Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Galena Biopharma Incorporated Fourth Quarter and Year End 2014 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. I would now like to introduce your host for today's conference, Ms. Remy Bernarda, Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications. Ma'am, you may begin.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining our call today. For those of you listening via telephone, I would encourage you to visit our website and log into our webcast presentation. For this year end call, we will be using slides to enhance our information flow. The slides can be accessed on our website in the Investors section under Events and Presentation. These slides are posted both as a PDF document and will also be available on the webcast. The slides are viewer controlled, meaning that you, the viewer will need to advance the slides. Our speakers will alert you to the slides they are addressing. As listed on slide number 2 on our presentation, during today's discussion, we may make forward-looking statements about our programs. Such statements include, but are not limited to, statements about our commercialization plans and the development progress of our clinical product candidates, including patient enrollment, trial initiations and collaborations. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those identified under Risk Factors in our annual report on Form 10-K which we have filed today and other documents filed with the SEC and available on our website. Actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by these forward-looking statements. I would now like to introduce the members of management on the call. Dr. Mark Schwartz, our President and CEO; Dr. Gavin Choy, Senior Vice President, Clinical Sciences and Operations, who will discuss our Clinical Programs; Christopher Lento, Senior Vice President of Commercial, who will discuss our Commercial Business; and Ryan Dunlap, our Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Please turn to slide number 3 for the overview of our pipelines. Dr. Schwartz will now begin our discussion.

Thank you, Remy. And welcome everyone to our fourth quarter and year end earnings conference call. Our team did a great job in 2014 and as it was great pleasure that we view our progress last year in preview our expectations for 2015. Today we will review these accomplishments and discuss key developments coming in 2015. Before I go into the details on our programs, I want to address the status of our corporate issues regarding the SEC we are aware that the SEC is investigating certain matters, relating to the use of certain outside Investor Relations professionals by us and by other public companies. We have been in contact with the SEC staffs for our council and are cooperating with the investigation. As we mentioned in our press release, the Plaintiffs in the Delaware derivative litigation have dropped their case against the company. As a reminder, Galena had formed a Special Litigation Committee or SLC to investigate the claims from this law suite and produce the report because the Delaware derivative litigation was dropped, the SLC is terminated its work. They are still two derivative cases pending in Oregon Federal and Oregon State Courts and we continue to pursue these vigorously. Although the litigation matters take time to resolve, the company is committed to bringing these maters to closure in a timely manner. So we cannot say with certainty, we believe we will be able to resolve the outstanding matters in a way that will not materially impact our cash position by the fundamentals of our business. Now on to our programs, please turn to Slide 4, as I will expand upon our my comments from last quarter about how our two businesses units commercial and clinical fit into our overall strategy. As I stated before, Galena's current structure,…

Thank you, Mark. As Mark mentioned, our primary focus in clinical development is on our immunotherapy programs with NeuVax and GALE-301 with a summary shown on Slide 10. Both of our programs have similar approach utilizing a peptide vaccine in combination with immune adjuvant GM-CSF to prevent the recurrence of cancer. Patients have been treated with standard of care therapy, which includes surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Once treated, these patients presumably have no evidence of disease but remain at a significant risk of recurrence due to possible micro metastatic disease. Our goal is to prevent this recurrence because once a patient recurs death will likely ensue, by preventing recurrence we can prevent death. One of the essential elements of our treatment approach is to target patients in the adjuvant setting or declared disease free. This patient population generally has healthy immune systems that have been reconstituted and are able to mount a robust response to immunotherapy treatment. Thus our agents work to stimulate the immune system to generate tumor targeting cytotoxic T emphasize or CTL to prevent the recurrence of cancer utilizing well validated targets such as HER2 and Folate binding protein. Patients treated with our agents undergo a primary vaccine series once in month for six month followed by twice yielded booster inoculations to provide a long term protective effect. While Mark discussed where NeuVax fits into the immunotherapy landscape, I want to share with you in greater detail our ongoing programs, as well as potential franchise expansion opportunities. NeuVax is a peptide vaccine derived from the HER2 protein. On Slide 11, I'll provide a brief overview of HER2 which is an oncogene in the EGFR family. Amplification or over expression of this oncogene has been sure to play an important role in the development and profession of…

Thank you, Gavin. Today we'll walk you through the 2014 successes we have had with our flagship product Abstral. I'll also take a moment to discuss the status of the launch of our second commercial product Zuplenz, as well as our plans for continued growth of the Galena commercial franchise. As noted in our press release and as Ryan will review in greater detail, our Abstral net revenue was $9.3 million in 2014. We achieved this number with the focused sales effort and we’re excited for continued growth of Abstral in 2015. As a reminder, Abstral is indicated for the treatment of breakthrough cancer pain and there is a TIRF or a Transmucosal Immediate Release Fentanyl product. As Mark mentioned, Galena is an oncology company and we're steadfastly focused on building Galena's commercial business within the oncology space. Our goal is to develop long-lasting relationships with medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and palliative care specialists, as well as the pain specialists who are treating a large number of cancer patients. As we shared last quarter, we believe the oncology market represents the most long-term potential and we understand that this market is slower to evolve and has a greater need for provider education. For the focus and targeted approach, our commercial team has four goals that will help Galena drive revenue for the company. Our primary goal is to make each of our commercial products profitable on a standalone basis. This will lend to profitability of the entire commercial franchise and ultimately generate funding for Galena's clinical development programs. Secondly, we continue to build and grow our relationships in the oncology space. These relationships exist with healthcare providers, wholesalers, distributors, specialty pharmacies, and managed care organizations. Third, we're focused on building the commercial organization in anticipation of the launch of NeuVax.…

Thank you, Chris and good afternoon everyone. Net revenue from Abstral sales for the fourth quarter of 2014 was $3.2 million and $9.3 million for the full year 2014. We are happy to say that Q4 was a record quarter for us reflecting a 100% increase from the $1.6 million net revenue reported in Q3 and landing us squarely within our 2014 net revenue guidance of $8 million to $10 million. We are certainly pleased with that trend and remain confident in our 2015 net revenue guidance of $15 million to $18 million with the expectation that our Abstral business will become cash flow positive by the end of 2015 and will continue to be the key revenue driver this year. Also with the launch of Zuplenz in the second quarter of this year, we expect that piece of our commercial business to begin contributing to our net revenue by the end of the year with Zuplenz becoming cash flow positive in the latter part of 2016. As Chris mentioned, in order to strengthen customer relationships and ensure smooth supply chain, we’ve agreed with our distribution partners to replace the short dated product remaining in the channel from the previous licensee with new longer dated Galena label product which will delay the revenue recognition for Zuplenz. Also while we haven’t yet determined the revenue recognition accounting policy for Zuplenz, when we do, it may be a deferral of revenue recognition until the point of sell through or when right of return from our customers no longer exists. This could also affect the timing of Zuplenz’s revenue recognition. Operating expenses for 2014 were $61.5 million and $14.6 million for the fourth quarter compared to third quarter operating expenses of $14.8 million, a decrease of $200,000. To break down the key components,…

Thank you, Ryan. As I stated in my opening remarks, our team significantly advanced all of our clinical and commercial programs in 2014. If you look at Slide 25, you can see that there are several fundamental milestones over the next year. For NeuVax our primary drivers will be completing enrollment our PRESENT trial next month and the preplanned interim analysis in late 2015, early 2016. We also expect to complete enrollment in the NeuVax and Herceptin combination trial during that same timeframe with key clinical milestones in 2016 and 2017. GALE-301 and GALE-401 will also update to read out this year. Finally as both Ryan and Chris mentioned, we expect to nearly double our revenues this year and look forward to launching our second commercial product this year. We expect to accumulate multiple value drivers as we head towards the final read out of the PRESENT trial. With achievement of these milestones across all of our programs, we expect to steadily build value for our shareholders. As I noted in my opening remarks, Galena is unique among similar sized biotechnology, immune-oncology companies and that we possess a very active development program combined with a rapidly growing commercial operations. This business strategy provides us with numerous opportunities to create value in both the short term and long-term, while positioning Galena to address multiple treatment needs across the full spectrum of cancer care. We will now open the call for questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Yigal Nochomovitz from Oppenheimer your line is open.

Hi, thanks very much for taking the questions. I just had a few on the commercial side of the business, I know you said that the $15 million to $18 million guidance range, can you put that potentially on Abstral versus Zuplenz number one. Number two, I just wanted to get your thoughts on the timing of the Zuplenz launch relative to the time when it was in-licensed, it seems like its taking some time to actually get the product out into the market. And then number three, is the strategy going to be the same with Zuplenz where you'll initially be distributing doctors to sort of get initial traction in the market. Thank you.

Yigal, this is Mark Schwartz. Let me answer the first question then I’ll turn it over to Chris at a commercial, thank you for tuning in today. The guidance that we’re giving is $15 million to $18 million, we have not split that out and we’re not going to do that quite yet, I think until we get a little bit better handle for exactly how Zuplenz launch is, what the market is. We've been heavily involved in pre-launch activities and we’re feeling pretty confident about the program we put in place. But I think given and till we have a good sense for exactly what the uptick is and how our targeting has worked out, what modifications we might need to make as we roll it out, I think we’re going to reserve that judgment. The $15 million to $18 million will most likely be mostly Abstral, but exactly how its twist out, I think we’ll be able to talk to the community here and maybe the next quarter or two.

Yes thank you for the question, I’ll pick up part two and part three. Starting with part three, we will not be distributing Zuplenz via voucher, we will have a copay assistance program in place, as well as using physician samples of the product. For part two, since acquisition and as Mark mentioned and Ryan alluded to, we’ve been engaged in significant pre-launch activities receiving a lot of interest from key prescribers and key providers. And much of the anticipation of the launch has to do with the manufacturing of our Galeno labeled product.

Got it. Thank you. And then just one question on the PRESENT, what exactly is the data disclosure plan for the interim and if you pass and I say keep going, and safety looks good, do we hear anything or we're only going to hear something that's unlikely when you'd have to stop the study. Thanks.

No, it is a pre-planned analysis and it’s a futility analysis. So we will get a recommendation by the IDMC or the Data Safety Monitoring Board to assuming that, a path as a futility to proceed with the trial we will announce that.

Great. And then just one final question regarding the overenrollment in PRESENT, you referenced the words timing and quality of the statistics. Should we take that to mean that by overenrolling, you sort of compensate against potential dropouts that you maintain the power that was originally planned in the study or is there some other interpretation there on that, the benefit for over enrolling the study. Thank you.

Yes Yigal, thank you, Gavin Choy, here. That's precisely correct. So we’re going to over enroll by 5% to 10% accommodating those patients that got through screening and this will obviously compensate also for the potential increase drop out rate.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line Mara Goldstein from Cantor Fitzgerald. Your line is open.

Thanks very much for taking the questions. Thanks for the slides this quarter it’s very helpful. I have a question on the commercial side first and on prescription, I understand the discussion around the vouchers being counted as prescriptions and what not. But if you look into the first eight weeks or so from the first quarter, the trends are still slightly down relative to the fourth quarter. So, I don’t know if you can put this sort of on an apples-to-apples percentage first, I mean I understand the dollar value of a script is higher and you can definitely see that dynamic in the percentage of higher dose prescriptions. But just in terms of an absolute comparison between what was vouchers versus non-vouchers from just the prior quarters, this quarter?

Sure Mara, thank you very much for the question. I could actually probably thinking a little further back for you. Initially when we launched our patient assistance program at it's peak 75% of our business was voucher business, currently in 2015 through the first two months, only 10% of our business is coming through the voucher. So we've actually made some dramatic improvements there and you’re right, our prescriptions have fluctuated month-to-month. Overall the trend line is positive and we continue to focus on steel demand while improving profitability at the same time.

Okay. And can I ask you a question on just sort of the procedural timing on the litigation around the patent for Abstral, what are the next kind of data points that we should be thinking about?

The litigation is fairly expanded litigation, it has really just started and Mara I’m not sure I can give you a really hard answer on that is with any litigation. I think our expectations in a general sense that is going to be fairly long and protracted. So I don’t know that there is going to be any news for quite a while and probably within 12 to 24 months from maybe the first set of motions and activities and I would anticipate it to go after the full 30 months stay. So I would not anticipate any news shortly.

But that 30 months stay is relatively close to the patent expiration anyway correct, I mean so then six months? Right.

You're correct.

Okay. All right and then can I ask one more question on also kind of statistics question on present trial?

Yes, yes please.

Okay. So first looking in the interim futility, I’m just wondering given there has been so much discussion around statistics and clinical trials in immunotherapy and late effect of all the benefit occurring to the tail, what's the profitability that you hit that you have a futility measure but that’s a function of being having a late effect does an early effect, I mean should we even be thinking about?

I think Mara you raise a good point and you’re right depending on some of the mechanistic elements, a lot of immunology studies have shown a late effect. I think two things from an empirical point of view in the Phase II trials that's not what we saw, we actually saw reasonably quick effect given the nature of the mechanism. As well futility analysis is about half way through the trials so we’re looking at 70 events, it’s pretty far along into the trial on a relative basis and I think we should be past that point of futility in relation to the signal out we’re measuring.

Okay. All right thank you. I will jump back in.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Joe Pantginis from Roth Capital Partners. Your line is open.

Good afternoon. Thanks for taking the question and thanks also for the details today. Couple of question on presenters well and the approach of NeuVax, I guess can you remind us at this points how the screening process went, how many patients you needed to screen and how the efficacy of the screening went?

Yeah thank you Joe for the question. So we screened over 3300 patients. As you know it is protractive screening process. Overall the overall screen failure rate has – is fairly high I would say, at about 75% screen failure rate.

Okay, great. That's helpful. And then with regard - Mark, you made some comments earlier one of your slides obviously about the importance of T cells and I guess I am asking for a little bit of reminder here because I think some intriguing data came out of the Phase I, II. Basically can you remind us about the level of T cell recruitment that you saw in earlier studies, I believe it was some of doctor people’s data?

Yes exactly Joe, this data has been published but in the Phase I, II studies, we saw as high as about 2% of the total T cell population was in fact NeuVax specific or E75 targeting HER2. And so we can generate a very potent T cell response. And I think that take home message of the point I was trying to make in the few slides is that, I think a lot of the excitement around checkpoint inhibitors is an example, the two recently approved drugs is that clearly the immune system can be a very effective mechanism for targeting cancers. It has taken some time to find exactly the right pathway to get there. But the essence of a checkpoint inhibitors really taking a breaks off and allowing the T cell to do it’s job. I think we’re coming at exactly that same endpoint allowing the T cell to do it’s job, we are just approaching it from a slightly different perspective. And we believe that one of the key elements of that is after setting is really appropriate that it's a setting with a low disease burden, a very healthy immune system. And so we’re getting at a same point in many respects as a checkpoint inhibitor is a very active T cell hunting down and targeting tumor cells in our case they're micrometastases or called tumor cells in what is otherwise a healthy women.

And thanks for that and that was the magic number I was looking for and I guess can you just put into perspective for everyone, I mean 2% that’s a quite a massive number of the T cell compartment isn't it?

It is that's actually very high - it would be uncommon to find a single target throughout the T cell population at high. I believe there's what over trillion T cells in the body. So 2% represents a significant number of cells given at. In fact one T cell can lyse through it’s mechanism lysis, the lysis mechanism A cancer cell. And again, the setting is what’s really key for us in that we are in a setting of otherwise healthy immune system targeting either single occult cancer cells or micrometastases so we are not trying to kill and remove a tumor mass or metastatic tumor, but really isolated tumor cells.

And then I guess the last question is on the slide with regard to expanding into other indications sort of the secondary and tertiary level of indications. You said you’re going to look at that, with regard to cost management and what have you. Do you have any potential that you’re looking at potential IFPs that could also potentially reduce cost?

We do – you're spot right on, we have a number - there is nothing that we can announce at the moment, we've got – do have several discussions ongoing. We're looking at a number of additional immunotherapy, a couple of checkpoint inhibitors to see how to leverage new access T cell population increasing capability with other additional mechanisms that will allow us to go after either different indications or different settings that NeuVax alone may not be quite as efficient in much like we are with NeuVax Herceptin. So stay tuned throughout 2015, nothing that we can announce at the moment, but certainly a number that we’re pursing in discussion we're in process.

Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Robert LeBoyer form Maxim Group. Your line is open.

Last quarter you had a decrease in sales over second quarter and first quarter and then this quarter we had a nice recovery. The thing that was attributed to last quarter was inventory and the wholesaler stocking levels. Could you describe the percentage of the sales that were due to restocking of that the due to pipeline and the supply chain, and also with Zuplenz it was mentioned of the previous licensees inventory levels and there was an expiration issue so that new inventory would be out there labeled with Galena's label. Does that mean that there is going to be a write-off or could you just comment on how long that inventory will last?

Hi Robert, it's Chris I’ll take the first part of that question and I’ll allow Ryan to answer the second part. Yes we had a much larger Q4 and our field demand or that demand driven by customers almost exactly matched what we’re selling to the wholesalers. So we saw a nice leveling off moving from Q3 to Q4. And you do see some up and downs here. But overall the trend has been positive and we’re learning how to manage the inventory at the wholesaler levels.

Hi Robert, Ryan Dunlap, I’ll take the second part of your question. Thanks for the question. With respect to the Zuplenz swap arrangement, if you look at our 10-K the way that’s been accounted for, as it’s been set up as a liability in the business combination accounting. So it’s not going to be a write-off and it’s not going to affect our P&L, but what it does affect is the timing of when we begin recognizing revenue or sales beyond the swap. So it will delay things a little bit from a revenue recognition standpoint but there won’t be natural write-offs that affects our P&L.

Thank you.

Hi this is Jason Kolbert. Can we just have one quick follow up too. I would like to just migrate back to NeuVax for a second. Help me understand what the historical control rates are for recurrence and how reliable those figures are and what assumptions you made in terms of the initial trial design so that we can ultimately understand how reliable the powering of the trial might be.

So the historical recurrence rate for node positive HER2 1+, 2+ breast cancer patients is about 25% over three year. And that data actually has been fairly steady for the last five or 10 years and there is actually some fairly recent trials in similar patient populations that have published, that really confirmed that rate, I think the number they are coming in at 23.5% if I'm not mistaken. So it's right around that same number. And so I think our assumptions going into the trial are still valid by the current data and I think that's a statistics, and you raised a good point because a lot of time the standard of care changes and things improve and patients, the assumptions at the beginning of trial don't hold up by the end of the trial but so far the data that we've been able to look at has indicated that the recurrence rates are still at about the same rate that they were when we set the trial up and did the original stats plan.

Thanks guys. That's really helpful. I'm sure you saw and we all saw the deal this week between Bavarian Nordic and Bristol-Myers Squibb and the combination of a checkpoint yet another vaccine. So it really seems like you are on the right space.

Thank you. And I think it just validates obviously immunotherapy area as a whole but more importantly I think the ability of vaccines to demonstrate their efficacy and ultimately gain their recognition value that they deserve as we learn how to best use them and what the appropriate settings are.

Thanks guys. We are really excited watching this trial and you understand all the reasons why. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Rahul Jasuja from Noble Life Science. Your line is open.

Hi everybody. Quick question on NeuVax, that's probably for Mark or Gavin here. So Mark I recall that there was the initiative to measure circulating tumor cells and that was something that - I know it's clearly expensive to do that and that was part of the protocol where you mentioned CTCs before and periodically during the trial as well as after. Now number one, if you could add some more color on that, and number two, it was clear that as you found a decrease in CTC, there was a corresponding increase in CTA T cells from your earlier work. In the interim analysis, would that be any criteria that will be measured and will that be disclosed?

Rahul, thank you for the question, Gavin here. You are correct. CTCs are part of the trial as built into the trial. As you might suspect, if we saw the data we would likely unblind the trial. So the data is being collected but we are not aware of the data and as unlikely at the interim analysis, we would know of that data set.

And how frequent is the CTC measurement, is it at the onset, and then periodically every several months or have you not disclosed that about the CTC measurement?

Correct. It's at baseline and periodically through the treatment course.

Okay. All right, thanks. That’s all I had.

Thank you. I would now like to turn the call back over to Mark Schwartz for any closing remarks.

I want to thank everybody and appreciate your time this afternoon. I know it was a bit of longer call than normal. But there is a lot of good information and I hope that the slides really helped as we made our key points. Thank you very much everybody.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This does conclude the program and you may all disconnect. Everyone have a great evening.