Blog Reader Question

Could we have both a SPA and AA? AA for US market and some kind of SPA to get approval in Europe, Australia and ROW? What do think the markets reaction would be with an AA in September?

I think an investor or shareholder's near-term focus should be on the SPA for metastatic melanoma. I do not believe AA is likely in the near-term (i.e., in September). I think Big Pharma thinks AA is a possible [but not probable] outcome and very worthy of an attempt to obtain it.

There is a lot on which to focus in the months of September and October in hopes of hearing or reading about material updates and progress, including (in no particular order):

• The non-core spin-offs,
• A dermatology deal and/or publication,
• The melanoma regulatory path, license deal and/or publications,
• Moffitt immunology results of additional mouse and initial human studies,
• The liver/HCC regulatory path, license deal and/or publication, and
• The pancreas regulatory path.

For now, we wait...

Spin-offs

Provectus made a Form D filing yesterday that is related to the remainder of the spin-off of the non-core products (companies). More information on Form Ds may be found here. The other previous Form D filing related to the spin-off process is here. I will have more to say after Q2 10-Q is filed, likely late this week or early next week.

April Monthly Trading Volume

Monthly trading volume for April was 1.73MM, down from 3.43MM for February (-50%). April's figure was the lowest in quite some time.

Network 1, due to their work on the spin-offs, is not currently a market maker, and that does not help the situation of anemic trading volume.

CEO Letter Thoughts

PV-10
Metastatic Melanoma


During 2011 we held our second and third meetings with the FDA to discuss the design of a pivotal Phase 3 randomized controlled trial ("RCT") suitable for Special Protocol Assessment ("SPA"). In December the FDA provided us further guidance regarding the submission of our Phase 3 protocol for review, notifying us that they did not require an additional end-of-Phase 2 meeting. Using the recommendations that we received from senior FDA officials regarding patient population and primary endpoint, we are requesting SPA review of our protocol. While the review process could occur in as little as 45 days from the date of submission, we expect it will be an iterative process, and thus, more time may be required to work with the FDA on a study design agreement. This, we believe, represents a major step for our company, probably the most significant achievement yet, in our pathway to approval for PV-10.


⬆ I will address this in a separate post.


As you may recall, too, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration ("TGA") has agreed in November 2010 to the same primary endpoint of progression free survival that has been proposed to the FDA. In our meetings with TGA we discussed the use of interim data from the first half of Phase 3 study subjects, in conjunction with safety data collected in earlier studies of PV-10 for melanoma, to allow early evaluation for marketing approval in Australia for metastatic melanoma. TGA agreed that these data should be sufficient for this review if the analysis confirmed efficacy.

⬆ This appears to be just a recap.


In addition, nonclinical studies, designed to characterize the immunologic response to PV-10 chemoablation, have been conducted by researchers at the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, with initial results reported in March 2012 at the Society of Surgical Oncology Annual Meeting. Paul Toomey, M.D., presented his work and that of his colleagues, confirming that PV-10 chemoablation of melanoma lesions leads to induction of systemic, tumor-specific anti-tumor immunity. Additional nonclinical studies are underway with confirmatory clinical studies planned. This work is fundamental for full characterization of PV-10's systemic benefit and may provide pivotal support for accelerated approval in the U.S.

⬆ I previously posted that the full scope of Moffitt's work -- completed, in-process and in the near future -- makes accelerated approval a real possibility.


Liver Metastasis


In April 2011 we received orphan drug designation from the FDA for Rose Bengal, the active ingredient in PV-10, for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma ("HCC"), the most common form of primary liver cancer. This designation entitles Provectus to exclusive marketing rights for PV-10 for HCC in the U.S. for up to seven years if we are the first company to receive marketing approval for this therapeutic drug product. We are also eligible to apply for a waiver from the FDA of certain user fees required by the Prescription Drug User Fee Act ("PDUFA"). In other words, once regulatory approval is received, orphan drug designation provides assurance for the value of our company's proprietary property, grants us market exclusivity, thereby affording us both financial and regulatory benefits. This orphan drug designation for HCC is in addition to that received for metastatic melanoma in December 2006.

⬆ This appears to simply highlight what management has been doing to move PV-10 for HCC along.


We are conducting nonclinical drug-drug interaction studies to verify safety of combining PV-10 with sorafenib, the standard of care for nonresectable locally advanced primary liver cancer. This supports advanced development of PV-10 for HCC in clinical studies comparing PV-10 with the standard of care versus the standard of care alone, to demonstrate an overall survival benefit of treating HCC with PV-10. We expect to provide further guidance on this important indication when we are closer to commencing a Phase 2 or Phase 2/3 clinical study.

⬆ I find it interesting to read that non-clinical drug-drug interaction studies to verify safety of combining PV-10 with sorafenib are ongoing (i.e., confirming the orthogonality of PV-10 and sorafenib). I do not have an expectation of the potential timing of a Phase 2 or Phase 2/3 trial yet.


Breast Cancer and Other Oncology Indications


One of our many objectives during 2011 was to demonstrate that PV-10 has multi-indication potential, and we intend to continue that quest in 2012. We are now in a position for a Phase 2 study in recurrent breast carcinoma, following the completion of our Phase 1 study several years ago. We look forward to being able to report further progress on this indication as well. Furthermore, we have shown success with PV-10 in treating pancreatic cancer in nonclinical studies and are considering a proof of concept clinical study in this equally important indication.

⬆ I take two things away from this. First, the company can start a Phase 2 trial, and second, they appear to me to be assessing whether to start such a trial. I also find it interesting to read about the success in treating pancreatic cancer in non-clinical studies. If you recall, Craig mentioned this in talks late last year.

Compassionate Use Program


I am also pleased to report that our Compassionate Use Program for PV-10 for patients with non-visceral cancers continues, with over 70 patients enrolled in six centers across the U.S. and Australia. The protocol for this program enables subjects to undergo more frequent and extensive treatments with PV-10 over a longer period of time than was allowed under the protocols used for the Phase 1 and 2 trials. We believe this dose regimen serves as a blueprint for our planned Phase 3 clinical trial for metastatic melanoma.

⬆ I previously posted that the utility of Provectus' compassionate use program, outside of the great benefit it has had and continues to have for patients accepted into it, is not fully appreciated.

PH-10
Psoriasis


Our largest clinical trial to date was completed in 2011. The data from this Phase 2C RCT, which enrolled ninety-nine subjects with mild-to-moderate plaque psoriasis, corroborated the potential effectiveness of PH-10 observed in these patients in our earlier clinical study.

⬆ This appears to be just a recap.


Reaching this milestone has also triggered increased efforts for our company to seek a licensure of PH-10 for the treatment of serious dermatological diseases, which would include psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, another indication for which PH-10 has completed Phase 2 clinical trials. We remain on track to secure a term sheet from a potential partner that would lead to a proposed licensing agreement and the engagement of a financial advisor to effect this transaction.

⬆ This also appears to be just a recap.


We have also successfully completed various dermatological toxicity studies which are appropriate at this stage of development of PH-10. We will work with the FDA to design the remaining toxicity studies necessary to support a New Drug Approval (NDA) filing. Because of the well-tolerated safety profile of Rose Bengal, we are enthusiastic about the potential for widespread acceptance of PH-10 upon eventual expected approval.

⬆ Again, another recap. I think management also is sharing their perspective about the licensing process and prospective partner feedback on PH-10.


PRESENTATIONS AT SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCES


PV-10 was the subject of several scientific presentations this year. Of particular note, Dr. Sanjiv Agarwala, Principal Investigator for the Phase 2 melanoma study, presented data at the European Association of Dermato-Oncology ("EADO") Conference in Nantes, France, in June 2011. This audience of prospective European investigators who specialize in dermato-oncology had a special interest in injectable therapies, and we were encouraged by the level of interest this group had in PV-10, particularly as we prepare for a global Phase 3 trial.

⬆ This appears to be just a recap.


In November 2011, Professor Merrick Ross, M.D., a Principal Investigator for our Phase 2 Melanoma trial, delivered a presentation at the 2011 International Melanoma Congress during the 5th Meeting of Interdisciplinary Melanoma/Skin Cancer Centres meeting in Tampa, Florida. His presentation included a discussion on the role of intralesional therapies for controlling both local disease and their possible effect on systemic disease, such as that which has been shown in Phase 2 testing of PV-10.

⬆ At the HemOnc Today conference in NYC earlier this month, Dr. Ross publicly said PV-10 should be approved. I have much more blog post material on PV-10 and the HemOnc Today conference.


We expect additional presentations at scientific conferences this year that will be announced when appropriate, as well as various peer-reviewed publications either this year or next.

⬆ Management is trying to push for the publication of the MM Phase 2 and/or HCC Phase 1 trial results in globally recognized peer-reviewed periodicals in 2012. Only time will tell if they are successful.

CORPORATE DEVELOPMENTS


Prominent leaders joined our Board of Directors and Corporate Advisory Board this year. Alfred E. Smith IV, Senior Advisor for the Marwood Group, joined our Board of Directors. Mr. Smith has extensive financial and healthcare experience. His knowledge of business and medicine has already helped provide our company with guidance on several drug development and corporate strategies.

⬆ This appears to be just a recap.

Dr. Craig Eagle, MD, Vice President of Strategic Alliances and Partnerships for the Oncology unit at Pfizer, and Stuart Fuchs, Chairman and CEO of CognoSPECTi, joined our Corporate Advisory Board. Dr. Eagle's experience in drug development, and Mr. Fuchs's venture capital and investment banking experience in the biotech industry, are great assets to our company as we further our path towards commercialization. Mr. Fuchs joined the Corporate Advisory Board after having served eight years on our Board of Directors. We expect to appoint others to our respective Boards this year and next.

⬆ Comments related to Eagle and Fuchs also appear to be just a recap. I think the comment related to the potential future appointments to the Corporate Advisory Board and the Board of Directors is very interesting to read.

Our balance sheet remains strong, with $7.7 million in cash and cash equivalents, providing us ample cash to fund our operations through 2013. Since we seek to spin-off our non-core subsidiaries, and concentrate our efforts on our drug development activities, in December 2011 we completed an unregistered offering of Units. Each Unit, which included shares of common stock in Pure-ific and a warrant to purchase ¾ share of the Company's common stock, were sold to accredited investors. The net proceeds of this transaction are expected to be used to spin-off Pure-ific as a new publicly traded company. We plan to fund and spin-off the remaining four non-core subsidiaries as well.

⬆ This also appears to be just a recap.

Also, we are in the process of implementing a new executive bonus plan that is expected to be based upon certain additional performance-based criteria, such as stock price and the signing of partnership agreements. This plan will replace the prior one which had been based on the attainment of certain scientific, medical and clinical milestones. We will disclose the details of the new plan once it is finalized.

⬆ I think the comments related to a new bonus compensation plan are interesting to read. I plan to follow-up with more due diligence, analysis and commentary on this topic.

Very Quick Hits for March 30

ex·cit·ed. Coming out of SSO, there is a palpable sense of excitement in management.

clar·i·ty. Following a call with management earlier today, I think I have never been more clear in my projection for or estimation of the company's trajectory.

CEO letter. I think the letter will come out next week.

Much more later (shortly).

Quick Hits for Thursday, March 22

Moffitt folks should speak tonight, tomorrow and the day after. The poster sessions for Toomey et al. at which they will speak and/or be available are:

The Moffitt poster will be very important to see and read. I think a copy of the poster will be available as part of one of the company's SSO-related PRs.

Both Rodman & Renshaw and Maxim Group issued psoriasis Phase 2c trial result update notes. R&R provided its note yesterday. Maxim's update came out today. Both are available via Provectus News. Both firms maintained their respective price targets of $3.00 and $3.50 per share (March 21 closing price: $0.89).

R&R's key points: The trial compared safety and efficacy of three dose levels of PH-10. The lower dose (0.002%) of PH-10 achieved the best activity among the three doses tested.

Maxim's key points: Positive PH-10 top-line Phase 2 results in Psoriasis. PV-10 is still the key catalyst.

Provectus has a new lead research analyst covering them at Maxim Group. The Maxim analyst that covered the company, Dr. Yale Jen, has moved on to ROTH Capital Partners. The current Maxim analyst is Dr. Echo Yinghui He.

PH-10 and PV-10 have a robust safety profile don't ya know! Spectacular efficacy should follow. The 2c trial results were very comparable to the 2b trial results for both efficacy and safety. Safety continues to be the mantra (Craig has previously made positive comments regarding the toxicity studies the company is running on PH-10). Think efficacy per unit safety (as much as an investment person thinks about return per unit risk): dermatology risk-reward. The value proposition relies on a combination of both parameters. I think we will see much higher efficacy with no material change in safety (i.e., adverse events) in the pivotal Phase 3 trial.

Of course, my opinion of the 2c trial results does not matter. The only opinions that matter are those of the prospective derm and derm-pharma companies thinking about licensing PH-10. Furthermore, what matters just as much is whether and how well management has made the case I outlined above, among other things, regarding efficacy and safety. Is it enough?

The spin-off process continues. With their Form D filing for Pure-ific Corporation, the company moves a step-closer to spinning off this non-core entity. I think much more information when the S-1 is filed. I have a tentative expectation for the filing as the end of the quarter.

Blog Reader Q&A

Is Provectus still using Numoda's TruPoints platform for PH-10? Yes.


Is Numoda involved in any other capacity? No.


What is the deal structure for the spin-offs? More information should be available when the S-1 is filed. I think the deal structure has changed (from when I reviewed spin-off materials with the intent, at the time, of considering investment in one of the spin-offs), so I won't comment on this topic until I have the most recent information.

The Year In Review

While the share price closed 2011 at 81 cents, down from December 31, 2010's close of 94 cents, there is much more to 2011's story about the company than a 14% decline. Much more.

Management has been working on several programs (an apt name describing their work in a particular category or on a particular effort):

• Melanoma (value driver);
• Dermatology (value driver);
• Liver (value driver);
• Other solid tumors, through the melanoma and liver trials, the compassionate care program, and animal work/R&D (value driver); and,
• Immunology (value enhancer).

Now take a look at the illustration below, and keep it in mind as we progress together through the rest of this blog post:

The company achieved major breakthroughs in every program. Yes, the price at the end of the year is materially lower than the beginning of it. That's relevant to traders. It is not relevant to me. It should not be relevant to investors.

I could go on for pages and pages, but I want (need) to convey my comments as simply as possible (in keeping with Paulson's simplicity of presentation of and conveyance of his investment thesis, cogently explaining a very complex story).

Clinical data: Robust clinical data across the board. Reproducible. In the case of immunology, by a third party (Moffitt). Some data, of course, was generated before (melanoma, spin-offs), some in 2011 (liver, immunology).

Regulatory path: To create value, management must create clarity. To lower risk, management must create certainty. The essence of their work on the SPA has been and is to provide clarity of destination and certainty of journey for big pharma. TGA MM "pre-approval," FDA MM Phase 3 trial design, FDA liver Phase 2/Phase 3 trial design, psoriasis Phase 3 trial design, etc. They have done that, but several decisions remain to be made or announced.

Peer reviews/Publications: Need-to-haves early on, but, generally speaking, nice-to-haves. In my opinion not need-to-haves. In process, but not announced.

License/Sale/Launch: The essence of monetization. Deals turned down or contemplated (melanoma, liver). Term sheets awaited (dermatology). S-1s to be filed (spin-offs).

Many of the yellow boxes should turn green in 2012, based on decisions made or announced, and other pronouncements.

For 2012, the illustration below sums up my view of value certainty (the numbers relate to valuation ranges):

Questions

I have blogged a good amount of my due diligence and analysis, and there will be more to come; however, my pace will slow. In the interim, if you have any questions, please e-mail me at i.am.a.pvct.investor@gmail.com. I will turn your questions and my responses into posts for everyone to read.