As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 27, 2012

Registration No. 333-183706

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO
FORM S-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

 

INTERCEPT PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware		2834		22-3868459
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(Primary Standard Industrial Classification Code Number)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

18 Desbrosses Street
New York, NY 10013
(646) 747-1000

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of Registrant’s principal executive offices)

 

Mark Pruzanski, M.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
18 Desbrosses Street
New York, NY 10013
(646) 747-1000

(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of agent for service)

 

Copies to:

William T. Whelan, Esq. Scott A. Samuels, Esq. Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. One Financial Center Boston, MA 02111 (617) 542-6000		Barbara Duncan Chief Financial Officer Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 18 Desbrosses Street New York, NY 10013 (646) 747-1000		Ilan S. Nissan, Esq. Christopher J. Austin, Esq. Goodwin Procter LLP The New York Times Building 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 (212) 813-8800

 

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after the effective date of this registration statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box. o

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

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.

Large accelerated filer o		Accelerated filer o		Non-accelerated filer x (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)		Smaller reporting company o

The Registrant is an “emerging growth company,” as defined in Section 2(a) of the Securities Act. This registration statement complies with the requirements that apply to an issuer that is an emerging growth company.

 

The Registrant hereby amends this registration statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this registration statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the registration statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to such Section 8(a), may determine.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

Subject to Completion
Preliminary Prospectus dated September 27, 2012

P R O S P E C T U S

4,300,000 Shares

Common Stock

 

This is Intercept Pharmaceuticals’ initial public offering. We are selling 4,300,000 shares of our common stock.

We expect the initial offering price to be between $13.00 and $15.00 per share. Currently, no public market exists for the shares. After pricing of the offering, we expect that the shares will trade on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “ICPT.”

We are an “emerging growth company” under federal securities laws and are subject to reduced public company disclosure standards. See “Prospectus Summary — Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company.”

Investing in our common stock involves risks that are described in the “Risk Factors” section beginning on page 10 of this prospectus.

 

		Per Share				Total
Public offering price		$				$
Underwriting discount		$				$
Proceeds, before expenses, to us		$				$

The underwriters may also exercise their option to purchase up to an additional 645,000 shares from us, at the public offering price, less the underwriting discount, for 30 days after the date of this prospectus.

Entities affiliated with certain of our existing stockholders and directors and entities affiliated with our director nominee have indicated an interest in purchasing up to an aggregate of approximately $30.0 million in shares of our common stock in this offering at the initial public offering price. However, because indications of interest are not binding agreements or commitments to purchase, the underwriters could determine to sell more, less or no shares to any of these potential investors and any of these potential investors could determine to purchase more, less or no shares in this offering.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The shares will be ready for delivery on or about         , 2012.

 

BofA Merrill Lynch

 

BMO Capital Markets

Needham & Company		Wedbush PacGrow Life Sciences		ThinkEquity LLC

 

The date of this prospectus is         , 2012.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Page
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY			1
RISK FACTORS			10
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS			42
USE OF PROCEEDS			44
DIVIDEND POLICY			45
CAPITALIZATION			46
DILUTION			48
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA			51
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS			53
BUSINESS			76
MANAGEMENT			105
EXECUTIVE AND DIRECTOR COMPENSATION			113
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PERSON TRANSACTIONS			124
PRINCIPAL STOCKHOLDERS			127
DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK			130
SHARES ELIGIBLE FOR FUTURE SALE			134
MATERIAL U.S. FEDERAL TAX CONSIDERATIONS TO NON-U.S. HOLDERS			137
UNDERWRITING			141
LEGAL MATTERS			146
EXPERTS			146
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION			146
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS			F-1

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with information different from that contained in this prospectus. We are offering to sell, and seeking offers to buy, shares of common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are permitted. The information contained in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of common stock.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This summary provides an overview of selected information contained elsewhere in this prospectus and does not contain all of the information you should consider before investing in our common stock. You should carefully read this prospectus and the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part in their entirety before investing in our common stock, including the information discussed under “Risk Factors” and our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto that appear elsewhere in this prospectus. Unless otherwise indicated herein, the terms “we,” “our,” “us,” or “the Company” refer to Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Overview

We are a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of novel therapeutics to treat chronic liver disease utilizing our expertise in bile acid chemistry. Our product candidates have the potential to treat orphan and more prevalent liver diseases for which there currently are limited therapeutic solutions.

Our Lead Product Candidate

Our lead product candidate, obeticholic acid, or OCA, is a bile acid analog and first-in-class agonist of the farnesoid X receptor, or FXR, which we believe has broad liver-protective properties. We are developing OCA initially for the second line treatment of primary biliary cirrhosis, or PBC. PBC is a chronic autoimmune liver disease that, if inadequately treated, may eventually lead to cirrhosis, liver failure and death. We are conducting a Phase 3 clinical trial of OCA in PBC, which we call the POISE trial, that we anticipate will serve as the basis for seeking regulatory approval in the United States and Europe. We currently expect results from the trial to be available by mid-2014. OCA has received orphan drug designation in the United States and Europe for the treatment of PBC.

We own worldwide rights to OCA outside of Japan and China, where we have exclusively licensed the compound to Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma, or DSP, and granted it an option to exclusively license OCA in certain other Asian countries. Patents covering the composition of matter for OCA expire in 2022, before any patent term adjustments or patent term extensions. Our current plan is to commercialize OCA in the United States and Europe ourselves for the treatment of PBC by targeting a limited and focused group of specialist physicians.

The liver performs many essential functions that are crucial for survival, including the regulation of bile acid metabolism. A critical function of bile acids is to facilitate the absorption of dietary cholesterol and other nutrients by acting as natural detergent-like emulsifying agents in the intestine. In the past decade, we have learned that bile acids are also complex signaling molecules that integrate metabolic, immune and inflammatory pathways involved in the healthy functioning of various tissues and organs. The biological effects of bile acids are mediated through dedicated receptors such as FXR, which regulates bile acid synthesis and clearance from the liver, thereby preventing excessive bile acid build-up in the liver, which may be toxic. In addition, bile acid activation of FXR induces anti-fibrotic, anti-inflammatory and other mechanisms that are necessary for the normal regeneration of the liver. We believe this makes FXR an attractive drug target in a broad spectrum of chronic liver diseases. Similar FXR-mediated protective mechanisms in other organs exposed to bile acids also make it a potential target for the treatment of a number of intestinal, kidney and other diseases.

PBC is a rare liver disease that primarily results from autoimmune destruction of the bile ducts that transport bile acids out of the liver. The disease causes a toxic build-up of bile acids in the liver, resulting in progressive liver damage marked by chronic inflammation and fibrosis, or scarring. In response to the bile acid mediated toxicity seen in PBC, liver cells release alkaline phosphatase, or ALP, a liver enzyme that is a key biomarker of the disease pathology. Elevated blood levels of ALP are used as the primary means of diagnosis of PBC and are closely monitored in patients as the most important indicator of treatment response and prognosis.

The only approved drug for the treatment of PBC is ursodeoxycholic acid, which is available generically as ursodiol. Ursodiol is itself a bile acid that is present in small quantities in humans, and is the least detergent of the various types of bile acids that make up the bile pool. Its primary mechanism of action at

TABLE OF CONTENTS

therapeutic doses is to dilute more detergent bile acids, but it has no known pharmacological effects mediated by FXR or other bile acid receptors. Although ursodiol is the standard of care, studies have shown that up to 50% of PBC patients fail to respond adequately to treatment, meaning that they continue to be at significant risk of progressing to liver failure even with treatment. The options for end-stage PBC patients who fail to respond to ursodiol are limited, and include liver transplant, which is associated with significant complications and costs. Patients typically need to take approximately one gram of ursodiol daily in divided doses, which we believe presents a compliance challenge for some patients. Given this issue, coupled with ursodiol’s limited efficacy in up to 50% of PBC patients, we believe that there is a significant unmet need for a novel second line therapy in PBC. We believe that OCA has the potential to provide significant benefits in the treatment of PBC, including efficacy, pharmacological activity and ease of use.

According to industry data, there are approximately 300,000 people with PBC in developed countries, of whom we believe approximately 60,000 have been diagnosed and are on ursodiol therapy. Based on this estimate, we believe there are up to 30,000 PBC patients who may currently be eligible for treatment with OCA. With increasing identification of PBC through routine liver function testing in primary care, we believe that there may be significantly more patients who will potentially be eligible for, and be interested in, receiving a new therapy if it becomes available on the market.

We have previously completed two randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2 trials with OCA in PBC patients, one with OCA in combination with ursodiol and one with OCA as monotherapy. The results demonstrated that over a 12-week period single daily doses of OCA at the lowest dose of 10 milligrams (mg) met the primary endpoint in both Phase 2 trials, producing statistically significant reductions in ALP levels of greater than 20%. We consider reductions in ALP levels of greater than 10% to be a clinically meaningful improvement. Pruritus, or itching, a very common symptom in PBC patients, was the most common adverse event reported in our Phase 2 trials, with severity increasing with dose.

Our Phase 3 POISE trial has been designed to study the safety and efficacy of OCA in patients with an inadequate therapeutic response to ursodiol or who are unable to tolerate ursodiol. The primary endpoint of the 12-month double-blind portion of the POISE trial is the achievement of both an ALP level of less than 1.67 times upper limit normal, or ULN, and a minimum 15% reduction in ALP level from baseline, together with a normal bilirubin level, as compared to placebo. Patients with ALP and bilirubin levels within these thresholds have been shown in long-term studies to be at significantly lower risk of progressing to liver transplant and death.

We are advancing a once daily 10 mg dose of OCA in the POISE trial as our potential approvable dose. We recently completed an intention to treat analysis for the 10 mg dose groups in our two Phase 2 trials that was limited to those patients who would have met the POISE trial entry criteria. This analysis demonstrated that after 12 weeks of treatment approximately 40% to 45% of OCA-treated patients would have met the POISE trial primary endpoint, as compared to 5% to 9% of the placebo-treated patients. In addition, 80% of OCA-treated patients across our Phase 2 trials had a reduction in ALP levels of at least 10%, as compared to 13% of placebo-treated patients.

If the POISE trial is successful, we intend to submit a New Drug Application, or NDA, to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, for approval of OCA for the treatment of PBC in the United States and a Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, to the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, for approval in Europe. Based on written scientific advice from the EMA, we believe that the EMA will accept our current clinical program as the basis for considering approval of OCA for PBC. With respect to the FDA, we intend to request that the POISE trial primary endpoint be accepted as a basis for approval of OCA under the FDA’s accelerated approval regulation that enables the use of a surrogate endpoint reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. If the FDA agrees to consider the potential approval of OCA in accordance with its accelerated approval regulation based on the POISE trial results, we will likely have to conduct a Phase 3 clinical outcomes trial to confirm the clinical benefit predicted by the biochemical therapeutic response. This Phase 3 clinical outcomes trial would have to be substantially underway at the time of the NDA submission and would be completed after accelerated approval. We are in discussions with the FDA about the details of such a clinical trial and are planning to initiate it as early as the second half of 2013.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A number of published clinical studies have demonstrated that, as a measure of therapeutic response, lower levels of ALP, on its own or in conjunction with normal bilirubin levels, correlate with a significant reduction in adverse clinical outcomes such as liver transplant and death. We believe that one of the key factors in the FDA’s acceptance of our POISE trial primary endpoint as a basis for approval will be the result of additional analysis of the already available PBC clinical outcomes data. We are sponsoring an independent study involving more than ten leading PBC centers in North America and Europe that are pooling their long-term patient data, anticipated to be from at least 4,000 patients, in order to further substantiate that our POISE trial primary endpoint is predictive of clinical benefit. We anticipate these results will be available in 2013 and will support what we believe is an emerging consensus among PBC opinion leaders concerning the clinical utility of our selected endpoint.

Additional Pipeline Opportunities Beyond OCA in PBC

In addition to PBC, we are pursuing other indications in our OCA development program, including portal hypertension, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH, and bile acid diarrhea. The pipeline chart below shows the current stage of development of OCA for these indications, as well as the preclinical programs for our other product candidates.

We are currently conducting an open label Phase 2a trial of OCA in patients with portal hypertension, and we anticipate receiving results from the 10 mg dose group of this trial by the end of 2012. There are currently no approved therapies for the treatment of portal hypertension, although beta blockers are commonly used to treat patients. In addition, OCA is currently being tested in a Phase 2b trial for the treatment of NASH, sponsored by the U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, or NIDDK, in collaboration with us. Based on the interim analysis that was completed in June 2012, the NIDDK decided to continue this Phase 2b trial and we anticipate that final results will be available in late 2014. There are currently no approved therapies for the treatment of NASH. In addition, investigators at the Imperial College of London initiated enrollment in July 2012 in an open label Phase 2a trial of OCA as a treatment for bile acid diarrhea.

By virtue of our patent portfolio and the proprietary knowhow of our employees and our collaborators at the University of Perugia, we believe that we hold a leading position in the bile acid chemistry therapeutic field. Through a longstanding exclusive collaboration with Professor Roberto Pellicciari, Ph.D., one of our co-founders, and certain scientists in the medicinal chemistry group at the University of Perugia, we have gained the capability to rationally design compounds that bind selectively and potently to FXR and other bile

TABLE OF CONTENTS

acid receptors. Starting with OCA, which was invented by Professor Pellicciari and, together with its underlying patents, was assigned to us under our agreements with him and the University of Perugia, our collaboration has resulted in a pipeline of bile acid analogs in addition to OCA, which target both FXR and a second dedicated bile acid receptor called TGR5, a target of interest for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and associated metabolic diseases. We intend to continue developing these and other product candidates as we advance our pipeline, in some cases subject to the procurement of additional funding or through strategic collaborations.

Our Strategy

Our strategy is to develop and commercialize novel therapeutics for patients with chronic liver and other diseases, beginning with OCA for the second line treatment of PBC and other follow-on indications that we believe are underserved by existing therapies. The key elements of our strategy are to:

We may enter into strategic collaborations to implement our strategy.

Risks Relating to Our Business

We are a development stage biopharmaceutical company, and our business and ability to execute our business strategy are subject to a number of risks of which you should be aware before you decide to buy our common stock. In particular, you should consider the following risks, which are discussed more fully in the section entitled “Risk Factors”:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company

We qualify as an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act. As an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of specified reduced disclosure and other requirements that are otherwise applicable generally to public companies. These provisions include:

We may take advantage of these exemptions for up to five years or such earlier time that we are no longer an emerging growth company. We would cease to be an emerging growth company on the date that is the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of $1 billion or more; (ii) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the completion of this offering; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. We may choose to take advantage of some but not all of these exemptions. We have taken advantage of reduced reporting requirements in this prospectus. Accordingly, the information contained herein may be different than the information you receive from other public companies in which you hold stock.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated in the State of Delaware on September 4, 2002. Our principal executive offices are located at 18 Desbrosses Street, New York, NY 10013, and our telephone number is (646) 747-1000. We also have an office in San Diego, CA. Our website address is www.interceptpharma.com. The information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of this prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE OFFERING

Entities affiliated with certain of our existing stockholders and directors and entities affiliated with our director nominee have indicated an interest in purchasing up to an aggregate of approximately $30.0 million in shares of our common stock in this offering at the initial public offering price. However, because indications of interest are not binding agreements or commitments to purchase, the underwriters could determine to sell more, less or no shares to any of these potential investors and any of these potential investors could determine to purchase more, less or no shares in this offering. Any shares purchased by these potential investors will be subject to lock-up restrictions described in “Shares Eligible for Future Sale.”

The number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after this offering is based on an aggregate of 10,733,483 shares, consisting of (i) 3,329,666 shares of common stock outstanding on June 30, 2012, (ii) 4,807,674 shares of common stock into which all of our preferred stock outstanding as of June 30, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering and (iii) 2,596,143 shares of common stock into which the shares of preferred stock issued on August 9, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering. The number of shares of our common stock outstanding immediately after this offering excludes:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Except as otherwise indicated, all information in this prospectus:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

The summary consolidated financial data presented below for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The summary consolidated financial data presented below for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2012, and for the period from inception (September 4, 2002) to June 30, 2012 (required to be included since we are a development stage company), are derived from our unaudited financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as our audited consolidated financial statements and include, in the opinion of management, all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the financial information set forth in those statements.

Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of future operating results. You should read this summary consolidated financial data in conjunction with the sections entitled “Risk Factors,” “Capitalization,” “Selected Financial Data” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes, all included elsewhere in this prospectus.

		Years Ended December 31,								Six Months Ended June 30,								Period From September 4, 2002 (Inception) Through June 30, 2012
		2010				2011				2011				2012
		(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
										(Unaudited)								(Unaudited)
Statement of Operations Data:
Licensing revenues		$	—			$	1,805			$	405			$	1,518			$	3,323
Operating expenses:
Research and development			12,710				11,426				4,751				8,078				63,330
General and administrative			3,644				4,210				2,020				2,003				26,424
Total operating expenses			16,354				15,636				6,771				10,081				89,754
Loss from operations			(16,354	)			(13,831	)			(6,366	)			(8,563	)			(86,431	)
Total other income (expense), net			1,266				1,093				115				797				4,125
Net loss		$	(15,088	)		$	(12,738	)		$	(6,251	)		$	(7,766	)		$	(82,306	)
Dividend on preferred stock, not declared			(2,901	)			(3,000	)			(1,500	)			(1,500	)			(9,814	)
Net loss attributable to common stockholders		$	(17,989	)		$	(15,738	)		$	(7,751	)		$	(9,266	)		$	(92,120	)
Net loss per share, basic and diluted		$	(5.40	)		$	(4.73	)		$	(2.33	)		$	(2.78	)
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic and diluted			3,329,666				3,329,666				3,329,666				3,329,666
Pro forma information(1)
Pro forma net loss attributable to common stockholders						$	(12,738	)						$	(7,766	)
Pro forma net loss per share, basic and diluted (unaudited)						$	(1.19	)						$	(0.72	)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following summary unaudited balance sheet data as of June 30, 2012 is presented:

The summary unaudited pro forma as adjusted balance sheet is for informational purposes only and does not purport to indicate balance sheet information as of any future date.

		As of June 30, 2012
		Actual				Pro Forma				Pro Forma As Adjusted(1)
		(In thousands)
		(Unaudited)
Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents		$	9,947			$	39,747			$	94,233
Working capital			6,104				35,904				90,390
Total assets			12,145				41,945				96,431
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities			3,578				3,578				3,578
Warrant liability			4,856				5,280				5,280
Deferred revenue			13,091				13,091				13,091
Common and preferred stock			31				11				15
Additional paid-in capital			72,895				102,292				156,774
Accumulated deficit during development stage			(82,306	)			(82,306	)			(82,306	)
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			(9,380	)			19,997				74,483

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information in this prospectus, including our financial statements and related notes, before deciding whether to invest in shares of our common stock. The occurrence of any of the adverse developments described in the following risk factors could materially and adversely harm our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Relating to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have never been profitable. Currently, we have no products approved for commercial sale, and to date we have not generated any revenue from product sales. As a result, our ability to reduce our losses and reach profitability is unproven, and we may never achieve or sustain profitability.

We have never been profitable and do not expect to be profitable in the foreseeable future. We have not yet submitted any product candidates for approval by regulatory authorities in the United States or elsewhere for our lead indication, primary biliary cirrhosis, or PBC, or any other indication. We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception, including net losses of $15.1 million and $12.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011, respectively, and we incurred a net loss of $7.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012. We had an accumulated deficit of $82.3 million as of June 30, 2012. Our working capital and cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2012 were $6.1 million and $9.9 million, respectively, and, after giving effect to the receipt of $29.8 million of net proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock on August 9, 2012, our working capital and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2012 would have been $35.9 million and $39.7 million, respectively.

To date, we have devoted most of our financial resources to our corporate overhead and research and development, including our drug discovery research, preclinical development activities and clinical trials. We have not generated any revenues from product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, obeticholic acid, or OCA, which is our lead product candidate, and our other product candidates, prepare for and begin the commercialization of any approved products, and add infrastructure and personnel to support our product development efforts and operations as a public company. We anticipate that any such losses could be significant for the next several years as we complete our Phase 3 clinical trial of OCA in PBC, which we call the POISE trial, and related activities required for regulatory approval of OCA and continue pursuing additional indications for OCA in clinical trials. If OCA or any of our other product candidates fails in clinical trials or does not gain regulatory approval, or if our product candidates do not achieve market acceptance, we may never become profitable. As a result of the foregoing, we expect to continue to experience net losses and negative cash flows for the foreseeable future. These net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. In addition, our expenses could increase if we are required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, or the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, to perform studies or trials in addition to those currently expected, or if there are any delays in completing our clinical trials or the development of any of our product candidates. The amount of future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenues.

We will require substantial additional funding, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all, and, if not so available, may require us to delay, limit, reduce or cease our operations.

We are currently advancing OCA through clinical development for multiple indications and other product candidates through preclinical development. Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is expensive. We will require substantial additional future capital in order to complete clinical development and commercialize OCA, and to conduct the research and development and clinical and regulatory activities necessary to bring other product candidates to market. For instance, to

TABLE OF CONTENTS

complete the work necessary to file a New Drug Application, or NDA, and a Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, for OCA as a treatment for PBC, which is currently anticipated to occur in 2014, we estimate that our ongoing Phase 3 POISE trial, and our planned clinical and preclinical studies, as well as other work needed to submit OCA for the treatment of PBC for regulatory approval in the United States, Europe and other countries, will cost approximately $40.0 million, including the internal resources needed to manage the program. If the FDA or EMA requires that we perform additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, our expenses would further increase beyond what we currently expect and the anticipated timing of any potential NDA or MAA would likely be delayed.

We intend to use substantially all of the net proceeds from this offering to fund (i) the continued clinical development of OCA in PBC, including our Phase 3 POISE trial and other studies and work necessary for anticipated FDA and EMA filings; (ii) the continuation of the long-term safety extension portion of our POISE trial and the Phase 3 clinical outcomes trial after the anticipated FDA and EMA filings; (iii) certain pre-commercialization activities of OCA for PBC; (iv) further preclinical development work on INT-767 and, if warranted, potential Phase 1 clinical trials of INT-767; and (v) if warranted, initiation of a Phase 2 clinical trial for an additional indication for OCA, such as portal hypertension. Any remaining amounts will be used for general corporate purposes, general and administrative expenses, capital expenditures, working capital and prosecution and maintenance of our intellectual property. As such, the expected net proceeds from this offering will not be sufficient to complete advanced clinical development of any of our product candidates other than OCA for PBC. Accordingly, we will continue to require substantial additional capital beyond the expected proceeds of this offering to continue our clinical development and commercialization activities. Because successful development of our product candidates is uncertain, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require to complete research and development and commercialize our products under development.

The amount and timing of our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Some of these factors are outside of our control. If we successfully complete this offering, based upon our currently expected level of operating expenditures, we believe that we will be able to fund our operations through 2015. This period could be shortened if there are any significant increases in planned spending on development programs or more rapid progress of development programs than anticipated. We do not expect our existing capital resources, including $29.8 million of net proceeds received on August 9, 2012 upon the issuance of our Series C preferred stock, along with the intended net proceeds from this offering, to be sufficient to enable us to complete the commercialization of OCA, if approved, or to initiate any clinical trials or additional development work for any of our other product candidates, other than as described above. See also “Use of Proceeds.” Accordingly, we expect that we will need to raise additional funds in the future.

We may seek additional funding through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, government or other third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements and other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements. Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. In addition, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our stockholders. In addition, the issuance of additional shares by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our shares to decline.

If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to significantly curtail one or more of our research or development programs. We also could be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise that may require us to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us.

Our revenues to date have been generated through our collaboration agreements and we may not receive any additional revenues under such agreements.

To date, our sources of revenue have been the up-front payments received under our collaboration and license agreements with Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma Co. Ltd., or DSP, and Les Laboratoires Servier and Institut de Recherches Servier, which are collectively referred to as Servier. Additional payments under each of the DSP and Servier agreements are based on the achievement of various research, development, regulatory and commercial sales milestones and royalty payments based on the sales of the products covered by such agreements. Future payments from DSP and Servier under their respective collaboration and license agreements are uncertain because DSP or Servier, as the case may be, may choose not to continue research or development of activities for the product candidates under license in their licensed territory, the product candidates may not be approved for the proposed indications or, even if any product candidate is approved for one or more indications, it may not be commercially successful. If we are unable to develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates, either alone or with collaborators, or if revenues from any such collaboration product candidate that receives marketing approval are insufficient, we will not achieve profitability. Even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability.

We have a limited operating history and we expect a number of factors to cause our operating results to fluctuate on a quarterly and annual basis, which may make it difficult to predict our future performance.

We are a development stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. Our operations to date have been limited to developing our technology and undertaking preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates. We have not yet obtained regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or approved products on the market. Our financial condition and operating results have varied significantly in the past and are expected to continue to significantly fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these fluctuations include:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

In addition, our financial results may vary due to fluctuations in our warrant liability. Accordingly, the results of any quarterly or annual periods should not be relied upon as indications of future operating performance.

Our recurring losses from operations may raise substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

Our recurring losses from operations may raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. If in the future, our independent registered public accounting firm were to include an explanatory paragraph in its report on our consolidated financial statements stating there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, such an opinion could materially limit our ability to raise additional funds through the issuance of new debt or equity securities or otherwise. There is no assurance that sufficient

TABLE OF CONTENTS

financing will be available when needed to allow us to continue as a going concern. The perception that we may not be able to continue as a going concern may cause others to choose not to deal with us due to concerns about our ability to meet our contractual obligations.

Risks Relating to Regulatory Review and Approval of Our Product Candidates

We cannot be certain that OCA or any of our other product candidates will receive regulatory approval, and without regulatory approval we will not be able to market our product candidates.

We are initially developing OCA for the treatment of patients with PBC, portal hypertension, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH, and bile acid diarrhea, and are also consulting with investigators to develop protocols for other indications. Our business currently depends entirely on the successful development and commercialization of OCA. Our ability to generate revenue related to product sales, if ever, will depend on the successful development and regulatory approval of OCA for the treatment of PBC and other indications and our other product candidates.

We currently have no products approved for sale and we cannot guarantee that we will ever have marketable products. The development of a product candidate and issues relating to its approval and marketing are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States, the EMA in Europe and regulatory authorities in other countries, with regulations differing from country to country. We are not permitted to market our product candidates in the United States or Europe until we receive approval of a NDA from the FDA or a MAA from the EMA, respectively. We have not submitted any marketing applications for any of our product candidates.

NDAs and MAAs must include extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to establish the product candidate’s safety and effectiveness for each desired indication. NDAs and MAAs must also include significant information regarding the chemistry, manufacturing and controls for the product. Obtaining approval of a NDA or a MAA is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and we may not be successful in obtaining approval. The FDA and the EMA review processes can take years to complete and approval is never guaranteed. If we submit a NDA to the FDA, the FDA must decide whether to accept or reject the submission for filing. We cannot be certain that any submissions will be accepted for filing and review by the FDA. Regulators of other jurisdictions, such as the EMA, have their own procedures for approval of product candidates. Even if a product is approved, the FDA or the EMA, as the case may be, may limit the indications for which the product may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the product labeling or require expensive and time-consuming clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval. Regulatory authorities in countries outside of the United States and Europe also have requirements for approval of drug candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those countries. Obtaining regulatory approval for marketing of a product candidate in one country does not ensure that we will be able to obtain regulatory approval in any other country. In addition, delays in approvals or rejections of marketing applications in the United States, Europe or other countries may be based upon many factors, including regulatory requests for additional analyses, reports, data, preclinical studies and clinical trials, regulatory questions regarding different interpretations of data and results, changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development and the emergence of new information regarding our product candidates or other products. Also, regulatory approval for any of our product candidates may be withdrawn.

We have completed three Phase 2 trials for OCA: two in patients with PBC and one in patients with type 2 diabetes with co-morbid nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. We are currently in the process of enrolling patients into our Phase 3 POISE trial. Before we submit a NDA to the FDA or a MAA to the EMA for OCA for the treatment of patients with PBC, we must successfully complete this trial. In addition, we must complete other preclinical and clinical studies, such as a Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers to evaluate the effect of OCA on the heart’s electrical cycle, known as the QT interval, studies to evaluate the interaction of OCA with other drugs and two-year, two-species carcinogenicity studies. We cannot predict whether our future trials and studies will be successful or whether regulators will agree with our conclusions regarding the preclinical studies and clinical trials we have conducted to date.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If we are unable to obtain approval from the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory agencies for OCA and our other product candidates, or if, subsequent to approval, we are unable to successfully commercialize OCA or our other product candidates, we will not be able to generate sufficient revenue to become profitable or to continue our operations.

We may never reach an agreement with the FDA on a surrogate endpoint for the accelerated approval of OCA for the treatment of PBC. The FDA, EMA and other regulators may require us to complete additional Phase 3 trials prior to the submission of an application for OCA for the treatment of PBC.

Typically, the FDA requires two pivotal clinical trials to approve a NDA. However, for OCA as a treatment for PBC, we currently plan to request accelerated approval from the FDA based on the Phase 3 POISE trial, the primary endpoint of which is a surrogate endpoint that we believe is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, therefore meeting the FDA’s requirements for consideration under its accelerated approval regulation. However, the FDA has not yet provided any assurance that it will accept our approach, and we do not know if we will receive further written guidance from the FDA prior to submitting a NDA as to the acceptability of the POISE trial surrogate endpoint to support an approval of OCA for the treatment of PBC. We are currently seeking to build additional consensus regarding the clinical utility of the surrogate endpoint by working with a number of leading PBC academic centers to pool together and analyze their long-term PBC patient data. However, we may not be able to attain such consensus and, even if we do achieve such consensus, the supporting data may still not be accepted by the FDA in its consideration of the adequacy of our surrogate endpoint under a NDA for OCA for the treatment of PBC. The FDA has informed us that, in the context of considering OCA for potential accelerated approval, we will be required to conduct a Phase 3 clinical outcomes trial to confirm the clinical benefit of OCA in PBC by demonstrating the correlation of biochemical therapeutic response in patients taking OCA with a significant reduction in adverse clinical outcomes over time. We believe that this Phase 3 clinical outcomes trial will need to be substantially underway at the time we submit a NDA. It is possible that our NDA submission for regulatory approval will not be accepted by the FDA for review or, even if it is accepted for review, that there may be delays in the FDA’s review process and that the FDA may determine that our NDA does not merit the approval of OCA for the treatment of PBC, in which case the FDA may require that we conduct and/or complete additional clinical trials and preclinical studies before it will reconsider our application for approval.

Because the FDA normally requires two pivotal clinical trials to approve a NDA, even if we achieve favorable results in our ongoing POISE trial, the FDA may not accept this trial as an adequate basis for approval and require that we conduct and complete a second Phase 3 clinical trial before considering a NDA for OCA for the treatment of PBC. Furthermore, the EMA and regulatory authorities in other countries in which we may seek approval for, and market, OCA, may require additional preclinical studies and/or clinical trials prior to granting approval. It may be expensive and time consuming to conduct and complete additional preclinical studies and clinical trials that the FDA, EMA and other regulatory authorities may require us to perform. As such, any requirement by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities that we conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, even if we receive regulatory approval of OCA for the treatment of PBC, the labeling for OCA in the United States, Europe or other countries in which we seek approval may include limitations that could impact the commercial success of OCA.

Delays in the commencement, enrollment and completion of clinical trials could result in increased costs to us and delay or limit our ability to obtain regulatory approval for OCA and our other product candidates.

Delays in the commencement, enrollment and completion of clinical trials could increase our product development costs or limit the regulatory approval of our product candidates. We are currently enrolling patients for our Phase 3 POISE trial. We currently expect results from the trial to be available by mid-2014. Although we anticipate that the net proceeds from this offering, together with existing cash and cash equivalents, including $29.8 million of net proceeds received on August 9, 2012 upon the issuance of our Series C preferred stock, and interest on our cash balances, will be sufficient to fund our projected operating requirements through the completion of our POISE trial, we may not be able to complete this trial on time or we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials or preclinical studies not currently planned to receive approval for OCA as a treatment for PBC, in which case we would require additional funding beyond the net

TABLE OF CONTENTS

proceeds of this offering. In addition, we do not know whether any future trials or studies of our other product candidates, including any confirmatory clinical trial of OCA, will begin on time or will be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement, enrollment and completion of clinical trials can be delayed or suspended for a variety of reasons, including:

For example, in the past, we experienced delays in our Phase 2 clinical trial of OCA given as a monotherapy to patients with PBC because we were unable to find and enroll a sufficient number of trial patients who met the specific enrollment criteria in accordance with our anticipated trial schedule.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may also occur and we or any of our collaborators may need to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes with appropriate regulatory authorities. Amendments may require us or any of our collaborators to resubmit clinical trial protocols to IRBs for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial. In addition, a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated at any time by us, our current or future collaborators, the FDA or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including:

In addition, if we or any of our collaborators are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other preclinical studies of our product candidates beyond those contemplated, our ability to obtain regulatory approval of these product candidates and generate revenue from their sales would be similarly harmed.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Clinical failure can occur at any stage of clinical development and we have never conducted a Phase 3 trial or submitted a NDA or MAA before. The results of earlier clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results and any product candidate we, DSP, Servier or our potential future collaborators advance through clinical trials may not have favorable results in later clinical trials or receive regulatory approval.

Clinical failure can occur at any stage of our clinical development. Clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we or our collaborators may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or preclinical studies. In addition, data obtained from trials and studies are susceptible to varying interpretations, and regulators may not interpret our data as favorably as we do, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Success in preclinical studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that subsequent clinical trials will generate the same or similar results or otherwise provide adequate data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of a product candidate. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry, including those with greater resources and experience than us, have suffered significant setbacks in Phase 3 clinical trials, even after seeing promising results in earlier clinical trials.

Both of our Phase 2 clinical trials of OCA in PBC patients showed statistically significant results against a primary endpoint that is similar to the endpoint of our Phase 3 POISE trial protocol currently underway. However, in our Phase 2 PBC trials, the primary endpoint was a reduction in alkaline phosphatase, or ALP, to a threshold below 1.5 times upper limit normal, or ULN, compared to placebo after 12 weeks of treatment, but the primary endpoint for our POISE trial is both a reduction in ALP to below a threshold of 1.67 times ULN, with a minimum of 15% reduction in ALP from baseline, and a normal bilirubin level, compared to placebo after 12 months of therapy. We cannot assure you that our POISE trial will achieve positive results. Moreover, the fact that a retrospective analysis of the data from our Phase 2 PBC trials appears to demonstrate that the defined endpoint in our POISE trial was achieved based on the Phase 2 data does not mean that this endpoint will be successfully achieved in the POISE trial.

In addition, the design of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support approval of a product and flaws in the design of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well-advanced. We have limited experience in designing clinical trials and may be unable to design and execute a clinical trial to support regulatory approval. Further, clinical trials of potential products often reveal that it is not practical or feasible to continue development efforts.

If OCA or our other product candidates are found to be unsafe or lack efficacy, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval for them and our business would be harmed. For example, if the results of our Phase 3 POISE trial of OCA do not achieve the primary efficacy endpoints or demonstrate expected safety, the prospects for approval of OCA would be materially and adversely affected.

In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety and/or efficacy results between different trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial protocols, differences in composition of the patient populations, adherence to the dosing regimen and other trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. We do not know whether any Phase 2, Phase 3 or other clinical trials we or any of our collaborators may conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates. If we are unable to bring any of our current or future product candidates to market, or to acquire any marketed, previously approved products, our ability to create long-term stockholder value will be limited.

Our product candidates may have undesirable side effects which may delay or prevent marketing approval, or, if approval is received, require them to be taken off the market, require them to include safety warnings or otherwise limit their sales.

A substance that binds to a receptor of a cell and triggers a response by that cell is called an agonist. OCA has been shown to be a potent agonist of the farnesoid X receptor, or FXR. With the exception of the bile acid CDCA, which has been approved to treat cholesterol gallstone dissolution and a rare lipid storage disease, there are no approved FXR agonists and the adverse effects from long-term exposure to this drug class are unknown. Unforeseen side effects from any of our product candidates could arise either during clinical development or, if approved, after the approved product has been marketed. The most common side effects observed in clinical trials of OCA were pruritus, or itching, headaches, fatigue, nausea, constipation and diarrhea. In our Phase 2 PBC clinical trial of OCA in combination with ursodiol, approximately 8% of the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

patients enrolled in the 10 milligram (mg) and 25 mg dose groups withdrew from the trial due to severe pruritus. At the 50 mg dose, approximately 25% of the patients withdrew from the trial due to severe pruritus. Additional or unforeseen side effects from these or any of our other product candidates could arise either during clinical development or, if approved, after the approved product has been marketed.

The range and potential severity of possible side effects from systemic therapies is significant. The results of future clinical trials may show that our product candidates cause undesirable or unacceptable side effects, which could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials, and result in delay of, or failure to obtain, marketing approval from the FDA and other regulatory authorities, or result in marketing approval from the FDA and other regulatory authorities with restrictive label warnings.

If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval and we or others later identify undesirable or unacceptable side effects caused by such products:

Any of these events could prevent us, DSP, Servier or our potential future collaborators from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product or could substantially increase commercialization costs and expenses, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenues from the sale of our products.

Reimbursement decisions by third-party payors may have an adverse effect on pricing and market acceptance. If there is not sufficient reimbursement for our products, it is less likely that they will be widely used.

Market acceptance and sales of OCA or any other product candidates that we develop, if approved, will depend on reimbursement policies and may be affected by future healthcare reform measures. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which drugs they will cover and establish payment levels. We cannot be certain that reimbursement will be available for OCA or any other product candidates that we develop. Also, we cannot be certain that reimbursement policies will not reduce the demand for, or the price paid for, our products. If reimbursement is not available or is available on a limited basis, we may not be able to successfully commercialize OCA or any other product candidates that we develop.

In the United States, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA, changed the way Medicare covers and pays for pharmaceutical products. The legislation established Medicare Part D, which expanded Medicare coverage for outpatient prescription drug purchases by the elderly but provided authority for limiting the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class. The MMA also introduced a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for physician- administered drugs. Any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates. Any reduction in payment that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors.

The United States and several other jurisdictions are considering, or have already enacted, a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to

TABLE OF CONTENTS

sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access to healthcare. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of OCA and any other products that we develop, due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative proposals.

In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or collectively, ACA, became law in the United States. The goal of ACA is to reduce the cost of health care and substantially change the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers. While we cannot predict what impact on federal reimbursement policies this legislation will have in general or on our business specifically, the ACA may result in downward pressure on pharmaceutical reimbursement, which could negatively affect market acceptance of OCA or any future product candidates. In addition, although the United States Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutionality of most of the ACA, some states have indicated that they intend to not implement certain sections of the ACA, and some members of the U.S. Congress are still working to repeal the ACA. We cannot predict whether these challenges will continue or other proposals will be made or adopted, or what impact these efforts may have on us.

If we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Act and similar legislation outside of the United States by extending the patent terms and obtaining data exclusivity for our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA marketing approval of OCA and our other product candidates, if any, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term restoration under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Act. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we will have the right to exclusively market our product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially. In the event that we are unable to obtain any patent term extensions, the issued composition of matter patents for OCA are expected to expire in 2022 assuming they withstand any challenge. We expect that the other patents and patent applications for the OCA portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, would expire from 2022 to 2028.

If we market products in a manner that violates healthcare fraud and abuse laws, or if we violate government price reporting laws, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties.

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, several other types of state and federal healthcare laws, commonly referred to as “fraud and abuse” laws, have been applied in recent years to restrict certain marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry. Other jurisdictions such as Europe have similar laws. These laws include false claims and anti-kickback statutes. If we market our products and our products are paid for by governmental programs, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of these laws.

Federal false claims laws prohibit any person from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government or knowingly making, or causing to be made, a false statement to get a false claim paid. The federal healthcare program anti-kickback statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce, or in return for, purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any healthcare item or service covered by Medicare, Medicaid or other federally financed healthcare programs. This statute has been

TABLE OF CONTENTS

interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers or formulary managers on the other. Although there are several statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor. Most states also have statutes or regulations similar to the federal anti-kickback law and federal false claims laws, which apply to items and services covered by Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. Administrative, civil and criminal sanctions may be imposed under these federal and state laws.

Over the past few years, a number of pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for a variety of promotional and marketing activities, such as: providing free trips, free goods, sham consulting fees and grants and other monetary benefits to prescribers; reporting inflated average wholesale prices that were then used by federal programs to set reimbursement rates; engaging in off-label promotion; and submitting inflated best price information to the Medicaid Rebate Program to reduce liability for Medicaid rebates.

If the FDA and EMA and other regulatory agencies do not approve the manufacturing facilities of our future contract manufacturers for commercial production, we may not be able to commercialize any of our product candidates.

We do not intend to manufacture the pharmaceutical products that we plan to sell. We currently have agreements with contract manufacturers for the production of the active pharmaceutical ingredients and the formulation of sufficient quantities of drug product for our Phase 3 POISE trial of OCA for the treatment of PBC and the other trials and preclinical studies that we believe we will need to conduct prior to seeking regulatory approval. However, we do not have agreements for commercial supplies of OCA or any of our other product candidates and we may not be able to reach agreements with these or other contract manufacturers for sufficient supplies to commercialize OCA if it is approved. Additionally, the facilities used by any contract manufacturer to manufacture OCA or any of our other product candidates must be the subject of a satisfactory inspection before the FDA or the regulators in other jurisdictions approve the product candidate manufactured at that facility. We are completely dependent on these third-party manufacturers for compliance with the requirements of U.S. and non-U.S. regulators for the manufacture of our finished products. If our manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conform to our specifications and current good manufacturing practice requirements of any governmental agency whose jurisdiction to which we are subject, our product candidates will not be approved or, if already approved, may be subject to recalls. Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks to which we would not be subject if we manufactured the product candidates, including:

Any of these factors could cause the delay of approval or commercialization of our product candidates, cause us to incur higher costs or prevent us from commercializing our product candidates successfully. Furthermore, if any of our product candidates are approved and contract manufacturers fail to deliver the required commercial quantities of finished product on a timely basis and at commercially reasonable prices and we are unable to find one or more replacement manufacturers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, in substantially equivalent volumes and quality and on a timely basis, we would likely be unable to meet demand for our products and could lose potential revenue. It may take several years to establish an alternative source of supply for our product candidates and to have any such new source approved by the government agencies that regulate our products.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, we may still face future development and regulatory difficulties.

Our product candidates, if approved, will also be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, record-keeping and submission of safety and other post-market information. In addition, approved products, manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and EMA requirements and requirements of other similar agencies, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMPs. As such, we and our contract manufacturers are subject to continual review and periodic inspections to assess compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control. We will also be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA and EMA and other similar agencies and to comply with certain requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. Accordingly, we may not promote our approved products, if any, for indications or uses for which they are not approved.

If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, it may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If our product candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

Risks Relating to the Commercialization of Our Products

Even if approved, our product candidates may not achieve broad market acceptance among physicians, patients and healthcare payors, and as a result our revenues generated from their sales may be limited.

The commercial success of OCA or our other product candidates, if approved, will depend upon their acceptance among the medical community, including physicians, health care payors and patients. For PBC, the current standard of care is ursodeoxycholic acid, which is available generically as ursodiol. In order for OCA to be commercially successful, we will need to demonstrate that it is safe and effective for the treatment of patients who have an inadequate response to or who are unable to tolerate ursodiol, referred to as second line treatment, and is more effective than any other alternatives that may be developed as a second line treatment for PBC, particularly given the planned much higher price that we anticipate charging for OCA compared to the price of generically available ursodiol. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates will depend on a number of factors, including:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If our product candidates are approved, but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, the medical community and healthcare payors, sufficient revenue may not be generated from these products and we may not become or remain profitable. In addition, efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful.

We have no sales, marketing or distribution experience and we will have to invest significant resources to develop those capabilities or enter into acceptable third-party sales and marketing arrangements.

We have no sales, marketing or distribution experience. To develop internal sales, distribution and marketing capabilities, we will have to invest significant amounts of financial and management resources, some of which will be committed prior to any confirmation that OCA or any of our other product candidates will be approved. For product candidates where we decide to perform sales, marketing and distribution functions ourselves or through third parties, we could face a number of additional risks, including:

We have entered into an agreement with DSP for the development and commercialization of OCA in Japan and China and other potential Asian countries, if approved, and have entered into an agreement with Servier to assist in the development and commercialization of certain of our earlier stage agonists of a dedicated bile acid receptor called TGR5 outside of the United States and Japan, if approved, and may elect to seek additional strategic collaborators for our product candidates. We may have limited or no control over the sales, marketing and distribution activities of these third parties. Our future revenues may depend heavily on the success of the efforts of these third parties.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If any of our current strategic collaborators fails to perform its obligations or terminates its agreement with us, the development and commercialization of the product candidates under such agreement could be delayed or terminated and our business could be substantially harmed.

We currently have strategic collaborations in place relating to certain of our product candidates. We entered into an exclusive license agreement with DSP regarding the development and commercialization of OCA for PBC and NASH in Japan and China and provided DSP with an option to extend its exclusive license to different indications as well as certain other Asian countries. We entered into a strategic collaboration with Servier initially focused on the identification and optimization of novel TGR5 agonists for the treatment of type-2 diabetes and other associated disorders. These strategic collaborations may not be scientifically or commercially successful due to a number of important factors, including the following:

If either DSP or Servier fails to develop or effectively commercialize OCA or any TGR5 compounds, respectively, we may not be able to replace them with another collaborator. We may also be unable to obtain, on terms acceptable to us, a license from such strategic collaborator to any of its intellectual property that may be necessary or useful for us to continue to develop and commercialize a product candidate. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and our ability to achieve future profitability, and could cause our stock price to decline.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We may not be successful in establishing and maintaining development and commercialization collaborations, which could adversely affect our ability to develop certain of our product candidates and our financial condition and operating results.

Because developing pharmaceutical products, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approval, establishing manufacturing capabilities and marketing approved products are expensive, we have entered into, and may seek to enter into, collaborations with companies that have more experience. For example, we have entered into collaborations with DSP for OCA and Servier for our earlier stage TGR5 program. We may establish additional collaborations for development and commercialization of OCA in territories outside of those licensed by DSP or for our earlier stage TGR5 program in the United States or Japan and product candidates and research programs, including INT-767 and INT-777. Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, we may enter into sales and marketing arrangements with third parties with respect to our unlicensed territories. If we are unable to maintain our existing arrangements or enter into any new such arrangements on acceptable terms, if at all, we may be unable to effectively market and sell our products in our target markets. We expect to face competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Moreover, collaboration arrangements are complex and time consuming to negotiate, document and implement and they may require substantial resources to maintain. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish and implement collaborations or other alternative arrangements for the development of our product candidates.

When we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of a product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that product candidate to the third party. For example, DSP has the exclusive rights to OCA in Japan and China and the option to exclusively license OCA in several other Asian countries. Our collaboration partner may not devote sufficient resources to the commercialization of our product candidates or may otherwise fail in their commercialization. The terms of any collaboration or other arrangement that we establish may not be favorable to us. In addition, any collaboration that we enter into, including our collaborations with DSP and Servier, may be unsuccessful in the development and commercialization of our product candidates. In some cases, we may be responsible for continuing preclinical and initial clinical development of a product candidate or research program under a collaboration arrangement, and the payment we receive from our collaboration partner may be insufficient to cover the cost of this development. If we are unable to reach agreements with suitable collaborators for our product candidates, we would face increased costs, we may be forced to limit the number of our product candidates we can commercially develop or the territories in which we commercialize them and we might fail to commercialize products or programs for which a suitable collaborator cannot be found. If we fail to achieve successful collaborations, our operating results and financial condition will be materially and adversely affected.

If we fail to develop OCA for additional indications, our commercial opportunity will be limited.

To date, we have focused the majority of our development efforts on the development of OCA for the second line treatment of PBC. One of our strategies is to pursue clinical development of OCA for other orphan and more common indications, to the extent that we have sufficient funding.

PBC is a rare disease and, as a result, the market size for treatments of PBC is limited. Furthermore, because a significant proportion of PBC patients do not exhibit any symptoms at the time of diagnosis, PBC may be left undiagnosed for a significant period of time. Due to these factors, our ability to grow revenues will be dependent on our ability to successfully develop and commercialize OCA for the treatment of additional indications. The completion of development, securing of approval and commercialization of OCA for additional indications will require substantial additional funding beyond the net proceeds of this offering and is prone to the risks of failure inherent in drug development. We cannot provide you any assurance that we will be able to successfully advance any of these indications through the development process. Even if we receive FDA approval to market OCA for the treatment of any of these additional indications, we cannot assure you that any such additional indications will be successfully commercialized, widely accepted in the marketplace or more effective than other commercially available alternatives. If we are unable to successfully develop and commercialize OCA for these additional indications, our commercial opportunity will be limited and our business prospects will suffer.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If serious adverse events or other undesirable side effects are identified during the development of OCA for one indication, we may need to abandon our development of OCA for other indications.

Product candidates in clinical stages of development have a high risk of failure. We cannot predict when or if OCA will prove effective or safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. To date, the most common side effects observed in clinical trials of OCA were pruritus, headaches, fatigue, constipation and diarrhea. New side effects could, however, be identified as we expand our clinical trials for OCA to other indications. If new side effects are found during the development of OCA for any indication, if known side effects are shown to be more severe than previously observed or if OCA is found to have other unexpected characteristics, we may need to abandon our development of OCA for PBC and other potential indications. We cannot assure you that additional or more severe adverse side effects with respect to OCA will not develop in future clinical trials, which could delay or preclude regulatory approval of OCA or limit its commercial use.

Risks Relating to Our Business and Strategy

We face competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. We have competitors in the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical and generic drug companies and universities and other research institutions. Many of our competitors have greater financial and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and more experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Large pharmaceutical companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing pharmaceutical products. These companies also have significantly greater research, sales and marketing capabilities and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions. Established pharmaceutical companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. As a result of all of these factors, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection and/or FDA approval or discovering, developing and commercializing drugs for the chronic liver and other diseases that we are targeting before we do. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Some of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies we expect to compete with include Astellas Pharma US, Inc., AstraZeneca, Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Inc., Galmed Medical Research Ltd., Immuron Ltd., Johnson & Johnson, Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., NasVax Ltd., NovImmune SA., Phenex Pharmaceuticals AG, Raptor Pharmaceutical Corp., Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Tioga Pharmaceuticals, Inc. In addition, many universities and private and public research institutes may become active in our target disease areas. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, technologies and drug products that are more effective or less costly than OCA or any other product candidates that we are currently developing or that we may develop, which could render our products obsolete and noncompetitive.

We believe that our ability to successfully compete will depend on, among other things:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If our competitors market products that are more effective, safer or less expensive than our future products, if any, or that reach the market sooner than our future products, if any, we may not achieve commercial success. In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapid technological change. Because our research approach integrates many technologies, it may be difficult for us to stay abreast of the rapid changes in each technology. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change, we may be unable to compete effectively. Technological advances or products developed by our competitors may render our technologies or product candidates obsolete, less competitive or not economical.

We depend on third-party contractors for a substantial portion of our operations and may not be able to control their work as effectively as if we performed these functions ourselves.

We outsource substantial portions of our operations to third-party service providers, including the conduct of preclinical studies and clinical trials, collection and analysis of data and manufacturing. Our agreements with third-party service providers and CROs are on a study-by-study and project-by-project basis. Typically, we may terminate the agreements with notice and are responsible for the supplier’s previously incurred costs. In addition, any CRO that we retain will be subject to the FDA’s and EMA’s regulatory requirements and similar standards outside of the United States and Europe and we do not have control over compliance with these regulations by these providers. Consequently, if these providers do not adhere to applicable governing practices and standards, the development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed or stopped, which could severely harm our business and financial condition.

Because we have relied on third parties, our internal capacity to perform these functions is limited to management oversight. Outsourcing these functions involves the risk that third parties may not perform to our standards, may not produce results in a timely manner or may fail to perform at all. Several years ago, we experienced difficulties with a third-party contract manufacturer for OCA, including delays in receiving adequate clinical trial supplies as requested within the requested time periods. We subsequently replaced this manufacturer with other third-party contract manufacturers for OCA. Although we have not experienced any significant difficulties with our third-party contractors since then, it is possible that we could experience difficulties in the future. In addition, the use of third-party service providers requires us to disclose our proprietary information to these parties, which could increase the risk that this information will be misappropriated. There are a limited number of third-party service providers that specialize or have the expertise required to achieve our business objectives. Identifying, qualifying and managing performance of third-party service providers can be difficult, time consuming and cause delays in our development programs. We currently have a small number of employees, which limits the internal resources we have available to identify and monitor third-party service providers. To the extent we are unable to identify, retain and successfully manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be adversely affected, and we may be subject to the imposition of civil or criminal penalties if their conduct of clinical trials violates applicable law.

A variety of risks associated with our planned international business relationships could materially adversely affect our business.

We have entered into an agreement with DSP for the development of OCA and with Servier for our earlier stage TGR5 program, and we may enter into agreements with other third parties for the development

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and commercialization of OCA or our other product candidates in international markets. International business relationships subject us to additional risks that may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or sustain profitable operations, including:

We will need to expand our operations and increase the size of our company, and we may experience difficulties in managing growth.

As we increase the number of ongoing product development programs and advance our product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials, we will need to increase our product development, scientific and administrative headcount to manage these programs. In addition, to meet our obligations as a public company, we will need to increase our general and administrative capabilities. Our management, personnel and systems currently in place may not be adequate to support this future growth. Our need to effectively manage our operations, growth and various projects requires that we:

If we are unable to successfully manage this growth and increased complexity of operations, our business may be adversely affected.

We may not be able to manage our business effectively if we are unable to attract and retain key personnel and consultants.

We may not be able to attract or retain qualified management, finance, scientific and clinical personnel and consultants due to the intense competition for qualified personnel and consultants among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses. If we are not able to attract and retain necessary personnel and

TABLE OF CONTENTS

consultants to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will significantly impede the achievement of our development objectives, our ability to raise additional capital and our ability to implement our business strategy.

Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. We are highly dependent on the development, regulatory, commercialization and business development expertise of Mark Pruzanski, our co-founder and president and chief executive officer; David Shapiro, our chief medical officer; Barbara Duncan, our chief financial officer, treasurer and secretary; Luciano Adorini, our chief scientific officer; and our other key employees and consultants, such as Professor Roberto Pellicciari, our co-founder who provides ongoing consulting services to us. If we lose one or more of our executive officers or key employees or consultants, our ability to implement our business strategy successfully could be seriously harmed. Any of our executive officers or key employees or consultants may terminate their employment at any time. Replacing executive officers, key employees and consultants 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 develop, gain regulatory approval of and commercialize products successfully. Competition to hire and retain employees and consultants from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these additional key personnel and consultants. Our failure to retain key personnel or consultants could materially harm our business.

We have scientific and clinical advisors and consultants who assist us in formulating our research, development and clinical strategies. These advisors are not our employees and may have commitments to, or consulting or advisory contracts with, other entities that may limit their availability to us and typically they will not enter into non-compete agreements with us. If a conflict of interest arises between their work for us and their work for another entity, we may lose their services. In addition, our advisors may have arrangements with other companies to assist those companies in developing products or technologies that may compete with ours.

Failure to build our finance infrastructure and improve our accounting systems and controls could impair our ability to comply with the financial reporting and internal controls requirements for publicly traded companies.

As a public company, we will operate in an increasingly demanding regulatory environment, which requires us to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and the related rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, expanded disclosure requirements, accelerated reporting requirements and more complex accounting rules. Company responsibilities required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act include establishing corporate oversight and adequate internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and are important to help prevent financial fraud.

We have begun implementing our system of internal controls over financial reporting and preparing the documentation necessary to perform the evaluation needed to comply with Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. However, we anticipate that we will need to retain additional finance capabilities and build our financial infrastructure as we transition to operating as a public company, including complying with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. As we begin operating as a public company following this offering, we will continue improving our financial infrastructure with the retention of additional financial and accounting capabilities, the enhancement of internal controls and additional training for our financial and accounting staff.

Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, starting with the second annual report that we would expect to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. However, for as long as we remain an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues

TABLE OF CONTENTS

of $1 billion or more; (ii) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the completion of this offering; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Until we are able to expand our finance and administrative capabilities and establish necessary financial reporting infrastructure, we may not be able to prepare and disclose, in a timely manner, our financial statements and other required disclosures or comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or existing or new reporting requirements. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our business and results of operations could be harmed and investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information.

Our employees may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading, which could significantly harm our business.

We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct. Misconduct by employees could include intentional failures to comply with the regulations of the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, provide accurate information to the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, comply with health care fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the health care industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, 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 comply with these 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 have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

We face potential product liability exposure, and if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability for a product candidate and may have to limit its commercialization.

The use of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we may obtain marketing approval expose us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims may be brought against us or our collaborators by participants enrolled in our clinical trials, patients, health care providers or others using, administering or selling our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against any such claims, we would incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

We have obtained limited product liability insurance coverage for our clinical trials in the United States and in selected other jurisdictions where we are conducting clinical trials. Our product liability insurance coverage for clinical trials in the United States is currently limited to an aggregate of $10 million and outside of the United States we have coverage for lesser amounts that vary by country. As such, our insurance

TABLE OF CONTENTS

coverage may not reimburse us or may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to product liability. We intend to expand our insurance coverage for products to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for our product candidates in development, but we may be unable to obtain commercially reasonable product liability insurance for any products approved for marketing. Large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us, particularly if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash resources and adversely affect our business.

Our insurance policies are expensive and only protect us from some business risks, which will leave us exposed to significant uninsured liabilities.

We do not carry insurance for all categories of risk that our business may encounter. Some of the policies we currently maintain include general liability, employment practices liability, property, auto, workers’ compensation, products liability and directors’ and officers’ insurance. We do not know, however, if we will be able to maintain insurance with adequate levels of coverage. Any significant uninsured liability may require us to pay substantial amounts, which would adversely affect our financial position and results of operations.

If we engage in an acquisition, reorganization or business combination, we will incur a variety of risks that could adversely affect our business operations or our stockholders.

From time to time we have considered, and we will continue to consider in the future, strategic business initiatives intended to further the expansion and development of our business. These initiatives may include acquiring businesses, technologies or products or entering into a business combination with another company. If we pursue such a strategy, we could, among other things:

Although we intend to evaluate and consider acquisitions, reorganizations and business combinations in the future, we have no agreements or understandings with respect to any acquisition, reorganization or business combination at this time.

Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property

It is difficult and costly to protect our proprietary rights, and we may not be able to ensure their protection. If our patent position does not adequately protect our product candidates, others could compete against us more directly, which would harm our business, possibly materially.

Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining patent protection and trade secret protection of our current and future product candidates and the methods used to manufacture them, as well as successfully defending these patents against third-party challenges. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our product candidates is dependent upon the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets that cover these activities.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in pharmaceutical patents has emerged to date in the United States or in many jurisdictions outside of the United States. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be enforced in the patents that may be issued from the applications we currently or may in the future own or license from third parties. Further, if any patents we obtain or license are deemed invalid and unenforceable, our ability to commercialize or license our technology could be adversely affected.

Others have filed, and in the future are likely to file, patent applications covering products and technologies that are similar, identical or competitive to ours or important to our business. We cannot be certain that any patent application owned by a third party will not have priority over patent applications filed or in-licensed by us, or that we or our licensors will not be involved in interference, opposition or invalidity proceedings before U.S. or non-U.S. patent offices.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain because legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep our competitive advantage. For example:

As of August 31, 2012, we were the owner of record of 45 issued or granted U.S. and non-U.S. patents relating to OCA with claims directed to pharmaceutical compounds, pharmaceutical compositions, methods of making these compounds, and methods of using these compounds in various indications. We were also the owner of record of 12 pending U.S. and non-U.S. patent applications relating to OCA in these areas.

In addition, as of August 31, 2012, we were the owner of record of issued or granted U.S. and non-U.S. patents relating to our product candidates other than OCA, with claims directed to pharmaceutical compounds, pharmaceutical compositions and methods of using these compounds in various indications. We were also the owner of record of pending U.S. and non-U.S. patent applications relating to such other product candidates in these areas.

Patents covering the composition of matter of OCA expire in 2022 if the appropriate maintenance fee renewal, annuity, or other government fees are paid. We expect that the other patents and patent applications for the OCA portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, would expire from 2022 to 2028. We expect the issued INT-767 composition of matter patent in the United States, if the appropriate maintenance fee, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2029. We expect the other pending patent applications in the INT-767 portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2027. We expect the issued INT-777 composition of matter patent in the United States, if the appropriate maintenance fee, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2030. We expect the other pending patent

TABLE OF CONTENTS

applications in the INT-777 portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2028 to 2029.

Without patent protection on the composition of matter of our product candidates, our ability to assert our patents to stop others from using or selling our product candidates in a non-pharmaceutically acceptable formulation may be limited.

Due to the patent laws of a country, or the decisions of a patent examiner in a country, or our own filing strategies, we may not obtain patent coverage for all of our product candidates or methods involving these candidates in the parent patent application. We plan to pursue divisional patent applications or continuation patent applications in the United States and other countries to obtain claim coverage for inventions which were disclosed but not claimed in the parent patent application.

We may also rely on trade secrets to protect our technology, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or feasible. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. Although we use reasonable efforts to protect our trade secrets, our employees, consultants, contractors, outside scientific collaborators and other advisors may unintentionally or willfully disclose our information to competitors. Enforcing a claim that a third party illegally obtained and is using any of our trade secrets is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop equivalent knowledge, methods and know-how.

We may incur substantial costs as a result of litigation or other proceedings relating to patent and other intellectual property rights.

If we choose to go to court to stop another party from using the inventions claimed in any patents we obtain, that individual or company has the right to ask the court to rule that such patents are invalid or should not be enforced against that third party. These lawsuits are expensive and would consume time and resources and divert the attention of managerial and scientific personnel even if we were successful in stopping the infringement of such patents. In addition, there is a risk that the court will decide that such patents are not valid and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the inventions. There is also the risk that, even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court will refuse to stop the other party on the ground that such other party’s activities do not infringe our rights to such patents. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has recently modified some tests used by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, in granting patents over the past 20 years, which may decrease the likelihood that we will be able to obtain patents and increase the likelihood of challenge of any patents we obtain or license.

We may infringe the intellectual property rights of others, which may prevent or delay our product development efforts and stop us from commercializing or increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot guarantee that our products, or manufacture or use of our product candidates, will not infringe third-party patents. Furthermore, a third party may claim that we or our manufacturing or commercialization collaborators are using inventions covered by the third party’s patent rights and may go to court to stop us from engaging in our normal operations and activities, including making or selling our product candidates. These lawsuits are costly and could affect our results of operations and divert the attention of managerial and scientific personnel. There is a risk that a court would decide that we or our commercialization collaborators are infringing the third party’s patents and would order us or our collaborators to stop the activities covered by the patents. In that event, we or our commercialization collaborators may not have a viable way around the patent and may need to halt commercialization of the relevant product. In addition, there is a risk that a court will order us or our collaborators to pay the other party damages for having violated the other party’s patents. In the future, we may agree to indemnify our commercial collaborators against certain intellectual property infringement claims brought by third parties. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have produced a proliferation of patents, and it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our products or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity is difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management’s time and attention in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, which may not be available, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, if we do not obtain a license, develop or obtain non-infringing technology, fail to defend an infringement action successfully or have infringed patents declared invalid, we may incur substantial monetary damages, encounter significant delays in bringing our product candidates to market and be precluded from manufacturing or selling our product candidates.

We cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our pending applications, or that we were the first to invent the technology, because:

Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering technology similar to ours. Any such patent application may have priority over our patent applications, which could further require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. If another party has filed a U.S. patent application on inventions similar to ours, we may have to participate in an interference proceeding declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention in the United States. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial, and it is possible that such efforts would be unsuccessful if, unbeknownst to us, the other party had independently arrived at the same or similar invention prior to our own invention, resulting in a loss of our U.S. patent position with respect to such inventions. Other countries have similar laws that permit secrecy of patent applications, and may be entitled to priority over our applications in such jurisdictions.

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we employ an outside firm and rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to non-U.S. patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance would have a material adverse effect on our business.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We may be subject to claims that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers. If we are not able to adequately prevent disclosure of trade secrets and other proprietary information, the value of our technology and products could be significantly diminished.

As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, we employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. We may be subject to claims that these employees, or we, have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

We rely on trade secrets to protect our proprietary technologies, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We rely in part on confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA, as part of its Transparency Initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights, and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could adversely affect our competitive business position.

We have not yet registered our trademarks and failure to secure those registrations could adversely affect our business.

If we seek to register any of our trademarks, our trademark applications may not be allowed for registration or our registered trademarks may not be maintained or enforced. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections. Although we are given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many other jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. If we do not secure registrations for our trademarks, we may encounter more difficulty in enforcing them against third parties than we otherwise would.

In addition, we have not yet proposed a proprietary name for any of our product candidates, including OCA, in any jurisdiction. Any proprietary name we propose to use with OCA in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable proprietary product name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA.

Risks Relating to Owning Our Common Stock

No public market for our common stock currently exists and an active trading market may not develop or be sustained following this offering.

Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our common stock. An active trading market may not develop following the completion of this offering or, if developed, may not be sustained. Entities affiliated with certain of our existing stockholders and directors and entities affiliated with our director nominee have indicated an interest in purchasing up to an aggregate of approximately $30.0 million in shares of our common stock in this offering at the initial public offering price. To the extent these potential investors are allocated and purchase shares in this offering, such purchases would reduce the available public float for

TABLE OF CONTENTS

our shares because these potential investors will be restricted from selling the shares under the lock-up agreements described in the “Shares Eligible for Future Sale” section of this prospectus. As a result, the liquidity of our common stock could be significantly reduced from what it would have been if these shares had been purchased by investors that were not affiliated with us. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of your shares. An inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital to continue to fund operations by selling shares and may impair our ability to acquire other companies or technologies by using our shares as consideration.

Our share price may be volatile, which could subject us to securities class action litigation and prevent you from being able to sell your shares at or above the offering price.

The initial public offering price for our shares will be determined by negotiations between us and the representatives of the underwriters and may not be indicative of prices that will prevail in the trading market. The market price of shares of our common stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to many risk factors listed in this section, and others beyond our control, including:

Furthermore, the stock markets have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity securities of many companies. These fluctuations often have been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. These broad market and industry fluctuations, as well as general economic, political and market conditions such as recessions, interest rate changes or international currency fluctuations, may negatively impact the market price of shares of our common stock. In addition, such fluctuations could subject us to securities class action litigation, which could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention from other business concerns, which could seriously harm our business. If the market price of shares of our common stock after this offering does not exceed the initial public offering price, you may not realize any return on your investment in us and may lose some or all of your investment.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We have a significant stockholder, which will limit your ability to influence corporate matters and may give rise to conflicts of interest.

Genextra S.p.A., together with its affiliates, whom we refer to collectively as Genextra, is our largest stockholder. When this offering is completed, Genextra is expected to beneficially own shares representing approximately 50.6% of our common stock, without giving effect to any shares that may be purchased by it in the offering, assuming we sell 4,300,000 shares in this offering. Accordingly, Genextra will exert significant influence over us and any action requiring the approval of the holders of our common stock, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. This concentration of voting power, which would increase to the extent Genextra is allocated and purchases shares in this offering, makes it less likely that any other holder of common stock or directors of our business will be able to affect the way we are managed and could delay or prevent an acquisition of us on terms that other stockholders may desire. In addition, if Genextra retains a majority of our common stock after this offering, Genextra would be able to control all matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, as well as our management and affairs. For example, in such instance, Genextra would control the election of directors and approval of any merger, consolidation, sale of all or substantially all of our assets or other business combination or reorganization. In addition, if Genextra continues to hold a majority of our common stock, we would be deemed a “controlled company” for purposes of NASDAQ listing requirements. Under NASDAQ rules, a “controlled company” may elect not to comply with certain NASDAQ corporate governance requirements, including (i) the requirement that a majority of our board of directors consist of independent directors, (ii) the requirement that the compensation of our officers be determined or recommended to the board by a majority of independent directors or a compensation committee that is composed entirely of independent directors, and (iii) the requirement that director nominees be selected or recommended to the board by a majority of independent directors or a nominating committee that is composed of entirely independent directors.

Furthermore, the interests of Genextra may not always coincide with your interests or the interests of other stockholders and Genextra may act in a manner that advances its best interests and not necessarily those of other stockholders, including seeking a premium value for its common stock, and might affect the prevailing market price for our common stock. Our board of directors, which will consist of seven directors upon the completion of this offering, including two designated by Genextra, has the power to set the number of directors on our board from time to time. Lorenzo Tallarigo, M.D., the chief executive officer of Genextra, and Paolo Fundaro, the chief financial officer of Genextra, were elected to our board of directors as nominees of Genextra under the provisions of our third amended and restated stockholders agreement that will terminate upon the completion of this offering.

We have broad discretion in the use of net proceeds from this offering and may not use them effectively.

We intend to use substantially all of the net proceeds from this offering to fund (i) the continued clinical development of OCA in PBC, including our Phase 3 POISE trial and other studies and work necessary for anticipated FDA and EMA filings; (ii) the continuation of the long-term safety extension portion of our POISE trial and the Phase 3 clinical outcomes trial after the anticipated FDA and EMA filings; (iii) certain pre-commercialization activities of OCA for PBC; (iv) further preclinical development work on INT-767 and, if warranted, potential Phase 1 clinical trials of INT-767; and (v) if warranted, initiation of a Phase 2 clinical trial for an additional indication for OCA, such as portal hypertension. Any remaining amounts will be used for general corporate purposes, general and administrative expenses, capital expenditures, working capital and prosecution and maintenance of our intellectual property. Although we currently intend to use the net proceeds from this offering in such a manner, we will have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds. Our failure to apply these funds effectively could affect our ability to continue to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

Being a public company will increase our expenses and administrative burden.

As a public company, we will incur significant legal, insurance, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, our administrative staff will be required to perform additional tasks. For example, in anticipation of becoming a public company, we will need to adopt additional internal controls and disclosure controls and procedures, retain a transfer agent, adopt an insider trading policy and

TABLE OF CONTENTS

bear all of the internal and external costs of preparing and distributing periodic public reports in compliance with our obligations under the securities laws.

In addition, laws, regulations and standards applicable to public companies relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related regulations implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the NASDAQ Stock Market, are creating uncertainty for public companies, increasing legal and financial compliance costs and making some activities more time consuming. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. We intend 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 connection with this offering, we are increasing our directors’ and officers’ insurance coverage, which will increase our insurance cost. In the future, it will 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.

We are an “emerging growth company” and will be able to avail ourselves of reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, which could make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of $1 billion or more; (ii) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the completion of this offering; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Purchasers in this offering will experience immediate and substantial dilution in the book value of their investment.

The initial public offering price will be substantially higher than the net tangible book value per share of shares of our common stock based on the total value of our tangible assets less our total liabilities immediately following this offering. Therefore, if you purchase shares of our common stock in this offering, you will experience immediate and substantial dilution of $9.05 per share in the price you pay for shares of our common stock as compared to its pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value, assuming an initial public offering price of $14.00 per share, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus. To the extent outstanding options or warrants to purchase shares of common stock that are in the money are exercised, there will be further dilution. For further information on this calculation, see “Dilution” elsewhere in this prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A significant portion of our total outstanding shares of common stock is restricted from immediate resale but may be sold into the market in the near future. This could cause the market price of our common stock to drop significantly, even if our business is doing well.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur in the future. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares of common stock intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our common stock. After this offering, we will have 15,033,483 outstanding shares of common stock based on the number of shares outstanding as of August 31, 2012, assuming we sell 4,300,000 shares in this offering. Of these shares, 4,673,589 shares, excluding any shares purchased by our affiliates, may be resold in the public market immediately and the remaining 10,359,894 shares are currently restricted under securities laws or as a result of lock-up agreements but will be able to be resold after this offering as described in the “Shares Eligible for Future Sale” section of this prospectus. Moreover, after this offering, holders of an aggregate of 12,142,578 shares of our common stock, including shares underlying options and warrants of such holders, will have rights, subject to certain conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. We also intend to register all 2,062,078 shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plans. Once we register these shares, they can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance and once vested, subject to the 180 day lock-up periods under the lock-up agreements described in the “Underwriting” section of this prospectus.

Future sales and issuances of our common stock or rights to purchase common stock pursuant to our equity incentive plans and our outstanding warrants could result in additional dilution of the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our share price to fall.

We expect that significant additional capital will be needed in the future to continue our planned operations. To the extent we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience substantial dilution. We may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. If we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in more than one transaction, investors may be materially diluted by subsequent sales. Such sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights superior to our existing stockholders.

As of June 30, 2012, we had issued options to purchase 1,309,364 shares outstanding under our 2003 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended, or 2003 Plan, and warrants to purchase 1,232,767 shares of our common stock. On July 31, 2012, we also granted options to purchase 23,794 shares of our common stock under the 2003 Plan to to our non-employee directors as of January 1, 2012 for service during fiscal year 2012. Furthermore, we intend to adopt our 2012 Stock Incentive Plan, or 2012 Plan, under which we may grant equity awards covering up to an additional 728,920 shares of our common stock (including the 555,843 shares of common stock to be added from the 2003 Plan), prior to the completion of this offering. On the 31st day after the completion of this offering, we will grant to our employees and directors (i) options to purchase 207,505 shares of our common stock and (ii) restricted stock units for 173,592 shares of our common stock, in each case, under our 2012 Plan. We plan to register the number of shares issuable upon outstanding awards and available for issuance under our 2003 Plan and 2012 Plan. Sales of shares granted under our equity incentive plans or upon exercise of warrants may result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, which could cause our share price to fall.

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

The trading market for our common stock will depend on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not have any control over these analysts. There can be no assurance that analysts will cover us or provide favorable coverage. If one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade our stock or change their opinion of our stock, our share 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 could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

NASDAQ may delist our securities from its exchange, which could limit investors’ ability to make transactions in our securities and subject us to additional trading restrictions.

We have applied to list our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market. In order to make a final determination of compliance with their listing criteria, NASDAQ may look to the first trading day’s activity and, particularly, the last bid price on such day. In the event the trading price for our common stock drops below the NASDAQ Global Market’s $4.00 minimum bid requirement, NASDAQ could rescind our initial listing approval. If that were to happen, the liquidity for our common stock would decrease. If we failed to list the stock on the NASDAQ Global Market, the liquidity for our common stock would be significantly impaired, which may substantially decrease the trading price of our common stock.

In addition, we cannot assure you that, in the future, our securities will meet the continued listing requirements to be listed on NASDAQ. If NASDAQ delists our common stock from trading on its exchange, we could face significant material adverse consequences, including:

Some provisions of 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 management.

Provisions in our restated certificate of incorporation and by-laws that will be effective upon the completion of this offering, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us or increase the cost of acquiring us, even if doing so would benefit our stockholders. These provisions include:

These provisions may also frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management or members of our board of directors. In addition, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which generally prohibits a Delaware corporation from engaging in any of a broad range of business combinations with an interested stockholder for a period of three years following the date on which the stockholder became an interested stockholder, unless such transactions are approved by our board of directors. This provision could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control, whether or not it is desired by or beneficial to our stockholders. Further, other provisions of Delaware law may also discourage, delay or prevent someone from acquiring us or merging with us.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Claims for indemnification by our directors and officers may reduce our available funds to satisfy successful stockholder claims against us and may reduce the amount of money available to us.

As permitted by Section 102(b)(7) of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our restated certificate of incorporation to be in effect upon the completion of this offering will limit the liability of our directors to the fullest extent permitted by law. In addition, as permitted by Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws to be in effect upon the completion of this offering will provide that we shall indemnify, to the fullest extent authorized by the Delaware General Corporation Law, each person who is involved in any litigation or other proceeding because such person is or was a director or officer of our company or is or was serving as an officer or director of another entity at our request, against all expense, loss or liability reasonably incurred or suffered in connection therewith. Our restated certificate of incorporation to be in effect upon the completion of this offering will provide that the right to indemnification includes the right to be paid expenses incurred in defending any proceeding in advance of its final disposition, provided, however, that such advance payment will only be made upon delivery to us of an undertaking, by or on behalf of the director or officer, to repay all amounts so advanced if it is ultimately determined that such director is not entitled to indemnification. If we do not pay a proper claim for indemnification in full within 60 days after we receive a written claim for such indemnification, except in the case of a claim for an advancement of expenses, in which case such period is 20 days, our restated certificate of incorporation and our restated bylaws authorize the claimant to bring an action against us and prescribe what constitutes a defense to such action.

Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law permits a corporation to indemnify any director or officer of the corporation against expenses (including attorney’s fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred in connection with any action, suit or proceeding brought by reason of the fact that such person is or was a director or officer of the corporation, if such person acted in good faith and in a manner that he reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the corporation, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, if he or she had no reason to believe his or her conduct was unlawful. In a derivative action, (i.e., one brought by or on behalf of the corporation), indemnification may be provided only for expenses actually and reasonably incurred by any director or officer in connection with the defense or settlement of such an action or suit if such person acted in good faith and in a manner that he or she reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interests of the corporation, except that no indemnification shall be provided if such person shall have been adjudged to be liable to the corporation, unless and only to the extent that the court in which the action or suit was brought shall determine that the defendant is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses despite such adjudication of liability.

The rights conferred in the restated certificate of incorporation and the restated bylaws are not exclusive, and we are authorized to enter into indemnification agreements with our directors, officers, employees and agents and to obtain insurance to indemnify such persons. We have entered into or plan to enter into indemnification agreements with each of our officers and directors and our director nominee, the form of which is attached as an exhibit to the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part.

The above limitations on liability and our indemnification obligations limit the personal liability of our directors and officers for monetary damages for breach of their fiduciary duty as directors by shifting the burden of such losses and expenses to us. Although we plan to increase the coverage under our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, certain liabilities or expenses covered by our indemnification obligations may not be covered by such insurance or the coverage limitation amounts may be exceeded. As a result, we may need to use a significant amount of our funds to satisfy our indemnification obligations, which could severely harm our business and financial condition and limit the funds available to stockholders who may choose to bring a claim against our company.

We do not anticipate paying cash dividends, and accordingly, stockholders must rely on stock appreciation for any return on their investment.

We do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the future. As a result, only appreciation of the market price of our common stock, which may never occur, will provide a return to stockholders. Investors seeking cash dividends should not invest in our common stock.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

As of December 31, 2011 and June 30, 2012, we had federal net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, of $55.0 million and $63.9 million, respectively, which expire from 2024 through 2032. Our ability to utilize our NOLs may be limited under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. The limitations apply if an ownership change, as defined by Section 382, occurs. Generally, an ownership change occurs when certain shareholders increase their aggregate ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage in a testing period (typically three years). We have assessed whether one or more ownership changes as defined under Section 382 have occurred since our inception and have determined that there have been at least two such changes. Accordingly, although we believe that these ownership changes have not resulted in material limitations on our ability to use these NOLs, our ability to utilize the aforementioned carryforwards may be limited. Additionally, U.S. tax laws limit the time during which these carryforwards may be utilized against future taxes. As a result, we may not be able to take full advantage of these carryforwards for federal and state tax purposes. Future changes in stock ownership may also trigger an ownership change and, consequently, a Section 382 limitation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus contains forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this prospectus, including statements regarding our strategy, future operations, future financial position, future revenue, projected costs, prospects, plans, objectives of management and expected market growth are forward-looking statements. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. These forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements about:

These forward-looking statements are only predictions and we may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, so you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Actual results or events could differ materially from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in the forward-looking statements we make. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and trends that we believe may affect our business, financial condition and operating results. We have included important factors in the cautionary statements included in this prospectus, particularly in the “Risk Factors” section, that could cause actual future results or events to differ materially from the forward-looking statements that we make. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers, dispositions, joint ventures or investments we may make.

The forward-looking statements in this prospectus represent our views as of the date of this prospectus. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our views to change. However, 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 prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Industry and Market Data

This prospectus contains estimates and other statistical data made by independent parties and by us relating to market size and growth and other data about our industry. We obtained the industry and market data in this prospectus from our own research as well as from industry and general publications, surveys and studies conducted by third parties. This data involves a number of assumptions and limitations and contains projections and estimates of the future performance of the industries in which we operate that are subject to a high degree of uncertainty. We caution you not to give undue weight to such projections, assumptions and estimates. Further, industry and general publications, studies and surveys generally state that they have been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, although they do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of such information. While we believe that these publications, studies and surveys are reliable, we have not independently verified the data contained in them. In addition, while we believe that the results and estimates from our internal research are reliable, such results and estimates have not been verified by any independent source.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

USE OF PROCEEDS

We estimate that our net proceeds from the sale of 4,300,000 shares of common stock in this offering will be approximately $54.5 million after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us and assuming an initial public offering price of $14.00 per share, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus. If the over-allotment option is exercised in full, we estimate that our net proceeds will be approximately $62.9 million. A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price per share of $14.00, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, would increase (decrease) the net proceeds to us from this offering by approximately $4.0 million, assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting underwriting discounts and estimated offering expenses payable by us.

The principal purposes of this offering are to obtain additional capital to support our operations, to create a public market for our common stock and to facilitate our future access to the public equity markets. We intend to use the net proceeds from this offering as follows:

We believe that the remaining clinical development and other studies and work needed for anticipated FDA and EMA filings for the approval of OCA as a treatment for PBC will require approximately $40.0 million. We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents, including $29.8 million of net proceeds received on August 9, 2012 upon the issuance of our Series C preferred stock, along with the intended net proceeds from this offering, together with interest on cash balances, will be sufficient to fund the continued development of OCA through the following events:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The amount and timing of our actual expenditures will depend upon numerous factors, including the ongoing status and results of the POISE trial. Furthermore, we anticipate that we will need to secure additional funding for the further development of OCA for other indications and for the development of our other product candidates.

Our expected use of net proceeds from this offering represents our current intentions based upon our present plans and business condition. As of the date of this prospectus, we cannot predict with certainty all of the particular uses for the net proceeds to be received upon the completion of this offering or the amounts that we will actually spend on the uses set forth above. The amounts and timing of our actual use of net proceeds will vary depending on numerous factors, including our ability to obtain additional financing, the relative success and cost of our research, preclinical and clinical development programs, the amount and timing of additional revenues, if any, received from our collaborations with DSP and Servier and whether we are able to enter into future collaborations. As a result, management will have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds, and investors will be relying on our judgment regarding the application of the net proceeds of this offering. In addition, we might decide to postpone or not pursue other clinical trials or preclinical activities if the net proceeds from this offering and the other sources of cash are less than expected.

Pending their use, we plan to invest the net proceeds from this offering in short- and intermediate-term, interest-bearing obligations, investment-grade instruments, certificates of deposit or direct or guaranteed obligations of the U.S. government.

DIVIDEND POLICY

We have never paid or declared any cash dividends on our common stock, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. We intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to fund the development and expansion of our business. Any future determination to pay dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend upon a number of factors, including our results of operations, financial condition, future prospects, contractual restrictions, restrictions imposed by applicable law and other factors our board of directors deems relevant.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAPITALIZATION

The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and capitalization as of June 30, 2012:

The unaudited pro forma as adjusted information below is prepared for illustrative purposes only and our capitalization following the completion of this offering will be adjusted based on the actual initial public offering price and other terms of this offering determined at pricing. You should read this table together with “Selected Financial Data,” our financial statements and the related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus and the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” section of this prospectus.

		As of June 30, 2012
		Actual				Pro Forma				Pro Forma as Adjusted(1)
		(In thousands, except share amounts) (Unaudited)
Cash and cash equivalents		$	9,947			$	39,747			$	94,233
Warrant liability			4,856				5,280				5,280
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value; 27,777,778 shares authorized, issued and outstanding, actual; 52,777,778 shares authorized and no shares issued and outstanding, pro forma; and 5,000,000 shares authorized and no shares issued and outstanding, pro forma as adjusted			28				—				—
Stockholders’ equity (deficit):
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 57,000,000 shares authorized, 3,329,666 shares issued and outstanding, actual; 150,000,000 shares authorized and 10,733,483 shares issued and outstanding, pro forma; 25,000,000 shares authorized and 15,033,483 shares issued and outstanding, pro forma as adjusted			3				11				15
Additional paid-in capital			72,895				102,292				156,774
Accumulated deficit during development stage			(82,306	)			(82,306	)			(82,306	)
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			(9,380	)			19,997				74,483
Total capitalization		$	(4,524	)		$	25,277			$	79,763

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after this offering is based on an aggregate of 10,733,483 shares, consisting of (i) 3,329,666 shares of common stock outstanding on June 30, 2012, (ii) 4,807,674 shares of common stock into which all of our preferred stock outstanding as of June 30, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering and (iii) 2,596,143 shares of common stock into which the shares of preferred stock issued on August 9, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering. It does not include:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DILUTION

If you invest in our common stock, your ownership interest will be diluted to the extent of the difference between the initial public offering price per share of our common stock and the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share of our common stock immediately after this offering. Dilution results from the fact that the initial public offering price per share is substantially in excess of the book value (deficit) per share attributable to the existing stockholders for the presently outstanding stock. As of June 30, 2012, our net tangible book value (deficit) was $(9.4) million, or $(2.82) per share of common stock. Net tangible book value (deficit) per share represents the amount of our total tangible assets less total liabilities, divided by 3,329,666, the number of shares of common stock outstanding on June 30, 2012.

Our pro forma net tangible book value (deficit) as of June 30, 2012 was $20.0 million, or $1.33 per share of common stock. Pro forma net tangible book value (deficit) per share represents the amount of our total tangible assets less our total liabilities, divided by the number of shares of our common stock outstanding, as of June 30, 2012, after giving effect to (i) the conversion of our preferred stock outstanding as of such dates into an aggregate of 4,807,674 shares of common stock upon the completion of this offering, (ii) the conversion of the shares of preferred stock issued on August 9, 2012 into an aggregate of 2,596,143 shares of common stock upon the completion of this offering, (iii) the receipt of $29.8 million of net proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock on August 9, 2012, and (iv) the reclassification of certain warrants with registration rights upon the completion of this offering from stockholders’ equity to warrant liability.

After giving effect to the sale of 4,300,000 shares of our common stock in this offering, assuming an initial public offering price of $14.00 per share, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us, our pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value as of June 30, 2012 would have been $74.5 million, or $4.95 per share. This amount represents an immediate increase in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value of $2.78 per share to our existing stockholders and an immediate dilution in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value of approximately $9.05 per share to new investors purchasing shares of our common stock in this offering. We determine dilution by subtracting the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after the offering from the amount of cash that a new investor paid for a share of common stock.

The following table illustrates this dilution on a per share basis:

Assumed initial public offering price per share						$	14.00
Historical net tangible book value (deficit) per share as of June 30, 2012		$	(2.82	)
Increase per share due to the conversion of all shares of preferred stock			1.41
Decrease per share due to the reclassification of warrants with registration rights to liability			(0.04	)
Increase per share due to the issuance of Series C preferred stock			2.78
Pro forma net tangible book value (deficit) per share as of June 30, 2012		$	1.33
Increase per share attributable to new investors		$	3.62
Pro forma net tangible book value per share after the offering							4.95
Dilution per share to new investors						$	9.05

If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares in full, the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after giving effect to the offering would be $5.29 per share. This represents an increase in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value of $0.34 per share to existing stockholders and dilution in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value of $0.34 per share to new investors.

A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price of $14.00, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, would increase (decrease) our pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value after this offering by $4.0 million and the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after this offering by $0.27 per share and would increase (decrease) the dilution per share to new investors in this offering by $0.27 per share, assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same. The information discussed above is illustrative only and may change based on the actual initial public offering price and other terms of the offering determined at pricing.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following table summarizes, on a pro forma as adjusted basis as of June 30, 2012, the total number of shares purchased from us, the total consideration paid, or to be paid, and the average price per share paid, or to be paid, by existing stockholders and by new investors in this offering at an assumed initial public offering price of $14.00 per share, which is the midpoint of the price range listed on the cover page of this prospectus, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us. As the table shows, new investors purchasing shares in this offering will pay an average price per share substantially higher than our existing stockholders paid.

		Shares Purchased								Total Consideration								Average Price Per Share
		Number				Percentage				Amount				Percentage
Existing stockholders			10,733,483				71.40	%		$	105,391,685				63.65	%		$	9.82
New investors			4,300,000				28.60			$	60,200,000				36.35	%		$	14.00
Total			15,033,483				100	%		$	165,591,685				100	%		$	11.01

The table above is based on (i) 3,329,666 shares of common stock outstanding on June 30, 2012, (ii) 4,807,674 shares of common stock into which all of our preferred stock outstanding as of June 30, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering and (iii) 2,596,143 shares of common stock into which the shares of preferred stock issued on August 9, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering.

The table above does not include:

If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares in full, the following will occur:

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

Entities affliated with certain of our existing stockholders and directors have indicated an interest in purchasing up to an aggregate of approximately $15.0 million in shares of our common stock in this offering

TABLE OF CONTENTS

at the initial public offering price. However, because indications of interest are not binding agreements or commitments to purchase, the underwriters could determine to sell more, less or no shares to any of these potential investors and any of these potential investors could determine to purchase more, less or no shares in this offering. The foregoing discussion and tables do not reflect any potential purchases by these potential investors or their affiliated entities. After giving effect to the purchase of shares in this offering by these existing stockholders, assuming an initial public offering price of $14.00 per share, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, our existing stockholders will hold 78.5% (75.3% if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment in full) of our common stock outstanding after this offering based on (i) 3,329,666 shares of common stock outstanding on June 30, 2012, (ii) 4,807,674 shares of common stock into which all of our preferred stock outstanding as of June 30, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering and (iii) 2,596,143 shares of common stock into which the shares of preferred stock issued on August 9, 2012 will be converted upon the completion of this offering. The new investors purchasing the remaining shares in this offering will hold 21.5% (24.7% if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment in full) of our common stock outstanding after this offering.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table sets forth our selected financial data for the periods and as of the dates indicated. You should read the following selected financial data in conjunction with our audited and unaudited financial statements and the related notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus and the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” section of this prospectus.

The statement of operations data for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011, and the balance sheet data as of December 31, 2010 and 2011, are derived from our audited financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.

The statement of operations data for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2012, and for the period from inception (September 4, 2002) to June 30, 2012 (required to be included since we are a development stage company) and the balance sheet data as of June 30, 2012, are derived from our unaudited financial statements and the related notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus. Our interim unaudited financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, or GAAP, on the same basis as the annual audited financial statements and, in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present a fair statement of our financial position as of June 30, 2012 and the results of our operations for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2012 and for the period from inception (September 4, 2002) to June 30, 2012.

Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected in the future and interim results are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any other period or the full year.

		Years Ended December 31,								Six Months Ended June 30,								Period From September 4, 2002 (Inception) Through June 30, 2012
		2010				2011				2011				2012
		(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
										(Unaudited)								(Unaudited)
Statement of Operations Data:
Licensing revenues		$	—			$	1,805			$	405			$	1,518			$	3,323
Operating expenses:
Research and development			12,710				11,426				4,751				8,078				63,330
General and administrative			3,644				4,210				2,020				2,003				26,424
Total operating expenses			16,354				15,636				6,771				10,081				89,754
Loss from operations			(16,354	)			(13,831	)			(6,366	)			(8,563	)			(86,431	)
Total other income, net			1,266				1,093				115				797				4,125
Net loss		$	(15,088	)		$	(12,738	)		$	(6,251	)		$	(7,766	)		$	(82,306	)
Dividend on preferred stock, not declared			(2,901	)			(3,000	)			(1,500	)			(1,500	)			(9,814	)
Net loss attributable to common stockholders		$	(17,989	)		$	(15,738	)		$	(7,751	)		$	(9,266	)		$	(92,120	)
Net loss per share, basic and diluted		$	(5.40	)		$	(4.73	)		$	(2.33	)		$	(2.78	)
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic and diluted			3,329,666				3,329,666				3,329,666				3,329,666

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Years Ended December 31,								Six Months Ended June 30,								Period From September 4, 2002 (Inception) Through June 30, 2012
		2010				2011				2011				2012
		(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
										(Unaudited)								(Unaudited)
Pro forma information(1)
Pro forma net loss attributable to common stockholders						$	(12,738	)						$	(7,766	)
Pro forma net loss per share, basic and diluted (unaudited)						$	(1.19	)						$	(0.72	)

		December 31,								June 30, 2012
		2010				2011
		(In thousands)
										(Unaudited)
Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents		$	15,424			$	17,707			$	9,947
Total assets			17,118				19,470				12,145
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, and other liabilities			1,587				1,504				3,578
Warrant liability			6,881				5,836				4,856
Deferred revenue			—				14,608				13,091
Common and preferred stock			31				31				31
Additional paid-in capital			70,268				72,134				72,895
Accumulated deficit during development stage			(61,803	)			(74,540	)			(82,306	)
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			8,318				(2,560	)			(9,380	)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with “Selected Financial Data” and our financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. In addition to historical information, this discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may differ materially from those discussed below. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those identified below, and those discussed in the section titled “Risk Factors” included elsewhere in this prospectus.

Overview

We are a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of novel therapeutics to treat chronic liver disease utilizing our proprietary bile acid chemistry. Our product candidates have the potential to treat orphan and more prevalent liver diseases for which there currently are limited therapeutic solutions.

We have devoted substantially all of our resources to our development efforts relating to our product candidates, including conducting clinical trials of our product candidates, providing general and administrative support for these operations and protecting our intellectual property. We do not have any products approved for sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. From our inception until June 30, 2012, we have funded our operations primarily through the private placement of preferred stock, common stock, convertible notes and warrants to purchase common stock totaling $70.6 million and through the receipt of $16.4 million of up-front payments under our collaborative agreements.

On August 9, 2012, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with an affiliated fund of OrbiMed Advisors LLC and Genextra S.p.A., pursuant to which we agreed to issue up to an aggregate of 25,000,000 shares of our Series C preferred stock at a price of $2.00 per share for gross proceeds of up to $50.0 million. The securities purchase agreement provides that the Series C preferred stock may be issued in two tranches consisting of 15,000,000 and 10,000,000 shares. The first tranche of Series C preferred stock was issued on August 9, 2012, and resulted in $29.8 million of net proceeds to us. The closing of the second tranche of Series C preferred stock will only occur if we do not complete an initial public offering of our common stock on or prior to the one year anniversary of the closing of the first tranche. All of our outstanding shares of Series C preferred stock will convert into 2,596,143 shares of our common stock upon the completion of this offering. The investors have been granted certain demand and piggyback registration rights in respect of their securities under our third amended and restated stockholders agreement.

We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception in 2002. Our net losses were approximately $15.1 million and $12.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011, respectively, and $6.3 million and $7.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2012, respectively. As of June 30, 2012, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $82.3 million. Substantially all our net losses resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We do not expect to generate revenue from product sales unless and until we successfully complete development and obtain marketing approval for one or more of our product candidates, which we expect will take a number of years and is subject to significant uncertainty. Accordingly, we anticipate that we will need to raise additional capital in addition to the net proceeds of this offering prior to the commercialization of OCA or any of our other product candidates. Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenue from product sales, we expect to finance our operating activities through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, government or other third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements and other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements. However, we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other arrangements when needed on favorable terms or at all. Our failure to raise capital or enter into such other arrangements as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our product candidates.

Prior to April 2011, we operated a wholly-owned subsidiary in Italy where our bile acid receptor research was primarily conducted. We are currently in the process of liquidating this subsidiary. However, we are continuing our early stage TGR5 research through our collaboration with Servier. Although our Italian subsidiary is currently in liquidation and essentially inactive, we do not intend to liquidate this subsidiary for some time because it acts as our legal representative for Phase 3 clinical trials in the European Union to satisfy European Union regulatory requirements.

Financial Overview

Revenue

To date, we have not generated any revenue from the sale of products. All our revenue has been derived from our collaborative agreements for the development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates. In March 2011, we entered into an exclusive licensing agreement with Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma Co. Ltd., or DSP, for the development of OCA in Japan and China. Under the terms of the agreement, we received an up-front payment of $15.0 million and may be eligible to receive up to approximately $300 million in additional payments for development, regulatory and commercial sales milestones for OCA in Japan and China. In August 2011, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Les Laboratories Servier and Institut de Recherches Servier, or collectively Servier, for the discovery, research and development of bile acid-derived agonists, or substances that bind to receptors of cells and trigger responses by those cells, for a dedicated bile acid receptor called TGR5. Under the terms of the agreement, we received an up-front payment from Servier of $1.4 million. Servier may be required to pay us up to an aggregate amount of approximately €108 million (equivalent to approximately $135.0 million as of June 30, 2012) upon the achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial sale milestones, as well as royalties on sales, based on the successful outcome of the collaboration. For accounting purposes, the up-front payments from both transactions are recorded as deferred revenue and amortized over time. Through the six months ended June 30, 2012, we recognized $3.3 million in license revenue for the relevant amortization of the two up-front payments. We expect to recognize as revenue an additional $0.9 million for the amortization of these payments through 2012 and do not expect to receive any milestone payments during 2012 related to these agreements. The Servier up-front payment is expected to be fully amortized in the third quarter of 2012. We anticipate that we will recognize revenue of approximately $1.6 million per year through 2020, the expected end of the development period, for the amortization of the up-front payment from DSP.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Research and Development Expenses

Since our inception, we have focused our resources on our research and development activities, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, manufacturing development efforts and activities related to regulatory filings for our product candidates. We recognize research and development expenses as they are incurred. Our research and development expenses consist primarily of:

From inception through June 30, 2012, we have incurred approximately $63.3 million in research and development expenses. We plan to increase our research and development expenses for the foreseeable future as we continue the development of OCA for the treatment of PBC and other indications and to further advance the development of our other product candidates, subject to the availability of additional funding.

The table below summarizes our direct research and development expenses by program for the periods indicated. Our direct research and development expenses consist principally of external costs, such as fees paid to investigators, consultants, central laboratories and CROs, in connection with our clinical trials, and costs related to acquiring and manufacturing clinical trial materials. We have been developing OCA and other agonists of the farnesoid X receptor, or FXR, as well as TGR5 agonists, and typically use our employee and infrastructure resources across multiple research and development programs. We do not allocate salaries, stock-based compensation, employee benefit or other indirect costs related to our research and development function to specific product candidates. Those expenses are included in “Indirect research and development expense” in the table below.

		Years Ended, December 31,								Six Months Ended, June 30,
		2010				2011				2011				2012
		(In thousands)
										(Unaudited)
Direct research and development expense by program:
OCA		$	8,001			$	8,056			$	3,033			$	5,922
INT-777			2,234				195				312				13
Total direct research and development expense			10,235				8,251				3,345				5,935
Personnel costs			2,078				2,750				1,180				1,830
Indirect research and development expense			397				425				226				313
Total research and development expense		$	12,710			$	11,426			$	4,751			$	8,078

The successful development of our clinical and preclinical product candidates is highly uncertain. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the nature, timing or costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the remainder of the development of any of our clinical or preclinical product candidates or the period, if any, in which material net cash inflows from these product candidates may commence. This is due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing drugs, including the uncertainty of:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A change in the outcome of any of these variables with respect to the development of a product candidate could mean a significant change in the costs and timing associated with the development of that product candidate. For example, if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, or another regulatory authority were to require us to conduct clinical trials beyond those that we currently anticipate will be required for the completion of clinical development of a product candidate or if we experience significant delays in enrollment in any of our clinical trials, we could be required to expend significant additional financial resources and time on the completion of clinical development.

OCA

The majority of our research and development resources are focused on the Phase 3 POISE trial and our other planned clinical and preclinical studies and other work needed to submit OCA for the treatment of PBC for regulatory approval in the United States and Europe. We have incurred and expect to continue to incur significant expense in connection with these efforts, including:

In addition, we are evaluating OCA in other chronic liver and other diseases. In connection with these efforts, we have incurred and expect to incur significant expenses relating to our agreement with the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, or NIDDK, for milestones related to the FLINT trial, a Phase 2b clinical trial in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH. These expenses include $1.0 million that was paid in June 2012 and an additional $1.25 million that is required to be paid within 60 days of full enrollment of the FLINT trial, which is expected to occur in 2012.

INT-767 and INT-777

We are currently conducting research in collaboration with Servier to discover and develop additional novel TGR5 agonists. We intend to continue to develop our two existing compounds not included in this collaboration, our dual FXR/TGR5 agonist INT-767 through preclinical development and, if warranted, Phase 1 clinical trials and INT-777 through potential collaborations with third parties, over the next several years.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and related costs for employees in executive, operational, finance and human resources functions. Other significant general and administrative expenses include allocation of facilities costs, professional fees for directors, accounting and legal services and expenses associated with obtaining and maintaining patents.

We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase as we operate as a public company and due to the potential commercialization of our product candidates. We believe that these increases will likely include increased costs for director and officer liability insurance, costs related to the hiring of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

additional personnel and increased fees for outside consultants, lawyers and accountants. We also expect to incur increased costs to comply with corporate governance, internal controls and similar requirements applicable to public companies.

Interest Income (Expense), Net

Interest income consists of interest earned on our cash and cash equivalents. We expect our interest income to increase following the completion of this offering as we invest the net proceeds from this offering pending their use in our operations.

Interest expense pertains to equipment currently under a capitalized lease. This capitalized lease matures in 2012 and, as such, we will no longer be subject to the interest expense under this capitalized lease.

Mark-to-Market Warrant Revaluation Income (Expense)

In conjunction with various financing transactions, we issued warrants to purchase shares of our common stock. Certain of the warrants include a provision that provides for a reduction in the warrant exercise price if there are subsequent issuances of additional shares of common stock for consideration per share less than the applicable per share warrant exercise price. The warrants containing this provision are deemed to be derivative instruments and as such, are recorded as a liability and marked-to-market at each reporting period using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Certain warrants that do not have these down-round provisions, and are currently classified in equity, contain provisions that require the shares of common stock underlying such warrants to be registered upon an initial public offering. Upon completion of this offering, we will reclassify these warrants as liabilities and record warrant revaluation income (expense) in the statement of operations. The fair value estimates of these warrants are based, in part, on subjective assumptions and could differ materially in the future. Non-cash changes in the fair value of the common stock warrant liability from the prior period is recorded as a component of other income and expense. We will continue to adjust the fair value of the common stock warrant liability at the end of each reporting period for changes in fair values until the earlier of the exercise or expiration of the applicable common stock warrants or until such time that the warrants are no longer determined to be derivative instruments.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based on our consolidated financial statements, which we have prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, or GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. We evaluate these estimates and judgments on an ongoing basis. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Our actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

While our significant accounting policies are more fully described in note 2 to our consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this prospectus, we believe that the following accounting policies are the most critical for fully understanding and evaluating our financial condition and results of operations.

Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenue when the following criteria are met: persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, services have been rendered, the price is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured.

We have entered into collaboration agreements with DSP and Servier. The terms of these agreements include nonrefundable up-front licensing fees, in addition to potential milestone payments and royalties on any future product sales developed by the collaborators under our licenses. We assess these multiple elements in order to determine whether particular components of the arrangement represent separate units of accounting.

We recognize up-front license payments as revenue upon delivery of the license only if the license has stand-alone value. The underlying performance obligations are accounted for separately as the obligations are

TABLE OF CONTENTS

fulfilled. If the license is considered as not having stand-alone value, the arrangement is accounted for as a single unit of accounting and the license payments and payments for performance obligations are recognized as revenue over the estimated period of when the performance obligations are performed.

Whenever we determine that an arrangement should be accounted for as a single unit of accounting, we determine the period over which the performance obligations will be performed and revenue will be recognized. If we cannot reasonably estimate the timing and the level of effort to complete our performance obligations under the arrangement, then we recognize revenue under the arrangement on a straight-line basis over the period that we expect to complete our performance obligations.

Our collaboration agreements also provide for potential milestone payments to us, none of which have been received to date. Revenues from milestone payments, if they are non-refundable and considered substantive, are recognized upon successful accomplishment of the milestones. If milestones are not considered substantive, milestone payments are initially deferred and recognized over the remaining performance obligation.

To date, we have not received any royalty payments and accordingly have not recognized any related revenue. We will recognize royalty revenue upon the sale of the related products, provided we have no remaining performance obligations under the arrangement.

We record deferred revenue when payments are received in advance of the culmination of the earnings process. This revenue is recognized in future periods when the applicable revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Valuation of Stock-Based Compensation and Warrant Liability

Stock-Based Compensation

We record the fair value of stock options issued to employees as of the grant date as compensation expense. We recognize compensation expense over the requisite service period, which is the vesting period. For non-employees, we also record stock options at their fair value as of the grant date. We then periodically re-measure the awards to reflect the current fair value at each reporting period until the non-employee completes the performance obligation or the date on which a performance commitment is reached. Expense is recognized over the related service period.

Stock-based compensation expense includes stock options granted to employees and non-employees and has been reported in our statements of operations as follows:

		Years Ended December 31,								Six Months Ended June 30,
		2010				2011				2011				2012
		(In thousands)
										(Unaudited)
Research and development		$	648			$	472			$	341			$	289
General and administrative			1,045				1,394				411				472
Total		$	1,693			$	1,866			$	752			$	761

We calculate the fair value of stock-based compensation awards using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the use of subjective assumptions, including stock price volatility, the expected life of stock options, risk free interest rate and the fair value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant. Our key assumptions are:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The assumptions used in the Black-Scholes option-pricing model for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011 are set forth below:

		Years Ended December 31,
		2010				2011
Volatility			112 – 113	%			107 – 113	%
Expected term (in years)			5.6 – 5.7				5.0 – 6.0
Risk-free interest rate			1.6 – 1.7	%			1.1 – 1.4	%
Expected dividend yield			—	%			—	%
Stock price		$	8.67			$	8.67

The following table presents the grant dates, number of underlying shares and related exercise prices of stock options granted to employees and consultants from January 1, 2010 through August 31, 2012, as well as the estimated fair value of the underlying common stock at each grant date.

Grant Date		Number of Shares				Exercise Price and Fair Value Per Share				Aggregate Intrinsic Value (In thousands)
8/16/2010			427,060			$	8.67				—
9/6/2010			28,990			$	8.67				—
10/13/2011			214,961			$	8.67				—
12/15/2011			6,057			$	8.67				—
7/31/2012			23,794			$	9.31				—

The estimated fair value of common stock per share in the table above represents the determination by our board of directors of the fair value of our common stock as of each date of grant, taking into consideration various objective and subjective factors, including the conclusions of valuations of our common stock, as discussed below.

The intrinsic value of all outstanding vested and unvested options as of June 30, 2012, based on an initial public offering price per share of $14.00, the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, and the exercise price of the outstanding options are as follows:

		Number of Options				Intrinsic Value
Unvested			335,466			$	1,757,291
Vested			973,873			$	4,816,309

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Due to the absence of an active market for our common stock, the fair value of our common stock for purposes of determining the exercise price for stock option grants was determined by our board of directors, with the assistance and upon the recommendation of management, in good faith, based on a number of objective and subjective factors consistent with the methodologies outlined in the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Practice Aid, Valuation of Privately-Held-Company Equity Securities Issued as Compensation, or the Practice Aid, including:

We relied, in part, upon a valuation performed by an independent third party firm as of March 31, 2010 in determining the fair value of our common stock for purposes of establishing stock option exercise prices and for utilization in the Black-Scholes option-pricing model for calculating stock compensation expense and the value of warrants that are classified as liabilities. We then performed our own update to this valuation as of September 30, 2011 and June 30, 2012, using the same valuation methodologies used by the independent third party, and relied, in part, upon an update to the valuation as of July 31, 2012 from the same independent third party firm that performed the 2010 valuation.

Each of these valuations utilized the same approach in estimating enterprise value, which was a combination of a market-based approach, an income-based approach and a liquidation approach. Utilizing these three different approaches, as described in more detail below, a total of eight enterprise values were considered at each valuation date.

Under the market-based approach, the valuations considered the enterprise values of comparable biotechnology companies in a similar stage of development as ours, based on market data from recent IPOs and M&A transactions. The valuations were based on two different potential enterprise values for each of the IPO and M&A scenarios, depending on our assumed expected date of the IPO or M&A transaction, as we believed that it was reasonable to assume that a transaction at a later date would result in a higher valuation due to anticipated continued progress in our business. This resulted in four estimated enterprise values at each valuation date (two for the IPO scenario and two for the M&A scenario). For the 2010 valuation, we assumed that an IPO would be completed in either mid-2011 or mid-2012 and established the enterprise values for the IPO scenario based upon the market-based approach as described above. For the September 2011 valuation, since we had passed the mid-2011 date without completing an IPO, we revised our assumptions about the expected date of an IPO. We further assessed and made adjustments to the dates used in the June 2012 and July 2012 valuations based on the circumstances at the time and maintained consistent enterprise values for each of the IPO scenarios in the various valuations. We made similar revisions in our assumptions about the expected timing of an M&A transaction by rolling forward the expected dates from the 2010 valuation and

TABLE OF CONTENTS

maintained constant the estimated enterprise values for a nearer term M&A transaction, given certain developments impacting our business during 2011 and 2012, as described below, but increased the estimated enterprise values for a longer-term M&A transaction from the 2010 valuation, given our expectations about our improved prospects in the longer term, as described below. The estimated enterprise values in the M&A scenarios were also based upon the market-based approach as described above. The estimated enterprise value in the longer-term M&A scenario was significantly greater than the values in the IPO scenarios because the market values for comparable companies completing an M&A transaction were significantly greater than comparable companies completing an IPO. The estimated enterprise value for the longer-term M&A scenario was also significantly greater than the values under the income-based approach for the continuing operation scenario discussed below.

Under the income-based approach, the valuations were based on a discounted cash flow, or DCF, analysis to estimate enterprise value under three different scenarios depending on various development and commercialization scenarios. As with any DCF analysis, we made assumptions around the timing and amount of future revenues and operating expenses, among other factors, as well as assumptions about taxes, working capital requirements, and, most significantly, the discount rate to be applied in the DCF analysis. Our assumptions reflected the current development status of OCA and our expectations about future clinical development and potential commercialization scenarios. For subsequent valuation dates in 2011 and 2012, we updated these assumptions based on developments in our business since the prior valuation date, as described below, which resulted in overall net positive, but immaterial, increases to the previously estimated enterprise values from each prior valuation date, with the size of the increases generally tied to the length of time since the prior valuation date. The estimated enterprise values in the various DCF scenarios were generally consistent with the estimated values in the IPO and near-term M&A scenarios for each valuation date. As discussed above, the enterprise value in the longer-term M&A scenario was assumed to be significantly higher than the near-term scenario because we assumed that we would make continued progress in our business prior to a longer-term M&A transaction.

Finally, for the liquidation approach, the valuations estimated an enterprise value based on potential proceeds available to stockholders upon a liquidation of our company, based on current cash, assets and liabilities and the assumed proceeds from the sale of our assets. For subsequent valuation dates in 2011 and 2012, we updated these financial metrics and assumed sale proceeds based on changes in our financial position and expected proceeds from the sale of our assets, which resulted in both positive and negative changes to the previously estimated enterprise values, although the value available to be distributed to common stockholders remained zero at each valuation date given the accumulated liquidation preferences of our preferred stock.

Once we estimated the enterprise values at each date, the determination of the fair value of our common stock required the allocation of these enterprise values using one of the approaches outlined in the Practice Aid, because we have multiple classes of capital stock. We relied on the probability-weighted expected return method, or PWERM, which models a company’s common stock value based on potential future liquidity events and applies probabilities to each scenario. These future liquidity events are then discounted to present value and, after applying the relevant probability for each potential event, result in a single probability-weighted equity value of the common stock of a company.

For our valuations, we used the scenarios described above to generate the eight different enterprise values for our company. In determining the value of the common stock in the IPO and M&A scenarios, we assumed that the preferred stock then outstanding would be converted into common stock. This was due to the fact that the assumed enterprise values in the M&A scenarios would yield a return to holders of preferred stock that was greater than the liquidation value of the preferred stock and the assumed enterprise values in the IPO scenarios would have resulted in the automatic conversion of the preferred stock into common stock in accordance with our certificate of incorporation or we assumed that we would obtain requisite consent from the preferred stockholders to convert their shares into common stock in an IPO. In allocating value to our common stock in the continuing operations and liquidation scenarios, we first allocated to our then outstanding shares of preferred stock the greater of the liquidation preference of the preferred stock and the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

amount that would have been payable had all such shares of preferred stock been converted to common stock immediately prior to such event, as required by our certificate of incorporation, and then allocated any remaining value to our common stock.

The resulting implied per share value of our common stock was $8.67 per share at both March 31, 2010 and September 30, 2011, $8.96 at June 30, 2012 and $9.30 at July 31, 2012. The probability weightings utilized in the PWERM analysis took into consideration, among other things, the actual and forecast quality of data from the completed and yet to be completed OCA clinical trials, respectively, our assessment of the overall development program that would be required for anticipated FDA and EMA filings to obtain marketing approval, as well as general prevailing market conditions. In each valuation, we assessed probabilities of an overall positive scenario (25% — 35% probability), an overall mixed scenario (50% — 60% probability) and an overall negative scenario (15% probability).

The tables below summarize the probability assessment of the described event in each of these scenarios.

		March 2010												September 2011
Event		Positive Scenario				Mixed Scenario				Negative Scenario				Positive Scenario				Mixed Scenario				Negative Scenario
Strategic merger or sale of our company			15	%			0	%			0	%			30	%			0	%			0	%
Initial public offering			30	%			15	%			0	%			15	%			15	%			0	%
Continuing operations in various development and commercialization scenarios			55	%			85	%			65	%			55	%			85	%			65	%
Failure or dissolution of our company with no value to common stockholders			0	%			0	%			35	%			0	%			0	%			35	%

		June 2012												July 2012
Event		Positive Scenario				Mixed Scenario				Negative Scenario				Positive Scenario				Mixed Scenario				Negative Scenario
Strategic merger or sale of our company			15	%			0	%			0	%			15	%			0	%			0	%
Initial public offering			40	%			40	%			0	%			50	%			35	%			0	%
Continuing operations in various development and commercialization scenarios			45	%			60	%			65	%			35	%			65	%			65	%
Failure or dissolution of our company with no value to common stockholders			0	%			0	%			35	%			0	%			0	%			35	%

The probability weightings assigned to the respective exit scenarios were primarily based on consideration of the status of our OCA development program, research programs, various regulatory interactions in the United States and Europe, industry clinical success rates, our expected near-term and long-term funding requirements, and an assessment of the then financing and overall biotechnology industry environments at the time the valuations were performed. In all scenarios, an overall discount rate of 25% and an additional discount for lack of marketability of up to 20% was applied at each valuation date. We also considered the rights, preferences and privileges of the preferred stock as compared to those of our common stock, including the liquidation preferences of the preferred stock. Our preferred stockholders have various rights that give them greater control and influence over future liquidity, financing and other decisions relating to our company than the holders of our common stock.

Except as otherwise described below, for the periods from June 30, 2011 to October 13, 2011; October 13, 2011 to December 15, 2011; December 15, 2011 to December 31, 2011; and December 31, 2011 to June 30, 2012, there were numerous changes in our underlying business and, therefore, in the assumptions utilized in arriving at the eight estimated enterprise valuations at each valuation date and in the assumptions utilized in the PWERM analysis. However, as noted above, the estimated enterprise values did not change significantly from period to period and, taken together, the changes to the estimated enterprise values were offset by the changes in our assumptions in the PWERM analysis, and, as a result, there was no material change in our estimate of the fair value of our common stock.

The absence of any such material change in the fair value of our common stock is due to the fact that while, on the one hand, we (a) were making progress during these periods in our development program for OCA, including the planning of our Phase 3 program for OCA as a treatment for PBC and the initiation of the POISE trial, and (b) entered into the DSP and Servier collaborations described above, which would have the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

effect of increasing the estimated fair value of our common stock, on the other hand, (i) we did not receive the clarity that we were seeking from the FDA regarding whether the POISE trial would be sufficient and appropriate for accelerated approval of OCA and we also determined that we may be required to conduct a larger and more expensive confirmatory clinical outcomes trial than we had been anticipating; (ii) European market conditions continued to steadily decline with an increased risk of downward product pricing and reimbursement pressure across various European countries; and (iii) dynamics in the U.S. market for financing and partnering deteriorated for private development stage biopharmaceutical companies such as ours, all of which had the effect of decreasing the estimated fair value of our common stock. We believe that these positive and negative factors generally offset each other, resulting in a steady estimate of the fair value of our common stock in the absence of an arm’s-length transaction or updated independent valuation indicating otherwise during the period.

To review the specific circumstances at the time of each successive valuation, in March 2010, we had just completed a $25 million Series B preferred stock financing and had recently successfully completed our Phase 2 clinical trial for OCA in PBC. Based upon an analysis of then current market conditions, together with the projections of management and the board of directors regarding future development timelines for our product candidates, we determined the probabilities of the different scenarios and events as reflected in the table above.

We re-evaluated the assumptions used and the resulting estimated enterprise values in our valuation analysis at the September 2011 valuation date. We considered the deteriorating market conditions for life science company IPOs and interactions with regulatory authorities about our proposed NDA and MAA program, which resulted in several material changes to our previously contemplated program, including our belief that we may be required to conduct a larger and more expensive confirmatory clinical outcomes trial. We rolled forward the timelines under the IPO and M&A transaction scenarios, but also increased the estimated enterprise value under the longer-term M&A scenario given that such a transaction was now projected to occur further in the future. Under the DCF analysis, we extended the timeline under which we expected to receive revenues but also revised other assumptions, resulting in net positive, but immaterial, increases in estimated enterprise values compared to the 2010 valuation. In addition, we slightly revised the probability assessments in the PWERM analysis to lower the probability of an IPO from 30% to 15% and increased the probability of a strategic merger or sale of our company from 15% to 30%. Since our valuation model had previously incorporated the potential for a licensing deal for OCA in Japan as well as the potential for a licensing deal for our TGR5 program, our entry into the DSP and Servier collaborations in March 2011 and August 2011, respectively, did not have an offsetting effect on the negative developments described above.

With regard to the June 2012 valuation date, based at the time on improving market conditions for life science company IPOs, our holding an organizational meeting and commencement of preparations in May 2012 for an IPO, the initial confidential submission of a draft registration statement on Form S-1 for our IPO in June 2012, our declining cash reserves, the initiation of the Phase 3 POISE trial and the continuation of the FLINT trial, along with our negotiations with several parties regarding a private financing, which increased our confidence in completing an IPO and continuing our clinical development activities, we shortened the timelines for an expected IPO. We also updated the various assumptions under the DCF analysis, resulting in net positive, but immaterial, increases in estimated enterprise values. In addition, based on the factors described above, we determined to increase the probability of the IPO in the PWERM analysis in both the positive and mixed scenario from 15% to 40%, with offsetting reductions in the strategic merger or sale of our company in a positive scenario by 15% and reductions in the probabilities of continuing operations from 55% to 45% in the positive scenario and from 85% to 60% in the mixed scenario.

With regard to the July 2012 valuation date, based upon the increased likelihood of completing the potential Series C preferred stock financing that would provide the company with near- and longer-term funding if a successful IPO could not be achieved, we re-evaluated our assumptions used in the June 30, 2012 valuation, resulting in no material changes to the base assumptions. However, we determined (i) to further increase the IPO probability in the PWERM analysis in a positive scenario by 10% to a 50% probability, with an offsetting decrease in the probability of the continuing operations scenario, and (ii) to decrease the IPO probability in a mixed scenario by 5%, with a corresponding increase to the continuing operations scenario, reflecting the fact that an IPO would not be undertaken if it was not attractive.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Management made significant judgments and estimates underlying the determination of these inputs to the valuations at each time point. These judgments and estimates were based on assumptions regarding our future performance, including the regulatory status of our programs; the attractiveness of completing an IPO at different time points; the potential value of a strategic merger or sale at different time points; and the timing and probability of continuing to successfully progress our various product candidates toward commercialization (our continued operations scenarios) under differing scenarios, as well as determinations of the appropriate valuation methods. If different assumptions had been applied in the valuations, our stock-based compensation expense, warrant liability remeasurement, net loss and net loss per share could have been significantly different. While the assumptions used represent management’s informed estimates based on all available information at each time point, these estimates involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment.

Stock Option Grants on August 16, 2010 and September 6, 2010

Our board of directors granted stock options on August 16, 2010 and September 6, 2010, each having an exercise price of $8.67 per share, which our board of directors determined to be equal to the fair value of our common stock on each date of grant. The exercise price per share determined by our board of directors was supported by an independent third party valuation as of March 31, 2010. The specific facts and circumstances considered by our board of directors for the March 31, 2010 valuation included the following:

The probability weightings, discussed above and listed in the table, assigned to the respective exit scenarios were primarily based on consideration of the factors described above. The resulting value, which represented the estimated fair value of our common stock as of March 31, 2010, was $8.67 per share.

In addition to the objective and subjective factors listed above, our board of directors also considered input from management and the valuation as of March 31, 2010. After considering the regulatory uncertainty faced by our development program for OCA together with certain countervailing factors, our board of directors determined that there was no change in the fair value of our common stock between March 31, 2010 and the dates of the stock option grants, August 16, 2010 and September 6, 2010, respectively.

Stock Option Grants on October 13, 2011 and December 15, 2011

Our board of directors granted stock options on October 13, 2011 and December 15, 2011, each having an exercise price of $8.67 per share, which our board of directors determined to be equal to the fair value of our common stock on each date of grant. We performed an update to the March 31, 2010 valuation as of September 30, 2011. The specific facts and circumstances considered by our board of directors for the September 30, 2011 valuation included the following: the regulatory status of our programs, the general market conditions for private company financings for development stage companies such as ours, the impact of our collaboration agreements with DSP and Servier and the other general items noted above. Among these factors, the board of directors considered the offsetting effects on the fair value of our common stock due to our new collaborative arrangements, on the one hand, and the continuing lack of regulatory clarity around our development program for OCA in the United States, on the other hand.

The probability weightings assigned to the respective exit scenarios, discussed above and detailed in the table, were primarily based on consideration of the factors described above. The resulting value, which represented the estimated fair value of our common stock as of September 30, 2011, was $8.67 per share.

Our board of directors determined that there was no change in the fair value of our common stock during the period between September 30, 2011 and December 15, 2011 because no significant event or other circumstances had occurred between those dates that would indicate a change had occurred in the fair value of our common stock.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Stock Option Grants on July 31, 2012

Our board of directors granted stock options on July 31, 2012, each having an exercise price of $9.30 per share, which our board of directors determined to be equal to the fair value of our common stock on the date of grant.

The exercise price per share determined by our board of directors was supported by an independent third party valuation analysis as of July 31, 2012 using the approaches discussed above to incorporate eight different enterprise values and the PWERM methodology to allocate these values to the common stock. The specific facts and circumstances considered by our board of directors for the July 31, 2012 valuation included the following: (i) the clinical development progress of OCA, including the initiation of the POISE trial and the continuation of the FLINT and PESTO trials, as well as risks and costs associated with these trials, (ii) the regulatory status of our programs, including communications received from the FDA concerning our Phase 3 program for OCA as a treatment for PBC, (iii) the general fluctuating market conditions for private company financings for development stage companies such as ours, including our negotiations relating to the potential of a Series C private placement followed by an IPO, (iv) the anticipated terms of our Series C preferred stock, including certain control rights and liquidation preferences anticipated to be granted to the holders of our Series C preferred stock, which would result in a higher implied value for our Series C preferred stock as compared to our common stock, (v) the general deteriorating market conditions in European markets for health care payor reimbursement of approved products, and (vi) other general factors consistent with the Practice Aid, such as risk factors faced by our company, the investments made in our company and the experience and competence of our management team. The probability weightings assigned to the respective exit scenarios, discussed above and detailed in the table, were primarily based on consideration of these factors.

Estimated Offering Price

On September 26, 2012, we and the underwriters determined the estimated price range for this offering. The midpoint of the estimated range was $14.00 per share. In comparison, our estimate of the fair value of our common stock was $9.31 per share as of July 31, 2012. We note that, as is typical in initial public offerings, the estimated price range for this offering was not derived using a formal determination of fair value, but was determined based upon discussions between us and the underwriters. Among the factors considered in setting the estimated range were prevailing market conditions and estimates of our business potential, as described above. In addition to this difference in purpose and methodology, we believe that the difference in value reflected between the midpoint of the estimated range and the board of directors’ determination of the fair value of our common stock on July 31, 2012 was primarily the result of the following factors:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Common Stock Warrant Liability

Some of our outstanding warrants to purchase shares of our common stock have anti-dilution provisions (commonly referred to as “down round” provisions) which cause the instruments to be deemed not to be indexed to our common stock and as such are recorded as a liability and remeasured each reporting period using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Furthermore, certain warrants that do not have these down-round provisions, and are currently classified in equity, contain provisions that require the shares of common stock underlying such warrants to be registered following an initial public offering. Upon completion of this offering, we will reclassify these warrants as liabilities and record warrant revaluation income (expense) in the statement of operations. These warrants are deemed to be derivative instruments that require liability classification and mark-to-market accounting. As such, at the end of each reporting period, the fair values of the warrants are determined by us using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model, which, under our facts and circumstances, approximate, in all material respects, the values determined using a binomial valuation model. The non-cash changes in the fair value of the warrants are recorded as other income or expense. We expect that the value of the warrants will fluctuate significantly from period to period.

The Black-Scholes option-pricing model and the bionomial valuation model require the use of subjective assumptions, including but not limited to stock price volatility, the expected life of the warrants, the risk free interest rate and the fair value of the common stock underlying the warrants. The fair value of the underlying common stock is determined as discussed above under “— Stock-Based Compensation.” We will continue to adjust the fair values of the warrants at each period end for any changes in fair value until the earlier of the exercise or expiration of the applicable common stock warrants or until such time that the warrants are no longer determined to be derivative instruments. Our warrant liability is expected to fluctuate based on the assumptions used in our valuation model.

JOBS Act

On April 5, 2012, the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, was enacted. Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an “emerging growth company” can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, for complying with new or revised accounting standards. In other words, an “emerging growth company” can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves of this extended transition period and, as a result, we will adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required for other public companies.

We are in the process of evaluating the benefits of relying on other exemptions and reduced reporting requirements provided by the JOBS Act. Subject to certain conditions set forth in the JOBS Act, as an “emerging growth company,” we intend to rely on certain of these exemptions, including without limitation, (i) providing an auditor’s attestation report on our system of internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and (ii) complying with any requirement that may be adopted by the PCAOB regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements, known as the auditor discussion and analysis. We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of $1 billion or more; (ii) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the completion of this offering; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Results of Operations

Comparison of the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011 and the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012

The following table summarizes our results of operations for each of the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2012, together with the changes in those items in dollars and as a percentage:

		Six Months Ended June 30,								Dollar Change				% Change
		2011				2012
		(In thousands) (Unaudited)
Licensing revenue		$	405			$	1,518			$	1,113				*
Operating expenses:
Research and development			4,751				8,078				3,327				70.0	%
General and administrative			2,020				2,003				(17	)			(0.8	)%
Loss from operations			(6,366	)			(8,563	)			(2,197	)			34.5	%
Interest income, net			21				10				(11	)