such as Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co. Ltd. and Roche and Chinese pharmaceutical companies such as 3SBio Inc. and Di’ao Group Chengdu Diao Jiuhong Pharmaceutical Factory. Many of these competitors have substantially greater name recognition, scientific, financial and marketing resources as well as established distribution capabilities than we do. Many of our competitors have more resources to develop or acquire, and more experience in developing or acquiring, new products and in creating market awareness for those products. Many of these competitors have significantly more experience than we have in navigating the Chinese regulatory framework regarding the development, manufacturing and marketing of drugs in China, as well as in marketing and selling anemia products in China. Additionally, we believe that most patients with anemia in CKD in China are currently being treated with traditional Chinese medicine, which is widely accepted and highly prevalent in China. Traditional Chinese medicine treatments are often oral and thus convenient and low-cost, and practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine are numerous and accessible in China. As a result, it may be difficult to persuade patients with anemia in CKD to switch from traditional Chinese medicine to roxadustat.

There is no assurance that roxadustat will be included in the Medical Insurance Catalogs.

Eligible participants in the national basic medical insurance program in China, which consists of mostly urban residents, are entitled to reimbursement from the social medical insurance fund for up to the entire cost of medicines that are included in the Medical Insurance Catalogs. Refer to “Business—Government Regulation—Regulation in China” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014. We believe that the inclusion of a drug in the Medical Insurance Catalogs can substantially improve the sales of a drug. The Ministry of Labor and Social Security in China (the “MLSS”) together with other government authorities, select medicines to be included in the Medical Insurance Catalogs based on a variety of factors, including treatment requirements, frequency of use, effectiveness and price. The MLSS also occasionally removes medicines from such catalogs. There can be no assurance that roxadustat will be included, and once included, remain in the Medical Insurance Catalogs. The exclusion or removal of roxadustat from the Medical Insurance Catalogs may materially and adversely affect sales of roxadustat.

We may not be successful in the tender processes for the purchase of medicines by state-owned and state-controlled hospitals.

Most hospitals in China participate in collective tender processes for the purchase of medicines listed in the Medical Insurance Catalogs and medicines that are consumed in large volumes and commonly prescribed for clinical uses. During a collective tender process, the hospitals will establish a committee consisting of recognized pharmaceutical experts. The committee will assess the bids submitted by the various participating pharmaceutical manufacturers, taking into consideration, among other things, the quality and price of the drug product and the service and reputation of the manufacturer. Only drug products that have been selected in the collective tender processes may be purchased by participating hospitals. If we are unable to win purchase contracts through the collective tender processes in which we decide to participate, there will be limited demand for roxadustat, and sales revenues from roxadustat will be materially and adversely affected.

We plan to seek approval for FG-5200 as a medical device, with respect to which we have no development and manufacturing experience. Even if FG-5200 can be manufactured successfully and achieve regulatory approval, we may not achieve commercial success.

We plan to seek regulatory approval for FG-5200 as a medical device, with which we have no development and manufacturing experience. There can be no assurance that we will achieve medical device designation or receive approval for FG-5200. In addition, we have not yet used the material planned for our clinical trials of FG-5200 in any previous clinical trials and because we have not yet received a license to manufacture FG-5200 in our China manufacturing facility or at scale, we will have to show that FG-5200 from our China manufacturing facility meets the applicable regulatory requirements. There can be no assurance that we can meet these requirements or that FG-5200 can be approved for development, manufacture and sale in China.

Even if we are able to manufacture and develop FG-5200 as a medical device in China, the size and length of any potential clinical trials required for approval are uncertain and we are unable to predict the time and investment required to obtain regulatory approval. Moreover, even if FG-5200 can be successfully developed for approval in China, our product candidate would require extensive training and investment in assisting physicians in the use of FG-5200.

The retail prices of any product candidates that we develop may be subject to control, including periodic downward adjustment, by Chinese government authorities.

The price for pharmaceutical products is highly regulated in China, both at the national and provincial level. Price controls may reduce prices to levels significantly below those that would prevail in less regulated markets or limit the volume of products which may be sold, either of which may have a material and adverse effect on potential revenues from sales of roxadustat in China. Moreover, the process and timing for the implementation of price restrictions is unpredictable, which may cause potential revenues from the sales of roxadustat to fluctuate from period to period.

If our planned business activities in China fall within a restricted category under the China Catalog for Guidance for Foreign Investment, we will need to operate in China through a variable interest entity structure.

The China Catalog for Guidance for Foreign Investment sets forth the industries and sectors that the Chinese government encourages and restricts with respect to foreign investment and participation. The Catalog for Guidance for Foreign Investment is subject to revision from time to time by the China Ministry of Commerce. While we currently do not believe the development and marketing of roxadustat falls within a restricted category under the Catalog for Guidance for Foreign Investment, if roxadustat does fall under such a restricted category, we will need to operate in China through a variable interest entity (“VIE”) structure. A VIE structure involves a wholly foreign-owned enterprise that would control and receive the economic benefits of a domestic Chinese company through various contractual relationships. Such a structure would subject us to a number of risks that may have an adverse effect on our business, including that the Chinese government may determine that such contractual arrangements do not comply with applicable regulations, Chinese tax authorities may require us to pay additional taxes, shareholders of our VIEs may have potential conflicts of interest with us, and we may lose the ability to use and enjoy assets held by our VIEs that are important to the operations of our business if such entities go bankrupt or become subject to dissolution or liquidation proceedings. VIE structures in China have come

under increasing scrutiny from accounting firms and the Securities and Exchange Commission ( “SEC”) staff. If we do attempt to use a VIE structure and are unsuccessful in structuring it so as to qualify as a VIE, we would not be able to consolidate the financial statements of the VIE with our financial statements, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.

FibroGen Beijing would be subject to restrictions on paying dividends or making other payments to us, which may restrict our ability to satisfy our liquidity requirements.*

We plan to conduct all of our business in China through FibroGen Beijing. We may rely on dividends and royalties paid by FibroGen Beijing for a portion of our cash needs, including the funds necessary to service any debt we may incur and to pay our operating expenses. The payment of dividends by FibroGen Beijing is subject to limitations. Regulations in China currently permit payment of dividends only out of accumulated profits as determined in accordance with accounting standards and regulations in China. FibroGen Beijing is not permitted to distribute any profits until losses from prior fiscal years have been recouped and in any event must maintain certain minimum capital requirements. FibroGen Beijing is also required to set aside at least 10.0% of its after-tax profit based on Chinese accounting standards each year to its statutory reserve fund until the cumulative amount of such reserves reaches 50.0% of its registered capital. Statutory reserves are not distributable as cash dividends. In addition, if FibroGen Beijing incurs debt on its own behalf in the future, the agreements governing such debt may restrict its ability to pay dividends or make other distributions to us. As of June 30, 2015, approximately $4.0 million of our cash and cash equivalents is held in China.

Any capital contributions from us to FibroGen Beijing must be approved by the Ministry of Commerce in China and failure to obtain such approval may materially and adversely affect the liquidity position of FibroGen Beijing.

The Ministry of Commerce in China or its local counterpart must approve the amount and use of any capital contributions from us to FibroGen Beijing, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to complete the necessary government registrations and obtain the necessary government approvals on a timely basis, or at all. If we fail to do so, we may not be able to contribute additional capital to fund our Chinese operations, and the liquidity and financial position of FibroGen Beijing may be materially and adversely affected.

We may be subject to currency exchange rate fluctuations and currency exchange restrictions with respect to our operations in China, which could adversely affect our financial performance.

If roxadustat is approved for sale in China, most of our product sales will occur in local Chinese currency and our operating results will be subject to volatility from currency exchange rate fluctuations. To date, we have not hedged against the risks associated with fluctuations in exchange rates and, therefore, exchange rate fluctuations could have an adverse impact on our future operating results. Changes in value of the Renminbi against the U.S. dollar, Euro and other currencies is affected by, among other things, changes in China’s political and economic conditions. Currently, the Renminbi is permitted to fluctuate within a narrow and managed band against a basket of certain foreign currencies. Any significant currency exchange rate fluctuations may have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

In addition, the Chinese government imposes controls on the convertibility of the Renminbi into foreign currencies and the remittance of foreign currency out of China for certain transactions. Shortages in the availability of foreign currency may restrict the ability of FibroGen Beijing to remit sufficient foreign currency to pay dividends or other payments to us, or otherwise satisfy their foreign currency-denominated obligations. Under existing Chinese foreign exchange regulations, payments of current account items, including profit distributions, interest payments and balance of trade, can be made in foreign currencies without prior approval from the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (“SAFE”) by complying with certain procedural requirements. However, approval from SAFE or its local branch is required where Renminbi is to be converted into foreign currency and remitted out of China to pay capital expenses such as the repayment of loans denominated in foreign currencies. The Chinese government may also at its discretion restrict access in the future to foreign currencies for current account transactions. If the foreign exchange control system prevents us from obtaining sufficient foreign currency to satisfy our operational requirements, our liquidity and financial position may be materially and adversely affected.

Because FibroGen Beijing’s funds are held in banks that do not provide insurance, the failure of any bank in which FibroGen Beijing deposits its funds could adversely affect our business.

Banks and other financial institutions in China do not provide insurance for funds held on deposit. As a result, in the event of a bank failure, FibroGen Beijing may not have access to funds on deposit. Depending upon the amount of money FibroGen Beijing maintains in a bank that fails, its inability to have access to cash could materially impair its operations.

We may be subject to tax inefficiencies associated with our offshore corporate structure.

The tax regulations of the United States and other jurisdictions in which we operate are extremely complex and subject to change. New laws, new interpretations of existing laws, or limitations on our ability to structure our operations and intercompany transactions may lead to inefficient tax treatment of our revenue, profits, royalties and distributions, if any are achieved. For example, under the Internal Revenue Code, certain types of income derived by our foreign subsidiaries that are controlled foreign corporations could give rise to a current inclusion of income to FibroGen, Inc., for U.S. tax purposes.

In addition, we and our foreign subsidiaries have various intercompany transactions. We may not be able to obtain certain benefits under relevant tax treaties to avoid double taxation on certain transactions among our subsidiaries. If we are not able to avail ourselves of the tax treaties, we could be subject to additional taxes, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The enactment of legislation implementing changes in the U.S. taxation of international business activities or the adoption of other tax reform policies could materially impact our financial position and results of operations.

The current Administration has proposed, and Congress has introduced, legislation to reform the U.S. taxation of international business activities, including, but not limited to, limiting the ability of taxpayers to claim and utilize foreign tax credits, limiting the check-the-box regime, revising the rules applicable to transfers of intangible property, and deferring certain tax deductions until non-U.S. earnings are repatriated to the United States. The current Administration has made public statements indicating that it has made the issue a priority, and key members of the U.S. Congress have conducted hearings and proposed legislation. Accordingly, depending on the final form of legislation enacted, if any, the consequences of changes to the U.S. taxation of international business activities may be significant for our China business and other offshore activities. If any of these proposals are enacted into legislation, they could have material adverse consequences on our effective tax rate, the amount of tax we pay, our financial position and results of operations.

We have implemented a corporate structure taking into consideration our international operations and potentially applicable tax impact on our worldwide operations, and any changes in applicable tax laws and regulations may negatively impact our financial condition and operating results.

We have developed our corporate structure to be closely aligned with the international nature of our business. There can be no assurance that the applicable tax laws and regulations will continue in effect or that the taxing authorities in any or all of the applicable jurisdictions will not challenge one or more aspects or characterizations of our corporate structure and the treatment of transactions or agreements within our corporate structure, or determine that the manner in which we operate our business is not consistent with our corporate structure. Any unfavorable changes in laws and regulations or positions by tax authorities could harm our financial position and results of operations.

Our foreign operations, particularly those in China, are subject to significant risks involving the protection of intellectual property.

We seek to protect the products and technology that we consider important to our business by filing patent applications in China and other countries, relying on trade secrets or pharmaceutical regulatory protection or employing a combination of these methods. We currently have 3 granted patents and 15 pending patent applications relating to roxadustat in China. Refer to “Business—Intellectual Property” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014. However, the filing of a patent application does not mean that we will be granted a patent, or that any patent eventually granted will be as broad as requested in the patent application or will be sufficient to protect our technology. There are a number of factors that could cause our patents, if granted, to become invalid or unenforceable or that could cause our patent applications not to be granted, including known or unknown prior art, deficiencies in the patent application, or lack of originality of the technology. Furthermore, the terms of our patents are limited. The patents we hold and patents that may be granted from our currently pending patent applications have, absent any patent term adjustment or extension, a twenty-year protection period starting from the date of application.

Intellectual property rights and confidentiality protections in China may not be as effective as those in the United States or other countries for many reasons, including lack of procedural rules for discovery and evidence, low damage awards, and lack of judicial independence. Implementation and enforcement of Chinese intellectual property laws have historically been deficient and ineffective and may be hampered by corruption and local protectionism. Policing unauthorized use of proprietary technology is difficult and expensive, and we may need to resort to litigation to enforce or defend patents issued to us or to determine the enforceability and validity of our proprietary rights or those of others. The experience and capabilities of Chinese courts in handling intellectual property litigation varies and outcomes are unpredictable. An adverse determination in any such litigation could materially impair our intellectual property rights and may harm our business.

We are subject to laws and regulations governing corruption, which will require us to develop and implement costly compliance programs.

We must comply with a wide range of laws and regulations to prevent corruption, bribery, and other unethical business practices, including the FCPA, anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws in other countries, particularly China. The creation and implementation of international business practices compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required.

Anti-bribery laws prohibit us, our employees, and some of our agents or representatives from offering or providing any personal benefit to covered government officials to influence their performance of their duties or induce them to serve interests other than the missions of the public organizations in which they serve. Certain commercial bribery rules also prohibit offering or providing any personal benefit to employees and representatives of commercial companies to influence their performance of their duties or induce them to serve interests other than their employers. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with certain accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations. The anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA are enforced primarily by the Department of Justice (“DOJ”). The SEC is involved with enforcement of the books and records provisions of the FCPA.

Compliance with these anti-bribery laws is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the anti-bribery laws present particular challenges in the pharmaceutical industry because in many countries, including China, hospitals are state-owned or operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees are considered foreign government officials. Furthermore, in certain countries (China in particular), hospitals and clinics are permitted to sell pharmaceuticals to their patients and are primary or significant distributors of pharmaceuticals. Certain payments to hospitals in connection with clinical studies, procurement of pharmaceuticals and other work have been deemed to be improper payments to government officials that have led to vigorous anti-bribery law enforcement actions and heavy fines in multiple jurisdictions, particularly in the United States and China.

It is not always possible to identify and deter violations, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations.

In the pharmaceutical industry, corrupt practices include, among others, acceptance of kickbacks, bribes or other illegal gains or benefits by the hospitals and medical practitioners from pharmaceutical manufacturers, distributors or their third party agents in connection with the prescription of certain pharmaceuticals. If our employees, affiliates, distributors or third party marketing firms violate these laws or otherwise engage in illegal practices with respect to their sales or marketing of our products or other activities involving our products, we could be required to pay damages or heavy fines by multiple jurisdictions where we operate, which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. The Chinese government has also sponsored anti-corruption campaigns from time to time, which could have a chilling effect on any future marketing efforts by us to new hospital customers. There have been recent occurrences in which certain hospitals have denied access to sales representatives from pharmaceutical companies because the hospitals wanted to avoid the perception of corruption. If this attitude becomes widespread among our potential customers, our ability to promote our products to hospitals may be adversely affected.

As we expand our operations in China and other jurisdictions internationally, we will need to increase the scope of our compliance programs to address the risks relating to the potential for violations of the FCPA and other anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws. Our compliance programs will need to include policies addressing not only the FCPA, but also the provisions of a variety of anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws in multiple foreign jurisdictions, including China, provisions relating to books and records that apply to us as a public company, and include effective training for our personnel throughout our organization. The creation and implementation of anti-corruption compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required. Violation of the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws can result in significant administrative and criminal penalties for us and our employees, including substantial fines, suspension or debarment from government contracting, prison sentences, or even the death penalty in extremely serious cases in certain countries. The SEC also may suspend or bar us from trading securities on U.S. exchanges for violation of the FCPA’s accounting provisions. Even if we are not ultimately punished by government authorities, the costs of investigation and review, distraction of company personnel, legal defense costs, and harm to our reputation could be substantial and could limit our profitability or our ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates. In addition, if any of our competitors are not subject to the FCPA, they may engage in practices that will lead to their receipt of preferential treatment from foreign hospitals and enable them to secure business from foreign hospitals in ways that are unavailable to us.

Uncertainties with respect to the China legal system could have a material adverse effect on us.

The legal system of China is a civil law system primarily based on written statutes. Unlike in a common law system, prior court decisions may be cited for reference but are not binding. Because the China legal system continues to rapidly evolve, the interpretations of many laws, regulations and rules are not always uniform and enforcement of these laws, regulations and rules involve uncertainties, which may limit legal protections available to us. Moreover, decision makers in the China judicial system have

significant discretion in interpreting and implementing statutory and contractual terms, which may render it difficult for FibroGen Beijing to enforce the contracts it has entered into with our business partners, customers and suppliers. Different government departments may have different interpretations of certain laws and regulations, and licenses and permits issued or granted by one government authority may be revoked by a higher government authority at a later time. Navigating the uncertainty and change in the China legal system will require the devotion of significant resources and time, and there can be no assurance that our contractual and other rights will ultimately be enforced.

Changes in China’s economic, political or social conditions or government policies could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

The Chinese economy and Chinese society continue to undergo significant change. Adverse changes in the political and economic policies of the Chinese government could have a material adverse effect on the overall economic growth of China, which could adversely affect our ability to conduct business in China. The Chinese government continues to adjust economic policies to promote economic growth. Some of these measures benefit the overall Chinese economy, but may also have a negative effect on us. For example, our financial condition and results of operations in China may be adversely affected by government control over capital investments or changes in tax regulations. As the Chinese pharmaceutical industry grows and evolves, the Chinese government may also implement measures to change the structure of foreign investment in this industry. We are unable to predict the frequency and scope of such policy changes, any of which could materially and adversely affect FibroGen Beijing’s liquidity, access to capital and its ability to conduct business in China. Any failure on our part to comply with changing government regulations and policies could result in the loss of our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates in China.

Our operations in China subject us to various Chinese labor and social insurance laws, and our failure to comply with such laws may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.*

We are subject to various Chinese labor laws, such as the Labor Contract Law, which, among others, limits the circumstances under which we may terminate labor contracts or hire contingent workers, and requires severance pay upon the termination of an employment contract. In addition, companies operating in China are generally required to contribute to labor union funds, mandatory social insurance and housing funds. Any failure by us to comply with Chinese labor and social insurance laws may subject us to late fees, fines and penalties, or cause the suspension or termination of our ability to conduct business in China, any of which could have a material and adverse effect on business, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to the Operation of Our Business

We may encounter difficulties in managing our growth and expanding our operations successfully.

As we seek to advance our product candidates through clinical trials and commercialization, we will need to expand our development, regulatory, manufacturing, commercialization and administration capabilities or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities for us. As our operations expand and we continue to undertake the efforts and expense to operate as a public reporting company, we expect that we will need to increase the responsibilities on members of management in order to manage any future growth effectively. Our failure to accomplish any of these steps could prevent us from successfully implementing our strategy and maintaining the confidence of investors in our company.

If we fail to attract and keep senior management and key personnel, in particular our chief executive officer, we may be unable to successfully develop our product candidates, conduct our clinical trials and commercialize our product candidates.

We are highly dependent on our chief executive officer, Thomas B. Neff, and other members of our senior management team. The loss of the services of Mr. Neff or any of these other individuals would be expected to significantly negatively impact the development and commercialization of our product candidates, our existing collaborative relationships and our ability to successfully implement our business strategy.

Recruiting and retaining qualified commercial, development, scientific, clinical and manufacturing personnel are and will continue to be critical to our success. Furthermore, replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to successfully develop, gain regulatory approval of and commercialize product candidates. We may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms given the intense competition among numerous biopharmaceutical companies for similar personnel.

There is also significant competition, in particular in the San Francisco Bay Area, for the hiring of experienced and qualified personnel, which increases the importance of retention of our existing personnel. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain personnel with the quality and experience applicable to our product candidates, our ability to pursue our strategy will be limited and our business and operations would be adversely affected.

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing, manufacturing and commercialization of our product candidates. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in a product, negligence, strict liability or breach of warranty. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we are unable to obtain insurance coverage at levels that are appropriate to maintain our business and operations, or if we are unable to successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or otherwise cease operations. Product liability claims may result in:

•

termination of further development of unapproved product candidates or significantly reduced demand for any approved products;

•

material costs and expenses to defend the related litigation;

•

a diversion of time and resources across the entire organization, including our executive management;

•

product recalls, withdrawals or labeling restrictions;

•

termination of our collaboration relationships or disputes with our collaboration partners; and

•

reputational damage negatively impacting our other product candidates in development.

If we fail to obtain and retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims, we may not be able to continue to develop our product candidates. We maintain product liability insurance in a customary amount for the stage of development of our product candidates. Although we believe that we have sufficient coverage based on the advice of our third party advisors, there can be no assurance that such levels will be sufficient for our needs. Moreover, our insurance policies have various exclusions, and we may be in a dispute with our carrier as to the extent and nature of our coverage, including whether we are covered under the applicable product liability policy. If we are not able to ensure coverage or are required to pay substantial amounts to settle or otherwise contest the claims for product liability, our business and operations would be negatively affected.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of computer system failures.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, and those of our CROs, collaboration partners, and other third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, fire, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our drug development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of our product candidates could be delayed.

Our headquarters and data storage facilities are located near known earthquake fault zones. The occurrence of an earthquake, fire or any other catastrophic event could disrupt our operations or the operations of third parties who provide vital support functions to us, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We and some of the third party service providers on which we depend for various support functions, such as data storage, are vulnerable to damage from catastrophic events, such as power loss, natural disasters, terrorism and similar unforeseen events beyond our control. Our corporate headquarters and other facilities are located in the San Francisco Bay Area, which in the past has experienced severe earthquakes and fires.

We do not carry earthquake insurance. Earthquakes or other natural disasters could severely disrupt our operations, and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters, damaged critical infrastructure, such as our data storage facilities, enterprise financial systems or manufacturing resource planning and enterprise quality systems, or otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans we have in place currently are limited

and are unlikely to prove adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of our disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are operating from single sites, increasing their vulnerability to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile, and you may not be able to resell your shares at or above your purchase price.

In general, pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences company stocks have been highly volatile in the current market. The volatility of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences company stocks is sometimes unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies and biotechnology and life science companies stocks often respond to trends and perceptions rather than financial performance. In particular, the market price of shares of our common stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to the following factors:

•

results of clinical trials of our product candidates, including roxadustat and FG-3019;

•

the timing of the release of results of and regulatory updates regarding our clinical trials;

•

the level of expenses related to any of our product candidates or clinical development programs;

•

results of clinical trials of our competitors’ products;

•

safety issues with respect to our product candidates or our competitors’ products;

•

regulatory actions with respect to our product candidates and any approved products or our competitors’ products;

•

fluctuations in our financial condition and operating results, which will be significantly affected by the manner in which we recognize revenue from the achievement of milestones under our collaboration agreements;

•

adverse developments concerning our collaborations and our manufacturers;

•

the termination of a collaboration or the inability to establish additional collaborations;

•

the publication of research reports by securities analysts about us or our competitors or our industry or negative recommendations or withdrawal of research coverage by securities analysts;

•

the inability to obtain adequate product supply for any approved drug product or inability to do so at acceptable prices;

•

disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies;

•

the ineffectiveness of our internal controls;

•

our failure or the failure of our competitors to meet analysts’ projections or guidance that we or our competitors may give to the market;

•

additions and departures of key personnel;

•

announced strategic decisions by us or our competitors;

•

changes in legislation or other regulatory developments affecting our product candidates or our industry;

•

fluctuations in the valuation of the biotechnology industry and particular companies perceived by investors to be comparable to us;

•

sales of our common stock by us, our insiders or our other stockholders;

•

speculation in the press or investment community;

•

announcement or expectation of additional financing efforts;

•

announcements of investigations or regulatory scrutiny of our operations or lawsuits filed against us;

•

changes in accounting principles;

•

activities of the government of China, including those related to the pharmaceutical industry as well as industrial policy generally;

•

performance of other United States publicly traded companies with significant operations in China;

•

terrorist acts, acts of war or periods of widespread civil unrest;

•

natural disasters such as earthquakes and other calamities;

•

changes in market conditions for biopharmaceutical stocks;

•

changes in general market and economic conditions; and

•

the other factors described in this “Risk Factors” section.

As a result of fluctuations caused by these and other factors, comparisons of our operating results across different periods may not be accurate indicators of our future performance. Any fluctuations that we report in the future may differ from the expectations of market analysts and investors, which could cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly. Moreover, securities class action litigation has often been initiated against companies following periods of volatility in their stock price. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, and could also require us to make substantial payments to satisfy judgments or to settle litigation.

If securities or industry analysts do not continue to publish research or reports about our business, or if they change their recommendations regarding our stock adversely, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade our stock, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Our principal stockholders and management own a significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exercise significant influence over matters subject to stockholder approval.*

As of July 31, 2015, our executive officers, directors and principal stockholders, together with their respective affiliates, owned approximately 24.2% of our common stock, including shares subject to outstanding options that are exercisable within 60 days after such date and shares issuable upon settlement of restricted stock units that will vest within 60 days after such date. Accordingly, these stockholders will be able to exert a significant degree of influence over our management and affairs and over matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of our board of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. The interests of this group may differ from those of other stockholders and they may vote their shares in a way that is contrary to the way other stockholders vote their shares. This concentration of ownership could have the effect of entrenching our management and/or the board of directors, delaying or preventing a change in our control or otherwise discouraging a potential acquirer from attempting to obtain control of us, which in turn could have a material and adverse effect on the fair market value of our common stock.

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make our common stock less attractive to investors. We will lose our status as an “emerging growth company” at the end of 2015.*

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”) and for so 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. Specifically, the JOBS Act:

•

eliminates the requirement to comply with the auditor attestation requirements in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting;

•

reduces disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation; and

•

exempts us from the requirements of holding a non-binding stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved.

Based on the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2015, we will cease to be an “emerging growth company” at the end of our 2015 fiscal year. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive given that we have chosen to rely on the exemptions available to “emerging growth companies,” and may continue to do so until we cease to be an

“emerging growth company” at the end of 2015, or through a permitted transition period thereafter with regard to certain disclosures. If any investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. However, we chose to “opt out” of such extended transition period, and as a result, we will comply with new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates that adoption of such standards is required for non-emerging growth companies. Our decision to opt out of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards is irrevocable.

Additional remedial measures that may be imposed in the proceedings instituted by the SEC against five China based accounting firms, including the Chinese affiliate of our independent registered public accounting firm, could result in our consolidated financial statements being determined to not be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act.

In late 2012, the SEC commenced administrative proceedings under Rule 102(e) of its Rules of Practice and also under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 against the Chinese affiliates of the “big four” accounting firms, including PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian CPAs Limited, the Chinese affiliate of our independent registered public accounting firm. The Rule 102(e) proceedings initiated by the SEC relate to these firms’ failure to produce documents, including audit work papers, in response to the request of the SEC pursuant to Section 106 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as the auditors located in China are not in a position lawfully to produce documents directly to the SEC because of restrictions under Chinese law and specific directives issued by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (“CSRC”). The issues raised by the proceedings are not specific to our auditors or to us.

In January 2014, an administrative law judge reached an initial decision that the Chinese affiliates of the “big four” accounting firms should be barred from practicing before the SEC for a period of six months. In February 2015, the Chinese affiliates of the “big four” accounting firms each agreed to a censure and to pay a fine to the SEC to settle the dispute and avoid suspension of their ability to practice before the SEC and audit U.S.-listed companies. The settlement required the firms to follow detailed procedures and to seek to provide the SEC with access to Chinese firms’ audit documents via the CSRC. If future document productions fail to meet specified criteria, the SEC retains authority to impose a variety of additional remedial measures on the firms depending on the nature of the failure.

We cannot predict if the SEC will further review the four firms’ compliance with specified criteria or if such further review would result in the SEC imposing additional penalties such as suspensions or commencing any further administrative proceedings. Although it does not play a substantial role (as defined under PCAOB standards) in the audit of our consolidated financial statements, if PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian CPAs Limited were denied, temporarily, the ability to practice before the SEC, our ability to produce audited consolidated financial statements for our company could be affected and we could be determined not to be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act. Such a determination could ultimately lead to the delisting of our shares from the NASDAQ Global Select Market or deregistration from the SEC, or both, which would substantially reduce or effectively terminate the trading of our stock.

We are incurring significant compliance costs as a result of operating as a public company and our management is required to devote substantial resources to public company compliance programs.

As a newly public company, we are incurring significant legal, insurance, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the listing requirements of The NASDAQ Stock Market and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. We are currently and intend to continue to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment will result in increased general and administrative expenses and may divert management’s time and attention from product development activities. If our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related to practice, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed. In the future, it may be more 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 factors could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors, particularly to serve on our audit committee and compensation committee, and qualified executive officers.

Specifically, in order to comply with the requirements of being a public company, we may need to undertake various actions, including implementing new internal controls and procedures and hiring new accounting or internal audit staff. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. We are continuing to develop and refine our disclosure controls and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file with the SEC is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods

specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that information required to be disclosed in reports under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our principal executive and financial officers. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls could adversely affect the results of periodic management evaluations. In the event that we are not able to demonstrate compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, that our internal control over financial reporting is perceived as inadequate, or that we are unable to produce timely or accurate financial statements, investors may lose confidence in our operating results and the price of our ordinary shares could decline. In addition, if we are unable to continue to meet these requirements, we may not be able to remain listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market.

We are not currently required to comply with the SEC’s rules that implement Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, and are therefore not yet required to make a formal assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting for that purpose. We will be required to comply with certain of these rules, including the requirement of an annual management report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, commencing with our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015. This assessment will need to include the disclosure of any material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting identified by our management or our independent registered public accounting firm. In addition, we will be required to have our independent registered public accounting firm attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting beginning with our first annual report on Form 10-K following the date on which we are no longer an emerging growth company. To achieve compliance with Section 404 within the prescribed period, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, outside consultants and continue to execute a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. Despite our efforts, there is a risk that we will not be able to conclude, within the prescribed timeframe or at all, that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as required by Section 404. If we identify one or more material weaknesses, it could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our consolidated financial statements and we cannot assure you that there will not be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal controls in the future.

We may engage in future acquisitions that could disrupt our business, cause dilution to our stockholders and harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and future prospects.

While we currently have no specific plans to acquire any other businesses, we may, in the future, make acquisitions of, or investments in, companies that we believe have products or capabilities that are a strategic or commercial fit with our present or future product candidates and business or otherwise offer opportunities for our company. In connection with these acquisitions or investments, we may:

•

issue stock that would dilute our existing stockholders’ percentage of ownership;

•

incur debt and assume liabilities; and

•

incur amortization expenses related to intangible assets or incur large and immediate write-offs.

We may not be able to complete acquisitions on favorable terms, if at all. If we do complete an acquisition, we cannot assure you that it will ultimately strengthen our competitive position or that it will be viewed positively by customers, financial markets or investors. Furthermore, future acquisitions could pose numerous additional risks to our operations, including:

•

problems integrating the purchased business, products or technologies, or employees or other assets of the acquisition target;

•

increases to our expenses;

•

disclosed or undisclosed liabilities of the acquired asset or company;

•

diversion of management’s attention from their day-to-day responsibilities;

•

reprioritization of our development programs and even cessation of development and commercialization of our current product candidates;

•

harm to our operating results or financial condition;

•

entrance into markets in which we have limited or no prior experience; and

•

potential loss of key employees, particularly those of the acquired entity.

We may not be able to complete any acquisitions or effectively integrate the operations, products or personnel gained through any such acquisition.

Provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders, and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current directors or management.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control of us or changes in our management. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, because our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions:

•

authorize “blank check” preferred stock, which could be issued by our board of directors without stockholder approval and may contain voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights superior to our common stock;

•

create a classified board of directors whose members serve staggered three-year terms;

•

specify that special meetings of our stockholders can be called only by our board of directors pursuant to a resolution adopted by a majority of the total number of directors;

•

prohibit stockholder action by written consent;

•

establish an advance notice procedure for stockholder approvals to be brought before an annual meeting of our stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for election to our board of directors;

•

provide that our directors may be removed prior to the end of their term only for cause;

•

provide that vacancies on our board of directors may be filled only by a majority of directors then in office, even though less than a quorum;

•

require a supermajority vote of the holders of our common stock or the majority vote of our board of directors to amend our bylaws; and

•

require a supermajority vote of the holders of our common stock to amend the classification of our board of directors into three classes and to amend certain other provisions of our certificate of incorporation.

These provisions, alone or together, could delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in control or changes in our management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management.

Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by certain anti-takeover provisions under Delaware law which may discourage, delay or prevent someone from acquiring us or merging with us whether or not it is desired by or beneficial to our stockholders. We are subject to the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner.

Any provision of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our amended and restated bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.

Our ability to use net operating losses to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.

In general, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change” is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change net operating losses (“NOLs”) or tax credits (“credits”), to offset future taxable income. Our existing NOLs or credits may be subject to substantial limitations arising from previous ownership changes, and if we undergo an ownership change our ability to utilize NOLs or credits could be further limited by Section 382 of the Code. In addition, future changes in our stock ownership, many of which are outside of our control, could result in an ownership change under Section 382 of the Code. Our NOLs or credits may also be impaired under state law. Accordingly, we may not be able to utilize a material portion of our NOLs or credits. Furthermore, our ability to utilize our NOLs or credits is conditioned upon our attaining profitability and generating United States federal and state taxable income. As described above under “—Risks Related to our Financial Position and History of Operating Losses,” we have incurred significant net losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future; thus, we do not know whether or when we will generate the United States federal or state taxable income necessary to utilize our NOLs or credits. A full valuation allowance has been provided for the entire amount of our NOLs and credits.

Changes in our tax provision or exposure to additional tax liabilities could adversely affect our earnings and financial condition.

As a multinational corporation, we are subject to income taxes in the United States and various foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining our global provision for income taxes and other tax liabilities. In the ordinary course of a global business, there are intercompany transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. Our income tax returns are subject to audits by tax authorities. Although we regularly assess the likelihood of adverse outcomes resulting from these examinations to determine our tax estimates, a final determination of tax audits or tax disputes could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

We are also subject to non-income taxes, such as payroll, sales, use, value-added, net worth, property and goods and services taxes in the United States and various foreign jurisdictions. We are subject to audit and assessments by tax authorities with respect to these non-income taxes and may have exposure to additional non-income tax liabilities which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation designates the state or federal courts located in the State of Delaware as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that, subject to limited exceptions, the state and federal courts located in the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (2) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders, (3) any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated by-laws, or (4) any other action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation described above. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find these provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gain and you may never receive a return on your investment.

You should not rely on an investment in our common stock to provide dividend income. We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future and investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock. We plan to retain any earnings to invest in our product candidates and maintain and expand our operations. Therefore, capital appreciation, or an increase in your stock price, which may never occur, may be the only way to realize any return on your investment.

ITEM 2.

UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS.

Use of Proceeds for Public Offering of Common Stock

On November 13, 2014, our Registration Statement on Form S-1, as amended (Reg. Nos. 333-199069 and 333-200189 was declared effective by the SEC for our initial public offering (“IPO”) of common stock, pursuant to which we sold an aggregate of 9,315,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $18.00 per share. AstraZeneca, one of our collaboration partners, agreed to purchase from us, concurrently with the closing of our IPO, in a private placement 1,111,111 shares of our common stock with an aggregate purchase price of $20.0 million at a price per share equal to the IPO price. Net proceeds from our IPO and concurrent private placement were $171.8 million, after deducting underwriting discounts of $11.7 million and offering expenses of $4.1 million.

As of June 30, 2015, the net proceeds are held in our investment accounts. There has been no material change in the planned use of proceeds from our IPO as described in our final prospectus filed with the SEC pursuant to Rule 424(b) under the Securities Act on November 14, 2014.

ITEM 3.

DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES.

Not applicable.

ITEM 4.

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.

Not applicable.

ITEM 5.

OTHER INFORMATION.

None.

ITEM 6.

EXHIBITS.

The exhibits listed on the accompanying Exhibit Index are filed or incorporated by reference (as stated therein) as part of this Quarterly Report on From 10-Q.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.


	FibroGen, Inc.

Dated: August 13, 2015	By:	/s/ Thomas B. Neff
		Thomas B. Neff
		Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

Dated: August 13, 2015	By:	/s/ Pat Cotroneo
		Pat Cotroneo
		Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

EXHIBIT INDEX


		Incorporation By Reference
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	SEC File No.	Exhibit	Filing Date

3.1	Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of FibroGen, Inc.	8-K	001-36740	3.1	11/21/2014

3.2	Amended and Restated Bylaws of FibroGen, Inc.	S-1/A	333-199069	3.4	10/23/2014

4.1	Form of Common Stock Certificate.	8-K	001-36740	4.1	11/21/2014

4.2	Investor Rights Agreement by and among FibroGen, Inc. and certain of its stockholders, dated as of December 1995.	S-1	333-199069	4.2	10/01/2014

4.3	Investor Rights Agreement by and among FibroGen, Inc. and certain of its stockholders, dated as of February 20, 1998.	S-1	333-199069	4.3	10/01/2014

4.4	Investor Rights Agreement by and among FibroGen, Inc. and certain of its warrant holders, dated as of June 3, 1999.	S-1	333-199069	4.6	10/01/2014

4.5	Investor Rights Agreement by and among FibroGen, Inc. and certain of its warrant holders, dated as of February 8, 2000.	S-1	333-199069	4.7	10/01/2014

4.6	Warrant to Purchase 67,200 Shares of Common Stock issued to Lease Management Services, Inc., dated as of June 6, 1995; as amended by Amendment to Warrant to Purchase 67,200 Shares of Common Stock by and between FibroGen, Inc. and Phoenixcor, Inc. (as successor in interest to Lease Management Services, Inc.), dated as of June 5, 2001.	S-1	333-199069	4.8	10/01/2014

4.7	Warrant to Purchase 43,140 Shares of Common Stock issued to Lease Management Services, Inc., dated as of December 11, 1997; as amended by Amendment to Warrant to Purchase 43,140 Shares of Common Stock by and between FibroGen, Inc. and General Electric Capital Corporation (as successor in interest to Lease Management Services, Inc.), dated as of December 9, 2003.	S-1	333-199069	4.9	10/01/2014

4.8	Warrant to Purchase 4,000 Shares of Common Stock issued to Laurence S. Shushan and Magdalena Shushan, Trustees of The Laurence and Magdalena Shushan Family Trust, dated as of June 3, 1999.	S-1	333-199069	4.10	10/01/2014

4.9	Warrant to Purchase 180,000 Shares of Common Stock issued to Slough Estates USA, Inc., dated as of June 3, 1999.	S-1	333-199069	4.11	10/01/2014

4.10	Warrant to Purchase 11,076 Shares of Common Stock issued to Bristow Investments, L.P, dated as of February 8, 2000.	S-1	333-199069	4.12	10/01/2014

4.11	Warrant to Purchase 2,769 Shares of Common Stock issued to Laurence S. Shushan and Magdalena Shushan, Trustees of The Laurence and Magdalena Shushan Family Trust, dated as of February 8, 2000.	S-1	333-199069	4.13	10/01/2014

4.12	Warrant to Purchase 124,605 Shares of Common Stock issued to Slough Estates USA, Inc., dated as of February 8, 2000.	S-1	333-199069	4.14	10/01/2014

4.13	Shareholders’ Agreement by and among FibroGen China Anemia Holdings, Ltd. and certain of its shareholders, dated as of July 11, 2012.	S-1	333-199069	4.15	10/01/2014

4.14	Share Purchase Agreement by and among FibroGen China Anemia Holdings, Ltd. and the purchasers party thereto, dated as of July 11, 2012.	S-1	333-199069	4.16	10/01/2014


		Incorporation By Reference
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	SEC File No.	Exhibit	Filing Date

4.15	Common Stock Purchase Agreement by and between FibroGen, Inc. and AstraZeneca AB, dated as of October 20, 2014.	S-1/A	333-199069	4.17	10/24/2014

31.1*	Certification of Chief Executive Officer, as required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a).	—	—	—	—

31.2*	Certification of Chief Financial Officer, as required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a).	—	—	—	—

32.1*	Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, as required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350)(1).	—	—	—	—

101*	Financial statements from the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2015, formatted in XBRL: (i) the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, (ii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations (iii) the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Loss, (iv) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and (v) the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.	—	—	—	—

*	Filed herewith.