UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

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

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2020

Commission File Number 001-38659

BIOSIG TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:  None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined by Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐    No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐    No ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 229.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒    No ☐

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

(Check one):

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal controls over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2020, based on the price at which the common stock was last sold on such date, is $182,302,855. For purposes of this computation, all officers, directors, and 5 percent beneficial owners of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. Such determination should not be deemed an admission that such directors, officers, or 5 percent beneficial owners are, in fact, affiliates of the registrant.

As of March 12, 2021, there were 31,789,781 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.  

Documents Incorporated by Reference:

The registrant incorporates by reference in Part III (Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14) of this Form 10-K portions of its Definitive Proxy Statement for the 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which shall be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Note on Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (including the section regarding Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations) contains forward-looking statements regarding our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates” and similar expressions or variations of such words are intended to identify forward-looking statements, but are not deemed to represent an all-inclusive means of identifying forward-looking statements as denoted in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  Additionally, statements concerning future matters are forward-looking statements.

Although forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K reflect the good faith judgment of our management, such statements can only be based on facts and factors currently known by us. Consequently, forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties and actual results and outcomes may differ materially from the results and outcomes discussed in or anticipated by the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in results and outcomes include, without limitation, those specifically addressed under the heading “Risk Factors” below, as well as those discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Readers are urged not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The SEC maintains an Internet site (www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including us.

We undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements in order to reflect any event or circumstance that may arise after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made throughout the entirety of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which attempt to advise interested parties of the risks and factors that may affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Unless the context indicates otherwise, references in this Annual Report to “BioSig,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” mean BioSig Technologies, Inc., and its predecessor entities.

ITEM 1 – BUSINESS

Corporate Structure

We were formed as BioSig Technologies, Inc., a Nevada corporation, in February 2009 and in April 2011 we merged with our wholly-owned subsidiary, BioSig Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation, with the Delaware corporation continuing as the surviving entity. BioSig is principally devoted to improving the standard of care in electrophysiology with our PURE EP™ System’s enhanced signal acquisition, digital signal processing, and analysis during catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias. The Company has generated minimal revenue to date and consequently its operations are subject to all risks inherent in business enterprise in early commercialization stage.

On November 7, 2018, we formed a subsidiary under the laws of the State of Delaware, originally under the name of NeuroClear Technologies, Inc., for the purpose of pursuing additional applications of the PURE EP™ signal processing technology outside of the field of cardiac electrophysiology. Subsequently, in March 2020, the subsidiary was renamed to ViralClear Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“ViralClear”). We own 70.2% of ViralClear’s outstanding shares of common stock as of March 12, 2021. ViralClear Pharmaceutical’s Business Overview can be found on pages 15.

On July 2, 2020, the Company formed an additional subsidiary, NeuroClear Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation, to pursue additional applications of the PURE EP™ signal processing technology outside of cardiac electrophysiology. We own 100% of the subsidiary’s outstanding shares of common stock as of March 12, 2021. We plan to rename and repurpose this additional subsidiary for future endeavors; and we intend to return ViralClear to its former name, NeuroClear Technologies, Inc. (referred to herein as “NeuroClear”). NeuroClear’s Business Overview can be found on pages 15-18.

Business Overview

We are a medical technology company that is commercializing our PURE EP™ System which is an advanced signal acquisition and processing platform designed to provide essential diagnostic signals with high clinical value in all types of cardiac catheter ablations.

PURE EP™ is designed to address long-standing limitations that slow and disrupt cardiac catheter ablation procedures, such as environmental lab noise, signal saturation, slow signal recovery, and inaccurate display of fractionated potentials.

Cardiac catheter ablation is a procedure that involves delivery of energy through the tip of a catheter that scars or destroys heart tissue to correct heart rhythm disturbances. In August 2018, we received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) to market our PURE (Precise Uninterrupted Real-time evaluation of Electrograms) EP™ System.

PURE EP™ is a signal processing platform that combines advanced hardware and software to address known challenges associated to signal acquisition, to enable electrophysiologists to see more signals and analyze them in real-time. The device aims to minimize noise and artifacts from cardiac recordings and acquire high-fidelity cardiac signals. Improving fidelity of acquired cardiac signals may potentially increase the diagnostic value of these signals, thereby possibly improving accuracy and efficiency of the EP studies and ablation procedures.

Our initial focus is on improving intracardiac signal acquisition and enhancing diagnostic information for catheter ablation procedures for complex arrhythmias like ventricular tachycardia (“VT”), a potentially life-threatening arrhythmia, and atrial fibrillation (“AF”), the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with a fivefold risk of stroke.

During 2019, we began conducting our first clinical observational patient cases using the PURE EP System at Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute at St. David’s Medical Center in Austin, Texas; Prisma Health at Greenville Health System in South Carolina; Indiana University; and Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in California. The initial experience across these early evaluation centers showed that the PURE EP™ System functions as designed: we received positive feedback from the EP users about the improved signal detection and fidelity during ablation procedures on patients with various arrhythmias, such as ischemic ventricular tachycardia, AF, atypical flutter, atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT), supraventricular tachycardia, premature ventricular contractions (PVC), and a rare case of dual septal pathway.

In November 2019, we commenced our first clinical study for the PURE EP™ System titled, “Novel Cardiac Signal Processing System for Electrophysiology Procedures (PURE EP 2.0 Study).” Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Research Foundation (TCARF) in Austin, Texas, was the first institution to conduct patient cases under the clinical study; Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida was the second institution; and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) was the third to conduct patient cases under the same clinical study. As of March 8, 2021, 81 patients have been enrolled in the study. Initial results of evaluated data from the PURE EP 2.0 Study found that a cumulative total of 29 PURE EP signals out of 34 (85.3%) were rated as statistically equivalent or better for the dataset (identical electrocardiographic and intracardiac signal data recorded during 15 AF ablation procedures from the PURE EP System, the signal recording system, and the 3D mapping system). In 35.5% of samples, the reviewers selected PURE EP because "more signal components were visible." 

We continue to install PURE EP Systems at centers of excellence for clinical evaluation under our market development plan. The PURE EP System has been utilized at several institutions, including University of Pennsylvania Hospital; Overland Park Regional Medical System in Overland Park, Kansas; Deborah Heart and Lung Center in Browns Mills, New Jersey; and Memorial Hospital of South Bend, part of Beacon Health System, in South Bend, Indiana; and Houston Methodist in Texas.

To date, more than 575 patient procedures have been conducted with the PURE EP System by more than 38 electrophysiologists across eight different clinical sites in the United States.

In addition to clinical evaluation, we have conducted a total of twenty-seven pre-clinical studies with the PURE EP™ System, twenty-two of which were performed at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. We also conducted a pre-clinical study at the Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, New York, with an emphasis on the VT model; and four pre-clinical studies at the University of Pennsylvania. We intend to continue additional research and development studies with our technology at Mayo Clinic and the University of Pennsylvania. We also intend to continue additional clinical external evaluation at a select number of other centers.

We have made progress towards obtaining a European CE marking certificate for medical devices. We intend to commence audit preparation for the International Organization for Standardization (“ISO”) 13485 with the expectation to proceed with the audit to obtain the ISO 13485 Certification and CE Mark in the first half of 2021 and subsequently file for CE Mark in the second half of 2021 or early in 2022, subject to the guidance from the European notified body.

In December 2020, we announced that three units were contracted for purchase by St David’s Healthcare of Austin, Texas and subsequently sold in February 2021. These units were our first commercial sale. Additionally, we are in active discussions with numerous accounts about the acquisition of the PURE EP™ System. We anticipate our initial customers will be medical centers of excellence and other healthcare facilities that operate EP labs.

Recent Developments

Mayo Clinic Artificial Intelligence (AI) Research Agreement

On January 2, 2021 we entered into a research agreement with Mayo Clinic regarding a Novel AI Program for our Novel Signal Recording System. The program is a strategic collaboration with Mayo to develop a next-generation AI- and machine learning-powered software for our PURE EP™ System. The new collaboration includes an R&D program that is expected to expand our proprietary hardware and software with advanced signal processing capabilities and aim to develop novel technological solutions by combining the electrophysiological signals delivered by PURE EP™ and other data sources.

The development program is under the leadership of Samuel J. Asirvatham, M.D., Mayo Clinic’s Vice-Chair of Innovation and Medical Director, Electrophysiology Laboratory, and Alexander D. Wissner-Gross, Ph.D., Managing Director of Reified LLC. We entered into a 10-year collaboration agreement with Mayo Clinic in March 2017 and in November 2019, we signed a patent and know-how license agreement with Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research in which such terms apply to this program. We also entered into a partnership with Reified LLC, a provider of advanced artificial intelligence-focused technical advisory services to the private sector in late 2019.

Aurigene Lawsuit

On January 8, 2021, Aurigene Pharmaceutical Services, LTD (“Aurigene”) filed a complaint with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut claiming the Company is in default of certain milestone payments for manufacturing and services under contracts dated June 23, 2020 and July 16, 2020 in aggregate amount of $1,530,000. The Company denies any liability and intends to defend this claim vigorously.

Our Industry

Pharmacological, or medicine-based, therapies have traditionally been used as initial treatments for cardiac arrhythmias, but they often fail to adequately control the arrhythmia and may have significant side effects. Catheter ablation is now often recommended for an arrhythmia that medicine cannot control. Catheter ablation involves advancing several flexible catheters into the patient’s blood vessels, usually either in the femoral vein, internal jugular vein or subclavian vein. The catheters are then advanced towards the heart. Electrical impulses are then used to induce the arrhythmia and local heating or freezing is used to ablate (destroy) the abnormal tissue that is causing it. Catheter ablation for most of arrhythmias has a high success rate. For patients with complex arrhythmias like AF and VT, it is often necessary to perform multiple procedures to achieve success.

Catheter ablation is usually performed by an electrophysiologist (a specially trained cardiologist) in a specialized room in an EP lab. According to a 2019 report by Health Research International, it is estimated that there will be approximately 11,466 global EP lab rooms performing catheter ablations in 2024 up from 9,978 in 2019, each typically with an EP recording system costing an average of $160,000. The global market for EP technologies employed in the catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias was estimated at $5.9 billion in 2019. This represented a 12.4% increase over the previous year that reflected a gradual rise in EP lab installations, an increase in the number of complex ablations performed, and the rising intensity and cost of devices employed in the treatment of complex ablations. Nearly 70% of revenues remain concentrated in the U.S. and industrialized nations of western Europe, which have the necessary resources to address this growing field. Overall, the growing reliability and long-term success of complex ablations is expected to drive an 11.5% annual increase in the global performance of complex ablations through 2024 which is expected to, in turn, drive an 11.3% real annual increase in total product sales during the same period to nearly $10.1 billion. In addition, global ablation procedure numbers are predicted to grow from 1,035,300 in 2019 to 1,556,055 in 2024; within this category, complex ablations (AF and VT) to increase from 529,650 in 2019 to 913,565 in 2024.

Catheter Ablation of AF and VT

Accurate recording of electrograms is critical to efficient mapping and ablation of complex arrhythmias. We believe that the clearer recordings and the very small amplitude of intracardiac signals--high frequency, small amplitude components in midst of large physiologic signals; signals important to characterize critical substrate, such as fractionated atrial and ventricular electrograms; and high-frequency, low-amplitude signals such as the Purkinje potentials—provided by the PURE EP System may improve outcomes during EP studies and ablation procedures for a variety of arrhythmias.

For patients who are candidates for ablation, an EP study is necessary to define the targeted sites for the ablation procedure. Two common, yet complex, conditions for which ablation procedures are performed are AF and VT. Most cardiac arrhythmias are well understood, and ablation simply requires destroying a small area of heart tissue possessing electrical abnormality. In contrast, complex arrhythmias, such as AF and VT, have complex pathophysiology and, because knowledge of their origins and mechanisms are incomplete, ablation treatments for these arrhythmias are largely empirical. Furthermore, the length of these procedures, which typically last from 3-6 hours, exposes the physician and staff to extensive radiation, requiring them to wear heavy lead vests. Consequently, ablating AF and VT has been regarded as being extremely difficult. Therefore, access to these procedures has traditionally been limited to being performed by only especially well-trained cardiologists and high-volume centers. Particularly during ablations for persistent (chronic) AF, long procedures and extensive ablation are often required. These procedures could result in significant scarring and damage to heart tissue, although a study from a French Bordeaux group found “recovery of atrial contractile function” (the heart goes back to beating and contracting normally) in 98% of patients in sinus rhythm after six months of follow-up. However, less experienced centers that do extensive ablations do run the risk of compromising the pumping ability and transport function of the left atrium.

AF is the most common heart rhythm disorder in the world and increases the risk for stroke 5-fold. In 2017, there were a reported 37.57 million prevalent cases of AF and 3.05 million incident cases of AF globally, contributing to over 287,000 deaths worldwide (Global, regional, and national prevalence, incidence, mortality, and risk factors for atrial fibrillation, 1990–2017: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017). In 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that it is estimated that 12.1 million people in the United States will have AF in 2030, more than 454,000 patients hospitalized annually as the primary diagnosis, and AF contributes to an estimated 158,000 deaths each year. An increasing proportion of diagnosed AF cases are now being treated via ablation, as both physician confidence and the devices used in these procedures improve. A growing amount of positive clinical data has demonstrated the efficacy of AF ablation when compared to the traditional first-line treatment of anti-arrhythmic drugs. The American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force reported that catheter-directed ablation of AF represents a substantial achievement that promises better therapy for a large number of patients presently resistant to pharmacological or electrical conversion to sinus rhythm (ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation). Additionally, the 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation findings show patients that were in the AF catheter ablation group had significantly reduced overall mortality rate, reduced rate of hospitalization for worsening heart failure, and improved left ventricular ejection fraction as compared with the medical therapy group, and according to device interrogation, more patients in the AF catheter ablation group were in sinus rhythm. However, rates of success and complications may vary for ablation, sometimes considerably.

The AF Ablation Long Term Registry is an international registry of 3,630 patients who underwent AF ablation between 2012 and 2015 – the study reported a 41% rate of repeat ablation at 3 years post ablation. At 12-month follow-up, the outcome was judged to have been successful in 74% of patients. However, almost 50% of the patients were still taking an antiarrhythmic drug. AF recurrences were less common in patients with paroxysmal (31%) than with persistent (40%) or long-standing persistent (44%) AF.

According to the Heart Rhythm Society, VT is the most dangerous arrhythmia since it may result in ventricular fibrillation, a rapid chaotic heartbeat in the lower chambers of the heart which can often result in sudden cardiac death. Because the fibrillating muscle cannot contract and pump blood to the brain and vital organs, ventricular fibrillation is the number one cause of sudden cardiac death which accounts for approximately 300,000 deaths in the U.S. each year. VT is typically treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators, or ICDs, or a combination of ablation along with an ICD. Catheter ablation of VT has historically been used primarily for drug refractory ventricular arrhythmias in patients with ICDs. However, advances in electro-anatomical mapping systems, techniques to identify ablation sites during sinus rhythm, and the use of hemodynamic support devices has broadened the applicability of catheter ablation for ventricular arrhythmias. When performed in centers with high procedural volumes, the rates of complications remain relatively low. However, success rates have historically been quite variable and highly dependent on the specific ablation approach adopted. Additionally, catheter ablation has evolved into an important treatment option for patients with scar-related heart disease presenting with VT or VF. An individual’s success rate of catheter ablation for VT is determined by the amount of infarct-related scar burden, represented as low-voltage signals; the experience of the team and center will influence outcomes. In patients with recurrent VT or VF despite complete revascularization and optimal medical treatment, radiofrequency catheter ablation should be considered. Recurrent VF episodes may be triggered by PVCs arising from partially injured Purkinje fibers or ventricular myocardium injured by ischemia and/or reperfusion. Precise catheter mapping and successful ablation of triggers for VT or VF, or myocardial substrate sustaining VT or VF, is a complex and demanding procedure according to the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death The Task Force for the Management of Patients with Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

We believe that ablation will continue to become a preferred treatment for AF and VT. This increase in demand for ablation procedures has also increased the demand for technological advances in medical devices essential to ablation procedures. Improvements are needed to help reduce the periprocedural complications and decrease costly lengths of stay in patients undergoing catheter ablation procedures, adding focus to improving outcomes at low volume hospitals and among patients at high risk due to comorbidities. We believe that the PURE EP System may have a meaningful impact on assisting ablation strategies especially for repeat ablations and for those with significant scarring as it was developed to reveal the high frequency and very small amplitude of intracardiac signals important for identifying ablation targets.

EP Lab Environment and EP Recording Systems

The EP lab environment and recording systems create significant amounts of noise and artifacts during EP procedures. Current surface and intracardiac recording systems typically consist of large workstations interconnected by a complex set of cables that contribute to significant amounts of noise during signal acquisition. Additional noise and artifacts generated from the EP lab equipment further hamper recordings of small electrophysiological potentials. Preserving spaciotemporal (space and time) characteristics of the signal in a very challenging EP recording environment is a difficult task. To remove noise and artifacts, recorders that are currently on the market offer a family of low pass, high pass and notch filters, but these filters alter signal information context.

The shape and amplitude of electrocardiograms, unipolar and bipolar electrograms, and, consequently, reconstructed endocardial and epicardial maps, are influenced not only by electrophysiological and structural characteristics of the myocardial tissue involved, but with characteristics of the recording system. Amplitude and morphology of electrocardiogram and intracardiac signals are significantly affected by filters used to remove noise.  Because of the number of amplitude and interval measurements made during an EP study, it is imperative that the recording system faithfully acquires surface electrocardiogram and intracardiac electrograms.  We believe that the recording systems that are currently available on the market are ineffective in preserving the optimal amount of original information contained in the cardiac signals.

In addition, the EP lab consists of sophisticated equipment that requires an electrophysiologist to mentally integrate information from a number of sources during procedures. There are numerous monitors in an EP lab that provide and display this variety of information. An electrophysiologist needs to evaluate the acquired cardiac signals and the patient’s responses to any induced arrhythmias during the procedure.  However, it can be difficult for an electrophysiologist to synthesize the disparate information produced by the numerous monitors in the lab and calculate the real-time, three-dimensional orientation of the anatomy and the location of the recording and ablation catheters. As the number of EP procedures increase, a variety of diagnostic, therapeutic and highly specialized ablation catheters are widely available and continue to be developed.  In addition, remote robotic and magnetic navigation systems have been developed to address limitations of dexterity in controlling the catheter tip, especially during complex arrhythmia ablation procedures. We believe that, considering the improvements being made with respect to other equipment used in the EP lab and the continual increase of ablation procedures, the EP recorders currently available on the market are not sufficiently advanced with respect to the quality of their recordings to deliver adequate results. We believe that the PURE EP System will be able to deliver superior quality of recordings that will allow it to successfully integrate with the other advanced equipment found in the EP lab.

The requirement for optimal signal integrity is amplified during ablation treatments of AF and VT. One of the main objectives of the AF ablation procedure is to precisely identify, ablate and eliminate pulmonary vein potentials and one of the main objectives of the VT procedure is to map the arrhythmia substrate and precisely identify, ablate and eliminate small abnormal potentials. The information provided by recorders is essential for an electrophysiologist to determine ablation strategy during termination of both pulmonary vein potentials and VT.  Therefore, it is important that the recording system’s noise removal technique does not alter the appearance and fidelity of these potentials. As a result, it is necessary that any new signal processing technology preserves signal fidelity as much as possible during EP recordings; otherwise, the signals that are needed to guide the ablation procedures will be difficult to distinguish due to noise interference.

Our Product

The PURE EP™ System is designed to address long-standing limitations that slow and disrupt cardiac catheter ablation procedures, such as environmental lab noise, signal saturation, slow signal recovery, and inaccurate display of fractionated potentials. PURE EP™ is a signal processing platform that combines advanced hardware and software to address known challenges associated to signal acquisition, to enable electrophysiologists to see more signals and analyze them in real-time. The device aims to minimize noise and artifacts from cardiac recordings and acquire high-fidelity cardiac signals. Improving fidelity of acquired cardiac signals may potentially increase the diagnostic value of these signals, thereby possibly improving accuracy and efficiency of the EP studies and ablation procedures.

PURE EP™ was designed to be useful in arrhythmia diagnosis. For example, in atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) & AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT), EP physicians often look for a slow pathway potential or accessory pathway potentials that are not easy to detect. Furthermore, during pacing maneuvers, important diagnostic signals may be buried inside the saturation artifact from the pacing electrode. The wide dynamic range of the PURE EP™ System may allow for better differentiation of those signals, as there is no system saturation and a quicker recovery to baseline.

Cardiac catheter ablation is a procedure that involves delivery of energy through the tip of a catheter that scars or destroys heart tissue to correct heart rhythm disturbances. In August 2018, we received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) to market our PURE (Precise Uninterrupted Real-time evaluation of Electrograms) EP™ System.

Our initial focus is on improving intracardiac signal acquisition and enhancing diagnostic information for catheter ablation procedures for complex arrhythmias, like ventricular tachycardia (“VT”) and atrial fibrillation, or AFib (“AF”). VT is a fast, abnormal heart rate in the heart’s lower chambers. VT does not give your heart enough time to fill with blood before it contracts again. This can affect blood flow to the rest of your body and is potentially life-threatening. AF is the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with a fivefold risk of stroke. AF occurs when the upper chambers of the heartbeat irregularly, and do not pump all of the blood to the lower chambers, causing some blood to pool and potentially form clots. If a clot breaks loose, it can travel through the bloodstream to the brain and lead to a stroke. Strokes related to AF are often more severe compared to strokes with other underlying causes.

We believe that the PURE EP System and its advanced signal processing tools may contribute to improvements in patient outcomes in connection with catheter ablation due to the following advantages over currently available devices on the market: 

We believe that these features may allow physicians to better determine precise ablation targets, strategy, and end point of procedures with the objective of reducing the need for patients to undergo multiple procedures, and to allow for less experienced EP physicians to perform more complex procedures. The PURE EP System is intended to operate in conjunction with the existing EP lab equipment.

Initial Analysis

According to S. J. Asirvatham, MD, et. al. (“Signals and Signal Processing for the Electrophysiologist,” Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. (2011) 4:965-973), recording environments in a typical electrophysiology laboratory presents challenging situations.  S. J. Asirvatham, MD, et. al., state, “Successful mapping and ablation in the electrophysiology laboratory is critically dependent on acquiring multiple, low-amplitude, intracardiac signals in the presence of numerous sources of electric noise and interference and displaying these signals in an uncomplicated and clinically relevant fashion, with minimal artifacts. This represents a significant engineering challenge and, in real-life electrophysiology laboratory, is not always successful.”

To determine and validate the state of present electrophysiology recording technology in the field, we completed a detailed analysis of the effect of filters used by existing EP recorders to reduce noise on spaciotemporal characteristics of electrocardiograms and intracardiac electrograms. We evaluated the signal quality (amplitude, morphology and duration) of the different recorders, along with the ability of the recorders to reduce noise level and remove baseline wander, which are the cardiac signals that have shifted from the isoelectric line (the base line of the signal tracing). The electrocardiogram and intracardiac signals subjected to the PURE EP System’s signal processing showed less baseline wander, noise and artifacts compared to the conventional electrophysiology recorders.  Further, spaciotemporal characteristics of signals were greatly distorted by the conventional electrophysiology system, particularly when a notch filter was used, as compared to the recording of the same spaciotemporal characteristics by the PURE EP System.

Proof of Concept Testing

In the second and third quarters of 2013, we performed and finalized testing of our proof of concept unit by initially using an electrocardiogram/intracardiac simulator at our lab, and subsequently by obtaining pre-clinical recordings from the lab at the University of California at Los Angeles. We believe that our proof of concept unit performed well as compared to GE’s CardioLab recording system, in that the electrocardiogram and intracardiac signals displayed on our proof of concept unit showed less baseline wander, noise and artifacts compared to signals displayed on GE’s CardioLab recording system.  Subsequently, we determined the final design of the PURE EP System prototype to use for end-user preference studies, additional pre-clinical studies and research studies.  

Prototype Testing

After conducting research of peer-reviewed EP publications (see Initial Analysis in Our Products section above), we contacted Samuel J. Asirvatham. M.D. (who we believed to be an expert in the field of signal-based catheter ablation), at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Since the end of 2014, we have collaborated with Dr. Asirvatham and other physicians affiliated with Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota and Jacksonville, Florida. We have performed pre-clinical studies at Mayo Clinic since 2015 to validate technology within the PURE EP System prototype. These studies have been designed to determine clinical effectiveness for features within the PURE EP System. Since March 2016, we have published nine manuscripts in collaboration with the physicians from Mayo Clinic evidencing our pre-clinical findings. To date, we have conducted a total of twenty-four pre-clinical studies with the PURE EP System, twenty-one of which were conducted at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. We also conducted a pre-clinical study at the Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, NY with emphasis on the VT model; and two pre-clinical studies at the University of Pennsylvania in preparation for clinical studies to be conducted there.

Clinical Evaluations

On February 18 and February 19, 2019, we conducted the first clinical cases with our PURE EP™ System. The observational patient cases were performed by Andrea Natale, M.D., F.A.C.C., F.H.R.S., F.E.S.C., Executive Medical Director, Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute at St. David’s Medical Center in Austin, Texas. On April 16, 2019, we announced the completion of our second set of observational patient cases, which were performed at Prisma Health at Greenville Health System in South Carolina by Andrew Brenyo, MD, FHRS. Dr. Brenyo used the PURE EP™ System during procedures on patients with ischemic ventricular tachycardias, AF, PVC, and atypical flutters.

On May 6, 2019, we announced the completion of our third set of observational patient cases at Indiana University under the leadership of Prof. John M. Miller, M.D., and Dr. Mithilesh K. Das, MBBS. Drs. Miller and Das used the PURE EP™ System during procedures on patients with atypical flutter, atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT), AF, supraventricular tachycardia, premature ventricular contractions, and a rare case of dual septal pathway. In August 2019, observational patient cases at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in California were performed by Brett Andrew Gidney, M.D. The initial experience across these early evaluation centers showed the PURE EP™ System functions as designed with positive feedback from EP users about the improved signal detection and fidelity.

In November 2019, we commenced our first clinical study for the PURE EP™ System titled, “Novel Cardiac Signal Processing System for Electrophysiology Procedures (PURE EP 2.0 Study).” Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Research Foundation (TCARF) in Austin, Texas, was the first institution to conduct patient cases under the clinical study. On January 16, 2020, we announced the installation of a PURE EP System at Mayo Clinic Florida campus in Jacksonville, Florida. Mayo Clinic was the second institution to conduct patient cases under the same clinical study. On August 4, 2020, we announced the installation of a PURE EP System at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) as part of the expanding clinical study. As of March 8, 2021, 81 patients have been enrolled in the study.

In September 2020, we presented results from our first randomized, blinded signal sample analysis in the PURE EP 2.0 Clinical Study. The data was generated during AF ablation procedures conducted at St. David’s Medical Center, Austin, Texas. Our scientific abstract and poster entitled, "A novel cardiac signal processing system for electrophysiology procedures: early insights from the PURE EP 2.0 study" was presented at the ESC Congress 2020 – The Digital Experience. The abstract was co-authored by Carola Gianni, M.D., Amin Al-Ahmad, M.D., Shane M. Bailey, M.D., G. Joseph Gallinghouse, M.D., Rodney P. Horton, M.D. and Andrea Natale, M.D. of TCAI. The independent, blinded reviewers were Bradley P. Knight, M.D. (Northwestern University), Wendy Tzou, M.D. (University of Colorado), and Pasquale Santangeli, M.D. (University of Pennsylvania). Identical electrocardiographic and intracardiac signal data were recorded during 15 AF ablation procedures from the PURE EP System, the signal recording system, and the 3D mapping system. The collected signals underwent blinded, controlled evaluation by three independent electrophysiologists to determine whether the PURE EP signals are a viable alternative to conventional sources and if it provides additional or clearer diagnostic information. Reviewers were asked to record the quality of each signal sample on a scale of 1-10 and select a rationale for their rating in a dropdown menu. Based on the ratings for each pair of signals, a cumulative total of 29 PURE EP™ signals out of 34 (85.3%) were rated as statistically equivalent or better for this dataset. In 35.5% of samples, the reviewers selected PURE EP™ data because "more signal components were visible." The abstract concludes that the PURE EP™ System is able to produce reliable and high-quality signals when compared to the available standard of care systems.

The PURE EP™ System was highlighted in several patient cases conducted live during EPLive in December 2020, the fifth international symposium on complex arrhythmias, by Andrea Natale, M.D., F.H.R.S., F.A.C.C., F.E.S.C., Executive Medical Director of the Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute (TCAI) at St. David’s Medical Center in Austin, TX and EPLive course director, and Joseph Gallinghouse, M.D.

Clinical observations collected with our PURE EP System were also presented by G. Joseph Gallinghouse, M.D., Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute at St. David’s Medical Center, during AF Symposium 2021 Spotlight Session: Early Stage and Emerging New Technologies and Drugs in Cardiac EP on January 29, 2021 streamed live. Dr Gallinghouse highlighted advantages of PURE EP across steps of a complex procedure and emphasized that accurate recording of electrograms is critical for mapping and ablation. He noted that he still quite often faces issues with suboptimal signal quality even though the lab has clean power and is properly shielded. With the PURE EP System, however, he was able to digitally zoom in on signals of interest without gaining noise; he was able to identify high frequency, low amplitude signals in a patient with atypical atrial flutter and significant scar in the atria.

On September 23, 2020, we installed the PURE EP System at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital. On October 29, 2020, we announced the installation of our PURE EP System at the Deborah Heart and Lung Center in Browns Mills, New Jersey for clinical evaluation. On January 12, 2021 we announced the installation and first patient cases conducted at Memorial Hospital of South Bend, part of Beacon Health System, in South Bend, Indiana under the leadership of Vinod Chauhan, M.D. and Deepak Gaba, M.D. And, on February 10, 2021 we announced new clinical sites to receive our systems: New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center, Michigan Medicine–University, and Houston Methodist Hospital.

To date, more than 575 patient procedures have been conducted with the PURE EP System by more than 38 electrophysiologists across eight different clinical sites in the United States.

In addition to clinical evaluation, we have conducted a total of twenty-seven pre-clinical studies with the PURE EP™ System, twenty-two of which were performed at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. We also conducted a pre-clinical study at the Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, New York, with an emphasis on the VT model; and four pre-clinical studies at the University of Pennsylvania. We intend to continue additional research and development studies with our technology at Mayo Clinic and the University of Pennsylvania. We also intend to continue additional clinical external evaluation at a select number of other centers.

The current PURE EP System

Examples of PURE EP Signals

Commercialization of the PURE EP™ System

We have developed a marketing strategy to introduce and support our PURE EP™ System. The strategy includes our presence (in-person and virtually) at leading industry events and scientific sessions, both nationally and internationally, for the purposes of physician education, PURE EP System’s demonstrations and select presentations of advanced R&D product pipeline.

We have begun implementing a market development program to commercially launch our PURE EP System. We have installed PURE EP Systems at several medical centers of excellence (COEs) throughout the U.S. during 2020 and will continue to do so in 2021 for clinical evaluation - whereby these systems are installed on a trial basis for system evaluations; data collection for our clinical trials; to gather and publish data in in peer-reviewed journals and for presentations at cardiology conferences; and for potential demonstrations to other physicians to observe the technology.

Health systems, facilities, and physicians that have conducted or observed cases performed with our technology may potentially acquire the system. Sales of our systems would potentially consist of hardware, software, and a recurring revenue feature through a technical service contract, including software upgrades, and down the line, include the AI aspect. In December 2020, we announced that three units were contracted for purchase by St David’s Healthcare of Austin, Texas.

We intend to support our commercial activities by growing clinical validation and educational and training programs, including establishing training hubs at our early hospital partners’ facilities. With the increased commercialization activity planned, we also plan to continue to grow our clinical account management team to support the initial use of the system and assist with ongoing product training and education, and plan to develop an agile regional sales team to escalate our commercialization efforts along with a technical support team.

We will deploy Vuzix’s M400 Smart Glasses for remote servicing of our PURE EP™ System to support our commercialization efforts which offers an ideal solution for compliance with COVID-19 travel restrictions. Vuzix® Corporation (NASDAQ: VUZI) is a leading supplier of smart glasses and augmented reality (AR) technology and products.

Our commercial and clinical activities are led by Vice President of Sales, John Kowalski who spent 24 years at Johnson & Johnson’s Biosense Webster division, a global leader and pioneering innovator in the electrophysiology market; Julie Stephenson, MBA, Vice President of Clinical Affairs; and Olivier Chaudoir, Senior Director of Marketing. We believe we have ample inventory to meet planned commercial placement requirements in 2021, and we believe we will increase our domestic sales efforts and also stage our European commercialization efforts during 2021-2022. We have made progress towards obtaining a European CE marking certificate for medical devices. We intend to commence audit preparation for the International Organization for Standardization (“ISO”) 13485 with the expectation to proceed with the audit to obtain the ISO 13485 Certification and CE Mark in the first half of 2021 and subsequently file for CE Mark in the second half of 2021 or early in 2022, subject to the guidance from the European notified body.

Technology and Development Plan

Our technology team consists of twelve engineers and consultants with expertise in digital signal processing, low power analog and digital circuit design, software development, embedded system development, electromechanical design, testing and system integration, and the regulatory requirements for medical devices. We have also entered into collaboration agreements with advisors and medical institutions in the fields of cardiology and electrophysiology, including Mayo Clinic and the Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute in Austin, Texas, where clinical trials are currently underway to define the clinical effectiveness of the system. Currently, we have outsourced manufacturing of the complete PURE EP System to Minnetronix Medical. In addition, we plan to identify a second medical device manufacturer.

We intend to continue additional research studies with our technology at Mayo Clinic. On November 20, 2019, we entered into licensing agreements with Mayo Clinic under newly reached terms to establish a new product pipeline to complement the PURE EP System and develop solutions for novel ways to treat autonomic nervous system disease. The new research and development pipeline contemplated pursuant to these agreements includes hardware, software, and algorithmic solutions to be integrated into the PURE EP platform technology.

On January 2, 2021 we entered into a research agreement with Mayo Clinic regarding a new AI research Program for our Novel Signal Recording System. The program is a strategic collaboration with Mayo to develop a next-generation AI- and machine learning-powered software for our PURE EP™ System. The new collaboration includes an R&D program that will expand our proprietary hardware and software with advanced signal processing capabilities and aim to develop novel technological solutions by combining the electrophysiological signals delivered by PURE EP™ and other data sources. The development program is under the leadership of Samuel J. Asirvatham, M.D., Mayo Clinic’s Vice-Chair of Innovation and Medical Director, Electrophysiology Laboratory, and Alexander D. Wissner-Gross, Ph.D., Managing Director of Reified LLC.

Competition

We are marketing the PURE EP System as an additional information system for the EP lab. In general, the EP market is characterized by intense competition. There are currently four large companies that share the majority of the EP recording market share in the US. They produce the following electrophysiology recording systems, with an average selling price of approximately $160,000 (source: DRG Medtech 360 Millennium report on EP Devices, issued in June 2019):

Based upon our analysis of data taken from patent applications filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and 510(k) approval applications filed with the FDA, and various publications, we believe that the above recording systems are built on relatively old technologies and all use similar approach in applying hardware and digital filters to remove noise and artifacts. We reasonably believe that such an approach sacrifices cardiac signal fidelity, and in the case of ablation, has a direct impact on the ablation strategy of an electrophysiologist. The method to remove noise and artifacts used by the conventional recorders could be a contributing factor to the multiple (or repeated) ablation procedures that are frequently required in order to completely cure patients from complex arrhythmias. We are not currently aware of any other companies that are developing similar recording technologies for electrophysiology laboratories.

Customers

In December 2020, we announced that three units were contracted for purchase by St David’s Healthcare of Austin, Texas and subsequently sold in February 2021, which was our first commercial contract. We are in active discussions with numerous additional accounts about the acquisition of the PURE EP System. We anticipate our customers will be medical centers of excellence and other healthcare facilities that operate EP labs.

Suppliers

The PURE EP System contains proprietary hardware and software modules that are assembled into the system. Hardware boards contain components that are available from different distributors. The parts used to manufacture analog and digital boards are readily available from several distributors or manufacturers. Presently, Minnetronix Medical in St Paul, Minnesota is manufacturing the complete PURE EP System, and we are evaluating a second medical device manufacturer. 

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 were $18,135,862 and $9,738,819, respectively.

ViralClear Business Overview

ViralClear Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

ViralClear Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“ViralClear”) is a majority-owned subsidiary of the Company originally known as NeuroClear Technologies, Inc. This subsidiary was established in November 2018 to pursue additional applications of the PURE EP™ signal processing technology outside of cardiac electrophysiology. In March 2020, NeuroClear Technologies, Inc. was renamed ViralClear and repurposed to develop merimepodib, a broad-spectrum anti-viral agent that showed potential for the treatment COVID-19.

The Company commenced FDA-approved clinical trials in Q2 2020 for the development of merimepodib for the treatment of COVID-19. In May 2020, the FDA cleared the Investigational New Drug Application that enabled the Company to proceed its proposed Phase 2 study of merimepodib oral solution in adults with COVID-19 who were hospitalized and either required supplemental oxygen or were on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices.

On October 26, 2020, the Company announced the halting of its signal finding Phase 2 trial, “A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Merimepodib in Combination with Intravenous Remdesivir in Adult Patients with Advanced Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).” After the implementation of a protocol amendment that expanded the size of the trial from 40 to 80 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, and that limited enrollment to seriously ill patients, (NIAID Grade 3, who required high flow, high concentration oxygen to maintain adequate oxygenation) the Safety Monitoring Committee (SMC) was unblinded for safety reasons since these patients are at higher risk for dying from their disease.

At the time of the last review of the data by the SMC, 44 patients had been enrolled in the trial of whom 42 had received study drug (either merimepodib solution or matching placebo). This last review of the data documented all 22 Grade 4 patients were discharged from the hospital and did not relapse during the 37 day follow-up period.  However, patients who were NIAID Grade 3 patients (n = 20) at the time of enrollment had markedly different outcomes. Specifically, the unblinded SMC detected an imbalance in survival rates in these NIAID Grade 3 patients between the placebo and merimepodib making it unlikely that the trial would meet its primary safety endpoints. We had therefore elected to stop enrollment into the clinical trial. Patients were followed as per the protocol for safety monitoring; however, no further study drug treatments would be administered. We no longer intend to further develop merimepodib. However, the Company will see if other parties are interested in acquiring or licensing merimepodib.

In late 2020, we realigned ViralClear with the original objective of pursuing additional applications of the PURE EP™ signal processing technology outside of cardiac electrophysiology, and we intend to return this subsidiary to its former name, NeuroClear Technologies, Inc. We own 70.2% of ViralClear’s outstanding shares of common stock as of March 12, 2021.

The Company incurred costs in connection with the winddown of the Phase II trial and the associated regulatory reporting in the final quarter of 2020 and may incur additional costs in 2021.   

On March 5, 2021, we announced that the U.S. Patent Office had allowed a utility patent which has been exclusively licensed from the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. The patent application number 16/805,017 entitled, "Systems and Methods for Electroporation" was filed on February 28, 2020. The patent describes and claims methods and materials for improving the treatment of hypertension via electroporation of nerves in the renal area. Electroporation is an emerging technique that has demonstrated efficacy in treatments for several critical conditions and is currently being evaluated for the treatments of autonomic nervous disorders, including hyper- and hypotension / syncope.

NeuroClear Business Overview

On July 2, 2020, the Company formed an additional subsidiary, NeuroClear Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation, to pursue additional applications of the PURE EP™ signal processing technology outside of electrophysiology. We own 100% of the outstanding shares of common stock as of March 12, 2021. We plan to rename this additional subsidiary and repurpose for future endeavors, and we intend to return ViralClear to its former name, NeuroClear Technologies, Inc. (referred to herein as “NeuroClear”).

NeuroClear is an early stage medical device company that is developing N-SENSE™, a novel sensing technology platform for high-speed electroneurogram (ENG) recordings. The specifications for this new product were based on the core competencies of the PURE EP™ signal processing technology, such as broad dynamic range of recorded signals and low signal-to-noise ratio, and adapted to address disorders of the autonomic nervous systems through recordings and analysis of action potentials, the impulses along the membrane of a muscle cell or a nerve cell. These impulses are considered to carry valuable clinical information but may be difficult to detect through conventional recording platforms.

NeuroClear aims to address what we believe to be the two main challenges of bioelectronic medicine devices: achieving accurate and targeted stimulation of specific nerves in a nerve bundle and implementing an effective feedback loop that can self-adjust for the optimal amount and timing of stimulation. We believe that advancements in overcoming these challenges will improve the safety and efficacy of current treatments and contribute to the developments of new therapy lines.

On December 18, 2020, NeuroClear signed a research agreement with the University of Minnesota launching a program to develop novel therapies to treat sympathetic nervous system disease. The program studies are expected to form a foundation for developing a new platform technology to address disorders of the autonomic nervous system. NeuroClear intends to develop new intellectual properties and products, including new hardware, software, and algorithmic solutions, with the support of Plexus a tier 1 US-based manufacturing partner and take it through FDA approval, manufacturing, and commercialization. The R&D program is led by Richard W. Bianco, Ph.D., Professor, Director of Experimental Surgical Services (ESS), Department of Surgery in the University of Minnesota Medical School, John W. Osborn, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Surgery and Director of the Minnesota Consortium for Autonomic Neuromodulation (MCAN) in the University of Minnesota Medical School and Barry Keenan, Ph.D., Vice President of Engineering at NeuroClear.

On February 10, 2021, the Company conducted its first preclinical experiment at the University of Minnesota.

NeuroClear has partnered with a tier 1 manufacturing partner to design, develop, and manufacture N-SENSE™, a novel sensing and stimulation platform technology.

NeuroClear will focus on improving therapies through clearer ENG recordings – methods used to visualize directly recorded electrical activities of neurons in the central nervous system (brain, spinal cord) and/or the peripheral nervous system (nerves, ganglions). ENGs are usually obtained by placing an electrode directly in the neural tissue. ENGs consist of small, high frequency, low amplitude signals, which have been proven hard to detect with conventional signal recording systems.

NeuroClear’s business strategy is to utilize our core signal processing technology to develop superior ENG recording and processing systems and includes the following:

• Develop N-SENSE™, a novel nerve sensing and stimulation platform technology to be used in product candidates which qualify for a nerve mapping and stimulation treatments including, but not limited to, renal denervation, deep brain stimulation and vagus nerve stimulation.

• Pursue licensing opportunities and partnerships to leverage our expertise in high-fidelity signal processing for feedback loop systems for development of products for commercial success.

We believe that the following clinical areas may benefit the most through the advancements in achieving accurate and targeted stimulation and implementation of an effective self-adjusting feedback loop:

• Renal denervation (“RDN”): RDN has been shown to reduce blood pressure and can be an effective treatment for resistant hypertension sufferers who have failed drug therapy. The technique has proven to be effective, but clinical endpoints are still suboptimal. RDN device market is expected to reach $7B by 2027 (CAGR 23.7%).¹

¹Source:  iHealthcareAnalyst, Inc.  Feb. 2020

• Deep Brain Stimulation (“DBS”): DBS is a treatment that involves implanting electrodes (leads) within certain areas of the brain to deliver electrical pulses, which has demonstrated improvements in the treatment of movement disorders, such as the Parkinson’s disease, tremors and dystonia.

NeuroClear may seek additional research collaborations with other academic centers active in one or more fields of clinical interests described above.

Industry and Market Overview

The global neurostimulation devices market is predicted to grow at 15.23% CAGR during the forecast period with the market size reaching $18.667 billion by 2025 from $7.974 billion in 2019. North America is dominating the neurostimulation devices market with highest market share due to robust healthcare infrastructure, growing R&D activity and presence of major healthcare players. The neurostimulation market is primarily driven by deep brain and spinal cord stimulation. The overall neurostimulation market is expected to grow due to societal factors such as an increase in the geriatric population, as well as the associated increase in the prevalence of chronic diseases.

The segment of the neurostimulation market for central nervous system (CNS), which include nVNS and DBS, is projected to exceed $14.5 billion in 2029 from a market value of $5 billion in 2019.²

Non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation

We believe there is a significant opportunity for nVNS based on the potential market size for the treatments for the diseases that nVNS may be applicable. Currently, approximately 1,500 million people worldwide suffer from chronic pain while 1,100 million people worldwide suffer from migraines.

Most of the currently available VNS products have achieved limited commercial success to date. LivaNova currently sells VNS devices that operate in 3 modes, including a non-rechargeable implantable pulse generator (IPG), SenTiva, which uses a limited closed-loop technology and comes with a wrist-worn magnet and a wireless programming wand. Cerbomed has commercialized a transcutaneous auricular VNS device, NEMOS, which consists of a handheld stimulation unit and an ear electrode worn as an earphone. Cerbomed received the European clearance (CE mark) for the VNS treatment of epilepsies and depression in 2010 and for the treatment of pain in 2012. NEMOS has been commercially available in Germany and Austria since 2013 and has expanded to Great Britain, France, and Spain.

The VNS patent domain is currently dominated by U.S. companies such as Medtronic, LivaNova, and Boston Scientific. Medtronic holds certain patents in closed-loop DBS technology, Medtronic currently markets IPGs such as RestoreSensor SureScan MRI, which is indicted for spinal cord stimulation as an aid in the management of chronic, intractable pain of the trunk and/or limbs and which automatically adjusts stimulation based on the patient's needs and preferences in different body positions, and Activa PC, which is a deep brain stimulator, for investigational loop.

We believe that digital health wearable markets present potential opportunities for our technology. We plan to develop technology that can provide a signaling feedback loop designed to deliver appropriate stimulation to the vagus nerve through audio and to seek licensing opportunities with consumer electronic market players.

²Source: Bioelectronic Medicine  2019 – 2029. IDTechEx report, Dr. Nadia Tsao.

Deep Brain Stimulation:

Deep brain stimulator market is one of the fastest growing sectors in the neurostimulation market worldwide, growing at 9.3% annually and expected to reach $2.3 billion in worldwide market size by 2028. According to the World Health Organization, globally, 264 million people suffer from depression while 50 million people suffer from epilepsy. Parkinson’s disease and essential tremor are FDA-approved indications for DBS, and the deep brain stimulator market is largely dominated by Medtronic, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. These companies have been working on innovations in their electrodes to avoid stimulation of adjacent structures (electric field shaping) which are the root cause of unwanted side effects of DBS. The industry is working on decreasing the size of the implant of the DBS device, which may lead to a skull-mounted implant. Medtronic’s Activa systems consist of dual-channel or single channel IPGs. Abbott sells two devices known as the Infinity DBS IPG and Brio Rechargeable IPG. The Infinity DBS IPG is designated to manage movement disorders including Parkinson’s disease, essential tremor, and dystonia. It utilizes the Bluetooth technology to communicate with a controller and can receive updates through an application. The system allows for currents to be steered towards target areas while avoiding peripheral stimulation. The Brio Rechargeable IPG delivers constant currents to maintain the desired stimulation level. It has shown clinical efficacy in Parkinson’s disease and dystonia. Boston Scientific offers the Vercise directional lead in unison with their Neural Navigator systems ranging from 8 to 16 electrode leads and a directional system. Medtronic’s Percept PC Deep Brain Stimulation (“DBS”) system includes their BrainSense technology making it the first and only DBS neurostimulation system that has the ability to chronically capture and record brain signals while providing therapy to patients with neurologic disorders associated with Parkinson’s Disease (“PD”), among others.

According to the National Institute of Health, future technical innovation in deep brain stimulators will focus on improving the practicability the device, including extension of battery life, reduced size of the devices and development of a device for delivering more tailored and adaptive stimulation and the integration of wireless technology. Clinically, the main challenge will be meeting the needs of an ageing population worldwide and expanding indications for DBS to circuitopathies other than Parkinson’s disease, including depression and Alzheimer disease. Even within established indications such as Parkinson’s disease, key questions remain unanswered because biomarkers that predict clinical responses and aid in patient selection and stimulation parameter settings are still largely lacking.

We believe that our technology may help advance clinical response to DBS due to more precise stimulation and improve overall safety of the DBS procedures.

Intellectual Property

Patents

Our success depends in large part on our ability to establish and maintain the proprietary nature of our technology. We filed a patent application with the USPTO in December 2013, “Systems and Methods for the Evaluation of Electrophysiology Systems.” In December 2014, we filed this patent application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) with the U.S. Receiving Office. This patent application describes a system that can show comparative output of any two cardiac signal systems—such as the PURE EP System as compared to a competitor system. We received notice of allowance on June 5, 2019 and on October 29, 2019, U.S. Patent No. 10,456,057 was issued.

In November 2017, we engaged 3LP Advisors LLC, now Sherpa Technology Group LLC as our intellectual property advisor. We have also retained Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C., a patent firm based in Washington DC, to help develop and execute a strategy for the development of our patent portfolio.  On May 9, 2018 we filed one “omnibus” hardware and software patent application with multiple claim sets, and several multiple feature-set graphical user interface (“GUI”) design patents. The omnibus patent application covers the core hardware and software technology associated with our PURE EP System, which technology includes a cardiac signal system that reads cardiac signals and filters such cardiac signals from noise such as non-cardiac signals or other body-generated artifacts. We also filed a second omnibus application in May 2019 capturing innovations in software with Samuel J. Asirvatham, M.D., Mayo Clinic’s Vice-Chair of Innovation and Medical Director, Electrophysiology Laboratory, as an inventor. Mayo Clinic’s interest in this jointly owned patent application is exclusively licensed to us for all applications.

Our owned patent portfolio now includes nine allowed/issued patents. Sixteen additional worldwide utility patent applications are pending covering various aspects of our PURE EP System for recording, measuring, calculating and displaying of electrocardiograms during cardiac ablation procedures. We also have two pending U.S. patent applications directed to artificial intelligence (AI). We also have 24 allowed/issued worldwide design patents, which cover various features of our display screens and graphical user interface for enhanced visualization of biomedical signals. Finally, we have licenses to 15 additional worldwide utility patent applications from Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research that are pending. These 15 applications are generally directed to electroporation and stimulation.

BioSig and ViralClear signed three patent and know-how license agreements with Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research in November 2019.  Under the terms of the such agreements, BioSig exclusively licensed additional patents and applications of the Mayo Clinic related to novel ways for ablation therapy and to treat autonomic nervous system disease including hardware, software and algorithmic solutions to be integrated into the PURE EP platform technology. BioSig intends to take the licensed intellectual properties and products, which have been developed by Mayo Clinic over the last decade, through FDA approval, manufacturing, and commercialization. The development program is run under the leadership of Dr. Asirvatham. On March 5, 2021, we announced that the U.S. Patent Office had allowed a utility patent that ViralClear has exclusively licensed from the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. The patent application number 16/805,017 entitled, "Systems and Methods for Electroporation" was filed on February 28, 2020. The patent describes and claims methods and materials for improving the treatment of hypertension via electroporation of nerves in the renal area. Electroporation is an emerging technique that has demonstrated efficacy in treatments for several critical conditions and is currently being evaluated for the treatments of autonomic nervous disorders, including hyper- and hypotension / syncope.

Trademarks

Our trademark for “BIOSIG TECHNOLOGIES” was registered on April 25, 2017. Our trademark for “PURE EP” was registered on January 26, 2016. Our trademark for the standard mark, “BIOSIG” was registered January 1, 2019, and our stylized/design trademark mark for the BioSig Technologies’ logo was registered February 12, 2019.

On October 7, 2019, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “SEE MORE, CLEARLY.”

On April 22, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “DECIBEL.”

On September 20, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “SMARTFINDER.”

On September 20, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “COMBIO.”

On October 22, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “WCT+.”

On October 22, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “ACCUVIZ.”

On November 5, 2018, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “NEUROCLEAR”, and on January 29, 2019, NeuroClear filed a stylized/design trademark application for the NeuroClear logo.

On October 4, 2019, we filed a stylized/design trademark application for “ALLIANCE FOR ADVANCING BIOELECTRONIC MEDICINE.”

On May 26, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “N-SENSE.”

On May 26, 2020, we filed a standard mark trademark application for “N-SENSE TECHNOLOGIES.”

Government Regulation

The U.S. government regulates healthcare and related products through various agencies, including but not limited to the following: (i) the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which enforces the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and related laws; (ii) the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), which administers the Medicare and Medicaid programs; (iii) the Office of Inspector General (OIG), which enforces various laws aimed at curtailing fraudulent or abusive practices, including by way of example, the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Physician Self-Referral Law, commonly referred to as the Stark law, the Civil Monetary Penalty Law (including the beneficiary inducement prohibition) (CMP), and the laws that authorize the OIG to exclude healthcare providers and others from participating in federal healthcare programs; and (iv) the Office of Civil Rights (OCR), which administers the privacy aspects of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). All of the aforementioned are agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Healthcare is also provided or regulated, as the case may be, by the Department of Defense through its TRICARE program, the Department of Veterans Affairs, especially through the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, the Public Health Service within HHS under Public Health Service Act § 340B (42 U.S.C. § 256b), the Department of Justice through the Federal False Claims Act and various criminal statutes, and state governments under the Medicaid and other state sponsored or funded programs. Various states also have state laws equivalent to certain healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including but not limited to state equivalents of the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Stark law, as well as more general state laws regulating all healthcare activities and certain healthcare products, including medical devices.

In addition to being regulated by the FDA, advertising and promotion of certain types of medical devices in the United States is also regulated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and by state regulatory and enforcement authorities. Recently, promotional activities for FDA-regulated products of other companies have been the subject of enforcement action brought under healthcare laws and consumer protection statutes. Further, competitors can initiate litigation relating to advertising claims under the federal Lanham Act and similar state laws.

FDA Regulation

Our solutions include software and hardware which will be used for patient diagnosis and, accordingly, are subject to regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies.  FDA regulations govern, among other things, the following activities that we perform and will continue to perform in connection with:

FDA Pre-market Clearance and Approval Processes

The FDA classifies all medical devices into one of three classes based on the risks associated with the medical device and the controls deemed necessary to reasonably ensure the device’s safety and effectiveness. Those three classes are:

Unless it is exempt from premarket review requirements, a medical device must receive marketing authorization from the FDA prior to being commercially marketed, distributed, or sold in interstate commerce in the United States. The most common pathways for obtaining marketing authorizations are 510(k) and PMA. With the enactment of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), the de novo pathway was made available for certain low-to-moderate risk devices that do not qualify for 510(k) clearance due to the absence of a predicate device.

510(k) Clearance Process

The 510(k) review process compares a new device to an existing legally marketed device (or, “predicate device”). “Substantial equivalence” means that the proposed new device: (i) has the same intended use as the predicate device; (ii) has the same or similar technological characteristics as the predicate device; (iii) is as safe and effective as the predicate device, as shown by the supporting information submitted within the 510(k); and (iv) does not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness than the predicate device.

To obtain 510(k) clearance, one must submit a 510(k) containing sufficient information and data to demonstrate that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device. This data generally includes non-clinical performance testing (e.g., software validation, bench testing electrical safety testing), but may also include clinical data. Typically, it takes approximately three-to-six months for the FDA to complete its review of a 510(k) submission; however, it can take significantly longer and not all 510(k) submissions are accepted by the FDA for review, and not all are cleared following FDA review. During its review of a 510(k), the FDA may request additional information, including clinical data, which may significantly prolong the review process. After completing its review of a 510(k), the FDA may issue an order, in the form of a letter (i) finding the proposed device to be substantially equivalent to the predicate device and stating that the device can be marketed in the U.S., or (ii) finding the proposed device not substantially equivalent to the predicate device and stating that device cannot be marketed in the U.S. We received 510(k) clearance for the PURE EP™ System on August 8, 2018.

After a device receives 510(k) clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or could require a pre-market approval, which requires more data and is generally a significantly longer process than the 510(k) clearance process.  The FDA requires each manufacturer to make this determination initially, but the FDA can review any such decision and can disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination, it can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until 510(k) clearance or a pre-market approval is obtained.

A device that reaches market through the 510(k) process is not considered to be “approved” by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. They are generally referred to as “cleared” or “510(k) cleared” devices.  Nevertheless, it can be marketed and sold in the U.S.

The Premarket Approval Pathway

The PMA process is the most stringent type of device marketing application required by the FDA. Whether PMA is granted is based on a determination by the FDA that the PMA application contains sufficient valid scientific evidence to ensure that the device is safe and effective for its intended use(s). A PMA application generally includes extensive information about the device including the results of clinical testing conducted on the device and a detailed description of the manufacturing process.

After a PMA application is accepted for review, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the submitted information. FDA regulations provide 180 days to review the PMA application and make a determination; however, in practice, the review time is typically longer (e.g., 1-3 years). During this review period, the FDA may request additional information or clarification of information already provided. Also, during the review period, an advisory panel of experts from outside the FDA may be convened to review and evaluate the data supporting the application and provide recommendations as to whether the data provide a reasonable assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended use. In addition, the FDA generally will conduct a preapproval inspection of the manufacturing facility to ensure compliance with the quality system regulation (QSR), which imposes comprehensive development, testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements for the design and manufacturing of a medical device.

Based on its review, the FDA may (i) issue an order approving the PMA, (ii) issue a letter stating the PMA is “approvable” (e.g., minor additional information is needed), (iii) issue a letter stating the PMA is “not approvable,” or (iv) issue an order denying PMA. A company may not market a device subject to PMA review until the FDA issues an order approving the PMA application. As a condition to approval, the FDA may impose post-approval requirements intended to ensure the continued safety and effectiveness of the device including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution, and requiring the collection of additional clinical data. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in materially adverse enforcement action, including withdrawal of the approval.

Most modifications to a PMA approved device, including changes to the design, labeling, or manufacturing process, require prior approval before being implemented. Prior approval is obtained through submission of a PMA supplement. The type of information required to support a PMA supplement and the FDA’s time for review of a PMA supplement vary depending on the nature of the modification.

We obtained FDA clearance related to the PURE EP System via the 510(k) process in 2018 and we do not anticipate a PMA for it or other devices at this time.

Pervasive and continuing FDA regulation

After a medical device is placed on the market, numerous FDA regulatory requirements apply, including, but not limited to, the following:

Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA, which may include one or more of the following sanctions:

We are subject to unannounced device inspections by the FDA, as well as other regulatory agencies overseeing the implementation of, and compliance with, applicable state public health regulations. These inspections may include our suppliers’ facilities.

U.S. Healthcare Laws and Regulations

In the United States, there are various healthcare fraud and abuse laws that apply to medical device manufacturers, such as us, with respect to our financial relationships with hospitals, physicians, patients, marketers and sales agents, and other potential purchasers or acquirers of our products or those who are in a position to refer or recommend our products. Federal and state anti-kickback laws prohibit the payment or receipt of kickbacks, bribes or other remuneration intended to induce the purchase or recommendation of healthcare products and services. The U.S. government has published regulations that identify exemptions or “safe harbors,” which describe various payment and business practices that, although they potentially implicate the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, are not treated as offenses under the statute, and thereby, protected from enforcement actions under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. To qualify, the activity must fit squarely within the safe harbor. Arrangements that do not meet a safe harbor are not necessarily illegal but will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and the federal safe harbors may not apply to state anti-kickback laws. Other provisions of state and federal law impose civil and criminal penalties for presenting, or causing to be presented, to third-party payors (including the government) for reimbursement claims that are false or fraudulent, or for items or services that were not provided as claimed. False claims allegations under federal, and some state, laws may be brought on behalf of the government by private persons, or “whistleblowers,” who could then receive a share of any recovery. In addition, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) imposes criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. The Physician Self-Referral Law, commonly referred to as the Stark law, is a strict liability statute that prohibits physicians from referring patients to receive certain services defined as “designated health services” payable by Medicare or Medicaid from entities with which the physician or an immediate family member has a financial relationship, unless a specific exception applies. Violations of these laws can lead to civil and criminal penalties, including but not limited to punitive sanctions, damage assessments, money penalties, imprisonment, denial of payment, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs, or some combination thereof.

International Regulation

International sales of medical devices are subject to foreign government regulations, which vary substantially from country to country. The time required to obtain approval by a foreign country may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval, and the requirements may differ significantly.

The European Union has adopted legislation, in the form of directives to be implemented in each member state, concerning the regulation of medical devices within the European Union. The directives include, among others, the Medical Device Directive that establishes standards for regulating the design, manufacture, clinical trials, labeling, and vigilance reporting for medical devices. Our PURE EP system may be affected by this legislation. Under the European Union Medical Device Directive, medical devices are classified into four classes, I, IIa, IIb, and III, with class I being the lowest risk and class III being the highest risk. Under the Medical Device Directive, a competent authority is nominated by the government of each member state to monitor and ensure compliance with the Medical Device Directive. The competent authority of each member state then designates a notified body to oversee the conformity assessment procedures set forth in the Medical Device Directive, whereby manufacturers demonstrate that their devices comply with the requirements of the Medical Device Directive and are entitled to bear the CE mark. CE is an abbreviation for Conformité Européenne (or European Conformity) and the CE mark, when placed on a product, indicates compliance with the requirements of the applicable directive. Medical devices properly bearing the CE mark may be commercially distributed throughout the European Union. Failure to obtain the CE mark will preclude us from selling the PURE EP System and related products in the European Union.

Employees

As of March 12, 2021, we had 49 full-time employees. Additionally, we use consultants as needed to perform various specialized services. None of our employees are represented under a collective bargaining agreement.

ITEM 1A – RISK FACTORS

RISK FACTORS

There are numerous and varied risks, known and unknown, that may prevent us from achieving our goals. You should carefully consider the risks described below and the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the consolidated financial statements and related notes. If any of the following risks, or any other risks not described below, actually occur, it is likely that our business, financial condition, and/or operating results could be materially adversely affected. The risks and uncertainties described below include forward-looking statements and our actual results may differ from those discussed in these forward-looking statements.

Risk Factor Summary

Below is a summary of the principal factors that make an investment in our common stock speculative or risky. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our other filings with the SEC before making investment decisions regarding our common stock.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Because we are an early commercialization stage company with one product in commercialization process, we expect to incur substantial additional operating losses.

We are an early commercialization stage company and we expect to incur substantial additional operating expenses over the next several years as our marketing, commercialization and customer development along with additional research and development increase for our PURE EP System and other product candidates. The amount of our future losses and when, if ever, we will achieve profitability are uncertain. Our products that have generated minimal commercial revenue, and, although we expect to generate revenues this year from the commercial sale of our PURE EP System, may not be able to generate sufficient revenues to fund our operating expenses, if any. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability will depend on, among other things, the following:

We might not succeed at all, or at any, of these undertakings. If we are unsuccessful at some or all of these undertakings, our business, prospects, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

Our PURE EP System and other product candidates are in continued development and may not be successfully developed or commercialized.

Although our main product candidate, the PURE EP System, received FDA 510(k) clearance from FDA, we are currently conducting clinical trials and may conduct additional clinical trials, which may require substantial further capital expenditure, to establish the safety and efficacy data needed to obtain acceptance by the medical community and coverage by third-party payors. The continued development of the PURE EP System, and/or any other product candidates we may develop, is dependent upon our ability to obtain sufficient additional financing. However, even if we are able to obtain the requisite financing to fund our development program, we cannot assure you that our current or future product candidates will be successfully developed or commercialized. Our failure to develop, manufacture, receive regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize any of our product candidates could result in the failure of our business and a loss of all of your investment in our company.

We expect to derive our revenue from sales of our PURE EP System and other products we may develop. If we fail to generate revenue from these sources, our results of operations and the value of our business will be materially and adversely affected.

As of December 31, 2020, our cash and cash equivalents were approximately $28.3 million. Based on our currently expected level of operating expenditures, we expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operations through at least the next 14 months, or May 2022. We expect our revenue to be generated from sales of our PURE EP System, for which we made first commercial sale in February 2021, and other products we may develop. Future sales of these products, if any, will be subject to, among other things, commercial and market uncertainties that may be outside our control. If we fail to generate our intended revenues from these products, our results of operations and the value of our business and securities would be materially and adversely affected.

We may need to finance our future cash needs through public or private equity offerings, debt financings or corporate collaboration and licensing arrangements. Any additional funds that we obtain may not be on terms favorable to us or our stockholders and may require us to relinquish valuable rights.

Until PURE EP System or another product of ours become commercially viable, we will have to fund all of our operations and capital expenditures from cash on hand, public or private equity offerings, debt financings, bank credit facilities or corporate collaboration and licensing arrangements. We believe that our existing cash on hand will be sufficient to enable us to fund our projected operating requirements for approximately one year and a day. However, we may need to raise additional funds more quickly if one or more of our assumptions prove to be incorrect or if we choose to expand our product development efforts more rapidly than we presently anticipate. We also may decide to raise additional funds before we require them if we are presented with favorable terms for raising capital.

If we seek to sell additional equity or debt securities, obtain a bank credit facility or enter into a corporate collaboration or licensing arrangement, we may not obtain favorable terms for us and/or our stockholders or be able to raise any capital at all, all of which could result in a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. The sale of additional equity or debt securities, if convertible, could result in dilution to our stockholders. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed obligations and could also result in covenants that would restrict our operations. Raising additional funds through collaboration or licensing arrangements with third parties may require us to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates, or to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us or our stockholders. In addition, we could be forced to discontinue product development, reduce or forego sales and marketing efforts and forego attractive business opportunities, all of which could have an adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

We may be unable to develop our existing or future technology.

Our product, the PURE EP System, may not deliver the levels of accuracy and reliability needed to make it a successful product in the marketplace, and the development of such accuracy and reliability may be indefinitely delayed or may never be achieved.  In addition, we may experience delays in the development of our technology for other reasons, including failure to obtain necessary funding and failure to obtain all necessary regulatory approvals.  Failure to develop this or other technology could have an adverse material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

We may experience delays in any phase of the preclinical or clinical development of a product, including during its research and development.

We may experience delays in any phase of the preclinical or clinical development of a product, including during its research and development. The completion of any of these studies may be delayed or halted for numerous reasons, including, but not limited to, the following:

If the preclinical and clinical studies that we are required to conduct to gain regulatory approval are delayed or unsuccessful, we may not be able to market any product that we develop in the future. Preclinical studies and clinical trials are expensive and difficult to design and implement and any delays or prolongment in our preclinical and clinical studies will require additional capital. There is no assurance that we will be able to acquire additional capital to support our studies. The failure to obtain additional capital would have a material adverse effect on the Company.

We have not completed a clinical trial of our product. The results of additional clinical studies may not support the usefulness of our technology.

In November 2019, we commenced our first clinical study with PURE EP System, and, to date, we have not completed a clinical trial of our product. Conducting clinical trials is a long, expensive, and uncertain process that is subject to delays and failure at any stage. Clinical trials can take months or years. The commencement or completion of any of our clinical trials may be delayed or halted for numerous reasons, including:

Results of pre-clinical studies do not necessarily predict future clinical trial results and previous clinical trial results may not be repeated in subsequent clinical trials. We may experience delays, cost overruns and project terminations despite achieving promising results in pre-clinical testing or early clinical testing. In addition, the data obtained from clinical trials may be inadequate to support a device’s approval or clearance, or to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the extent required to obtain third-party coverage and/or reimbursement. The FDA may disagree with our interpretation of the data from our clinical trials, or may find the clinical trial design, conduct, or results inadequate to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the product candidate. The FDA may also require additional pre-clinical studies or clinical trials that could further delay clearance or approval of any product candidates we may develop in the future and/or the PURE EP System to the extent we seek clearance/approval for different indications than that for which it is currently cleared. If we are unsuccessful in receiving FDA clearance approval of a future product candidate, or a product’s clearance or approval is withdrawn, we would not be able to commercialize the product(s) in the U.S., which could seriously harm our business. Moreover, we face similar risks in other jurisdictions in which we may sell or propose to sell our products.

The medical device industry is subject to stringent regulation and failure to obtain regulatory approval will prevent commercialization of our products.

Medical devices are subject to extensive and rigorous regulation by the FDA pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, by comparable agencies in foreign countries and by other regulatory agencies and governing bodies. Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and associated regulations, manufacturers of medical devices must comply with certain regulations that cover the composition, labeling, testing, clinical study, manufacturing, packaging and distribution of medical devices. In addition, medical devices must receive FDA clearance or approval before they can be commercially marketed in the U.S., and the FDA may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the effects of approved products that have been commercialized and can prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of these post-market evaluation programs. The process of obtaining marketing clearance or approval from the FDA for new products could take a significant period of time, require the expenditure of substantial resources, involve rigorous pre-clinical and clinical testing, require changes to the products and result in limitations on the indicated uses of the product.  In addition, if we seek regulatory approval in non-U.S. markets, we will be subject to further regulatory approvals that may require additional costs and resources.  There is no assurance that we will obtain necessary regulatory approvals in a timely manner, or at all.

To obtain 510(k) clearance for a medical device, a pre-market notification must be submitted to the FDA demonstrating that the device is “substantially equivalent” to a previously cleared “predicate” device. A new device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device “at least as safe and effective” as the predicate. The FDA considers a device substantially equivalent to a predicate if it has the same intended use as the predicate and has either: (i) the same technological characteristics as the predicate or (ii) different technological characteristics from the predicate, but the information submitted to the FDA does not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness or demonstrates that the device is at least as safe and effective as the predicate.

We received 510(k) clearance to market our current lead product, the PURE EP System in the U.S. However, if we intend to market the PURE EP System for additional medical uses or indications, we may need to submit additional 510(k) applications to the FDA that are supported by satisfactory clinical trial results specifically for the additional indication. Clinical trials necessary to support 510(k) clearance or PMA approval for any future product candidates, or any new indications for use for our PURE EP System, would be expensive and could require the enrollment of large numbers of suitable patients who could be difficult to identify and recruit. Delays or failures in any necessary clinical trials could prevent us from commercializing any modified product or new product candidate and could adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

The results of our initial clinical trials may not provide sufficient evidence to allow the FDA to grant us such additional marketing clearances and even additional trials requested by the FDA may not result in our obtaining 510(k) marketing clearance for our product. The failure to obtain FDA marketing clearance for any additional indications for the PURE EP System or any other of our future products would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We, and our third-party manufacturer(s), are, and will be, subject to extensive regulation by the FDA.

In addition to the pre-market regulations, once a device is approved or cleared for the applicable indications for use, numerous FDA regulations apply, including but not limited to those relating to manufacturing, labeling, packaging, advertising, and record keeping. Notably, these regulations apply to us, as well as our contract manufacturer(s). Even if regulatory approval or clearance of a product is obtained, the approval or clearance may be subject to limitations on the uses for which the product may be marketed or contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product. Any such requirements could reduce our revenues, increase our expenses, and render the product not commercially viable.  If we fail to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements, or if previously unknown problems with any approved commercial products, manufacturers, or manufacturing processes are discovered, we could be subject to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions or other negative consequences, including:

Regulations are constantly changing, and in the future our business may be subject to additional regulations that increase our compliance costs.

We believe we understand the current laws and regulations to which our products will be subject in the future.  However, federal, state and foreign laws and regulations relating to the sale of our products are subject to future changes, as are administrative interpretations of regulatory agencies. If we fail to comply with such federal, state or foreign laws or regulations, we may fail to obtain regulatory approval for our products and, if we have already obtained regulatory approval, we could be subject to enforcement actions, including injunctions preventing us from conducting our business, withdrawal of clearances or approvals and civil and criminal penalties. In the event that federal, state, and foreign laws and regulations change, we may incur additional costs to seek government approvals, in addition to the clearance from the FDA in order to sell or market our products. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing regulatory requirements or the promulgation of new regulatory requirements or policies, we or our licensees may, following approval, lose marketing approval for our products which will impact our ability to conduct business in the future.

The market for our technology and revenue generation avenues for our products may be slow to develop, if at all.

The market for our products may be slower to develop or smaller than estimated or it may be more difficult to build the market than anticipated.  The medical community may resist our products or be slower to accept them than we anticipate.  Revenues from our products may be delayed or costs may be higher than anticipated which may result in our need for additional funding.  We anticipate that our principal route to market will be through commercial distribution partners.  These arrangements are generally non-exclusive and have no guaranteed sales volumes or commitments.  The partners may be slower to sell our products than anticipated.  Any financial, operational or regulatory risks that affect our partners could also affect the sales of our products.  In the current economic environment, hospitals and clinical purchasing budgets may exercise greater restraint with respect to purchases, which may result in purchasing decisions being delayed or denied.  If any of these situations were to occur this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

Our estimate of the size of our addressable market may prove to be inaccurate.

While our addressable market size estimate for the EP market was made in good faith and is based on assumptions and estimates we believe to be reasonable, this estimate may not be accurate. If our estimates of the size of our addressable market are not accurate, our potential for future growth may be less than we currently anticipate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

If we seek to market our products in foreign jurisdictions, we may need to obtain regulatory approval in these jurisdictions.

In order to market our products in the European Union and many other foreign jurisdictions, we may need to obtain separate regulatory approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. Approval procedures vary among countries (except with respect to the countries that are part of the European Economic Area) and can involve additional clinical testing. The time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. Should we decide to market our products abroad, we may fail to obtain foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority, including obtaining CE Mark approval, does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. We may be unable to file for, and may not receive, necessary regulatory approvals to commercialize our products in any foreign market, which could adversely affect our business prospects. In addition, a new Medical Device Regulation was published in 2017, which includes additional premarket and post-market requirements, as well as potential product reclassifications or more stringent commercialization requirements that could delay or otherwise adversely affect our clearances and approvals.

The EP market is highly competitive.

There are a number of groups and organizations, such as healthcare, medical device and software companies in the EP market that may develop a competitive offering to our products.  The largest companies in the EP market are GE, Johnson & Johnson, Boston Scientific, Siemens and Abbott.  All of these companies have significantly greater resources, experience and name recognition than we possess. There is no assurance that they will not attempt to develop similar or superior products, that they will not be successful in developing such products or that any products they may develop will not have a competitive advantage over our products. Moreover, our product may not be viewed as superior to existing technology or new technology from our competitors and as a result we may not be able to justify expected selling price our product, which may have a material adverse effect on market acceptance of our product. In addition, if we experience delayed regulatory approvals or disputed clinical claims, we may not have a commercial or clinical advantage over competitors’ products that we believe we currently possess.  Should a superior offering come to market, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

We rely on key officers, consultants and scientific and medical advisors, and their knowledge of our business and technical expertise would be difficult to replace.

We are highly dependent on our officers, consultants and scientific and medical advisors because of their expertise and experience in medical device development.  We do not have “key person” life insurance policies for any of our officers.  Moreover, if we are unable to obtain additional funding, we will be unable to meet our current and future compensation obligations to such employees and consultants. In light of the foregoing, we are at risk that one or more of our consultants or employees may leave our company for other opportunities where there is no concern about such employers fulfilling their compensation obligations, or for other reasons.  The loss of the technical knowledge and management and industry expertise of any of our key personnel could result in delays in product development, loss of customers and sales and diversion of management resources, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

We may fail to attract and retain qualified personnel.

We expect to rapidly expand our operations and grow our sales, research and development and administrative operations.  This expansion is expected to place a significant strain on our management and will require hiring a significant number of qualified personnel.  Accordingly, recruiting and retaining such personnel in the future will be critical to our success.  There is intense competition from other companies, research and academic institutions, government entities and other organizations for qualified personnel in the areas of our activities.  Many of these companies, institutions and organizations have greater resources than we do, along with more prestige associated with their names. If we fail to identify, attract, retain and motivate these highly skilled personnel, we may be unable to continue our marketing and development activities, and this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

If we do not effectively manage changes in our business, these changes could place a significant strain on our management and operations.

Our ability to grow successfully requires an effective planning and management process. The expansion and growth of our business could place a significant strain on our management systems, infrastructure and other resources. To manage our growth successfully, we must continue to improve and expand our systems and infrastructure in a timely and efficient manner. Our controls, systems, procedures and resources may not be adequate to support a changing and growing company. If our management fails to respond effectively to changes and growth in our business, including acquisitions, there could be a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

Our strategic business plan may not produce the intended growth in revenue and operating income.

Our strategies ultimately include making significant investments in sales and marketing programs to achieve revenue growth and margin improvement targets. If we do not achieve the expected benefits from these investments or otherwise fail to execute on our strategic initiatives, we may not achieve the growth improvement we are targeting and our results of operations may be adversely affected. We may also fail to secure the capital necessary to make these investments, which will hinder our growth.

In addition, as part of our strategy for growth, we may make acquisitions and enter into strategic alliances such as joint ventures and joint development agreements. However, we may not be able to identify suitable acquisition candidates, complete acquisitions or integrate acquisitions successfully, and our strategic alliances may not prove to be successful. In this regard, acquisitions involve numerous risks, including difficulties in the integration of the operations, technologies, services and products of the acquired companies and the diversion of management’s attention from other business concerns. Although we will endeavor to evaluate the risks inherent in any particular transaction, there can be no assurance that we will properly ascertain all such risks. In addition, acquisitions could result in the incurrence of substantial additional indebtedness and other expenses or in potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities. There can be no assurance that difficulties encountered with acquisitions will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We currently have limited sales, marketing or distribution operations and will need to expand our expertise in these areas.

We currently have limited sales, marketing or distribution operations. We have begun implementing a market development program and are in the process of building such operations in connection with the commercialization of PURE EP System, and we are expanding our expertise in sales, marketing and distribution operations for commercial growth. To increase internal sales, distribution and marketing expertise and be able to conduct these operations, we have begun to invest in and will have to invest significant amounts of financial and management resources. In developing these functions ourselves, we could face a number of risks, including:

Our product development program depends upon third-party researchers, including Mayo, who are outside our control and whose negative performance could materially hinder or delay our pre-clinical testing or clinical trials.

We do not have the ability to conduct all aspects of pre-clinical testing or clinical trials ourselves. We depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as commercial third-parties, government, universities and medical institutions, to conduct our pre-clinical and clinical trials under agreements with us. For our first clinical trial for the PURE EP System, titled “Novel Cardiac Signal Processing System for Electrophysiology Procedures (PURE EP 2.0 Study)” which commenced in November 2019, we rely on third parties, including TCARF and Mayo Clinic to conduct the patient cases. In addition, we are party to various license agreements with Mayo, pursuant to which we rely on research and development information, materials, technical data, unpatented inventions, trade secrets, know-how and supportive information of Mayo to develop, make, have made, use, offer for sale, sell, and import licensed products. These collaborators are not our employees and we cannot control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs.  These investigators may not assign as great a priority to our programs or pursue them as diligently as we would if we were undertaking such programs ourselves.  The failure of any of these outside collaborators to perform in an acceptable and timely manner in the future, including in accordance with any applicable regulatory requirements, such as good clinical and laboratory practices, or pre-clinical testing or clinical trial protocols, could cause a delay or otherwise adversely affect our pre-clinical testing or clinical trials, our success in obtaining regulatory approvals and, ultimately, the timely advancement of our development programs. In addition, these collaborators may also have relationships with other commercial entities, some of whom may compete with us.  If our collaborators assist our competitors at our expense, our competitive position would be harmed.

If healthcare providers are unable to obtain sufficient reimbursement or other financial incentives from third-party healthcare payers related to the use of our products, their adoption and our future product sales will be materially adversely affected.

Widespread adoption of the PURE EP System, and any other products we may develop in the future, by the medical community is unlikely to occur without a financial incentive from third-party payors for the use of these products. Third-party payors include but are not limited to governmental programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial health insurers and private payors, workers’ compensation programs, and other organizations. Currently, the PURE EP System does not receive separate reimbursement from any third-party payor. Instead, healthcare providers typically receive reimbursement for the procedure in which our product is used. Future regulatory action by CMS or other governmental agencies, or unfavorable clinical data, among other things, may impact coverage and/or reimbursement policies for procedures performed using our products. If healthcare providers are unable to obtain adequate coverage of, or reimbursement for, procedures performed using our products, or if managed care organizations do not receive improved capitated payments due to more accurate patient risk assessment using our products, we may be unable to sell our products at levels that are sufficient to allow us to achieve and maintain profitability, and our business would suffer significantly.

We may face risks associated with future litigation and claims.

We may, in the future, be involved in one or more lawsuits, claims or other proceedings. These suits could concern issues including contract disputes, employment actions, employee benefits, taxes, environmental, health and safety, personal injury and product liability matters. Due to the uncertainties of litigation, we can give no assurance that we will prevail on any claims made against us in any such lawsuit. Also, we can give no assurance that any other lawsuits or claims brought in the future will not have an adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity or operating results.

The risk that we may be sued on product liability claims is inherent in the development and commercialization of medical devices. Specifically, we believe we will be subject to product liability claims or product recalls, particularly in the event of false positive or false negative reports, because we plan to develop and manufacture medical diagnostic products. Once a product is approved for sale and commercialized, the likelihood of product liability lawsuits increases. Product liability claims could be asserted directly by consumers, health-care providers or others. We have obtained product liability insurance coverage; however such insurance may not provide full coverage for our current or future clinical trials, products to be sold, and other aspects of our business. A product recall or a successful product liability claim or claims that exceed our planned insurance coverage could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and we may not be able to maintain current coverage, or expand our insurance coverage to include future clinical trials or the sale of new products or existing products in new territories, at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect against losses due to product liability or at all. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could result in judgments, fines, damages and liabilities that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In the event of an award against us during a time when we have no available insurance or insufficient insurance, we may sustain significant losses of our operating capital. We may incur significant expense investigating and defending these claims, even if they do not result in liability. Moreover, even if no judgments, fines, damages or liabilities are imposed on us, our reputation could suffer, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as impair our reputation in the medical and investment communities. 

Our business is subject to cybersecurity risks.

Our operations are increasingly dependent on information technologies and services. Threats to information technology systems associated with cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents or attacks continue to grow, and include, among other things, storms and natural disasters, terrorist attacks, utility outages, theft, viruses, phishing, malware, design defects, human error, and complications encountered as existing systems are maintained, repaired, replaced, or upgraded. Risks associated with these threats include, among other things:

Although we utilize various procedures and controls to mitigate our exposure to such risk, cybersecurity attacks and other cyber events are evolving and unpredictable. Moreover, we have no control over the information technology systems of our suppliers, and others with which our systems may connect and communicate. As a result, the occurrence of a cyber incident could go unnoticed for a period time.

We presently maintain insurance coverage to protect against cybersecurity risks. However, we cannot ensure that it will be sufficient to cover any particular losses we may experience as a result of such cyberattacks. Any cyber incident could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to U.S. federal and state healthcare laws, including fraud and abuse, false claims, and privacy laws and regulations. Prosecutions under such laws have increased in recent years and we may become subject to such litigation and enforcement. If we are unable to, or have not fully complied with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

We are subject, directly or indirectly, to various U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations. These laws include fraud and abuse laws, such as the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, federal False Claims Act, and federal Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing and education programs. In addition, we may be subject, directly or indirectly, to patient privacy regulations by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The healthcare laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to, the following. 

Additionally, we may be subject to state equivalents of each of the healthcare laws described above, among others, some of which may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of the payor. Many U.S. states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, some of which apply to the referral of patients for healthcare services reimbursed by any source, not just governmental payors, including private insurers. Several states impose marketing restrictions or require medical device companies to make marketing or price disclosures to the state. There are ambiguities as to what is required to comply with these state requirements, and if we fail to comply with an applicable state law requirement we could be subject to penalties. 

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our future business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, healthcare reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, the Affordable Care Act, among other things, amended the intent requirement of the federal Anti-Kickback and criminal healthcare fraud statutes. As a result of such amendment, a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of these statutes or specific intent to violate them in order to have committed a violation. Moreover, the Affordable Care Act provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act.

Violations of fraud and abuse laws may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, including penalties, fines and/or exclusion or suspension from federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and debarment from contracting with the U.S. government. In addition, private individuals have the ability to bring actions on behalf of the U.S. government under the False Claims Act as well as under the false claims laws of several states.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our existing or future business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. Any such actions instituted against us could have a significant adverse impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. Even if we are successful in defending against such actions, we may nonetheless be subject to substantial costs, reputational harm and adverse effects on our ability to operate our business. In addition, the approval and commercialization of any of our products outside the United States will also likely subject us to non-U.S. equivalents of the healthcare laws mentioned above, among other non-U.S. laws.

If any of our employees, agents, or the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we do business are found to have violated applicable laws, we may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs, or, if we are not subject to such actions, we may suffer reputational harm for conducting business with persons or entities found, or accused of being, in violation of such laws. Any such events could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

In addition, to the extent we commence commercial operations overseas, we will be subject to the federal Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other countries’ anti-corruption/anti-bribery regimes, such as the U.K. Bribery Act. The federal Foreign Corrupt Practices Act prohibits improper payments or offers of payments to foreign governments and their officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Safeguards we implement to discourage improper payments or offers of payments by our employees, consultants, sales agents or distributors may be ineffective, and violations of the federal Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar laws may result in severe criminal or civil sanctions, or other liabilities or proceedings against us, any of which would likely harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations.

We could be adversely affected if healthcare legislation or reform measures substantially change the market for medical care or healthcare coverage in the U.S., negatively affecting our business or revenue for PURE EP or future products.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, commonly referred to as the “Healthcare Reform Law,” includes a number of rules regarding health insurance, the provision of healthcare, conditions to reimbursement for healthcare services provided to Medicare and Medicaid patients, and other healthcare policy reforms. Through the law-making process, substantial changes have been and continue to be made to the current system for paying for healthcare in the U.S., including changes made to extend medical benefits to certain Americans who lacked insurance coverage and to contain or reduce healthcare costs (such as by reducing or conditioning reimbursement amounts for healthcare services and medical devices, and imposing additional taxes, fees, and rebate obligations on medical device companies). This legislation was one of the most comprehensive and significant reforms ever experienced by the U.S. in the healthcare industry and has significantly changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. This legislation has impacted the scope of healthcare insurance and incentives for consumers and insurance companies, among others. Additionally, the Healthcare Reform Law’s provisions were designed to encourage providers to find cost savings in their clinical operations. Medical devices represent a significant portion of the cost of providing care. This environment has caused changes in the purchasing habits of consumers and providers and resulted in specific attention to the pricing negotiation, product selection and utilization review surrounding medical devices. This attention may result in our products we may commercialize or promote, including our current commercial products, being chosen less frequently or the pricing being substantially lowered. At this stage, it is difficult to estimate the full extent of the direct or indirect impact of the Healthcare Reform Law on us.

These structural changes could entail further modifications to the existing system of private payors and government programs (such as Medicare, Medicaid, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program), creation of government-sponsored healthcare insurance sources, or some combination of both, as well as other changes. Restructuring the coverage of medical care in the U.S. could impact the reimbursement for medical devices, including our current commercial products, those we and our development or commercialization partners are currently developing or those that we may commercialize or promote in the future. If reimbursement for our approved medical devices, products we currently commercialize or promote, or any product we may commercialize or promote is substantially reduced or otherwise adversely affected in the future, or rebate obligations associated with them are substantially increased, it could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition or results of operations.

Extending medical benefits to those who currently lack coverage will likely result in substantial costs to the U.S. federal government, which may force significant additional changes to the healthcare system in the U.S. Much of the funding for expanded healthcare coverage may be sought through cost savings. While some of these savings may come from realizing greater efficiencies in delivering care, improving the effectiveness of preventive care and enhancing the overall quality of care, much of the cost savings may come from reducing the cost of care and increased enforcement activities. Cost of care could be reduced further by decreasing the level of reimbursement for medical services or products (including those products currently being developed by us or our development or commercialization partners or any product we may commercialize or promote, including our current commercial products), or by restricting coverage (and, thereby, utilization) of medical services or products. In either case, a reduction in the utilization of, or reimbursement for, any medical device or any product we may commercialize or promote, including our current commercial products, or for which we receive marketing approval in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition or results of operations.

Further, the healthcare regulatory environment has seen significant changes in recent years and is still in flux.  Legislative initiatives to modify, limit, replace, or repeal the Healthcare Reform Law and judicial challenges continue.  Congress has enacted legislation that repeals certain portions of the Healthcare Reform Law, including but not limited to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, passed in December 2017, which included a provision that eliminates the penalty under the Healthcare Reform Law’s individual mandate, effective January 1, 2019, as well as the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, passed in February 2018, which, among other things, repealed the Independent Payment Advisory Board (which was established by the Healthcare Reform Law and was intended to reduce the rate of growth in Medicare spending). Additionally, in December 2018, a district court in Texas held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and that the rest of the Healthcare Reform Law is, therefore, invalid. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the holding on the individual mandate but remanded the case back to the lower court to reassess whether and how such holding affects the validity of the rest of the Healthcare Reform Law. The Fifth Circuit’s holding has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and a decision on the case is pending. Substantial uncertainty remains as to the future of the Healthcare Reform Law. We cannot predict the impact on our business of future legislative and legal challenges to the Healthcare Reform Law or other changes to the current laws and regulations. However, it is possible that such initiatives could have an adverse effect on our ability to obtain approval and/or successfully commercialize products in the U.S. in the future. For example, any changes that reduce, or impede the ability of healthcare providers to obtain reimbursement for medical procedures in which the products we currently, or intend to, commercialize are used, or that reduce medical procedure volumes, could adversely affect our operations and/or future business plans. The financial impact of U.S. healthcare reform legislation over the next few years will depend on a number of factors, including the policies reflected in implementing regulations and guidance and changes in sales volumes for medical devices affected by the legislation. From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced and passed in the U.S. Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing coverage, reimbursement, pricing, and marketing of medical device products. In addition, third-party payor coverage and reimbursement policies are often revised or interpreted in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic may adversely affect our business.

In an effort to contain and mitigate the spread of COVID-19, many countries, including the United States, have imposed unprecedented restrictions on travel, quarantines, and other public health safety measures. Such government-imposed precautionary measures may have been relaxed in certain countries or states, but there is no assurance that more strict measures will be put in place again due to a resurgence in COVID-19 cases. The COVID-19 pandemic may adversely impact our business plan as our clinical studies may be delayed as hospitals in the impacted regions may shift their resources to patients affected by the disease. The rapidly evolving nature of the circumstances is such that it is impossible, at this stage, to determine the full and overall impact the COVID-19 pandemic may have, but it could disrupt production and cause delays in the supply and delivery of products used in our research and development efforts, adversely affect our employees, and disrupt our operations, all of which may have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, the pandemic may have an adverse effect on the ability of regulatory bodies to review submissions in a timely manner, grant approvals or supervise our candidates and products, and may further divert the attention and efforts of the medical community to coping with the coronavirus and disrupt the marketplace in which we operate and may have a material adverse effects on our operations. Patient enrollment in future clinical trials could be slowed, delayed, or suspended due to the pandemic as well.

Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has created significant economic uncertainty and volatility in the credit and capital markets. Management plans to secure the necessary financing through the issue of new equity and/or the entering into of strategic partnership arrangements; however, there is no assurance that our management will be able to obtain such financing on reasonable terms or at all. A continuation or worsening of the levels of market disruption and volatility seen in the recent past could have an adverse effect on our ability to access capital and on the market price of our common stock, and we may not be able to successfully raise capital through the sale of our securities. If we are unsuccessful in commercializing our products or raising capital, we may need to reduce activities, curtail or cease operations.

In addition, a significant resurgence of COVID-19 or other infectious diseases could result in a widespread health crisis that could adversely affect the economies and financial markets worldwide, resulting in an economic downturn that could impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a smaller reporting company, we are subject to scaled disclosure requirements that may make it more challenging for investors to analyze our results of operations and financial prospects.

Currently, we are a “smaller reporting company,” as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. As a “smaller reporting company,” we are able to provide simplified executive compensation disclosures in our filings and have certain other decreased disclosure obligations in our filings with the SEC, including being required to provide only two years of audited financial statements in annual reports. Consequently, it may be more challenging for investors to analyze our results of operations and financial prospects.

Furthermore, we are a non-accelerated filer as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act, and, as such, are not required to provide an auditor attestation of management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting, which is generally required for SEC reporting companies under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Because we are not required to, and have not, had our auditor’s provide an attestation of our management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting, a material weakness in internal controls may remain undetected for a longer period.

There are inherent limitations in all control systems, and misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

The ongoing internal control provisions of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 require us to identify material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting, which is a process to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, does not expect that our internal controls and disclosure controls will prevent all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. In addition, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and the benefit of controls must be relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, in our company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple errors or mistakes. Further, controls can be circumvented by individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more persons, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is also based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, a control may be inadequate because of changes in conditions, such as growth of the company or increased transaction volume, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

In addition, discovery and disclosure of a material weakness, by definition, could have a material adverse impact on our financial statements. Such an occurrence could discourage certain customers or suppliers from doing business with us and adversely affect how our stock trades. This could in turn negatively affect our ability to access equity markets for capital.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we do not obtain protection for our intellectual property rights, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our research and development efforts to develop competing products.

We intend to rely on a combination of patents, trade secrets, and nondisclosure and non-competition agreements to protect our proprietary intellectual property. Our owned patent portfolio now includes nine allowed/issued patents. Sixteen additional worldwide utility patent applications are pending covering various aspects of our PURE EPTM System for recording, measuring, calculating and displaying of electrocardiograms during cardiac ablation procedures. We also have two pending U.S. patent applications directed to artificial intelligence (AI). We also have 24 allowed/issued worldwide design patents, which cover various features of our display screens and graphical user interface for enhanced visualization of biomedical signals. Finally, we have licenses to 15 additional worldwide utility patent applications from Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research that are pending. These 15 applications are generally directed to electroporation and stimulation.  We plan to file additional patent applications in the U.S. and in other countries as we deem appropriate for our products.  Our applications have and will include claims intended to provide market exclusivity for certain commercial aspects of the products, including the methods of production, the methods of usage and the commercial packaging of the products. However, we cannot predict:

Our success also depends upon the skills, knowledge and experience of our scientific and technical personnel, our consultants and advisors as well as our licensors and contractors.  To help protect our proprietary know-how and our inventions for which patents may be unobtainable or difficult to obtain, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements.  To this end, it is our policy to require all of our employees, consultants, advisors and contractors to enter into agreements which prohibit the disclosure of confidential information and, where applicable, require disclosure and assignment to us of the ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions important to our business.  These agreements may not provide adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information in the event of any unauthorized use or disclosure or the lawful development by others of such information.  If any of our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information is disclosed, the value of our trade secrets, know-how and other proprietary rights would be significantly impaired and our business and competitive position would suffer.

Given the fact that we may pose a competitive threat, competitors, especially large and well-capitalized companies that own or control patents relating to electrophysiology recording systems, may successfully challenge our current and planned patent applications, produce similar products or products that do not infringe our future patents, or produce products in countries where we have not applied for patent protection or that do not respect our patents.

If any of these events occurs, or we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets or proprietary know-how, the value of our intellectual property may be greatly reduced.  Patent protection and other intellectual property protection are important to the success of our business and prospects, and there is a substantial risk that such protections will prove inadequate.

If we infringe upon the rights of third parties, we could be prevented from selling products and forced to pay damages and defend against litigation.

If our products, methods, processes and other technologies infringe the proprietary rights of other parties, we could incur substantial costs and we may be required to:

Any of these events could substantially harm our earnings, financial condition and operations.

We depend on our collaboration with Mayo Clinic for the research and development of additional advanced features of PURE EP™ System. If this collaboration is not successful, we may not be able to realize the market potential of such features, and may not have rights to use any such developed advanced features.

On March 15, 2017, we entered into a know-how license agreement with Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (“Mayo Clinic”), effective December 2, 2016, and as amended whereby we were granted an exclusive license, with the right to sublicense, certain know how and patent applications in the fields of signal processing, physiologic recording, electrophysiology recording, electrophysiology software and autonomics to develop, make and offer for sale.  The agreement expires ten years from the effective date.  In furtherance of this collaboration, we subsequently entered into four additional agreements whereby we were granted exclusive licenses, with the right to sublicense additional Mayo Clinic patents and know-how. Pursuant to these agreements, Mayo Clinic retains ownership of the licensed intellectual property and any developed intellectual property.  Mayo Clinic also retains the right to prosecute and enforce the developed intellectual property. If our agreements with Mayo Clinic terminate, our access to technology and intellectual property licensed to us by Mayo Clinic may be restricted or terminate entirely, which may delay our continued development of such advanced features utilizing the Mayo Clinic’s technology or intellectual property or require us to stop development of those product candidates completely.  Additional risks posed by this collaboration include:

Our collaboration with Mayo Clinic is made subject to the rights of the U.S. government to the extent that the technology covered by the licensed intellectual property was developed under a funding agreement between Mayo Clinic and the U.S. government. Additionally, to the extent there is any conflict between our agreements with Mayo Clinic and applicable laws or regulations, applicable laws and regulations will prevail. Some, and possibly all, of the developed intellectual property rights relating to our advanced features may have been developed in the course of research funded by the U.S. government. As a result, the U.S. government may have certain rights to intellectual property embodied in our current or future products pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Government rights in certain inventions developed under a government-funded program include a nonexclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right to require us, or an assignee or exclusive licensee to such inventions, to grant licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if the U.S. government determines that adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention, that government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs, that government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations, or that the right to use or sell such inventions is exclusively licensed to an entity within the U.S. and substantially manufactured outside the U.S. without the U.S. government’s prior approval. Additionally, we may be restricted from granting exclusive licenses for the right to use or sell our inventions created pursuant to such agreements unless the licensee agrees to additional restrictions (e.g., manufacturing substantially all of the invention in the U.S.). The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if we fail to disclose the invention to the government and fail to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. In addition, the U.S. government may acquire title in any country in which a patent application is not filed within specified time limits. Additionally, certain inventions are subject to transfer restrictions during the term of these agreements and for a period, thereafter, including sales of products or components, transfers to foreign subsidiaries for the purpose of the relevant agreements, and transfers to certain foreign third parties. If any of our intellectual property becomes subject to any of the rights or remedies available to the U.S. government or third parties pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, this could impair the value of our intellectual property and could adversely affect our business. The U.S. government has not exercised any of these rights or provided us with any notice of its intent to exercise any of these rights with respect to any of the intellectual property licensed to us by Mayo Clinic. We are not aware of any instance in which the U.S. government has ever exercised any such rights with respect to any technologies or other intellectual property developed under funding agreements with the U.S. government.

Risks Related to our Common Stock

The market price for our common stock may fluctuate significantly, which could result in substantial losses by our investors.

The stock market in general, and Nasdaq in particular, as well as biotechnology companies, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of small companies. The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as:

These factors and any corresponding price fluctuations may materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock and result in substantial losses by our investors.

Further, the stock market in general, and the market for technology companies in particular, has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations in the past. Continued market fluctuations could result in extreme volatility in the price of our common stock, which could cause a decline in the value of our common stock.

Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant financial market volatility and uncertainty in recent months. A continuation or worsening of the levels of market disruption and volatility seen in the recent past could have an adverse effect on our ability to access capital, on our business, results of operations and financial condition, and on the market price of our common stock.

Price volatility of our common stock might be worse if the trading volume of our common stock is low. In the past, following periods of market volatility, stockholders have often instituted securities class action litigation. If we were involved in securities litigation, it could have a substantial cost and divert resources and attention of management from our business, even if we are successful. Future sales of our common stock could also reduce the market price of such stock.

Moreover, the liquidity of our common stock is limited, not only in terms of the number of shares that can be bought and sold at a given price, but by delays in the timing of transactions and reduction in security analysts’ and the media’s coverage of us, if any. These factors may result in lower prices for our common stock than might otherwise be obtained and could also result in a larger spread between the bid and ask prices for our common stock. In addition, without a large float, our common stock is less liquid than the stock of companies with broader public ownership and, as a result, the trading prices of our common stock may be more volatile. In the absence of an active public trading market, an investor may be unable to liquidate its investment in our common stock. Trading of a relatively small volume of our common stock may have a greater impact on the trading price of our stock than would be the case if our public float were larger. We cannot predict the prices at which our common stock will trade in the future.

Although our shares of common stock are now listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market, we currently have a limited trading volume, which results in higher price volatility for, and reduced liquidity of, our common stock.

Although our shares of common stock are now listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “BSGM,” trading volume in our common stock has been limited and an active trading market for our shares of common stock may never develop or be maintained. The absence of an active trading market increases price volatility and reduces the liquidity of our common stock. As long as this condition continues, the sale of a significant number of shares of common stock at any particular time could be difficult to achieve at the market prices prevailing immediately before such shares are offered.

If we cannot continue to satisfy the continuing listing criteria of the Nasdaq Capital Market, the exchange may subsequently delist our common stock.

Nasdaq requires us to meet certain financial, public float, bid price and liquidity standards on an ongoing basis in order to continue the listing of our common stock. Generally, we must maintain a minimum amount of stockholders’ equity and a minimum number of holders of our securities. If we fail to meet any of the continuing listing requirements, our common stock may be subject to delisting. If our common stock is delisted and we are not able to list our common stock on another national securities exchange, we expect our securities would be quoted on an over-the-counter market. If this were to occur, our stockholders could face significant material adverse consequences, including limited availability of market quotations for our common stock and reduced liquidity for the trading of our securities. In addition, we could experience a decreased ability to issue additional securities and obtain additional financing in the future. There can be no assurance that an active trading market for our common stock will develop or be sustained.

Future sales of our common stock in the public market or other financings could cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, the perception that these sales might occur or other financings, could depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. A substantial majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock are freely tradable without restriction or further registration under the Securities Act unless these shares are owned or purchased by “affiliates” as that term is defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. In addition, shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding options, restricted stock units and shares reserved for future issuance under our incentive stock plan will be eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by applicable vesting requirements and, in some cases, subject to compliance with the requirements of Rule 144. As a result, these shares can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to restrictions under the securities laws.

If we sell additional equity or debt securities to fund our operations, it may impose restrictions on our business.

In order to raise additional funds to support our operations, we may sell additional equity or debt securities, which may impose restrictive covenants that adversely impact our business. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and could also result in restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we are unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities due to such restrictions, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Our stockholders may experience substantial dilution as a result of the exercise of outstanding options or warrants to purchase shares of our common stock, or upon exchange of the shares of ViralClear common stock into shares of our common stock.

As of March 12, 2021, we have outstanding options to purchase 3,780,037 shares of common stock and have reserved 1,466,565 shares of our common stock for further issuances pursuant to our 2012 Equity Incentive Plan. In addition, as of March 12, 2021, we may be required to issue 47,003 shares of our common stock for issuance upon conversion of outstanding convertible Series C preferred stock which includes accrued dividends as of March 12, 2021 and 1,436,200 shares of our common stock for issuance upon exercise of outstanding warrants.  Should all of these shares be issued, you would experience dilution in ownership of our common stock and the price of our common stock will decrease unless the value of our company increases by a corresponding amount.

The Company is party to securities purchase agreements between ViralClear and the private placement investors with respect to a provision in each securities purchase agreement which provides that in the event that (i) ViralClear common stock is not listed on a national securities exchange by October 31, 2020, or (ii) a change of control (as defined in each securities purchase agreement) of ViralClear occurs, whichever is earlier, at the option of the holder of ViralClear common stock, each share of ViralClear common stock may be exchanged into 0.9 of a share our common stock if the ViralClear common stock subject to the share exchange was purchased in the private placement that closed in August or September 2019, or 1.1 shares of our common stock if the ViralClear common stock subject to the share exchange was purchased in the private placement that closed in October 2019 through December 2019. On November 30, 2020 and December 31, 2020 (the deadline to exchange), the Company issued an aggregate of 83,055 shares of common stock in exchange for 80,958 shares of ViralClear common stock. As such, as of December 31, 2020, the Company had a majority interest in ViralClear of 70.2%.  

The interests of our controlling stockholders may not coincide with yours and such controlling stockholders may make decisions with which you may disagree.

As of March 12, 2021, four of our stockholders beneficially owned over 20.52% of our common stock. As a result, these stockholders may be able to influence the outcome of matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. In addition, this concentration of ownership may delay or prevent a change in control of our company and make some future transactions more difficult or impossible without the support of our controlling stockholders. The interests of our controlling stockholders may not coincide with our interests or the interests of other stockholders.

Delaware law and our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and By-laws contain anti-takeover provisions that could delay or discourage takeover attempts that stockholders may consider favorable.

Our board of directors is authorized to issue shares of preferred stock in one or more series and to fix the voting powers, preferences and other rights and limitations of the preferred stock. Accordingly, we may issue shares of preferred stock with a preference over our common stock with respect to dividends or distributions on liquidation or dissolution, or that may otherwise adversely affect the voting or other rights of the holders of common stock. Issuances of preferred stock, depending upon the rights, preferences and designations of the preferred stock, may have the effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change of control, even if that change of control might benefit our stockholders. In addition, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. Section 203 generally prohibits a public Delaware corporation from engaging in a “business combination” with an “interested stockholder” for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person became an interested stockholder, unless (i) prior to the date of the transaction, the board of directors of the corporation approved either the business combination or the transaction which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder; (ii) the interested stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of the corporation outstanding at the time the transaction commenced, excluding for purposes of determining the number of shares outstanding (a) shares owned by persons who are directors and also officers and (b) shares owned by employee stock plans in which employee participants do not have the right to determine confidentially whether shares held subject to the plan will be tendered in a tender or exchange offer; or (iii) on or subsequent to the date of the transaction, the business combination is approved by the board and authorized at an annual or special meeting of stockholders, and not by written consent, by the affirmative vote of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding voting stock which is not owned by the interested stockholder.

Section 203 could delay or prohibit mergers or other takeover or change in control attempts with respect to us and, accordingly, may discourage attempts to acquire us even though such a transaction may offer our stockholders the opportunity to sell their stock at a price above the prevailing market price.

The stockholder rights plan adopted by our board of directors may impair an attempt to acquire control of BioSig.

On July 14, 2020, our board of directors adopted a stockholder rights plan (the “Rights Plan”) and declared a dividend of one preferred share purchase right for each outstanding share of BioSig’s common stock to stockholders of record on July 27, 2020, and one right will be issued for each new share of common stock issued thereafter. Each right will initially trade with common stock, and will allow its holder to purchase from BioSig one one-thousandth of a share of Series F Junior Participating Preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share, for an exercise price of $50.00, once the rights become exercisable. In the event that a person or group acquires beneficial ownership of 12% or more of BioSig’s then outstanding common stock, subject to certain exceptions, each right would entitle its holder (other than such person or members of such group) to purchase additional shares of BioSig’s common stock having a market value of two times the exercise price of the right. In addition, at any time after a person or group acquires 12% or more of BioSig’s outstanding common stock (unless such person or group acquires 50% or more), the Board may exchange one share of BioSig’s common stock for each outstanding right (other than rights owned by such person or group, which would have become void). The Rights Plan could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of BioSig or a large block of our common stock without the approval of our board of directors. The rights will expire on July 13, 2021, unless terminated earlier by our board of directors. 

The terms of our Series C Preferred Stock prohibit us from paying dividends in the future on our common stock. As a result, any return on investment may be limited to the value of our common stock.

The terms of our Series C Preferred Stock prohibit us from paying dividends in the future on our common stock, absent consent from the holders representing a super-majority of the outstanding shares of our Series C Preferred Stock and a certain investor. Because we will likely not pay dividends, our common stock may be less valuable because a return on an investment in our common stock will only occur if our stock price appreciates.

Risks Related to our Series C Preferred Stock

Our Series C Preferred Stock contains covenants that could limit our financing options and liquidity position, which would limit our ability to grow our business.

Covenants in the certificate of designation for our Series C Preferred Stock impose operating and financial restrictions on us. These restrictions prohibit or limit our ability to, among other things:

These restrictions may limit our ability to obtain financing, withstand downturns in our business or take advantage of business opportunities. Moreover, debt financing we may seek may contain terms that include more restrictive covenants, may require repayment on an accelerated schedule or may impose other obligations that limit our ability to grow our business, acquire needed assets, or take other actions we might otherwise consider appropriate or desirable.

In addition, the certificate of designation for our Series C Preferred Stock requires us to redeem shares of our Series C Preferred Stock, at each holder’s option and for an amount greater than their stated value, upon the occurrence of certain events, including our being subject to a judgment of greater than $100,000 or our initiation of bankruptcy proceedings.

The holders of our Series C Preferred Stock are entitled to receive a dividend, which may be increased if we do not comply with certain covenants.

The holders of the Series C Preferred Stock are entitled to a 9% annual dividend on the $1,000 per share stated value of our Series C Preferred Stock, which is payable in cash or, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, in pay-in-kind shares.  The dividend may be increased to a 18% annual dividend if we fail to comply with certain covenants, including our being subject to a judgment of greater than $100,000 or our initiation of bankruptcy proceedings.   As a result of the payment of dividends related to our Series C Preferred Stock, we may be obligated to pay significant sums of money or issue a significant number of shares of our common stock, which could negatively affect our operations or result in the dilution of the holders of our common stock, respectively.

The terms of our Series C Preferred Stock contain anti-dilution provisions that may result in the reduction of the conversion prices in the future.

The terms of our Series C Preferred Stock contain anti-dilution provisions, which provisions require the lowering of the conversion price to the purchase price of future offerings. If in the future we issue securities for less than the conversion of our Series C Preferred Stock then in effect, we will be required to further reduce the relevant conversion prices. 

General Risk Factors

The liability of our directors and officers is limited.

The applicable provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law and our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and By-laws limit the liability of our directors to us and our stockholders for monetary damages for breaches of their fiduciary duties, with certain exceptions, and for other specified acts or omissions of such persons. In addition, the applicable provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law and of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and By-laws provide for indemnification of such persons under certain circumstances. In the event we are required to indemnify any of our directors or any other person, our financial strength may be harmed.

Negative publicity or unfavorable media coverage could damage our reputation and harm our operations.

In the event that the marketplace perceives our products as not offering the benefits which we believe they offer, we may receive negative publicity. This publicity may result in litigation and increased regulation and governmental review. If we were to receive such negative publicity or unfavorable media attention, whether warranted or unwarranted, our ability to market our products would be adversely affected. We may be required to change our products and services and become subject to increased regulatory burdens, and we may be required to pay large judgments or fines and incur significant legal expenses. Any combination of these factors could further increase our cost of doing business and adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

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

The trading market for our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We currently have new research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our stock or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which could cause our stock price and trading volume to decline.

We are subject to financial reporting and other requirements that place significant demands on our resources.

We are subject to reporting and other obligations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Section 404 requires us to conduct an annual management assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. These reporting and other obligations place significant demands on our management, administrative, operational, internal audit and accounting resources. Any failure to maintain effective internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and stock price. Moreover, effective internal control is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and prevent fraud. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, we may not be able to manage our business as effectively as we would if an effective control environment existed, and our business and reputation with investors may be harmed.

ITEM 1B – UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2 – PROPERTIES

We maintain our principal executive office at 54 Wilton Road, Westport, Connecticut, where we sublease approximately 4,343 square feet of office space.  This lease runs until October 30, 2021, with monthly payments of $18,277 per month from May 1, 2019 through April 30, 2020, $18,639 per month from May 1, 2020 through April 30, 2021 and $19,001 from May 1, 2021 through October 31, 2021, inclusive of a fixed utility charge. In connection with the lease, we paid a security deposit of $68,764, of which $34,382 represents the last two months of the term. There is no option to extend the lease past its initial term.

In addition, we maintain our engineering offices at 12424 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California, where we lease approximately 4,000 square feet of office space.  This lease runs until June 30, 2021, with monthly payments of $14,731 from July 1, 2018 with escalating payments to $16,033 through June 30, 2021. In February 2021, we extended our LA lease till June 2022 with a fixed payment of $13,702 per month through June 2022. We do not have an option to extend the Los Angeles lease beyond June 2022.

On October 1, 2019, we entered into a lease agreement for approximately 1,400 square feet of office space in Rochester Minnesota commencing November 1, 2019 and expiring on October 31, 2021 at an initial rate of $3,411 per month with escalating payments to $3,513 through October 31, 2021. This lease agreement includes an option to extend the lease for two additional periods of two years each past its initial term.

We believe we may need to expand our current facilities to meet our future needs.

ITEM 3 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Aurigene Pharmaceutical Services LTD vs. ViralClear Pharmaceuticals Inc. and BioSig Technologies, Inc.

On January 8, 2021, Aurigene Pharmaceutical Services, LTD (“Aurigene”) filed a complaint with the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut claiming the Company is in default of certain milestone payments for manufacturing and services under contracts dated June 23, 2020 and July 16, 2020 in aggregate amount of $1,530,000. The Company contends that work was halted before any work was started on the contractual defined milestones and intends to defend vigorously.

From time to time, we may become involved in other various lawsuits and legal proceedings which arise in the ordinary course of business. However, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and an adverse result in these or other matters may arise from time to time that may harm our business. We are currently not aware of any such legal proceedings or claims that we believe will have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or operating results.

There are no material proceedings in which any of our directors, officers or affiliates or any registered or beneficial shareholder of more than 5% of our common stock is an adverse party or has a material interest adverse to our interest.

ITEM 4 – MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5 – MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market for Common Stock

On October 29, 2014, our common stock commenced trading on OTCQB under the symbol “BSGM” and on September 21, 2018 we commenced trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market exchange under the same ticker symbol. Prior to October 29, 2014, there was no established trading price for our common stock. The last reported sales price of our common stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market on March 12, 2021, was $4.58 per share.

Holders of Record

As of March 12, 2021, there were approximately 279 holders of our common stock, as determined by counting our record holders and the number of participants reflected in a security position listing provided to us by the Depository Trust Company. Because the “DTC participants” are brokers and other institutions holding shares of our common stock on behalf of their customers, we do not know the actual number of unique shareholders represented by these record holders.

Dividends

We have never paid cash dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future but intend to retain our capital resources for reinvestment in our business.

ITEM 6 – SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Not applicable.

ITEM 7 – MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations in conjunction with our financial statements and the related notes thereto that are included in this Form 10-K.  In addition to historical information, the following discussion and analysis includes forward-looking statements that reflect our plans, estimates and beliefs.  Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to these differences include those discussed below and elsewhere in this prospectus, particularly in the section entitled “Risk Factors.” See “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Overview

We are a medical technology company that is commercializing our PURE EP™ System which is an advanced signal acquisition and processing platform designed to provide essential diagnostic signals with high clinical value in all types of cardiac catheter ablations.

PURE EP™ is designed to address long-standing limitations that slow and disrupt cardiac catheter ablation procedures, such as environmental lab noise, signal saturation, slow signal recovery, and inaccurate display of fractionated potentials.

Cardiac catheter ablation is a procedure that involves delivery of energy through the tip of a catheter that scars or destroys heart tissue to correct heart rhythm disturbances. In August 2018, we received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) to market our PURE (Precise Uninterrupted Real-time evaluation of Electrograms) EP™ System.

PURE EP™ is a signal processing platform that combines advanced hardware and software to address known challenges associated to signal acquisition, to enable electrophysiologists to see more signals and analyze them in real-time. The device aims to minimize noise and artifacts from cardiac recordings and acquire high-fidelity cardiac signals. Improving fidelity of acquired cardiac signals may potentially increase the diagnostic value of these signals, thereby possibly improving accuracy and efficiency of the EP studies and ablation procedures.

Our initial focus is on improving intracardiac signal acquisition and enhancing diagnostic information for catheter ablation procedures for complex arrhythmias like ventricular tachycardia (“VT”), a potentially life-threatening arrhythmia, and atrial fibrillation (“AF”), the most common cardiac arrhythmia associated with a fivefold risk of stroke.

During 2019, we began conducting our first clinical observational patient cases using the PURE EP System at Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute at St. David’s Medical Center in Austin, Texas; Prisma Health at Greenville Health System in South Carolina; Indiana University; and Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in California. The initial experience across these early evaluation centers showed that the PURE EP™ System functions as designed: we received positive feedback from the EP users about the improved signal detection and fidelity during ablation procedures on patients with various arrhythmias, such as ischemic ventricular tachycardia, AF, atypical flutter, atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT), supraventricular tachycardia, premature ventricular contractions (PVC), and a rare case of dual septal pathway.

In November 2019, we commenced our first clinical study for the PURE EP™ System titled, “Novel Cardiac Signal Processing System for Electrophysiology Procedures (PURE EP 2.0 Study).” Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Research Foundation (TCARF) in Austin, Texas, was the first institution to conduct patient cases under the clinical study; Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida was the second institution; and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) was the third to conduct patient cases under the same clinical study. As of March 8, 2021, 81 patients have been enrolled in the study. Initial results of evaluated data from the PURE EP 2.0 Study found that a cumulative total of 29 PURE EP signals out of 34 (85.3%) were rated as statistically equivalent or better for the dataset (identical electrocardiographic and intracardiac signal data recorded during 15 AF ablation procedures from the PURE EP System, the signal recording system, and the 3D mapping system). In 35.5% of samples, the reviewers selected PURE EP because "more signal components were visible." 

We continue to install PURE EP Systems at centers of excellence for clinical evaluation under our market development plan. The PURE EP System has been utilized at several institutions, including University of Pennsylvania Hospital; Overland Park Regional Medical System in Overland Park, Kansas; Deborah Heart and Lung Center in Browns Mills, New Jersey; and Memorial Hospital of South Bend, part of Beacon Health System, in South Bend, Indiana; and Houston Methodist in Texas.

To date, more than 575 patient procedures have been conducted with the PURE EP System by more than 38 electrophysiologists across eight different clinical sites in the United States.

In addition to clinical evaluation, we have conducted a total of twenty-seven pre-clinical studies with the PURE EP™ System, twenty-two of which were performed at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. We also conducted a pre-clinical study at the Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, New York, with an emphasis on the VT model; and four pre-clinical studies at the University of Pennsylvania. We intend to continue additional research and development studies with our technology at Mayo Clinic and the University of Pennsylvania. We also intend to continue additional clinical external evaluation at a select number of other centers.

We have made progress towards obtaining a European CE marking certificate for medical devices. We intend to commence audit preparation for the International Organization for Standardization (“ISO”) 13485 with the expectation to proceed with the audit to obtain the ISO 13485 Certification and CE Mark in the first half of 2021 and subsequently file for CE Mark in the second half of 2021 or early in 2022, subject to the guidance from the European notified body.

In December 2020, we announced that three units were contracted for purchase by St David’s Healthcare of Austin, Texas and subsequently sold in February 2021. These units were our first commercial sale. Additionally, we are in active discussions with numerous accounts about the acquisition of the PURE EP™ System. We anticipate our initial customers will be medical centers of excellence and other healthcare facilities that operate EP labs.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. The preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements. The consolidated financial statements include estimates based on currently available information and our judgment as to the outcome of future conditions and circumstances.

Among the significant judgments made by management in the preparation of our financial statements are the following:

Research and Development

We account for research and development costs in accordance with the Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 730-10, Research and Development (“ASC 730-10”). Under ASC 730-10, all research and development costs must be charged to expense as incurred. Accordingly, internal research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Third-party research and developments costs are expensed when the contracted work has been performed or as milestone results have been achieved. Company-sponsored research and development costs related to both present and future products are expensed in the period incurred.

Stock-Based Compensation

All stock-based payments to employees and to nonemployee directors for their services as directors consisted of grants of restricted stock and stock options, which are measured at fair value on the grant date and recognized in the statements of operations as compensation expense over the relevant vesting period. Restricted stock payments and stock-based payments to nonemployees are recognized as an expense over the period of performance. Such payments are measured at fair value at the earlier of the date a performance commitment is reached, or the date performance is completed. In addition, for awards that vest immediately and are non-forfeitable, the measurement date is the date the award is issued.

Use of estimates

The preparation of these consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates include the recoverability and useful lives of long-lived assets, the fair value of long-term operating leases, patent capitalization, fair value of acquired assets, the fair value of the Company’s stock, stock-based compensation, fair values relating to derivative liabilities and the valuation allowance related to deferred tax assets. Actual results may differ from these estimates.

Derivative Instrument Liability

We account for derivative instruments in accordance with ASC 815, which establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other financial instruments or contracts and requires recognition of all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value, regardless of hedging relationship designation. Accounting for changes in fair value of the derivative instruments depends on whether the derivatives qualify as hedge relationships and the types of relationships designated are based on the exposures hedged. On December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company did not have any derivative instruments that were designated as hedges.

On December 31, 2020 and 2019, we had outstanding preferred stock that contained embedded derivatives. These embedded derivatives include certain conversion features and reset provisions.

Income Taxes

Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the estimated future tax effects of net operating loss and credit carryforwards and temporary differences between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their respective financial reporting amounts measured at the current enacted tax rates. We record an estimated valuation allowance on our deferred income tax assets if it is not more likely than not that these deferred income tax assets will be realized. We recognize a tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement.

Results of Operations

We anticipate that our results of operations will fluctuate for the foreseeable future due to several factors, such as the progress of our research and development efforts and the timing and outcome of regulatory submissions. Due to these uncertainties, accurate predictions of future operations are difficult or impossible to make.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2020 Compared to Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2019

Revenues and Cost of Goods Sold. We had no revenues or cost of goods sold during the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and 2019.

Research and Development Expenses. Research and development expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 were $18,135,862, an increase of $8,397,043 or 86.2%, from $9,738,819 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. This increase is primarily due 2020 increases in Data /AI development in BioSig segment along with product development and consulting work in the ViralClear segment. In addition, in 2020 ViralClear issued: (i) its common stock with a fair value of $3,174,550; (ii) 259,959 warrants with a fair value of $1,299,795 and (iii) cash in aggregate of $408,545 to acquire research and development as compared to 2019 where BioSig issued warrants with a fair value of $3,162,342 and cash of $175,000 to acquire research and development (see discussion below).

Research and development expenses were comprised of the following:

Stock-based compensation for research and development personnel was $1,253,156 and $1,920,060 for the year ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2019, we and ViralClear entered into patent and know how agreements pursuant to which we paid Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (“Mayo”) whereby we and NeuroClear paid Mayo an aggregate of $175,000 and warrants with an estimated fair value of $3,162,342.

On March 24, 2020, ViralClear entered into an asset purchase agreement (the “Asset Purchase Agreement”) with Trek Therapeutics, PBC (“Trek”).  Pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, Trek sold to ViralClear all right, title and interest of Trek and its affiliates to certain assets (the “Purchased Assets”). As consideration for the Purchased Assets, ViralClear agreed to pay Trek in upfront and milestone payments a combination of cash, shares of ViralClear’s common stock, which common stock may equal up to 10% of ViralClear’s outstanding equity, and sublicense fees in the event ViralClear sublicenses the Purchased Assets. On March 30, 2020, pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, ViralClear paid $350,000 in cash and issued 634,910 shares of ViralClear’s common stock to Trek at a fair of $3,174,550. The Purchased Assets were recorded as acquired research and development.

On April 8, 2020, ViralClear entered into a know-how license agreement (the “Agreement”) with Mayo.  The Agreement grants to ViralClear (i) an exclusive worldwide license, with the right to sublicense, within the field of anti-viral agents to target COVID-19 (the “Field”) to certain patent rights for the development and commercialization of products, methods, and processes for public use and benefit (the “Licensed Products”) and (ii) a non-exclusive worldwide license, with the right to sublicense, within the Field, to use the know-how of Mayo that is necessary to develop the Licensed Products.

The Agreement will expire upon the later of either (a) the expiration of the licensed patent rights or (b) the 7th anniversary of the date of the first commercial sale of a Licensed Product, unless earlier terminated by Mayo for ViralClear’s failure to cure a material breach of the Agreement, ViralClear’s or a sublicensee’s commencement of any action or proceedings against Mayo or its affiliates other than for an uncured material breach of the Agreement by Mayo, or insolvency ViralClear.

In connection with the Agreement, ViralClear issued to Mayo 259,959 shares of ViralClear’s common stock. ViralClear also agreed to make earned royalty payments to Mayo in connection with ViralClear’s sales of the Licensed Products along with certain milestone payments.

General and Administrative Expenses. General and administrative expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 were $40,953,253, an increase of $16,142,541, or 65%, from $24,810,712 incurred in the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. This increase is primarily due to increase in equity-based and other compensation, increases in professional services, consulting fees and travel, meals and entertainment costs.

Payroll related expenses (including equity compensation) increased to $31,080,261 in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 from $17,882,004 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019, an increase of $13,198,257, or 74%. This increase is due to the value of the stock-based compensation increasing to $23,911,391 in 2020, as a result of the vesting of stock and stock options issued to board members, officers and employees, as compared to $13,923,678 of stock-based compensation in 2019, along with added additional personnel in 2020.

Professional services for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 totaled $1,948,437, an increase of $944,298, or 94%, over the $1,004,139 recognized for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. Of professional services, legal fees totaled $1,503,487 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020, an increase of $601,348, or 67%, from $902,139 incurred for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. The significant increase in legal fees in 2020 is due to legal work in asset acquisitions, financing and in developing and registering patents. Accounting fees incurred in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 amounted to $257,956, an increase of $155,956 or 153%, from $102,000 incurred for the same period in 2019. The significant increase is due to additional work relating to internal control audit, design and monitoring, audit work relating to ViralClear segment.  

Consulting fees totaled $6,868,943 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020, an increase of $3,527,175 or 106%, from $3,341,768 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019.  The increase primarily relates to our fund raising and investor relations to support our increased efforts in market research and potential investor identification and key consultants in connection with our commercialization efforts.

Travel, meals and entertainment costs for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 were $372,568, a decrease of $331,997, or 47%, from $704,565 incurred during the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. The decrease in 2020 was due to various restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic-related measures as compared to 2019.

Rent for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 totaled $483,859, an increase of $70,096, or 17%, from $413,763 incurred during the same period in 2019.  In 2020, our significant increase was the result of our full year lease payments with our sublease of our corporate headquarters in Connecticut and lease of facilities in Minnesota along with escalation increases of our existing leases in 2020.

Depreciation and Amortization Expense. Depreciation and amortization expense for the twelve months ended 2020 totaled $93,533 as compared to $54,349 incurred during the same period in 2019.  The increase is due primarily to additional equipment purchased and amortization of our patent development costs in 2020.

Interest Income.  Interest income for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 totaled $45,496 as compared to $132,751 earned during the twelve months ended December 31, 2019. The decrease in 2020 was due reduction of interest rates earned with cash balances in our interest-bearing accounts.

Preferred Stock Dividend. Preferred stock dividend for the year ended December 31, 2020 totaled $14,080, a decrease of $11,083, or 44% from $25,163 incurred during the year ended December 31, 2019. Preferred stock dividends are related to the issuance of our Series C Preferred Stock from 2013 through 2015.  The significant decrease in 2020 as compared to 2019 is the result of 2020 conversions of the Series C Preferred Stock.  

Noncontrolling Interest. In 2019 and 2020, ViralClear sold shares of its common stock to fund its initial and ongoing operations. As of December 31, 2020, we had a majority interest in ViralClear of 70.2%. The proportionate loss attributed to noncontrolling interests for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $6,921,709 as compared to $415,849 for 2019.

Net Loss Available to BioSig Technologies, Inc. Net loss available to common stockholders for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 was $52,231,684, compared to a net loss of $34,079,991 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019, an increase of $18,151,693 or 53%.  The primary reasons for the increase, as described above, are the increases in research and development costs and general and administrative expenses from 2019 to 2020.

Segment Results

The Company reports segment information based on the “management” approach. The management approach designates the internal reporting used by management for making decisions and assessing performance as the source of the Company’s reportable segments.

Summary Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019 are detailed in Note 12 of the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

COVID-19

The full public-health impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is currently indeterminable and rapidly evolving, and the related health crisis has adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect the global economy, resulting in possibly delaying our commercialization objectives of the PURE EP Systems.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We had an accumulated deficit as of December 31, 2020 of approximately $157 million, as well as a net loss of approximately $52 million and negative operating cash flows. We expect to continue incurring losses and negative cash flows from operations until our products (primarily PURE EP System) reach commercial profitability. We believe that our existing cash on hand and access to existing financing will be sufficient to enable us to fund our projected operating requirements for approximately 14 months. However, we may need to raise additional funds more quickly if one or more of our assumptions prove to be incorrect or if we choose to expand our product development efforts more rapidly than we presently anticipate. We also may decide to raise additional funds before we require them if we are presented with favorable terms for raising capital.

Our plans include the continued commercialization of PURE EP System and raising capital through the sale of additional equity securities, debt or capital inflows from strategic partnerships. There are no assurances, however, that we will be successful in obtaining the level of financing needed for our operations. If we are unsuccessful in commercializing our products and raising capital, we may need to reduce activities, curtail or cease operations.

Equity Financing

On February 21, 2020, we entered into an underwriting agreement (the “Underwriting Agreement”) with Laidlaw & Company (UK) Ltd. (the “Underwriter”), relating to an underwritten public offering of 2,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, at the public offering price of $4.00 per share. At closing on February 25, 2020, the Company received net proceeds of approximately $9,100,000, after deducting the underwriting discount and other offering expenses of approximately $100,000.

Pursuant to the Underwriting Agreement, we issued to the Underwriter or its designees warrants to purchase up to an aggregate 125,000 shares of common stock. The underwriter warrants are exercisable immediately and on or prior to February 21, 2025, at a price per share equal to $4.80 and are exercisable on a “cashless” basis.

On May 20, 2020, ViralClear and the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with certain accredited investors, pursuant to which ViralClear agreed to sell an aggregate of 1,068,550 shares of ViralClear’s common stock, at $10.00 per share, for an aggregate consideration of $10,592,075, net of expenses of $93,425. This private placement closed on May 20, 2020.

On June 24, 2020, we entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with several institutional and accredited investors, pursuant to which we agreed to issue and sell in a registered direct offering an aggregate of 2,187,500 shares of common stock of the Company at an offering price of $8.00 per share, for gross proceeds of approximately $17.5 million before the deduction of fees and offering expenses. The net proceeds to the Company from the offering, after deducting fees and expenses, were approximately $16.16 million. The offering closed on June 26, 2020.

At-the-Market Offering

On August 28, 2020, we entered into an Open Market Sale Agreement (the “Sales Agreement”) with Jefferies LLC to act as our sales agent and/or principal (“Jefferies” or the “Agent”), with respect to the issuance and sale of up to $45,000,000 of our shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Shares”), from time to time in an at-the-market offering (the “Offering”).

Upon delivery of a placement notice, Jefferies may sell the Shares by any method permitted by law deemed to be an “at the market offering” as defined in Rule 415(a)(4) promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. We may sell the Shares in amounts and at times to be determined by us from time to time subject to the terms and conditions of the Sales Agreement, but we have no obligation to sell any of the Shares under the Sales Agreement. We or Jefferies may suspend or terminate the offering of Shares upon notice to the other party and subject to other conditions. Jefferies will act as sales agent on a commercially reasonable efforts basis consistent with its normal trading and sales practices and applicable state and federal law, rules and regulations and the rules of Nasdaq.

We will pay Agent a commission equal to 3.0% of the gross proceeds from the sale of the Shares pursuant to the Sales Agreement. The Company has also agreed to provide Jefferies with customary indemnification and contribution rights.

The offering of Shares pursuant to the Sales Agreement will terminate upon the earlier of (i) the sale of all Shares subject to the Sales Agreement or (ii) termination of the Sales Agreement in accordance with its terms.

From August 24, 2020 through December 28, 2020, we sold an aggregate of 424,357 shares of our common stock under the Sales Agreement for proceeds of $2,228,000, net of expenses of $222,397 inclusive of initial offering expenses of $146,704.

From January 1, 2021 to March 12, 2021 we sold an aggregate of 251,720 shares of our common stock under the Sales Agreement for proceeds of $1,300,285, net of expenses of $40,215. As of March, 12, 2021, we had capacity to issue up to $41,191,020 million of common stock under the Sales Agreement.

The Shares are sold and issued pursuant the Company’s shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-230448), which was previously declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and a related prospectus.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2020 Compared to Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2019

As of December 31, 2020, we had a working capital of $24,229,382, comprised of cash of $28,268,029, inventory of $768,319 and prepaid expenses of $300,080, which was offset by $4,722,138 of accounts payable and accrued expenses, accrued dividends on preferred stock issuances of $72,217 and short term lease liabilities of $312,691. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2020, cash provided by financing activities totaled $42,845,395, comprised of proceeds from the sale of our common stock of $25,214,311, sale of subsidiary stock to non-controlling interests of $10,592,075, proceeds from At-the-market sale of our common stock of $2,228,000 and proceeds from the exercise of options and warrants of $4,811,009.  In the comparable period in 2019, $10,007,188 was raised through the sale of our common stock, sale of subsidiary stock to non-controlling interests of $5,011,309 and proceeds of $8,408,841 from the exercise of options and warrants. At December 31, 2020, we had cash of $28,268,029 compared to $12,108,582 at December 31, 2019. Our cash is held in bank deposit accounts. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, we had no convertible debentures outstanding.

Cash used in operations for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 was $26,599,228 and $15,482,982, respectively, which represent cash outlays for research and development and general and administrative expenses in such periods. Increase in cash outlays principally resulted from increased research and development and general and administrative expenses due to the continued development of our operations.

Cash used in investing activities for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 was $86,720, compared to $285,934 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019.  During the twelve months ended December 31, 2020, we purchased office furniture and computer equipment. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2019, we incurred $111,591 in patent and trademark costs and $177,092 purchases of office furniture and computer equipment, net with proceeds from disposal of equipment of $2,749.

Our Series C Preferred Stock contains triggering events which would, among other things, require redemption (i) in cash, at the greater of (a) 120% of the stated value of $1,000 or (b) the product of (I) the variable weighted average price of our common stock on the trading day immediately preceding the date of the triggering event and (II) the stated value divided by the then conversion price or (ii) in shares of our common stock, equal to a number of shares equal to the amount set forth in (i) above divided by 75%. As of December 31, 2020, the aggregate stated value of our Series C Preferred Stock was $105,000. The triggering events include our being subject to a judgment of greater than $100,000 or our initiation of bankruptcy proceedings. If any of the triggering events contained in our Series C Preferred Stock occur, the holders of our Series C Preferred Stock may demand redemption, an obligation we may not have the ability to meet at the time of such demand.  We will be required to pay interest on any amounts remaining unpaid after the required redemption of our Series C Preferred Stock, at a rate equal to the lesser of 18% per annum or the maximum rate permitted by applicable law.

We expect to incur losses from operations for the near future. We expect to incur increasing marketing and commercialization expenses related to our PURE EP system in addition to additional research and development costs, including expenses related to clinical trials. We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase in the future as we expand our business development, add infrastructure and incur additional costs related to be a public company, including incremental audit fees, investor relations programs and increased professional services.

Our future capital requirements will depend on a number of factors, including the progress of our research and development of product candidates, the timing and outcome of regulatory approvals, the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patent claims and other intellectual property rights, the status of competitive products, the availability of financing and our success in developing markets for our product candidates. We believe our existing cash will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital equipment requirements for the 14 months.

Future financing may include the issuance of equity or debt securities, obtaining credit facilities, or other financing mechanisms. Even if we are able to raise the funds required, it is possible that we could incur unexpected costs and expenses or experience unexpected cash requirements that would force us to seek alternative financing. Furthermore, if we issue additional equity or debt securities, existing holders of our securities may experience additional dilution or the new equity securities may have rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of existing holders of our securities.

If additional financing is not available or is not available on acceptable terms, we may be required to delay, reduce the scope of or eliminate our research and development programs, reduce our commercialization efforts or obtain funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or others that may require us to relinquish rights to certain product candidates that we might otherwise seek to develop or commercialize independently.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

There were various updates recently issued, most of which represented technical corrections to the accounting literature or application to specific industries and are not expected to a have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

ITEM 7A – QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Not applicable.

ITEM 8 – FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

BIOSIG TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and
Stockholders of BioSig Technologies, Inc.

Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of BioSig Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2020, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in equity, and cash flows for the year then ended, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2020, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s consolidated financial statements based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audit, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audit included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audit also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current period audit of the consolidated financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the board of directors and that: (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the consolidated financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Stock Based Compensation – Initial Measurement of Fair Value

Description of the Matter

As described in Note 2 of the consolidated financial statements, the Company measures stock-based awards at fair value and recognizes compensation expense related to such awards over the requisite service period. The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of the awards. Certain inputs in the model used for determination of fair value of the awards of the Company and its subsidiary, such as the expected term, volatility, and fair value of stock, require management to make significant judgments.

How We Addressed the Matter in Our Audit

We reviewed the key assumptions utilized in calculation of volatility, and assessed the comparable companies used in the volatility calculation of the Company’s subsidiary. We reviewed management’s determination of the expected term and the fair value of the subsidiary’s stock and compared to the terms of the compensation agreements, historical information, and market data.

Recognition and Disclosure of Research and Development Costs

Description of the Matter

As described in Note 2 of the consolidated financial statements, research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Significant estimates include assessment of work in progress of multiple third-party contracts and evaluation whether milestones and contingent payments are probable in estimating the research and development costs to accrue or disclose in the reporting period. Recognition and disclosure of research and development costs were considered a critical audit matter due their material impact on disclosures in the consolidated financial statements and the nature and extend of audit effort required to evaluate the results of audit procedures.

How We Addressed the Matter in Our Audit

We reviewed third-party contracts, statements of work and purchase orders, discussed with personnel and obtained confirmations with external service providers as to the progress or stage of completion of services, the agreed-upon fee to be paid for such services, and probability of milestones and contingent payments.

Going Concern – Assessing the Company’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern

Description of the Matter

As described in Note 3 of the consolidated financial statements, the Company has adequate cash on hand, which will provide sufficient liquidity to finance the operating activities of the Company for twelve months from the issuance of these consolidated financial statements. We determined that the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is a critical audit matter due to significant management’s judgments and assumptions used in estimating future cash flows.

How We Addressed the Matter in Our Audit

We reviewed forecasted information, assessed reasonableness of the forecasted operating results and uses and sources of cash used in management’s assessment. This testing included inquiries with management, comparison of prior period forecasts to actual results, assessment of available financing, consideration of positive and negative evidence impacting management’s forecasts, market and industry factors.

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders

of BioSig Technologies, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of BioSig Technologies, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2019 and the related statements of operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the financial statements). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

See the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements

See the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements

*-less than $1

See the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements

*-less than $1