SEC Filing | Harrow, Inc.

View:

Download DOC

Download PDF

Download XLS

immy_8k.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): April 12, 2013

IMPRIMIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


Delaware	001-35814	45-0567010

(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)	(Commission File Number)	(IRS Employer Identification No.)


437 South Hwy 101, Suite 209		92075
Solana Beach, CA
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (858) 704-4040

N/A

(Former name or former address if changed since last report.)

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:

o		Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

o		Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

o		Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

o		Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))

Item 7.01. Regulation FD Disclosure

Attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this Item 7.01 is a presentation that is being used by the management of Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company") in meetings describing the Company.

The information contained in Item 7.01 of this report and in Exhibit 99.1 shall not be deemed “filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act"), or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.

Item 9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits

(d) Exhibits

99.1	Presentation dated April 2013

SIGNATURES

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

	IMPRIMIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Dated: April 12, 2013	By:	/s/ Mark L. Baum
		Name: Mark L. Baum
		Title: Chief Executive Officer

EXHIBIT INDEX

99.1	Presentation dated April 2013

immy.htm

Exhibit 99.1

Imprimis Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.

“Positioned to Monetize One of the Largest
Databases of Compounded Drug Formulations”

April 2013

Mark L. Baum, C.E.O.

Safe Harbor Statement

The Company cautions you that the statements included in this presentation are not a description of historical
facts and are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These include statements regarding the Company’s
interpretation of the results of its Phase 3 clinical trial for Impracor™, the Company’s ability to obtain regulatory
approval to market Impracor™, the Company’s potential benefits arising from the Company’s relationship with
Professional Compounding Centers of America, Inc., the Company’s ability to leverage compounded generic
drugs to create a development pipeline and otherwise pursue its business plan and the Company’s ability to
leverage its Accudel™ technology in the development of potential product candidates.

These forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations, estimates, forecasts and
projections about the Company and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results and
events to differ materially from those stated in the forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially
from those set forth in this presentation due to the risks and uncertainties inherent in the Company’s business,
including, without limitation: the outcome of the final analyses of the data from the past and future Phase 3 clinical
trial may vary from the Company’s initial conclusions; the FDA may not agree with the Company’s interpretation
of such results or may challenge the adequacy of the Company’s future Impracor™ clinical trial design or the
execution of the same clinical trials; the FDA may continue to require the Company to complete additional clinical
trials for Impracor™ before the Company can submit a 505(b)(2) NDA application; the results of any future clinical
trials may not be favorable and the Company may never receive regulatory approval for Impracor™; and the
Company’s possible need to raise additional funding to complete its product development plans.

More detailed information about the Company and the risk factors that may affect the realization of forward-
looking statements is set forth in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including
its Annual Report on Form 10-K and its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC. Such documents
may be read free of charge on the SEC’s web site at www.sec.gov.

You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the
date hereof, given these risks and uncertainties. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by
this cautionary statement and the Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update this presentation to
reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof.

Imprimis Overview

Imprimis Snapshot

• Approx. $19.5M in cash1

• Nominal debt; no preferred instruments

• Phase 3 topical NSAID pivotal to start mid 2013

• Exclusive commercial rights to PCCA development IP

• 10,000+ drug formulations

• 10+ drug delivery technologies

• Vast market “unmet need” database

• Accudel™ targeted drug delivery platforms

• Experienced science and management teams

1) Cash position at December 31, 2012 ($10M), and net proceeds $(9.5M) of public offering and over-allotment exercise February/March, 2013

Imprimis Overview

Low Risk

Low Margin

505(b)(2) … Lower Risk | Higher Margin

We develop proprietary drug assets using the 505(b)(2) pathway

Less Development Time & Lower Cost

Application	505(b)(1) NDA	505(b)(2) NDA	505(j) ANDA
New Chemical Entity (NCE)	Yes	Yes/No (Rely on RLD and Prior Investigation)	No (RLD is off patent)
New Indication	Yes	Yes	No
New Form/Dose	Yes	Yes	No
Required Data for Approval	• Complete Pharmacology • Complete Preclinical Safety, including long term carcinogenicity in 2 species • Complete analytical development and quality manufacturing • Complete Phase 1-3 clinical trials	• Data from published literature • FDA findings on efficacy/safety of approved drug/formulation • Studies to support change • Dermal/Eye Safety (topical drugs) • Clinical Efficacy/Safety • CMC (3 registration batches with stability data)	• Bioequivalence

• 505(b)(2) products can have Orange Book-listed patents, can enjoy 30-month protection against
generic competitors; NCE (5 yrs); Orphan Drug (7 yrs); Pediatric Extension (6 mos.)

• 505(b)(2) Development Budget Comparison: $2-7M versus $100M+ for (b)(1)

Imprimis Development Model

Imprimis Brings Innovation

from Pharmaceutical Compounders

to the >$300B U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry

Pharmaceutical

Compounders

99%

PCCA Strategic Relationship

• Professional Compounding Centers of America
(PCCA) is the largest compounding pharmacy
organization in North America

1. Supply chemicals, equipment, accredited training, software,
and business/pharmacy consulting assistance

• Over 3,900 pharmacy businesses/chains worldwide

• PCCA relationship gives Imprimis exclusive access to:

1. Proprietary and proven drug formulations

2. Proprietary and proven drug delivery technologies
(Lipoderm® and others)

3. Market data (>100,000 inbound calls per year)

4. Analytics

• Our strategic relationship is exclusive

• PCCA invested $4M into Imprimis at $4.80 per share

Risk Mitigated

Proprietary Drug Pipeline

Imprimis Vision

Drive Shareholder Value

• Monetize vast PCCA IP

and development assets

• Selective internal
development

• Partner

• Out-license

Improve Patient Care

• Novel drug administration

• Reduce or eliminate
negative side effect
profiles

• Increase therapeutic
benefit to patients

Monetizing the PCCA Relationship

Step 1: Opportunity Matrix

X Axis: Drug Administration

Y Axis: Health Categories

• Competition

• Dollar Size

• Number of Annual RX

Internally Develop

Partner, Out-License

Improving Patient Care:
Impracor™ Phase 3
Topical NSAID

The Case for a Topical NSAID

	Oral NSAIDs	Topical NSAIDs
Efficacy in Acute Soft Tissue Injuries	Good	Good
Efficacy in Osteoarthritis	Good	Good
Incidence of Adverse Events	High	Low
GI Safety (Stomach)	Poor	Good
Hepatic Safety (Liver)	Poor	Good
Renal Safety (Kidney)	Poor	Good
Cardiovascular Safety (Heart)	Poor	Good

Resultant Complications from Systemic (Oral) NSAID Use

• 16,000 deaths (US/yr)

• 100,000 hospitalizations (US/yr)

The Topical NSAID Market

The Case for Impracor™

• Market Analysis:

• The $10B+ US NSAID Market is Transitioning to Topicals

• Voltaren Gel (1% diclofenac) has ~75% Rx share

• Despite Suboptimal Products, U.S. Topical NSAID Market is Growing

• 2016 Topical NSAID Market Possibly >$1B

• There is a compelling unmet need for an effective semi-solid NSAID

Factor	Impracor™	Voltaren®
Delivery Technology	Patented Accudel™ Micelles	None; Alcohol
Per Dose Quantity	3g	4g
Dose Frequency	BID (2X Daily)	QID (4X Daily)
API	10% Ketoprofen	1% Diclofenac
COX Selectivity	Cox 1	Cox 2
Smell	Neutral	Insect Repellant
Tactile	Smooth	Greasy

Impracor™ Phase 3 Program

Initial Phase 3 Trial

• Removing subjects who should not have entered the trial: p=0.038

• Remove subjects who did not comply with the protocol: p=0.034

New Acute Pain Clinical Trials to Achieve FDA Approval

• Two adequate and well controlled acute pain trials

• Analgesic Solutions (Dr. Nathaniel Katz) design/execute program

• Use patented tools and methods to reduce placebo effect

• Rapid trial enrollment from “banking” of qualified patients

• Seek “sprains, strains and joint pain” label

• Could be the only acute pain topical NSAID (if FDA approved)

Phase 3 Clinical Trials Planned - Mid 2013

Initial Trial Data - Q1 2014

Impracor™ Commercialization

• Capture existing compounded topical ketoprofen market

• Doctors prefer FDA approved product

• Patients prefer insurance reimbursement

• Potentially more margin for pharmacies for FDA-approved
product

• Option to utilize PCCA member network to launch in US

• Out-license and compete against Voltaren in the large and
growing US topical NSAID market

• Benefit from format, feel, potency, dosing & smell
advantages

Impracor™ Intellectual Property

FDA Exclusivity

• FDA protection with up to 3 years of new drug exclusivity

• “Paragraph IV” claims can prevent generics for up to 30 months

*** FDA “High Hurdles” for Topical Generics

• Voltaren™ - off exclusivity and off patent for years - no generics

• There are currently no generics in the topical NSAID market:

• FDA Guidance: Voltaren™ generics must complete clinical studies prior to ANDA

• Generic drug companies are not in the business of conducting clinical trials

• Conclusion: Bioequivalence for an ANDA for topical drugs is difficult to establish

USPTO Protections

• Core Accudel™ US/Canadian patents issued

• New Impracor™ packaging applications filed

Executive Team and
Select Financial Data

Management Team Snapshot

Strong operational and management experience within our leadership group

Compensation weighted in equity

Chief Executive Officer: Mark L. Baum, J.D.

15+ Years of Senior Executive Experience; Founder/President, YesRx.com (1999)

Founder of 3 private investment funds; Restructured numerous companies (private-to-public)

Responsible for Restructuring Imprimis, including ~$24M new equity investment and PCCA transaction

President: Balbir Brar, D.V.M., Ph.D.

25 Years of Senior Drug Development Experience

Senior Positions: Lederle/Wyeth, SmithKline & Beckman, and Allergan

Drugs: Botox, Ketorolac (Cataracts), Restasis (Dry Eye), Lumigam, Latisse, Alphagan and 8 other drugs

Chief Medical Officer: Joachim P.H. Schupp, M.D.
Senior Positions: Ciba-Geigy, Novartis, ProSanos, Adventrx, Apricus Biosciences

Drugs: Voltaren line extensions, Apligraf, Femara, Exjade and Sandoglobulin

VP, Accounting and Public Reporting: Andrew R. Boll

8+ years of experience in small capitalization company financial reporting; focus on restructured businesses

Led forensic-type accounting and financial reporting of historical Imprimis records during restructuring

Clinical and Regulatory Team Snapshot

Senior Regulatory Advisor: Lee S. Simon, M.D.
FDA Division Director of Analgesic, Anti-Inflammatory & Ophthalmologic Drug Products (2001-2003)
Served on multiple FDA advisory committees; 12 years as an NIH funded investigator

Senior consultant to Pharmacia/Searle on COX-2 development

Two terms on the BOD of the American College of Rheumatology; 110 Original Publications

Senior Clinical Advisor: Roy D. Altman, M.D.

Professor of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology/Immunology at UCLA ; 35+ yrs clinical experience

Founding Member/Past President of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International

Chairman for the Design and Conduct of Clinical Trials in Osteoarthritis as well as the Chairman on
Clinical Trials in Osteoarthritis; Over 200 juried manuscripts and over 60 books

Edited the 4th edition of Osteoarthritis: Diagnosis and Management.

Co-editor :Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism and Editor and Chief of Osteoarthritis and Cartilage

Senior Clinical Advisor: Marc C. Hochberg, M.D.

Faculty, The Johns Hopkins University SOM & University of Maryland SOM

Head of the Division of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology at University of Maryland SOM

Focus on clinical epidemiology of musculoskeletal diseases, osteoarthritis and osteoporosis

PI of NIH and Dep’t Vet. Affairs funded studies, and is a Co-investigator on several other studies

Senior Regulatory Advisor: Allan M. Green, M.D., PhD, J.D.

Physician, Attorney, Inventor and Research Scientist

Operating and Management Experience with Numerous Biomedical Companies

Of Counsel to Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

Teaches Food and Drug Law at Boston College Law School

Capital Structure

	Capital Structure March 14, 2013 (Unaudited)	Percent
Common Shares	8,888,250	82.58%
Total Restricted Stock Units	200,000	1.86%
Total Options & Warrants - Weighted Avg. Ex. Price $5.49	1,675,487	15.56%
Total Common Shares - Diluted	10,763,737	100.00%

Summary

• Imprimis is a Company with Vision

• Unique Drug Development Model

• Near Term Catalysts

• Robust and Compelling Development Assets

• Key Strategic Relationships

• Cash Resources to Execute

• Highly Capable Team

Questions & Discussion

Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Delivering Safe, Effective and Direct Solutions

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark L. Baum, J.D.

(858) 433-2816 - Direct

mark@imprimispharma.com

Appendix - Investment
Summary & Support

Accudel™ Topical
Delivery Technology

Introduction to Accudel™

Pluronic Lecithin Organogel (PLO) Platform

Lipophillic APIs

Hydrophillic APIs

Pluronic Phase

Lecithin Phase

• Accudel™ is a cream that “carries” drugs
through the skin, penetrating to the problem site

• Pluronic Lecithin Organogel (PLO) drug carrier

• Accommodates different size molecules and large
quantities of active drugs

• Works with drugs with different physicochemical
properties

• Quickly absorbed and aesthetically pleasing

• Low toxicity and biodegradable; components are
non-immunogenic and are “Generally Regarded
As Safe” (GRAS) by the US FDA

• Thermodynamically stable, insensitive to moisture
and resistant to microbial contamination

Drug

Lecithin Phase

Drug

Pluronic Phase

Introduction to Accudel™

In Vitro Penetration Data for Impracor™ and
European Marketed Products (Fastum®, Ketum®, Oruvail®)

• 63% - 70% of ketoprofen in Impracor that was available for
release diffused through the membrane (0.45 m Nylon) of a
Franz Cell Apparatus within 4 hoursi.

• (Fastum, Ketum, Oruvail) 2.5% topical ketoprofen were tested
in a Franz Cell Apparatus (Silicon membrane). Less than 20%
of ketoprofen present in the formulation was made available to
diffuse out of the formulation into the receptor phase in the un-
ionized formii.

i. DPT Study Report TC.0706.01

ii. Thesis Tettey-Amlalo, Dec 2005

Faculty of Pharmacy Rhodes University, Grahamstown

Impracor™ Topical
NSAID
Competition and Market

The Problem With Oral NSAIDs

Solution is to deliver NSAIDs topically to the specific site of pain or inflammation

Fact: Extremely Large Population Uses NSAIDs

• 70 Million prescriptions for NSAIDs each year in US (Wiegard in Medscape)

• Regularly used by more than 60M Americans (Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:171-177)

• 70% of all 65+ Year Olds Take NSAIDs Weekly

• Usage of oral NSAIDs is increasing

Result: Toxicity to Gastro Intestinal (GI) Tract, Kidneys and Liver

• Over 100,000 per year are hospitalized from NSAID complications

• Hospitalizations alone cost more than $2B per year

• Over 16,000 deaths every year from GI NSAID complications

• NSAID GI Toxicity - the 15th most common cause of death in US

Widespread Usage With Serious Side Effects

Competitive Landscape

10% Ketoprofen

Cream

1 gram
3 x per day =
3 grams/day

Safe / Cutaneous

Elegant Formulation

Convenient / Cream

Accudel Delivery System
Local AEs 1-2%

Seeking acute
musculoskeletal pain label

IMPRACOR

(Imprimis)

1.3% Diclofenac
epolamine

10 x 14 cm patch
2 x per day

Fixed one size patch

Adherence issues

Not to be worn in water

Local AEs 11%

Acute soft tissue
injury (positive data
in ankle sprain)

FLECTOR PATCH

(Pfizer/IBSA)

1% Diclofenac

sodium

2-4 gram

4 x per day =
16 grams/day

Large Quantities

Sticky / Greasy

Odor / Staining

Local AEs 7%

Chronic OA of hand
and knee

VOLTAREN GEL

(Endo/Novartis)

1.5% Diclofenac

sodium

40 drops of liquid
(10 drops to each of 4 sides of knee)

3-4 x per day =
160 drops/day

Dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO); Safety concerns

Complicated application

Causes garlic taste/breath

Local AEs 47%

Chronic OA of knee

PENNSAID

(Covidien/Nuvo)

Ketoprofen vs. Ibuprofen

“Meta-analysis of 26 trials (n=2,853) … showed that Ketoprofen was
significantly better than all other topical NSAIDs. In terms of efficacy,
Ketoprofen was significantly better than ibuprofen, felbinac, piroxicam and
indomethacin.”

Topical NSAIDs for acute pain: a meta-analysis

Lorna Mason, R Andrew Moore*, Jayne E Edwards, Sheena Derry and Henry J McQuay

BMC Family Practice 2004, 5:10

The Impracor Solution

Ketoprofen vs. Diclofenac

The proportion of participants experiencing successful treatment with topical
ketoprofen in seven clinical studies was 73% (251/346, range 57% to 89%)

The proportion of participants experiencing successful treatment with topical
diclofenac in three clinical studies was 52% (166/319, range 39% to 92%)

Ketoprofen is a Superior Active Ingredient

Topical NSAIDs for acute pain in adults.

Massey T, Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;6:CD007402

Relative COX-1/COX-2 Selectivity

Vane S J Thorax 2000;55:S3-S9

5-50 fold
COX-2

selective

<5-fold
COX-2
selective

-3

-2

-1

Additional Impracor™
Clinical Materials

Topical NSAIDs in Acute OA Knee Pain Model

	Ketoprofen 20% Patch (ENDO)	Ketoprofen Transfersome Gel, Diractin™ (IDEA)	Diclofenac Solution Pennsaid™ (Nuvo)
Phase	3	2/3	2
Study Dates	Aug 2006 - May 2007	Jul 2003 - Jan 2004	Jul 2010 - Mar 2011
# of Subjects/ Age	309 / above 18 years	397/ above 40 years	248 / 18 -80 years
Regimen/ Duration	Ketoprofen Patch applied o.d. 4 weeks	110 mg ketoprofen b.i.d. (n=138) 6 weeks (1 placebo capsule b.i.d. 100 mg celecoxib capsule b.i.d.)	1.3 mL applied to front, back and sides of knee b.i.d. (n=84) Vehicle and placebo controlled 4 weeks
Selection	Diagnosis of knee (unilateral or bilateral), CRO: PPD	Morning stiffness < 30’, crepitus, at least 3 on Likert’s 5 point scale, not on NSAIDS	Patients using NSAIDs underwent a 1-week washout This was a non-flare study
Primary Endpoint	WOMAC (pain) week 2	WOMAC (pain ) week 6•	WOMAC (pain ) week 4
Secondary Endpoints	Pain Intensity/ relief (diary) WOMAC (function), Rescue Medication, quality of sleep, lost days of work. Pat./Phys. global assessment	WOMAC (function)-week 6. Patient global assessment (5 Point Likert)•	WOMAC (stiffness) , WOMAC (function), WOMAC (pain on walking) - - week 4 Patient global assessment Pain assessment 11 point scale
Conclusions	ITT Primary Endpoint met: Significant differences vs placebo (p=0.014). All secondary endpoints met. Previously two Phase 3 sprain/strain trials failed, program discontinued. ENDO 10Q 2007	WOMAC pain LS mean reduction - 18.2 (-22.1 to - 14.3), -20.3 (-24.3 to -16.2) and -9.9 (-13.9 to - 5.8) osteoarthritis (p <0.01) All WOMAC subscale scores were normalized to a scale of 0 to 100 by dividing the sum subscale score by the number of questions of each score. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007; 66(9): 1178-83. Swissmedic approval based on single study	WOMAC pain reduction (5-Point Likert) from baseline (-3.9 [- 4.8 to -2.9]) compared with vehicle -control solution (-2.5 [- 3.3 to -1.7]; p = 0.023) or the placebo solution (-2.5 [-3.3 to -1.7]; p = 0.016). CMAJ • AUG. 17, 2004; 171 (4) 5 Phase 3 trials have achieved all 3 primary end points in OA.

Retrospective Analysis of 1st Phase 3 Study

p = 0.038

mITT ** (n=326)

Study Design Error

ITT * (n=361)

Mean reduction from baseline in mm (100 mm Visual Analogue Scale)

“Once randomized, you’re analyzed” p = 0.087

* ITT = Intent-to-treat (ITT) population

** mITT = Modified ITT of ITT patients - 35 met study entry criteria, but were excluded from ITT due to exclusionary criteria:
(1) misdiagnosis, (30) positive drug screen, (4) other lab values at baseline making the patient ineligible for the trial

*** mPP = Modified per protocol (mPP) analysis of mITT patients -- who complied with the protocol? (52) improperly dosed,
(22) no valid Day 3 primary endpoint assessment, and (4) were misdiagnosed

Design & Execution Optimization Lead to Statistical Significance (p = <0.05)

mPP *** (n=250)

Study Mgmt Errors

p = 0.034

Change from baseline
in pain intensity
during daily activities
over the past 24
hours on Day 3 Visit
(Day 3, +1 or +2 days)

New Impracor Phase 3 Program: 1H 2013

Old Phase 3 Trial	New Phase 3 Trial
Many sprains and strains trials have failed	• Acute OA flare (as a pain model) provides a more reliable population with better chance for separation
High placebo responses	• Utilize analgesia-specific proprietary implements and methodologies to identify placebo responders
Insufficient monitoring for patient eligibility	• Invest in trial design and management • Use only experienced pain trial investigators
Patients were entered into the ITT up to 72 hours after injury	• OA flare model designed for NSAID “wash-out” and immediate randomization of eligible patients
People were allowed in if they had 6/10 pain level over last 24 hours - regardless of pain at baseline	• OA flare model has defined entry criteria for pain intensity after NSAID “wash-out” and before randomization
30 subjects used un-allowed drugs	• Local laboratory for eligibility (drugs, liver, kidney, hematology)
Major dosing compliance problems related to smaller size of tube orifice vs. applicator card box	• Provide scales and weigh tubes at any office visit

Initial Phase 3 Trial

Design:	Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled at 26 sites
Study Population:	Efficacy, n = 361 Uncomplicated acute soft tissue injuries Ankle (n=97), Shoulder (n=87), Knee (n=59), Wrist (n=57), Elbow (n=30), Calf/Anterior Tibialis (n=11), Hamstring/Quadriceps (n=8), Forearm (n=5), Biceps/Triceps (n=3), Hand (n=3) Safety, n = 364 Ranging in age from 18 - 75 years
Key Entry Criteria:	Injury occurred within 72 hours, pain intensity ≥ 60mm on 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS); no intake of unallowable medication
Dosing Regimen:	Impracor vs. Placebo (Vehicle) cream, 1g t.i.d. x 7 days
Primary Endpoint:	Change from baseline in pain intensity during daily activities on Day 3 office visit (+1, +2 days) with 100 mm VAS measurement
Secondary Endpoints:	• Change from baseline in three times daily pain intensity immediately prior to medication • Various other treatment satisfaction and safety assessments • Pharmacokinetics in subset of patients

Sprain-Strain Soft Tissue Study

Safety: Low Incidence of Adverse Events

* Clinical Study Report: TDLP-110-001, September 2010

** Prescribing Information for Flector Patch, Voltaren Gel and Pennsaid Solution

• No related gastrointestinal (GI), cardiac, liver, or other serious AEs

• Low incidence of cutaneous AEs

1g, 3x daily

180mg, 2x daily

4g, 4x daily

40 drops, 4x daily

Pharmacokinetics: Low Systemic
Absorption

* Cannavino, C. et al. Efficacy of Transdermal Ketoprofen in delayed onset muscular soreness,Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, 13: 200-208,
2003 and Clinical Study Report Project No. 990808, Phase 1/2 Study Report Aug 2007

**Orudis ketoprofen extended release capsule/ Oruvail capsule prescription information

Impracor*

10% ketoprofen cream

Oruvail**

1g t.i.d. (48hr)

2g t.i.d. (48hr)

Orudis**

Clear Separation of Data Day 4 Onwards

Mean Change from Baseline in 3X/daily
Pain Intensity Prior to Medication (from Patient Diary)

All ITT patients (n=361)

* =.statistically significant

p = 0.041*

We Believe We Know What Body Part to Study

Day 7

n=77

p=0.0396

Knees and Adjacent Muscle Injuries

Average Change in Pain Intensity from Baseline

Phase 1/2 Study - Investigator IND Efficacy by Assessing DOMS

Cannavino, C. et al. Efficacy of Transdermal Ketoprofen in delayed onset muscular soreness,Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, 13: 200-208, 2003
and Clinical Study Report Project No. 990808, Phase 1/2 Study Report Aug 2007

Time

24h

48h

Impracor

Placebo

Time

24h

48h

Impracor

Placebo

VAS muscle soreness means ± SE 0, 24 and 48 hours,
significantly less soreness in the Impracor vs placebo group
(p=0.0118) between 24 and 48 hours

VAS muscle soreness means ± SE at 0, 24 and 48 hours.
Significantly less soreness in the Impracor vs placebo
(p=0.0104) between 24 and 48 hours

No Adverse Events Reported

p=0.0118

p=0.0104

Either Active o (both legs) Placebo

n=16

1/2 Active/Placebo on R or L Legs

n=16

Additional Corporate
Information

Board of Directors

Robert J. Kammer, D.D.S.

Managing Member of financial group that restructured Imprimis

Active Clinical Research & Consulting Practice

30+ Years Clinical Practice - Diplomate, American Board of Orofacial Pain

Retired Associate Professor & Course Director - Orofacial Pain, University of Colorado

Mark L. Baum, J.D.

15+ Years of Senior Executive Experience; Founder/President, YesRx.com (1999)

Founder of 3 private investment funds; Restructured numerous companies (private-to-public)

Responsible for Restructuring Imprimis, including $7.95M New Equity Investment and PCCA transaction

Paul Finnegan, M.D., M.B.A.
13+ Years Commercialization and Development Experience
Ops Experience: Avalon Ventures, Alexion, Pharmacia/Searle); Univ. of Chicago MBA

Senior Positions: Avalon Ventures, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Pharmacia/Searle/Monsanto

Drugs: Celebrex, Bextra, Arthrotec, Soliris, Inspra and Aldactone/Soldactone

Jeff Abrams, M.D.

Founder and Director since 1998

Practicing primary care clinician for 20+ years

Co-developer of our Accudel drug delivery technology and Impracor topical NSAID

Stephen Austin, C.P.A.

Audit Committee Chairman; Board service on over 12 boards and related board committees

Partner at Swenson Advisors, LLP since May 1998

Manages audit, SEC, Sarbanes-Oxley and business consulting engagements with a focus on technology,
manufacturing, service, real estate, social media and non-profit organizations

Balance Sheet

ASSETS				December 31, 2012
Current Assets
	Cash and cash equivalents		$	10,035,615
	Other assets			670,381
		TOTAL ASSETS	$	10,705,996
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
	Accounts payable and accrued expenses		$	709,559
		TOTAL LIABILITIES		709,559
Stockholder’s Equity
	Common stock, $0.001 par value, 395,000,000 shares authorized,
		6,772,066 shares issued and outstanding		6,772
	Additional paid-in capital			34,093,933
	Deficit accumulated during the development stage			(24,104,268)
		TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY		9,996,437
		TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY	$	10,705,996

(Abbreviated)

Imprimis Development Process

Ideas

Candidates

Projects

• Market Data

• Drug Master File

• Field Experience

• Out-License or Develop

• Complete Phase 3

• NDA via 505(b)(2)

• Market Launch/Partner

NDA & LAUNCH

Candidate